Submissions

Author Guidelines

SERJ Publication Template

1. ABOUT SERJ

The Statistics Education Research Journal (SERJ) is a peer-reviewed, electronic journal of the International Association for Statistical Education (IASE, https://iase-web.org) and International Statistical Institute (ISI, https://www.isi-web.org) . SERJ is published 2–3 times a year (regular issues in May and November; special issue in June). All papers undergo a double-blind review process and are reviewed by at least two referees. The journal is open access, and publications are cost free for authors and readers. (The costs are absorbed by IASE.)

2. SERJ AIMS AND AUDIENCES

SERJ aims to advance research-based knowledge that can help to improve the teaching, learning, and understanding of statistics (broadly viewed, including data science, probability, and closely related fields) at all educational levels (primary, secondary, tertiary, adult education) and in both formal (classroom-based) and informal (out-of-classroom) contexts whether as part of mathematics education, STEM topics, statistics or data science programs, or in other learning contexts. SERJ seeks original, high-quality papers that describe new empirical research, analyze published research, or present conceptual analyses and frameworks that build on scholarly literature and that can contribute to scholarly knowledge and educational practice in statistics to advance literacy development (e.g., statistical, data, probability, risk, etc.) and related competencies and skills.

Papers submitted to SERJ should be relevant to the aims of SERJ and to its readers who are engaged in or interested in research on any aspect of statistics education, learning, or usage. Such readers may be involved directly in research or practice in education (e.g., statistics, mathematics, science, engineering, business) or other fields (e.g., psychology and social sciences, measurement, natural and health sciences, management, public services, official statistics).

3. PAPERS OF INTEREST TO SERJ

Reports of original empirical research. Such reports can describe diverse types of studies of a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed nature. Examples are observational, experimental or quasi-experimental, teaching experiment, case study, ethnographic, phenomenological, survey, or meta-analytic studies on any of the areas described above. (Interim results from ongoing studies may also be submitted if their scope is adequate). Such research may examine, for example, cognitive, epistemological, motivational, attitudinal, curricular, teacher- or teaching-related, technological, institutional, or societal factors and processes that are related to the development, understanding, and improvement of stochastic knowledge or how learners or people think critically about statistical (mis)information and “fake” news. Along the same lines, research may focus on how people, e.g., school or college students, educators, workers, managers, specialists, or adults in general, think about, use or apply statistical information and ideas, broadly viewed, in diverse life and societal contexts and practices. Research reports should exhibit the characteristics of a high-quality report. (For more information, see, for example, https://www.nctm.org/publications/write-review-referee/journals/Characteristics-of-a-High-Quality-JRME-Manuscript/ or listen to the IASE webinar at https://iase-web.org/Webinars.php?p=230426_1800.)

Conceptual papers. Such papers can present reflective or theoretical analyses, epistemological studies, integrative and critical literature reviews (e.g., systematic literature reviews, scoping reviews, etc.), combinations of conceptual analyses with some empirical work of a limited or structured scope, and structured reflections on educational practice related to statistics education, broadly viewed, as a basis for proposing new epistemological and conceptual ideas. Such papers should be based on or emerge from scholarly research, and be written so as to make explicit their contribution to future research, theory-building, or teaching and learning in an area of educational practice related to statistics learning or usage. On occasion SERJ invites reflective papers about the implications of research literature for teaching and learning in statistics or that aim to inform researchers who plan related studies. For more details, see Conceptual Papers in SERJ

Brief reports. These are papers whose shorter length is usually due to the focus on topics or findings that do not merit or require a lengthier regular paper as described above. Such papers can report, for example, on replication and extension research, instrument development and psychometric studies, program evaluations, or interim results from innovative instructional projects. The possibility of submitting a compact Brief Report offers researchers a useful publication channel while maintaining the same scientific standards as in full-length papers.

Other. Authors wanting to submit other types of papers, e.g., reactions to papers published in SERJ, are asked to send an inquiry to the editor.

4. OVERVIEW OF JOURNAL POLICIES

Language. All submissions must be written in English to undergo the review process. After a manuscript written in English is accepted for publication, authors can submit a second version of the manuscript written in a different language for distribution. It is the responsibility of the authors to ensure that the other language version is the same as the final English version. Both versions will be available for download.

Duplicate publishing. A submitted paper must not have been published previously or be under consideration for publication elsewhere. If a submitted paper is accepted for publication, the paper will be publicly available via the SERJ website. IASE and ISI do not approve the uploading of SERJ papers for distribution through archival services or repositories. See Appendix 1 for more details on how to avoid or address potential duplicate publishing scenarios.

Manuscript length. SERJ encourages authors to aim for focused and balanced writing in order to maximize a paper’s ability to contribute to SERJ readers and to the accumulation of new knowledge. Authors should consider the following guidelines when planning papers.

• Reports of original empirical research and conceptual papers should normally not exceed a maximum of 10,000 words in body text (about 18–20 pages). However, authors are encouraged to aim for a range of  6000–8000 words (about 12–15 pages), which should be suitable for deep yet concise reporting. (Note: Word counts in these guidelines refer only to body text or main text, not to all other elements, i.e., abstract, keywords, acknowledgments, references, or appendices.) Page counts refer to text formatted using the SERJ Publication Template.
• Brief reports should be no longer than 2500 words of body text.
• Papers longer than 10,000 words of body text (longer than about 20 pages) may be appropriate in some cases but in general should be avoided. Such papers will be considered for review only at the editor’s discretion because they might pose a burden on both reviewers and readers. Authors should justify the need for that length.

5. MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION AND FORMATTING

Writing style and presentation. Papers should be written with the aim of making them interesting and comprehensible to researchers as well as practitioners and statistics educators in general, not only to specialists in the paper topic. Papers should be concise and focused but contain all information necessary to inform both referees and readers. Given the international audience of SERJ, authors should make sure to provide sufficient details regarding terms, acronyms, concepts or issues that are country-specific and whose understanding is essential for readers from other countries. Before finalizing a paper and submitting it to SERJ, authors are advised to review related papers that have already been published in SERJ to become acquainted with the type of discourse and text organization that typifies SERJ papers.

Blinding. SERJ uses double-blind refereeing. Submitted manuscripts should be in a form ready for blind review. Blinding may take various forms, but general guidelines include the following.

• Check file properties to ensure that no personal details were automatically inserted. 
• Remove information from an (optional) Acknowledgments section.
• Delete the name of the institution or town/location in which data were collected.
• Delete complete bibliographic items in which the authors’ names appear. 
• In-text citations to authors’ prior work should be written as (Author(s), date) or Author(s) (date) using the the words “Author” and “date”. 
• If authors want to refer to their prior publications or work anonymously without suggesting it is their work, it is preferable to use the 3rd person voice. For example, instead of “In our prior work (Smith & Jones, 1998) we developed a model …”, use: “This study is based on a model developed by Smith and Jones (1998) … ."

Formatting and layout. Authors are required to use the formatting styles in the SERJ Publication Template. In addition, authors should ensure that they follow  APA7 bibliographic citation styles and grammar guidelines.

Bibliography and citations. References to relevant literature should follow the guidelines described in the current edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed,). Examples for a variety of references are provided in the SERJ Publication Template. Additionally, each listed reference item should be cited in the text, and each text citation should be listed in the References.

Appendices (optional). Authors may add 1–2 appendices if there is a need to present valuable auxiliary information such as the full text of a new research instrument or a questionnaire for which details are not already widely available. With few exceptions, no results or tables with additional data should appear in an appendix but should instead be part of the main text. Appendices should be brief and essential to the understanding of the paper; appendices are allowed at the discretion of the editor.

6. SUBMISSION, REFEREEING, AND PUBLICATION PROCESSES

Submission Process. Manuscripts should be submitted via the submissions page at iase-pub.org/serj .  Manuscripts should be in a form ready for blind review and conform to the formatting and other instructions in Section 5. All elements of the paper being submitted (i.e., abstract, body/main text, tables and figures, etc.) must be compiled in one file and placed where they would normally appear in a published paper. 

Refereeing process and editorial decisions. Submissions are first screened by the editor, often in consultation with other editorial board members, to examine relevance to SERJ’s aims, to examine adherence to submission guidelines, and to check that there are no major flaws that would result in an outright rejection. The bulleted list below specifies the manuscript’s route after initial screening. Upon completion of the refereeing process, authors receive a letter specifying the editor’s decision regarding the acceptability of the paper and a summary of the editor’s explanations for this decision. If appropriate, the anonymized reports from the referees and the associate editor will be attached to the message.  

• Submissions that do not address the aims of SERJ, adhere to the submission guidelines, or have flaws that would result in poor reviews will be rejected without being sent for review.
• If problems exist that appear to be fixable and the paper seems to have potential, the editor will provide brief advice on key problem areas that need to be addressed and encourage resubmission before the paper is sent for review. 
• Papers that pass initial screening are reviewed by an associate editor, who acts as an internal referee.
  • The associate editor might recommend to the editor that the paper be rejected. If the editor agrees, the associate editor will provide a review of the manuscript, and authors will be notified of the decision.
  • The associate editor might coordinate the review process, enlist reviews from at least two external referees, and offer a recommendation to the editor. SERJ uses a double-blind refereeing process, i.e., authors do not know the referees’ identity and (external) referees do not know the authors’ identity. Based on the referees’ reports, the editor makes a decision to (a) accept the manuscript as submitted; (b) accept the manuscript provisionally/require revisions on the condition minor revisions are made; (c) require revisions/reject the manuscript but encourage the authors to rewrite the paper and resubmit it for another refereeing cycle, although no promise is made that after revision the paper would be accepted; or (d) decline the submission.

Publication. Papers accepted for publication may be further revised by the editors or assistant editor to improve clarity of presentation and to correct technical issues. On acceptance, authors will be asked to sign a copyright transfer form. Papers that are ready for publication will be sent to authors for proofing if time permits, and in such cases authors will be asked to react to the proofs within 2-3 days and indicate small technical changes that may still be needed.

7. FINAL REMINDERS AND ADVICE
Given the nature of reviewing and publishing electronic manuscripts, authors are reminded that they must attend to the journal’s length guidelines, number all sections and subsections in a consistent manner, and follow the formatting and layout included in the SERJ Publication Template.

Going beyond technical aspects, the review process enables SERJ to accept for publication high-quality manuscripts that are interesting, informative, and make a genuine contribution to scholarly knowledge and practice in statistics education. The review process is designed to provide authors with valuable feedback that can help them to develop their papers further and bring them to adequate quality if possible. It is easier to review and provide constructive feedback on papers that describe well-planned studies using descriptions that are well-developed, logically organized, and written in a clear and succinct style. 

Please send queries about these guidelines or about papers you are considering to the editor, Susan A. Peters (s.peters@louisville.edu).

APPENDIX 1: DUPLICATE PUBLISHING

Prospective authors should be attentive to “prior/duplicate publishing” issues. Like many journals, SERJ’s policy is that in general, papers that have already been published (i.e., were already made available and intended for wide public consumption via printed or electronic means, including the Internet) cannot be accepted for consideration by SERJ. Any manuscript submitted for publication in SERJ must not be identical to the original paper or report, must be made suitable for SERJ’s audiences, and must be adapted to the goals and format of SERJ. Authors are encouraged to consult the editor in advance if doubts exist as to whether a prior publishing situation beyond those listed below exists. 

Conference proceedings. Some authors submit manuscripts to SERJ based on a paper previously published in conference proceedings, whether in print or published online. SERJ will consider them if what is being submitted to SERJ is substantially expanded compared to the proceedings paper. Direct duplication of conference papers will not be accepted.

Technical reports. Many funded projects require that researchers prepare technical or progress reports and publish them as part of the dissemination process or as a ‘deliverable’ product of the project to create an apparent duplicate publication situation. In general, SERJ does not consider it as a prior publication because in many cases the circulation of such technical reports is limited. However, the manuscript submitted to SERJ must not be identical to the project report.

Publication on a personal website or repository website prior to SERJ publication. Some authors post drafts of research manuscripts on a personal/departmental website or online repository to solicit commentary from colleagues or share their work. For SERJ, this is not considered as prior publication. Yet, the manuscript eventually submitted to SERJ should not be identical to the draft. If the paper is accepted for publication in SERJ, the SERJ paper should not be uploaded to a personal website or repository.

Prior publication in a non-English language journal. Some authors publish a paper in a non-English journal, such as a local (refereed or non-refereed) publication, and later translate the paper in order to publish it in English in SERJ. This is not considered a prior publication because many SERJ readers may not have access to the non-English publication. Nonetheless, this situation should be acknowledged in the letter to the editor and in the acknowledgments section. 

Prior Brief report. Authors who publish (either in SERJ or in another peer-reviewed journal in the English language) a brief report (e.g., with preliminary results) must not later submit a full-length paper on the same study to SERJ if the full-length paper includes most of the materials already published in the brief report.

APPENDIX 2: EDITORIAL DECISIONS 

Overall, the editors can make one of four basic decisions listed below.

Accept Submission. The paper fits SERJ aims and policies, has good quality, and should be published. Very small corrections or fixes of a technical nature may be needed.

Revisions Required: Provisionally accepting the paper after relatively minor revisions. The manuscript is strong and interesting. However, modest yet important changes in content are needed before the paper can be fully accepted for publication. Further external refereeing is usually not needed after revision—the revised paper will be assessed only by the editor and associate editor. The editor will indicate in the decision letter whether a paper will be subject to another review round. 

Revisions Required: Rejecting the manuscript but encouraging a rewrite and resubmission. The paper has some significant flaws in its current content, methodology, analysis, presentation of results, or scholarly writing, as detailed in the referees’ reports and summarized in the editorial letter. Yet, the theme and information provided are of potential interest to SERJ readers, and the problems detected may be fixable. Hence, authors are encouraged to rewrite and resubmit. The editor will indicate in the decision letter whether a paper will be subject to another review round. After authors resubmit their revised paper, the revision will be reviewed again by external referees to assess the extent to which the suggested changes were implemented and whether the new draft is of acceptable quality. It should be emphasized that no promises are made that after a rewrite, the resubmitted paper will be found suitable for publication. Some such papers are eventually rejected. 

Decline Submission. The paper is not adequate for SERJ. Reasons for rejection may include, for example: the author is not acquainted with previous relevant research on the topic in ways that deeply affected the design or interpretation of the findings or the contribution of the paper, the data used are of poor quality or there is an inadequate research design, data analysis is inappropriate, there are unwarranted conclusions that go well beyond the information available to the authors, and so forth. In cases for which the paper is better suited for a different journal, the editor might encourage the authors to resubmit the manuscript elsewhere. In other cases, the paper is rejected because even with a rewrite, it is unlikely that the problems detected can be fixed so as to make the paper of sufficient quality for publication.