Submissions

magis receives unpublished original papers in Spanish, Portuguese, English and French. The original language is kept throughout the evaluation process and in the final publication. magis receives contributions consisting in the setting out or analysis of epistemology, methodological perspectives and designs, theoretical reflections and research results relevant in the education field, whose main target audience is made up of researchers and professionals in education as well as public servants in the educational sector.

The papers are divided into three groups in the publication:

First Group:
Articles derived from a research, which, according to its nature can be:

1. Reflective articles: meta-research documents including theoretical elaboration, critical interpretation, conceptualizations related to epistemological aspects or methodological constructions derived from researches completed by the authors.
2. Scientific and technological research articles: documents providing original outcomes in detail, as resulting from research projects already completed. In general, the document structure shall consist of six basic items: introduction, conceptual background, methodology, results, result discussion and conclusions.
3. Review articles: documents providing either a state of the art or a thorough revision regarding the advances and trends in a knowledge field, on a specific theme, topic or problem. These documents characterize by a very careful bibliographic review and a great deal of pertinent references to technical works and researches (at least 50 cited references).

 

Second Group:

Essays (which will not be considered for indexing processes): This group includes high-level scholarly essays providing reflections not derived from research processes. These papers are read and evaluated by an editorial committee and shall conform the standards described under numbers 3 and 5 herein.

 

Third Group:

Context documents: special contributions and information (which will not be considered for indexing processes): Documents such as interviews, conferences, presentations, translations, book reviews, opening lectures, among others. These unpublished papers shall be read and evaluated by the editorial committee and shall conform the standards described in the Standards for your unpublished paper.

Currently unpublished papers are not being received for the second and third groups.

 

• Conditions

To begin the evaluation process for an unpublished paper to be included in magis, it must be formatted according to the standards described and sent through the platform. The authors shall submit a letter accepting and certifying:

1. That the paper is unpublished: it has been neither published nor accepted to be published in any other journal;
2. That it has not been submitted to another journal at the same time, and, while the paper is under evaluation in magis, it shall not be submitted to another journal for publication; that once it is accepted in magis, it shall not be submitted to another journal; 
3. That the contents in the unpublished papers are intellectual property created by the authors themselves, and any data or text the authors may take from already published documents shall be duly included as a featured citation with its corresponding details in the reference listing at the end of the document;
4. That the author is responsible for the contents in the paper;
5. That the paper has not been posted online either as a working paper (or gray literature) or in a website and, whenever the paper is accepted in magis, the author shall remove it from any other website and only the title, abstract, keywords and a hyperlink shall remain therein.

The author shall certify and accept these conditionsby sending a signed Letter of Conditions that can be downloaded here.

In addition to the foregoing, when a paper is accepted for publication, the author shall sign a license granting a partial use of his/her work.

 

• Standards for your unpublished paper

1. The unpublished paper shall include an abstract between 75 and 100 words stating concisely an introduction, the objectives, methodology and main results. Likewise, it shall contain some keywords accounting for the topics dealt with in the paper, according to the UNESCO thesaurus. The abstract and keywords are obligatory items in the unpublished papers, except for the special contributions like presentations, opening lectures, conferences, and so on, where these items are optional.
2. The unpublished paper shall be submitted in a Microsoft Word® file (97 and subsequent versions), formatted for letter-size paper, typeface Times New Roman, font size 12, double line spacing, margins of 3 cm, and page number in the right top corner of the page. The unpublished paper full length shall be 20 to 30 pages, including notes and references. The title shall not be longer than 10 words. The figures, images, tables and graphs shall have their own title and be numbered; in addition, they shall include an indication whether they have been created by the author or, otherwise, provide the source information.
3. The manuscript must eliminate all data that allude to the authors or allow their identification (project codes, names of particular research, etc.), to guarantee the anonymity of the evaluation process at all times. To this purpose, the guidelines should be reviewed to ensure a blind review. 
4. The unpublished papers shall conform the guidelines in the publication manual of the American Psychological Association (APA, 7th ed., 2019). Please check below a succinct account of some standards provided in the APA manual:

Citations
In this item we will provide you with some indications on how to include appropriately in your text the contribution(s) by other authors.

1. Direct citations from the source (quotations)

This way of citing is used when you need to reproduce verbatim the work by other authors, or either yours. It contains the author’s name, year, and page the citation was taken from.

1. When a verbatim citation is shorter than 40 words, it shall be embedded in the body text and indicated between quotations marks.

Example:
Regarding the disciplines, medicine, clinical psychology, anthropology, sociology and philosophy, among others, have conducted studies and readings of the body that are not finished off, since some other readings have stemmed from conceptions of the body as a bearer of social symbolisms in the photography, painting, cinema, theater, and literature, “possibilities of analysis that multiply when the need to build an explicit narrative of the body arises” (Morán, 1997, p. 147).

2. In the cases that the citation is 40 words or longer, it shall be included as a separate paragraph with 2.4 cm indentation on the left, without quotations marks.

Example:
The body is both expression and word, it is a language that never stops accompanying the words; furthermore, (...) what is expressed with gestures and body movements is deemed more reliable, less controllable at will, than what is expressed by speech. Then, it can be said that the power of words lies essentially in the way they are uttered. (Bárcena, Tizio, Larrosa & Asencio, 2003, p. 19).

 

Where shall the author’s name, year and page of the verbatim citation be indicated?

In both citations, those shorter than 40 words and the longer ones:

• When the author’s surname has been mentioned before the verbatim citation, the year shall be indicated between parentheses immediately after the author’s surname. After closing the quotation marks, the source page shall be indicated in another pair of parentheses.

Example:
On this regard, Fernando Bárcena, Hebe Tizio, Jorge Larrosa y José M. Asencio (2003) state the following: Bodies are places of existence, territories of memory, desperation and desire, or their longing for. But they are actually quite peculiar places, since, by being vindicated as one’s own, as one’s own territory, these vivid and existed bodies are an open space/time (.) the bodies are places of existence and there is no existence without a place, either over here or over there. The body is the place that opens to what occurs in it, enjoying, suffering, being born, dying, thinking, laughing (.) the body is an event of the existence (p. 25).

• When the verbatim citation is embedded in the body text but the author’s surname has not been mentioned before it, then the author’s surname, year and source page shall be indicated between parentheses just after closing the quotation marks.

Example:
The consolidation of the Social Psychology started from a sociological approach, in which the representation was built through a significance, both individual and social, shaping the coherent structure of an object. The theory of social representations, still developing, provides that they are interpretation systems ruling our relation to the world and to the others, and that they drive and organize the behaviors and communications (Ruiz, 2003, p. 45).

 

2. Non-literal citations or paraphrase

This way of citing corresponds to the cases when other author’s ideas are used but not reproduced verbatim, but stated in the new writer’s words. In these cases, the author’s name, year and source page shall be indicated.

• When the author is mentioned just before paraphrasing his/her idea, the year of the work shall be indicated between parenthesis just after his/her surname.

Example:
This expectation is backed by the observations by Marc Howard Ross (1995) about the culture of conflict in some societies that carry on the violent acts.

• When the paraphrased idea is stated without mentioning the author in it, the author’s surname and the year shall be indicated, between parentheses and separated by a comma, at the end of the idea.

Example:
In all of them, the starting points are the conflicts identified in an educational situation at the college like the evaluation, which involves many pedagogical dimensions that should be articulated with each other (Vargas, 2008).

• In the infrequent cases when the author(s) and year of the work are mentioned within the text, these data shall not be indicated again.

Example:
In this vein, a study by Filippos Vlachos and Fotini Bonoti, in 2006, including 210 Greek children, 7 to 12 years old, who were assigned to do tasks like spontaneous writing, copying and dictating from the Luria-Nebraska neuropsychological battery, found that in the evaluated skills the high scores are distributed between boys and girls.

• When the cited work is by two authors, each citation thereof shall include the first surname of each one.

Examples:
Reading is important because it is a communicative activity allowing the communication and to approach to the knowledge world (Cuervo & Flórez, 2004).

Children undergoing retardation in the development of communication, speech, and language before getting into the school may have difficulties, among others, to use the language to communicate and learn (Cuervo & Flórez, 2004).

• When the cited work is by more than two authors and up to six, the first citation shall include the surnames of each one. The subsequent citations thereof shall indicate only the first author’s surname followed by the expression et al.

Example:
First citation of the work: The early development of the child in different areas will show that he/she has the skills and abilities expected for that age and, therefore, that he/she will have no problems when developing the activity that may affect the initial learning of reading (Flórez, Torrado, Arévalo, Mesa, Mondragón & Pérez, 2005).

Subsequent citations thereof: certain skills and abilities in keeping with their age (Flórez et al., 2005).

• When the work is by more than six authors, the first and all subsequent citations shall indicate the first author’s surname and the expression et al.

Example:
It seems like these differences use to counterweight each other and help women because those verbal and discursive skills are greatly useful in the writing of research report articles, which are required in the higher levels of scientific education (Halpern et al., 2007).

• As you can see in the examples above, when the cited work is by more than one author, the sign & [et or ampersand] shall be used just before the last author’s surname.

References
The References listing at the end of the text allows to identify the works and their authors cited therein. It shall include only those references cited in your unpublished paper. Suggested works, according to the background or related readings, shall be included under the item Bibliography.

The works in the References listing shall be entered in alphabetic order based on the first author’s surname.

In general, each Reference includes: author, year of publication, title, and publication info. Please check below the structure established to include as references some types of documents:

1. Periodicals:
   published according to a given regularity

1.1. Printed Journals 
Surname, name’s initials —either one or two—. (Year). Title of the article. Name of the journal, volume(number), starting page-ending page.

Example:
Vargas, M. V. (2008). Pedagogical Sense of Evaluation. A Case Study at the Science Faculty of the Pontificia Universidad Javeriana. Universitas Scientiarum, 13 (3), 252-257.

1.2. Online Journals
Surname, First Name’s Initial—either one or two—. (Year). Title of the article. Title of the journal, volume(number), starting page-ending page. DOI or URL

Example:
Flórez, R., Torrado, M. C., Arévalo, I., Mesa, C., Mondragón, S. & Pérez, C. (2005). Metalinguistic Skills, Metacognitive Operations and their Relationships to the Reading and Writing Competence Levels: An Exploratory Study. Forma y Función (18), 15-44. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0120-338X2005000100001&lng=en&tlng=es 

• When the publication has a DOI [Digital Object Identifier], it shall be indicated after the period. This cases do not require any additional information for identification or retrieval.

Example:
Flórez, R., Restrepo, M. A. & Schwanenflugel, P. (2009). Promoting the Starting Literacy and Prevention of Difficulties in the Reading: A Teaching Experience at Preschool Classroom. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 27 (1), 79-96. DOI:10.1038/0278-6133.24.2.225.

• When the publication does not have a DOI and was retrieved online, the URL of the main webpage of the periodical shall be indicated after the period. It does not require the retrieval date.

Example:
Arredondo, V. (2007). Linking Paradigms: Higher Education-Society. Universidad Veracruzana and its Link to the Society. http://www.anuies.mx/servicios/d_estrategicos/libros/lib53/145.htm

2. Non-Periodical Publications:
   Sources released as a unique publication: books, reports, manuals, audiovisuals and so on.

2.1. Full document
Surname, name initial —either one or two—. (Year). Title of the publication. Publishing company or institution.

Example:
Worchel, S., Cooper, J., Goethals, G. R. & Olson, J. M. (eds.) (2002). Psicología social. Thomson.

2.2. Excerpts from a non-periodical publication
Surname, name initial —either one or two—. (Year). Chapter title. In editor’s name initial, editor’s surname. (ed.). Title of the publication (pages). Publishing company or institution.

Example:
Meira-Cartea, P. Á. (2002). Global Environmental Problems and Environmental Education: An Approach from the Social Representations of the Climate Change. In Campillo, M. (ed.). El papel de la educación ambiental en la pedagogía social. Diego Marín Editorial.

• Evaluation process for unpublished papers

magis is a peer-reviewed journal. Therefore, all papers are subject to a rigorous evaluation process consisting of different stages and taking two to five months to be completed, depending on the amount of unpublished papers received. The evaluation in magis is carried out under the method of academic opinion by blind peers. The stages are as follows:

1. Receipt of unpublished papers: once magis receives an unpublished paper, the author(s) is sent an e-mail message informing him/her that the checking process is started. It is indispensable to attach the signed Letter of Conditions, the filled Author’s and Research Info Form and the anonymous file containing the unpublished paper full text, as indicated in number 5 herein, so that the unpublished paper be received by magis.
2. Checking of conformity regarding the provisions by magis: in this second stage, the edition team checks that the unpublished paper conforms the formal requirements provided in number 3 herein to prepare the document. To start the process of the first checking, it is a must to submit the three files indicated above. If any of these files is not uploaded to the platform, the process shall not be started and the author shall be notified about it to his/her email. Once the pending file(s) is uploaded to the platform, the checking process shall begin.
3. Analysis of the theme relevancy and the basic qualities of the academic writing: firstly, the edition team reads the unpublished paper and determines whether it satisfies the basic criteria of academic writing and whether it deals with a theme appropriate for the field of our journal. If so, then the process goes on. Otherwise, the author(s) is sent a message stating the reason why the unpublished paper was not accepted in magis. During this stage, the Turnitin platform is used to detect plagiarism in the manuscript.
4. First blind evaluation by expert peers: once the edition team determines that the unpublished paper matches the thematic field of our journal and conforms the formal requirements provided herein, the evaluation process starts based on the method of academic opinion by blind peers. The editor requests some highstanding experts in the specific theme dealt with in the unpublished paper to evaluate it anonymously. The number of experts evaluating each paper may vary. To start the process, magis requires that at least 2 expert peers accept to check the paper; though it is possible to call any additional expert peer. These peer experts are not part of the editorial committee and they usually are from countries other than the author’s one. The editor shall send each peer evaluator (a) the unpublished paper without any information about the author, (b) this Guidelines document, and (c) an Evaluation Form according to the type of paper (reflective article, scientific and technological research article, and review article). Each peer evaluator shall have a deadline of two weeks to process and submit his/her academic opinion.
5. Peer evaluators are requested to fill in the evaluation form, where he/she: (a) indicates whether the document conforms or not the formal and content requirements, (b) provides an opinion consisting in a general assessment of the paper and including his/her suggestions, contributions, observations, and (c) recommends to publish or not the paper according to a scale providing the option to suggest that the unpublished paper be published after some amendments or deep modifications (the Evaluation Form for the scientific and technological research articles has been disclosed both printed on paper and online). In addition, the Evaluation Form asks the peer evaluators if they are available to evaluate the new version prepared by the author now based on the peer evaluator’s observations, so as to continue the process until having the unpublished paper in a version deemed suitable for publication.
6. Preparation of the unpublished paper second version, based on the observations by the peer evaluators; removal or rejection of unpublished papers: after the editor receives the opinions by the expert evaluators, he/she prepares a document gathering the observations and removes all the information related to the author’s identity. This new document is sent to the author(s) and the editorial team defines whether the author(s) can submit a new version of the unpublished paper after implementing the observations by the evaluators or, otherwise, the unpublished paper is removed from the process. In the case that the author(s) is interested in submitting the new version to go on with the evaluation process, then the editor sets a deadline for submitting it based on how deep the amendments/modifications should be. When the author(s) decides not to continue the process, his/her unpublished paper is removed from our journal database and the evaluators are informed that there is not a new version to be evaluated. In the case that the unpublished paper is rejected outright by the evaluators, the author(s) is informed that the paper shall be removed and the opinions shall be attached to the message. Since some part of the publishing policy in magis is intended to contribute to improve the processes of writing articles, the authors are always provided with the opinions by the evaluators, even so in the cases of the unpublished papers removed or rejected outright.
7. Verification by the peer evaluators of the amendments to the second version: after receiving the new version of the paper, the editor forwards it to each evaluator as an anonymous document together with the evaluation each peer expert did on the first version. Each evaluator receives this second version with the evaluation he/she did on the first one, in order to verify whether the suggested amendments were taken into account by the author(s). Based on this criterion, each peer expert evaluates the unpublished paper again and tells the editor either if there is a need to do more amendments or that the paper can be forwarded to the editorial committee for deliberation.
8. Preparation of the final version: once the editor receives the new opinions by the peer evaluators, when two/three of them agree on that the unpublished paper is ready, as it is, for publication, the article begins the editorial process. When the evaluators, or either any of them, think that the unpublished paper needs some other amendments, the editor prepares a new document compiling the evaluations while keeping the peer experts anonymous. Then the editor forwards this document to the author(s) and the previous step is repeated until the evaluators deem the unpublished paper suitable for publication. Anonymity shall be kept throughout the process for both the authors and the evaluators. This way the process ends up with a final version.

Once the paper is approved by the editorial committee, the paper starts the preparation for publication. Throughout this process, the paper is examined in depth to confirm that it is an unpublished work and is then formatted to conform the editorial standards of our journal. Consequently, the authors may be asked to do some changes to the paper. They shall be notified by e-mail about the changes required and the deadline, either 1 or 2 weeks. As this process consists of different stages, the change requests can be send in different time points. In addition, during this process the authors are requested the ORCID code and partial use license signed.

Sometimes, the author(s) sends answers and meta-observations to the comments by the evaluators in order to either explain or clarify the reasons why the author(s) is not making certain amendments as suggested by the evaluators. In such cases, a blind dialogue is started between the evaluator and the author(s), which is mediated by the editorial committee. This dialogue is intended as a discussion space to deliberate on the amendments/modifications. Though, in any case, the approval or rejection is up to the opinion by the expert evaluator.

In the case that despite having three evaluators in the process, their concepts are quite dissimilar and contradictory, magis shall resort to a fourth evaluator to resolve the issue. The process to follow by the fourth evaluator is the same as with the other ones.

 

• Steps to submit your unpublished paper

To have an unpublished paper subject to the evaluation process for magis, the author shall submit the unpublished paper through the OJS platform, also attaching the following documents:

1. Author’s and Research Info Form: This form gathers all the required information about the author(s), the type of unpublished paper and the research the document stemmed from. The order of the author’s names entered in the Research and Author’s Info Form shall be kept the same in the published paper. In addition, the wording of the author’s names shall be kept the same as entered in the Form. The first author entered in the Form shall be taken as the Corresponding Author to communicate with our journal. 
2. Letter of Conditions, signed by the author(s),  either digital or scanned signature. A sample letter can be found in magiswebpage.
3. To ensure the anonymity throughout the evaluation process, the author(s) shall submit a third file consisting of the unpublished paper full text but omitting any reference to its author(s) or any indication that may reveal his/her identity.
4. Should the authors decide to add or remove any of them from the paper based on the contributions by each one, they can do it before the expert peers start the evaluation process; once this process begins, no change shall be done to the paper authorship.

 

 

• Compensation

Each evaluator shall receive a certificate recognizing their participation as an academic peer.

 

• Online Information

The information about the journal can be find in the webpage http://magisinvestigacioneducacion.javeriana.edu.co/. You can also find therein links to download the Author’s and Research Info Form and a sample of the Letter of Conditionsrequired to submit your unpublished paper for evaluation.

 

magis is a biannual digital publication.