Indexed in Journament

commonwealth journal of academic research

EN

Login or register to claim ownership or editorship of this journal.
35.2 / 100
Journament Score
Poor
Ranked #16,911 of 29,341 scored journals (33,995 indexed)
Scores higher than 42.3% of scored journals
050100
The Journament Score is computed from platform statistics — reader engagement, accessibility, publication timeliness, keyword breadth, community impact and content distribution — into a single 0–100 figure, recalculated as new articles and metadata are indexed. Dimensions that cannot be measured for this journal are excluded rather than estimated. It is independent of the paid AI Quality Analysis, which never affects this score or the ranking. Full methodology →

About This Journal

This is a position paper which examines followers and environment as core contributory elements in the emergence of Toxic school leaders in the school systems. Leaders, followers and their environment are the power base for the leadership itself. Therefore, leaders are helpless sometimes too. This means that, they can be wrongly motivated in a direction that will not be beneficial to the school organisations by their followers. Occasionally, effective school leaders turn out making poor decisions because the ambitious followers are joined into a single entity and persuasive about a plan to achieve a goal. It is important for the school leaders to be more incredulous of the preponderance perspectives of the followers to look into their views more closely. At a different time, leaders get into difficulty because they are encircled by followers who are ambitious, eulogise the leaders with flattery words and insulate the leaders from discomforting actualities. Any organisation that tolerates any act of toxicity from its leaders will be more likely to breed conformers and colluders as followers, so the environment plays an important role in immortalising toxic leaders’ behaviours. The connection between the leaders, their followers, and the environment can be leverage to the toxicity outcome of the leaders. It is hard for toxic leaders to come off in stalwart organisations with stout establishments where adequate checks and balances on power and control are monitored.
Short Name commonwealth journal of academic research
Abbreviated Name cjar
URL https://www.cjar.eu

Quality Profile

4 of 12 dimensions measured
Engagement 30.2
Accessibility 35.0
Innovation 70.0
Community Impact 0.7
This journal Average of scored journals
Platform statistics — the free Journament Score AI Quality Analysis — separate paid product, ranks nothing

8 of the 12 dimensions could not be measured for this journal. They are left out entirely rather than plotted as zero, and with 4 dimensions measured there is not enough of a profile to draw as a shape.

Show the numbers
Journament quality dimensions for commonwealth journal of academic research
Dimension This journal Corpus average
Engagement 30.2 30.1
Accessibility 35.0 17.9
Timeliness 19.2
Diversity 28.8
Innovation 70.0 31.2
Community Impact 0.7 13.4
Content Distribution 88.4
Content Quality 55.5
Ethics & Transparency 40.2
Editorial Standards 33.4
Publication Regularity 53.2
Geographic Reach 30.8

Articles (0)

No articles found
This journal doesn't have any indexed articles yet.
Journament Score
35.2/100 · Poor
Ranked #16,911 of 29,341 scored
(33,995 journals indexed)
Platform Statistics
AI Quality Analysis
Separate paid analysis — does not affect ranking.

Overall Quality Score

35.2/100

Tier: Poor

The Journament Overall Quality Score is a comprehensive metric that evaluates academic journals across multiple dimensions including engagement, accessibility, diversity, innovation, and community impact.

This score helps researchers, institutions, and publishers understand the holistic quality and impact of a journal beyond traditional metrics.

Engagement Score

30.2/100

Measures user interactions, views, citations, and community involvement with this journal's content.

Higher engagement scores indicate that the journal's content is actively being read, cited, and discussed within the academic community.

Accessibility Score

35.0/100

Evaluates how easily researchers can access journal content, including open access availability, ISSN registration, and indexing.

This metric considers factors such as paywalls, open access policies, and availability across different academic databases and search engines.

Diversity Score

Not yet measured

Assesses geographic and institutional diversity of authors, editorial board composition, and topic breadth.

A diverse journal publishes work from various geographic regions, institutions, and covers a broad range of topics within its field.

Innovation Score

70.0/100

Evaluates research novelty, interdisciplinary work, and emerging topics based on AI analysis of article abstracts.

This score reflects how much the journal publishes cutting-edge research, explores new methodologies, and bridges different academic disciplines.

Community Impact Score

0.7/100

Measures scholarly contribution and real-world applications of published research.

This metric evaluates how the journal's research translates into practical applications, policy changes, and benefits to society beyond academia.

Timeliness Score

Not yet measured

Evaluates recent publication activity, publication frequency, and currency of research topics.

Higher scores indicate consistent publishing schedules and timely coverage of current research trends.

Content Distribution

Not yet measured

Measures how evenly reader attention spreads across the journal's articles, using the Gini coefficient of article clicks.

Higher scores mean readership is distributed across many articles rather than concentrated on one or two.

Ethics & Transparency Score

Not yet measured

Research Integrity (10% weight)

Assesses COPE standards compliance, ethical considerations in research, transparency in methodologies, and reproducibility practices.

This metric ensures the journal maintains high ethical standards and promotes transparent, trustworthy research.

Content Quality Score

Not yet measured

Academic Rigor (20% weight) + Methodology Quality (12%)

Evaluates research methodology soundness, statistical rigor, theoretical framework strength, appropriateness of research methods, data quality, and clarity & readability.

This comprehensive metric ensures published research meets the highest academic standards.

Editorial Diversity Score

Not yet measured

Author Diversity + Interdisciplinary Value (8%)

Measures geographic diversity of authors, institutional variety, editorial board composition, and cross-disciplinary connections.

Diverse editorial teams bring varied perspectives and reduce bias in academic publishing.

Publication Regularity Score

Not yet measured

Assesses consistency of publication schedule, frequency stability, and predictable output patterns.

Regular publication schedules indicate reliable journal operations and consistent workflow management.

Geographic Reach Score

Not yet measured

Evaluates international author representation, global readership distribution, and cross-border research collaboration.

Wide geographic reach indicates global impact and international recognition of the journal's research.