Focus and scope

The aim of ÁPICE. Revista de Educación Científica is to respond to the needs, concerns and interests of teachers and researchers in the field of science education, and to improve the quality of science education in our society. The journal publishes relevant research related to all levels of education, both formal and informal, from early childhood to university. Manuscripts may be based on empirical or theoretical research, or original, appropriately justified new proposals. The specific objectives of the journal are:

• to promote the dissemination of research and innovation in the field of Science Didactics.
• to encourage the exchange of ideas and collaboration between researchers and teachers interested in improving their educational practice and training.

Manuscripts submitted for publication should relate to one of the following thematic areas:

• Teacher training and professional development
• Science teaching and learning
• Environmental and health education
• Social and cultural dimension of science
• Non-formal and informal education
• Information and communication technology (ICT)
• Other related to Science Education

Indexation

ÁPICE. Revista de Educación Científica is included in the following directories and databases:

REDIB    Dialnet      Google Scholar     MIAR    Dulcinea     DOAJ     ERIHPlus     Latindex Catálogo V2.0

Peer review process

ÁPICE. Revista de Educación Científica publishes original, unpublished research on topics related to science education research and innovation.

Receipt of manuscripts will be acknowledged in all cases.

The review process will consist of two stages:

1. Topic and format: The Editorial Board will assess whether manuscripts meet the profile, publication guidelines and quality standards of the journal. Manuscripts deemed to meet these criteria will be accepted for the next stage of the review process.
2. External review: Manuscripts which pass the first stage of the review process will be forwarded for external, anonymous peer review by two independent experts in the topic of the manuscript. Any disagreement between reviewers will be resolved by the arbitration of a third reviewer. ÁPICE operates a system of double-blind peer review, meaning that author identities are concealed from reviewers, and vice versa. All identifying information (name, affiliation) should, therefore, be removed from the manuscript, though included in the submission metadata. All self-citations should likewise be removed from the manuscript and reinserted in the final version of the article once accepted. Reviewers will have six weeks to issue a report of their assessment and one of the following recommendations:

• Accept without revisions
• Accept with revisions
• Revise and resubmit for review
• Reject

The Editor will compile a summary report of the results of the review and issue a final decision regarding publication, based on the following categories:

1. Accept manuscript: manuscript is accepted for publication with no changes and sent straight to print.
2. Revisions needed: manuscript requires minor changes to bring it to a publishable standard; authors will be required to implement the recommended changes within a maximum period of one month.
3. Resubmit for review: manuscript requires substantial changes to bring it to a publishable standard; authors should implement the recommended changes and resubmit the manuscript for review by the same reviewers within a maximum period of three months.
4. Reject

The final decision regarding publication and the reviewers’ recommendations will be notified to the contact author within four months of receipt of the manuscript. The contact author will be notified when the manuscript is published.

Frequency of publication

ÁPICE is published twice a year, in July and December.

As well as its two main issues, the journal may also publish a one-off monograph issue during the year.

Languages of publication

ÁPICE accepts original manuscripts in Spanish, though manuscripts in English and Portuguese will also be considered for publication.

Manuscripts in Spanish and Portuguese should also include the title, abstract and keywords in English. Manuscripts in English should include the title, abstract and keywords in Spanish.

Open access policy

All of the journal’s content is available in open access, on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

ÁPICE does not charge contributors any submission or publication fees (APCs), and does not charge readers for access to journal content.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to share and disseminate their accepted and published work on personal websites and in institutional repositories, provided ÁPICE is clearly acknowledged as the source of publication, and a full bibliographic reference and digital identifier (DOI) are included.

Archiving

ÁPICE uses the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among collaborating libraries, allowing them to create permanent archives of the journal for the purposes of preservation and restoration (see http://revistas.udc.es/index.php/apice/gateway/lockss).

It also has the complete archive of all publications in DOAJ and, from 2021, in the repository of the University of A Coruña RUC.

Review guidelines

Manuscripts submitted for publication in the Science Education Research section will be assessed on the basis of the following criteria:

- Relevance

• Relevance to the field of study
• Specification and justification of research aim(s)
• Relevance of conclusions and final remarks

- Theoretical basis and literature review

• Theoretical basis matches the aims of the research
• Theoretical framework is sufficient and includes the background and state of the art on the topic
• Quality, up-to-date literature review on the topic

- Data collection and analysis (empirical research only)

• Appropriateness and specification of sample, participants, instruments, procedures, etc.
• Accurate analysis and reporting of results

- Conclusions and implications

• Accuracy and internal coherence of the research (relevance of relationship between statements and data, etc.)
• Interpretation consistent with the discussion of the results (in the case of empirical research and trialled innovations)
• Quality and clarity of implications for future research and/or educational practice

-Format

• Appropriate title, abstract and keywords (relevant to article content)
• Clear, readable, grammatically correct writing style
• Clarity and relevance of tables, graphics, figures, etc.
• Format, presentation, length and references in accordance with journal guidelines

- Other

Manuscripts submitted for publication in the Science Education Innovation section will be assessed on the basis of the following criteria:

- Relevance

• Relevance to the field of study
• Specification of research aim(s)
• Relevance of concluding observations

- Theoretical basis and literature review

• Theoretical framework for the proposal is sufficient

- Proposal design and development

• Justification and relevance of the proposal
• Precise, well-structured discourse (coherence, central line of argument, recommendations, etc.)
• Originality of activities/tasks

- Final considerations

• Identification of positive aspects, possible limitations, future prospects, etc.

-Format

• Appropriate title, abstract and keywords (relevant to article content)
• Clear, readable, grammatically correct writing style
• Clarity and relevance of tables, graphics, figures, etc.
• Format, presentation, length and references in accordance with journal guidelines.

- Other

Reviewers will complete two forms: one ‘For the author(s) and editor’, and a second ‘For the editor’.

 

Peer review reports will be sent directly to the authors and should therefore omit any information that might identify the reviewer. Reports will include one of the following recommendations:

• Accept without revisions or with minor formal revisions
• Accept with revisions
• Revise and resubmit for review
• Reject

Reports should also specify the reasons for the recommendation and any changes required to the manuscript. Reports should be detailed and constructive, and provide precise suggestions and advice on how to improve the manuscript (method, theory, references, etc.)

Ethics and best practice

ÁPICE. Revista de Educación científica is committed to the research excellence and integrity of all of its publications, and is therefore guided in all of its activities by the Code of Conduct established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in its Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (http://publicationethics.org).

The Editorial Team undertakes to

General duties and responsibilities

• Ensure the quality of all published work.
• Promote editorial independence.
• Respect privacy.
• Protect intellectual property.
• Maintain the integrity and academic standard of all published work.
• Publish manuscripts in a timely manner.
• Work continually to improve the journal.

Responsibility for publications

• Take responsibility for the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts submitted for publication based on the recommendation of the two external reviewers and that of a third arbiter, if required.
• Apply the principle of impartiality in the acceptance or rejection of manuscripts submitted for publication, and respect authors’ intellectual freedom. Manuscripts will be assessed on the basis of their research quality, originality, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the focus of the journal.

• Ensure the confidentiality of all manuscripts received. The same guarantee of confidentiality will apply in relation to the double-blind peer review process to ensure that author identities are concealed from the reviewers and vice versa. All communication between authors, reviewers, members of the Editorial Team, the Advisory Board and any other body that exists within the journal, now or in the future, will also be confidential.

• Protect the right to intellectual property over research results, establish measures to avoid plagiarism or the publication of research without authors’ consent, and use all resources at the journal’s disposal to verify the originality of all manuscripts submitted for publication.
• Publish corrections, clarifications and apologies as necessary.

Authors undertake to

• Be responsible for the content of the submitted manuscript. In the case of co-authored manuscripts, the corresponding author must declare explicitly that all of the authors are named, and have approved the manuscript and given their consent for it to be published.
• Declare that all of the work in the submitted manuscript is original, has not been published previously, and is not in the process of being reviewed for publication by another journal.
• Acknowledge that they have read and accept the guidelines provided by the journal for the preparation of manuscripts and the process of peer review.
• For empirical research papers, authors will also be responsible for ensuring that the ethical standards for research involving human beings are met. For more information, authors are advised to read: Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association) and Declaración de Helsinki de la Asociación Médica Mundial (AMM) - Principios Éticos para las Investigaciones Médicas en Seres Humanos.
• Notify the journal of any significant errors or inaccuracies detected after publication, together with all the information necessary to correct them.
• Conflicts of interest and disclosure. Authors should be prepared to declare that there is no conflict of interest that could affect the results of the research or the interpretations offered. They should also state sources of funding for the research, where applicable, and the name of the project their paper reports on.

Reviewers undertake to

• Complete their assessment of the manuscript within the time frame stipulated. Any delays should be notified to the journal as soon as possible.
• Conduct their reviews objectively and constructively, and offer clear comments and suggestions for improvements, in accordance with the review guidelines provided by the journal. Personal opinions about the authors are irrelevant and will be considered inappropriate.
• Adhere to the principle of objectivity in their assessment of the manuscript. The review should provide clear, constructive, justified comments and suggestions, and avoid personal opinions about the author. Reviewers are advised to consult the specific guidelines for reviewers provided by the journal.
• Be bound by the same duty of impartiality and confidentiality as the editors. Their assessment will be based solely on the research quality of the manuscript in terms of both content and format. Reviewers will not, under any circumstances, use or disseminate the manuscript for any purpose other than the review process. The results of the review will only be made known to the corresponding editor and the authors.
• Decline the invitation to peer review an article in the event of a conflict of interest due to collaboration or competition with the author(s) or the affiliated institution.

Editors' underkate to

• Decline the proposal to edit an article in the event that it involves a conflict of interest due to collaborative or competitive relationships with the author or with the institution from which he/she comes.
• Ensure freedom of expression.
• Publish content in the required time. Respect the deadlines established once the edition has been accepted. If they do not assume it, they must communicate it well in advance.
• Be willing to post corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary.

Monitoring of bad practices

Ápice. Revista de Educación Científica assumes its obligation to act accordingly in the event of suspicion of malpractice or inappropriate conduct. The journal will make every reasonable effort to ensure that the papers submitted for evaluation are rigorous and ethically appropriate.

History of the journal

Ápice. Revista de Educación Científica was created in 2017 as the result of a collaboration agreement between the Sapanish Association of Teachers and Ressearchers in Experimental Science Didactics (ÁPICE) and the University of A Coruña.