Editorial Policies and Practices

About submitting an article or essay

The author(s) must follow all the guidelines in the Submissions tab. When sending the text formatted under the REVEDUC template, the following documents must be attached to the system: 

• CopySpider report.
• Declaration of Consent and Originality for Submission, indicating that the article is original and has not been submitted for evaluation in another journal, and agreeing to the submission, format, evaluation, approval and publication rules adopted by the journal.
• Declaration of the contribution of the author(s) to the research and the manuscript when there is more than one author.
• Copy of the approval report from the Ethics Committee and the number of human beings. 

About Access and Gratuity

The Revista Eletrônica de Educação offers immediate free access to its content. It follows the principle that by making scientific knowledge freely available, with no requirement to register with the journal or embargo, it provides greater worldwide democratization of knowledge and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing recommended by the DOAJ. We also use COPE's Ethics toolkit for a successful editorial office and the Basic Guidelines for Integrity in Scientific Activity.

This allows immediate free access to the publications and enables any user to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of the articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them on as data for software or use them for any other legal purpose.

Text submissions, evaluation, and editorial processes are free of charge.

On originality and novelty

The Revista Eletrônica de Educação is committed to publishing original and unpublished manuscripts.

The work submitted by authors to this journal must be original and will be checked with anti-plagiarism software before being sent for evaluation, following the Guidelines for Authors and Publication standards

Authors must declare that their text has not been published elsewhere or is being evaluated for publication by another journal; if not, they must justify this in "Comments to the editor". If it is identified that the text has been submitted to or published in another journal, or any form of plagiarism or self-plagiarism, the text will be disregarded, and the REVEDUC Editorial Team will contact the author to inform them that it has been archived.  

On Research Ethics

In cases where human beings are involved in the research, a research consent form must be submitted when the article is submitted, proving that all procedures have been carried out by the laws and institutional guidelines or those of the appropriate review committee. Details of approval by the relevant ethics committee must be provided when submitting an article, including the institution, the name of the review committee, and the authorization number(s).

Studies with human beings that adopt categorizations by race/ethnicity, age, illness/disability, religion, sex/gender, sexual orientation or other socially constructed groupings should include a justification for the choice of definitions and categories Appropriate, non-stigmatizing language should be used when describing the different groups.

The right to privacy of individuals and institutions must be guaranteed. Products, procedures, or equipment that could pose a danger to the replication of the research must be identified in the text. 

The approval of the ethics committee selected by the authors must be obtained before the start of the research; it is not possible to obtain retrospective approval, and therefore the study may be rejected for publication in the Revista Eletrônica de Educação.

About Peer Review

The Revista Eletrônica de Educação adopts procedures that avoid conflicts of interest during the evaluation stages of submitted articles. To ensure the integrity of the blind peer review for submissions to the journal, all possible care must be taken not to reveal the identity of authors and reviewers during the process. This requires authors, editors, and evaluators (who may send documents to the system as part of the evaluation process) to take certain precautions with the text and document properties. 

The evaluation process begins with a pre-evaluation of the material submitted, carried out by the Executive Secretariat, accompanied by an Editor assigned to monitor the evaluation process. This initial process involves checking that the text complies with the journal's publication standards and scope, the guidelines for authors, the proper presentation of the anonymous text in the template, forwarding the documents requested for submission (CopySpider Report; Declaration of Consent and Originality for Submission, indicating that the article is original and has not been submitted for evaluation in another journal and agreement with the rules of submission, format, evaluation, approval, and publication adopted by the journal; Declaration of the contribution of the author(s) to the research and the manuscript when there is more than one author; Copy of the approval opinion of the Ethics Committee and process number, in the case of research involving human beings). 

If the text submitted does not comply with the scope of the journal, the items are not in conformity with the indicated requests, or are missing, the authors will be sent a message indicating the inadequacy of the submission, and the text will be archived.  

If the text is coherent with the scope of the journal and all the documents are presented correctly, the designated Editor begins the peer review process by selecting two or more evaluators (researchers, specialists) who have expertise in the area of knowledge covered by the production, from an institution other than that of the author, and sends them an invitation to take part in the evaluation process. 

In this invitation, in addition to some general information, the title and abstract of the text are sent so that the reviewer can confirm their interest and availability to submit their review. The reviewer is usually asked to confirm their interest within ten days of the invitation being sent. If the reviewer agrees to give an opinion on the submitted text, the system gives them access to the full text (in template format and anonymously) and the evaluation form. As a rule, reviewers are given 20 days to submit their opinion. Having received two or more opinions, the Editor systematizes the results into a final opinion sent to the author(s), regardless of whether or not the article is approved.

Once the article has been accepted without the need for corrections, it is sent to the editing stage. 

Opinions that suggest minor or extensive changes are forwarded by the Editor to the author(s) with the indication that if they are interested in publishing the article, they should send a reformulated version under the evaluators' requests so that it can be accepted for a second round of evaluation. In these cases, the reworked article must be submitted by the date indicated by the Editor, who will then forward it to the same reviewers for further evaluation. Once the opinions have been received, the actions indicated above are followed by the Editors.

Opinions suggesting rejection of the analyzed article are forwarded to the authors and are archived.

It should be noted that if the Editor identifies divergences in the opinions, they may refer the submitted text to a third reviewer or define the final result as whether or not the material is approved.

About Complaints and Appeals

Complaints against the journal, its staff, editorial board or editor and appeals must be submitted in writing and will be analyzed by the editor(s) responsible for the article and the editor(s)-in-chief, taking into account: the opinions of experts, editorial autonomy as to the relevance and consistency of the contributions and in the light of the precepts of ethics and good practice in research and publishing.

About corrections and retractions

The editors of Revista Eletrônica de Educação should consider correcting or retracting a publication in the following cases and circumstances: 

• There are strong indications that the results are unreliable due to a serious error (information, calculation or methodological); falsified data (e.g., image manipulation), or fabrication (e.g., data);
• Presence of plagiarism or self-plagiarism when the results have been previously published in other journals, websites, books, and other media without proper attribution of authorship and sources and authorization for their use by the intellectual owners of the published information;
• Containing material and data without authorization for its use; infringement of copyright or other legal issues (e.g. defamation, privacy);
• Contains unethical research;
• The publication is the result of a compromised or manipulated peer review process;
• The author(s) did not declare any relevant conflict of interest that affected the peer review results.

It is the obligation of each author to correct or provide proof of the veracity of the research when the authors themselves or third parties identify errors and/or inaccuracies in the texts.