For Authors
Dear author(s),
When submitting your manuscript for the first time, you must upload the following files to the JIRTE system. Please do not hesitate to contact our editorial board during the submission process of your manuscript. jirtejournal@gmail.com
1. The full text of your manuscript which is prepared according to the JIRTE template. Do not fill out your name and institution information. (File Type= Full Text), (File Format: .doc or .docx)
2. Introductory information about the authors of the manuscript (File Type= Cover Page), (File Format: .doc or .docx) Cover Page Template
3. Plagiarism report not exceeding 20% (File Type= Plagiarism Report), (File Format: .pdf)
4. Copyright Transfer Agreement scanned after signed by all authors. (File Type= Additional file for editor) (File Format: .jpg or pdf)
5. Ethics Committee Approval (Except review studies). (File Type= Additional file for editor) (File Format: .pdf)
Note: Manuscripts not prepared according to JIRTE's manuscript template will be returned to the authors without editorial review. Authors can submit their manuscripts back to JIRTE after adapting their manuscripts to the JIRTE template.
The Processes of Reviewing and Publishing Manuscripts
The reviewing process of the manuscripts sent to JIRTE proceeds following these steps:
-
The manuscript is reviewed by the Editor to see whether its aims, subject, content, and style of writing fit the requirements of JIRTE (Maximum 10 days). The manuscript is approved by the Editor, and send to Field Editor. Other manuscripts not approved by the Editor send back to their authors/owners for revision and resubmission
-
The examination/review of the Field Editor results in the decision of either sending the manuscript to reviewers or returning them back to their authors/owners for revision (Maximum 10 days).
-
The selection processes of reviewers are based on expertise and experience in the relevant field. The reviewers are given 20 days to review a manuscript sent to them.
-
If a reviewer thinks that she/he cannot complete the reviewing process within the given time, she/he can ask the Editor for extra time or let the Editor know that she/he is not being able to review the manuscript due to various reasons, such as the shortage of time. Doing these things help the Editor to assign new reviewers without losing too much time.
-
If a reviewer cannot review the manuscript assigned to her/him within the given scope of time, she/he is sent a reminder e-mail with an additional 10 days for completing the reviewing process. If she/he does not return the reviewed manuscripts within the additional time, that manuscript may withdraw from her/him. After then, it is assigned to another reviewer.
-
If there is a divergence of opinion between the two reviewers (one accepting the manuscript and the other rejecting it), the field editor examines the review reports, compares and contrasts the reviewers’ critics and viewpoints, as well as their reasoning to arrive at a decision.
-
If the Field Editor may not arrive at a decision after examining the reviewer reports, then the manuscript is assigned to a third reviewer.
-
The decision for a manuscript is supposed to be given within the first 90-120 days. Then the authors are informed about the decision. The accepted papers are to be published in the following issue of JIRTE.
- The principle of transparency is at the core of the correspondence among the authors, the Editor, and the Field Editor in JIRTE. However, the principle of privacy of the authors’ identity has to be kept safe in correspondence between the Editor or the Field Editor and the reviewers. Besides, the identities of the reviewers are not included in the reports sent to the authors.
- If a reviewer thinks that the manuscript assigned to her/him contains any problem related to research ethics or the data used in the study, or she/he believes that there is a conflict of interest between her/him and the author(s), she/he has to share these issues with the Editor before commencing the process of reviewing.
- In order to attain an integrated and coherent reviewing process, and to contribute to the author’s academic development, the Editor may ask the reviewers to read each other’s reports and then comment on the report she/he read. In the case of this situation, the names and identities of the reviewers have to be kept anonymous.
Requirements for Formatting Manuscripts and their Content
Authors are advised to read the rules and regulations below and then edit their manuscripts in accordance with the relevant ones before sending it to JIRTE. Please click on to reach the manuscript template.
Check List:
- Please make sure that the manuscript you send to JIRTE has not been sent to any other periodicals for review or publication.
- The manuscript has been formatted in accordance with the JIRTE template.
- The authors are responsible to conduct a plagiarism check of their manuscripts using one of the major plagiarism software and uploading its report to JIRTE System. Any manuscript having a plagiarism rate of over 20 % will be returned to its authors.
- The authors are required to fill in and sign the copyrights transfer form. Then, scan it and upload it to the JIRTE System.
- The manuscripts to be submitted to JIRTE should not exceed 25 pages or 10.000 words.
General Formatting Rules
The font used in the entire manuscript should be Segoe UI, font size 10. Page margins for bottom and top should be pre-set as 2,5 cm, and for right and left should be pre-set as 2,5 cm. The text should be justified with no hyphenation breaks in words at the end of a line. The text should be typed as a single-column document. Paragraphs and headings should not be indented but aligned with the main text. In between the paragraphs, single line spacing should only be used.
Article titles should be boldfaced and centered in Arial, font size 18. Please use capitals in initial letters only, excluding the conjunction words, articles, and prepositions. The main headings (INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND, METHODS, FINDINGS, AND DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS) should be written in Gill Sans MT font size 12, with boldfaced capital letters, and centered. Single line spacing should be given before and after the main headings, but only before the sub-headings. The subheadings should be written in bold but only the initials in capital letters, excluding conjunction words, articles, and prepositions. The subheadings must be in a standardized form not including any type of hierarchical order. So, the headings in the manuscripts should not be numbered.
The authors must try to avoid using footnotes or endnotes unless their use is essential. Instead, the APA 6 referencing system should be used. If the authors feel that they should use footnotes, they must prefer Segoe UI, font size 8.
Emphasis should be expressed using quotation marks (“ ”) or italics. Please do not use boldfaced characters in the text.
Lists in the text should be horizontal and not vertical. The list should use Roman numerals [(i), (ii), and so on], not Arabic (1, 2).
Direct quotes should be 1 cm left-indented from the main text and typed in Segoe UI, font size 9. They should not be written in italics. Please refer to the manuscript template for example.
The main document to be used for peer-review may include the title, abstract, keywords, main body, references, figures and tables, and supplementary materials. The names of all authors and their institutions should not be included in the main document.
Abstract
The abstract should be written in Segoe UI fonts and font size 8 with single line spacing, justified to both margins. Abstracts should be between 150 and 250 words. Three to five words, word groups, or expressions representing the manuscript should be given as keywords. Only the initials of the first word of the keywords should be in capital letters. No citations should appear in the abstract. The abstract should include the research purpose, methods, participants, and import and results.
Main Text
Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods studies should contain the following sections: Introduction, Methods, Findings and Interpretation, and Conclusions and Discussion.
The Introduction and Background section may include the conceptual/theoretical framework of the study, the discussion of the relevant literature, and the research purpose including the problem statement or research questions. The discussion of the relevant literature should consistently analyze the relevant literature; emphasize the gaps and inconsistencies in the literature, and discuss actions toward solving these problems. The Introduction and Background section must not include any subheading.
The Methods section needs to include the research design or the type of the study (cross-sectional, longitudinal, survey, experimental, ethnographic and etc.), the description of the sampling procedure (including the description of the population), or the selection of the study group, data collection instruments and procedures, data analysis, and the issues of validity, reliability, and ethics.
The Findings section should introduce the results of the research in the forms of texts, tables, and figures, and the interpretation of these results. The last section of the main text should draw conclusions from the previous section, compare and contrast them with the relevant literature, and discuss the implications of the research results in consideration with policy, practice, and future research.
Other types of studies can allow slight variations in sections, but they should not contain too many details and sub-sections that could distract readers’ attention and compromise readability.
Tables and Figures
Tables, figures, pictures, graphics, and similar aspects should be embedded in the text, and not provided as appendices. Please locate tables as editable text and not as images however figures might be presented in different forms as images and etc. For tables and figures, please use Segoe UI, font size 9. While generating tables, ensure that the indentation under the paragraph tab is as follows: before and after: 0, single spacing. Tables and figures should be left-aligned, and the text wrapping feature should be turned off. Table and figure numbers should be typed in Segoe UI, font size 10 as “Table 1” or “Figure 1” (as bold), but the remaining text in the headings of the tables and figures should be standard as “Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the Participating Middle School Students”, only the initials in capital letters, excluding conjunction words, articles, and prepositions.
Citations and References
Both in-text citations and references should comply with the APA guidelines as provided in the Publication Manual of American Psychological Association (APA) (6th edition).
Some Examples of Citing and Referencing
|
Paper written by one author:
In-text:
Standard citation (White, 2008), in-text citation “White (2008) argues that …”, citation for a paraphrasing or a direct quotation (White, 2008, s. 32).
In reference list:
White, J. (2008). Social studies teachers' understanding of temporality, The Journal of History and Social Studies Education, 1(4), 121-132. http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/JOER.101.3.109-118
|
|
Paper written by two authors:
In-text:
Standard citation (Chen and Pajares, 2010), in-text citation “According to Chen and Pajares (2010) …”, citation for a paraphrasing or a direct quotation (Chen and Pajares, 2010, p. 77).
In reference list:
Chen, J. A., & Pajares, F. (2010). Implicit theories of the ability of grade 6 science students: Relation to epistemological beliefs and academic motivation and achievement in science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(1), 75-87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2009.10.003
|
|
Paper written by three or more authors:
In-text:
First standard citation (Grever, de Bruijn & van Boxtel, 2012), subsequent standard citation (Grever et al, 2012), in-text citation (if it appears for the first time) Grever, de Bruijn and van Boxtel (2012), subsequent in-text citation Grever et al (2012), citation for a paraphrasing or a direct quotation (if it appears for the first time) (Grever, de Bruijn and van Boxtel, 2012, p. 878), subsequent citation for a paraphrasing or a direct quotation (Grever et al, 2012, p. 878).
In reference list:
Grever, M.; de Bruijn, P., & van Boxtel, C. (2012). Negotiating historical distance: Or, how to deal with the past as a foreign country in heritage education. Paedagogica Historica, 48(6), 873-887. https://doi.org/10.1080/00309230.2012.709527
|
|
In-text citation of several sources in order:
Citations should be arranged in alphabetical order. For example (Aksan, 2019; Chen & Pajares, 2010; Grever et al, 2012; Punch, 2005; White, 2008).
|
|
In-text citation of secondary sources:
A source quoted from another one should be cited (Ebdon, 1978 cited in Punch, 2005, p. 38).
The standard and in-text citations and citations of paraphrasing or a direct quotation to books, book chapters, translated books, theses and dissertations, and conference or symposium papers should be the same as the ones in journal papers as shown above. However, their appearance in the reference list may differ.
|
|
Books in the reference list:
Punch, K. (2005). Introduction to social research: Quantitative and qualitative approaches. London: Sage.
|
|
Book chapters in the reference list:
McDiarmid, G. (1994). Understanding history for teaching: A study of the historical understanding of prospective teachers. In M. Carretero and F. J Voss, (eds.). Cognitive and instructional processes in history and social studies. Hillsdale, NJ: Lea.
|
|
Translated books in the reference list:
Harari, Y. N. (2018). 21. Yüzyıl için 21 ders (Trans.: S. Siral). İstanbul: Kolektif.
|
|
Theses and dissertations in the reference list:
McNiel, D. S. (2006). Meaning through narrative: A personal narrative discussing growing up with an alcoholic mother (Master’s thesis). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 1434728)
Fell-Eisenkraft, S. L. (2006). Creating, negotiating, and experiencing a September 11th oral history project: Action research with middle school students from Chinatown. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, Teachers College, New York, USA.
Dere, İ. (2017). Sosyal bilgiler derslerinde bir öğrenme ve öğretme yöntemi olarak sözlü tarih [Use of oral history as learning and teaching method in social studies courses]. (Doctoral dissertation), Uşak University, Turkey. Retrieved from https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi/ Access Date:
|
|
Conference or symposium papers in the reference list:
Harrison, N. (2012). Putting history in its place: grounding the Australian curriculum-history in the local community. Paper presented at the Joint Australian Association for Research in Education and Asia-Pacific Educational Research Association Conference (AARE-APERA 2012) (Sydney, New South Wales, Australia).
|
|
Organizational Reports
In-text:
First standard citation (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2019), subsequent standard citation (OECD, 2019), in-text citation (if it appears for the first time) Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), (2019), subsequent in-text citation OECD (2012), citation for a paraphrasing or a direct quotation (if it appears for the first time) (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2019, p.16), subsequent citation for a paraphrasing or a direct quotation (OECD, 2019, p. 16).
In reference list:
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2019a). PISA 2018 assessment and analytical framework. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: https://doi.org/10.1787/b25efab8-en
|
|
Appendices
Each appendix should be displayed on a separate page after the references section.
|
Keeping Certain Reviewers Out of the Reviewing Process
The authors have the right to ask the Editor not to assign their manuscripts to certain reviewers due to conflict of interest or other ethical issues.
Besides, the Editor is to not send any manuscript to those reviewers,
● with whom the author(s) has/have shared publication(s) previously,
● who helped the author(s) in reading drafts of the given manuscript,
● who experienced problems with the author(s) beforehand,
● who may financially benefit from the publication of the given manuscript,
● who are working in the same institution (departments) with the author(s)
Withdrawing a Manuscript
The authors have the right to withdraw their manuscript before its publication. If they would like to do so they need to fill in the “Article Withdrawal Form”, sign it, and sent JIRTE for approval. Only those manuscripts obtaining the approval of the Editorial Board can be sent to other journals for publication.
Appealing Against Reviewers’ Reports or the Decisions of the Editorial Board
The authors always have the right to appeal against the review reports or editorial board decisions. If they would like to do so they are supposed to justify their objection and add the necessary documents or evidence to their application. If the editor comes to the point, she/he may commence a fresh round of review.
Author Rights Related to Published Articles
-
The authors may inform the Editor about using their published in JIRTE for other purposes.
-
In response to this kind of inquiry, the Editorial Board is to provide relevant feedback.
Typesetting Errors
The authors have the right to ask for correction of the typesetting errors or other problematic aspects, arising from themselves within five days.
- Journal of Innovative Research in Teacher Education (JIRTE) also publishes the review papers. The board of editors thinks that review works are valuable parts of scientific and academic studies/publications.
- The critics and reviews of the books written in English are accepted. The review papers published in JIRTE are given DOI (Digital Object Identifier) numbers and sent to the databases indexing JIRTE.
What is a review paper?
- A review paper is a text which introduces a book, an article, or a compilation to a wider audience through discussing, criticizing, and interpreting its content and structure in a constructive way.
- A book review is different from a book report. A book report acknowledges just the content of the book, while the content stands for only a small part in an academic review paper.
- A book review is expected to criticize and comment on the content, method, and structure of the text in hand constructively. It also needs to review the thoughts in a critical way, discuss the consistency of the thoughts, and the way in which the sources and resources are used.
Writing the review
The author needs to ensure that the content of the review includes these points:
- A brief, impressive introduction of the topic/subject, and the discussion of the text under consideration;
- A summary of the original text;
- Presenting the inferences made from the text, and the strengths and weaknesses of it referring to the logical order of thoughts;
- A discussion and conclusion part consisting of the author of the review ‘s viewpoints in relation to the original text.
The format of the review
The formatting requirements presented for research articles are also valid for book reviews. Thus, the writing rules and citation style must be addressed.
-
The title of a book review paper must be different from the title of the book reviewed.
-
The issues listed below must be included in the review paper.
° The author(s) or editor(s) name, and surname (it must be stated if the text is a compilation)
° The title of the book
° Publication year
° The place it published
° The publisher
° Number of pages in total
The Review Process of the Book Reviews
JIRTE gives priority to the reviews of those books or texts published within the last five years. Demanding the review of their publication(s), the publisher(s) or the author(s) should send a request to JIRTE sending an e-mail to jirtejournal@gmail.com.
-
Since book reviews are given a limited place in journal issues, monographies authored by individuals are given priority. Other types of reviews come after the monographs. The review of textbooks and handbooks are not published in JIRTE.
-
Before starting a book review for JIRTE, the reviewers are advised to get in touch with the journal editor first.
-
There should not be any personal connection between the author(s) of the original text and the reviewer (working at the same department chair, thesis jury membership, close friends etc.).
3.735 times read.
