Access to login into the old portal (Manuscript Communicator) for Peer Review-
Paper Submission and Review Guidelines
Introduction to JEET
The Journal of Engineering Education Transformations (JEET) is a forum to facilitate conversations among engineering educators who would like to showcase their transformational work as publications reviewed by expert educators and education researchers from across the world.
JEET publishes papers that contribute to Engineering Education Research (EER). Engineering education research is a field of inquiry that adopts a scholarly approach to the education of engineers. As a result, EER reports on studies that contribute to ongoing conversations that influence the education of engineers and the role of educators and institutions in this process. As a result, papers that aim to join this conversation are welcomed to JEET.
JEET does not, however, publish technical papers or papers that report on engineering research in general. Engineering research, even if it is conducted by a student or a teacher at a university, does not qualify as engineering education research. For instance, a paper describing a new algorithm that sorts a list of elements efficiently compared to the existing algorithms is not a good fit for JEET. Although an educator's use of specific pedagogical techniques and tools, derived from the relevant literature, to teach (existing) algorithms in a computer science and engineering classroom, along with some evaluations of how these techniques and tools helped students learn better, will be an excellent JEET paper.
Contact Details
For queries related to submissions, please send an email to submission.jeet@ritindia.edu.
To submit a manuscript on the online submission system, please see the guidelines below.
Categories of Papers
Authors are invited to submit manuscripts in the following categories:
- Practice Papers
- Research Papers
- Op-Edarticles(byinvitation only)
Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research designs are accepted.
Practice Papers
Practice papers report on an intervention that is considered best practice and could be valuable to other engineering education practitioners and researchers. For best practice papers, a clear problem or purpose should be described. Details of the intervention should be discussed so that readers can relate to the specific context. Authors are encouraged to review other engineering education research and show how the intervention relates to other studies. The authors should indicate how they attempted to measure the effectiveness of the intervention in relation to the identified problem or purpose. An attempt should also be made to show how the reliability and validity of this evidence were considered. Authors are also encouraged to discuss the outcomes of
the intervention highlighting any positive outcomes or negative consequences that other practitioners could learn from.
Research Papers
The purpose of research papers is to contribute to an ongoing conversation in engineering education research literature. As a result, although research papers may evolve out of a current problem or intervention, the purpose needs to be aligned with addressing a gap in the literature. Therefore, it is important that research papers contextualize the work presented in a discussion of existing engineering education research literature. The method that is used for the study should align with a clear research question or objectives for the study. The validity of the data and any shortcomings in the research approaches need to be discussed, and the claims or conclusions that are made need to be strongly supported by evidence that is presented. The research contribution is also important, and the authors need to discuss the significance of the findings or results in the context of the existing literature. The paper is also typically of interest to a broad audience as compared to a best practice paper.
Manuscript Submission Guidelines
General Guidelines
- Manuscripts are accepted only in English.
- Please refer to the JEET template (find link under Template) when preparing your manuscript. Only manuscripts that adhere to the template will be considered.
- Authors also need to ensure that the quality and clarity of the manuscript. It is also strongly recommended that authors consult a professional editor before submission. JEET recommends authors to follow its style guide (http://www.journaleet.org/index.php/jeet/pages/view/sg).
- JEET has also prepared a set of author guidelines for preparing and structuring a manuscript for submission (this document, linked under http://www.journaleet.org/index.php/jeet/pages/view/rg). The criteria that reviewers will use to review papers are also included below for further guidance.
- Practice papers and Research papers are expected to be submitted for double-blind review, i.e., any information identifying the authors or their institution should be anonymized.
- Submitted manuscripts must not have been published as copyrighted material nor be submitted for consideration for publication as copyrighted material while in review by the Journal, whether in print or electronic form. If authors wish to submit their manuscript elsewhere for review, they should first request that the manuscript be withdrawn from JEET.
- By submitting a manuscript, the author(s) agree that the copyright will be transferred to JEET if the manuscript is accepted for publication.
Submission Guidelines
- Manuscripts must be submitted in electronic form only at the Journal's Web site: http://www.journaleet.org/
- Upon submission, the system will prompt the authors to:
- Provide a justification of whether the authors believe that the paper is a practice or a research paper
- Indicate the contact details of the corresponding author
- Indicate the word count
- Declare that the manuscript has not been submitted to any other journal for review
- Indicate that they have checked that there is no identifying information in the uploaded manuscript
- Provide additional information to the editor (optional)
- An automatic and immediate email confirmation is provided if the submission process is completed successfully.
- All manuscripts will be subject to a plagiarism check before they are considered by an Associate Editor.
- An Associate Editor subsequently evaluates manuscripts for their compatibility with the Journal's mission and review criteria and will advise the authors if the manuscript is deemed suitable and will proceed to the double-blind peer-review process.
- The Journal aims to provide feedback on submitted manuscripts within three months.
- There are no charges for submitting to or publishing in JEET.
Submission checklist
The following list is useful during the final checking of a manuscript before submitting it to the Journal for review.
- All content that identifies the authors has been removed for the double-blind review process. This includes author names and affiliations, acknowledgments, and any citations in the content that refer to work that has previously been published by the authors.
- All necessary files have been uploaded.
- The uploaded manuscript makes use of the JEET template.
- The manuscript has been spell checked and grammar checked.
- References are in the correct format (APA).
- All references mentioned in the Reference list are cited in the text, and vice versa.
- Permission has been obtained for the use of copyrighted material from other sources (including the Web).
Resubmission after the review process
After your paper has been reviewed, the Associate Editor will consider the feedback from the reviewers and their own evaluation of your submitted manuscript and will decide on whether or not your paper is deemed suitable for further consideration. In many cases, minor or major revisions will be required.
When submitting a revised version of your manuscript, it is important to illustrate to the Associate Editor (and, where applicable, reviewers) that you have considered and addressed any concerns or issues that were raised. Please do this by uploading a track changed version of your paper as well as an accompanying table that indicates how each concern/issue has been addressed. Authors are advised to show that they have understood and embraced any comments and have considered the reviewer and editor perspectives on their work.
Paper Review Guidelines
Before Accepting a Reviewing Assignment
- Read the abstract to determine if the manuscript you are being asked to review matches your expertise.
- Make sure that you will have sufficient time to complete the review. JEET expects reviews to be completed in 3-4 weeks.
Guidelines for Performing the Review
Peer review is vital for academic publications. As a reviewer, you are responsible for carefully reading the manuscript and evaluating its strengths and weaknesses. Each reviewer is expected to provide useful comments targeted towards improving the quality of the manuscript and addressing any weaknesses you are concerned about. It is recommended that in addition to providing detailed feedback in the form of comments, reviewers should download the manuscript, provide suggestions, and highlight issues in the manuscript itself. Since the review process is double-blind, any comments you make and any edits you make using the 'track changes' feature in MS Word will need to be anonymized.
All manuscripts submitted to JEET undergo strict plagiarism checks before they are assigned for review. However, if you do find anything in the manuscript that appears to violate copyright or plagiarism policies, please contact the editor right away.
Keep in mind that the review is intended as a quality check as well as useful feedback for the authors. Be kind and thoughtful, even for manuscripts that do not meet the standards of JEET. Harsh or discouraging language is not appropriate for peer reviews. As you review the manuscript, think about how you would like your own manuscript to be reviewed, and review accordingly!
Review Criteria
When submitting your review of the manuscript, you will be asked to provide feedback to the associate editor using the following criteria:
- Contribution
Consider what is novel about the study, its contribution, and if it is valuable to other engineering education practitioners and researchers.
- For practice papers: What can the readership take away from the study for use in their own practice?
- For research papers: How does the study contribute to ongoing conversations in engineering education research and/or practice?
Rate from 1 to 5 with 5 being the highest level of contribution* (mandatory; radio buttons 1-5)
Additional Comments for contribution (optional; textbox)
- Contextualization
Consider how the study has been grounded in theory and has been integrated into the existing literature.
- For practice papers: Does the study relate to what has already been written in the field?
- For research papers: Are the purpose, limitations, and implications of the study discussed in relation to engineering education research and/or practice?
Rate from 1 to 5 with 5 being the highest level of contextualization* (mandatory; radio buttons 1-5)
Additional Comments for contextualisation (optional; textbox)
- Scientific Rigor
Consider how well designed and executed the study is and the extent to which the findings/results are valid.
- For practice papers: Is the research method/approach, used to determine the intervention's effectiveness, appropriate for the study and adequately described? Are the arguments employed valid and supported by the evidence presented?
- For research papers: Is the research method informed by theory, aligned to the study purpose, and clearly articulated? Are the arguments employed valid and supported by the evidence presented?
Rate from 1 to 5 with 5 being the highest level of scientific rigor* (mandatory; radio buttons 1-5) Additional Comments for scientific rigor (optional; textbox)
- Clarity and Quality
Is the submission well organized? Is the problem, purpose, research objectives sufficiently motivated? Is it clearly structured, easy to read, and with a logical flow of thought?
Is the quality and clarity of writing of an acceptable standard? Is the readability affected by grammar, spelling, and punctuation? Are all figures and illustrations relevant, and do they enhance the overall message? Is the work of authors referenced appropriately?
Rate from 1 to 5 with 5 being the most clearly structured* (mandatory; radio buttons 1-5) Additional Comments for Clarity and Quality (optional; textbox)
- Overall Comments To The Authors* (mandatory; textbox)
- Overall Comments To The Editor (optional; textbox)
Upon Completing the Reviewing Assignment
- Check that metadata that can identify you as a reviewer has been removed from any files that you intend to submit as part of your review.
- Submit your comments and upload the manuscript's MS Word or PDF file with your comments and highlights.
- If you have questions at any point during the review process, please email the corresponding associate editor through the reviewer portal on the JEET website.