Submission Format


Contributors should submit their manuscripts in .doc or .rtf format through the online submission process. Research manuscripts and essays should include a cover page with running head, author's name, and affiliation, followed by an abstract of 100–150 words as well as by a list of 3–5 keywords. Manuscripts should be double-spaced with 1-inch margins and must accord with the style guidelines outlined in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th edition). The editors encourage contributors to avoid including explanatory notes whose material can be incorporated into the text.

Submission guidelines      

a. Blind Review requirements: All submissions are subjected to a blind peer review process. Therefore, names and affiliations should not appear in the manuscript itself and MUST be removed before submission. Non-blinded manuscripts will be returned to the author to be blinded.

b. Line numbers: Include line numbers in your submission.

c. Abstracts: These can be structured or unstructured. Structured abstracts are recommended but not required.

Empirical manuscripts' structured abstracts should include a brief description of the following sections:

  • Purpose
  • Research Methods/Approach (e.g., Setting, Participants, Research Design, Data Collection, and Analysis),
  • Observations/Results,
  • Integration into previous research and Implications for Research and Practice.

Nonempirical or conceptual manuscripts structured abstracts should use subheads appropriate to the conceptual argument or position promoted or discussed. For example,

  • Purpose
  • Proposed Conceptual Argument or Model Implications for Research

Including section heads, abstracts should not exceed 200 words. Please refer to the citation below for further details on structured abstracts.

Mosteller, F., Nave, B., & Miech, E. J. (2004). Why we need a structured abstract in education research. Educational Researcher33(1), 29-34.

d. Reproductions: Authors are responsible for obtaining permission to reproduce copyrighted material from other sources and are required to sign an agreement for the transfer of copyright to the publisher, this includes but is not limited to the reproduction of any figure, table, or extract from the text of another source.

e. Illustrations: Illustrations submitted (line drawings, halftones, photos, photomicrographs, etc.) should be clean digital files. For the highest quality reproduction, contributors should follow these guidelines:

  • 300 dpi or higher
  • EPS, TIFF, JPG, or PSD format only
  • Submitted as separate files, not embedded in text files

f. Tables and Figures: Tables and figures should be included in the text of the manuscript at the appropriate point, with a short descriptive title noted above each table. Figures should be completely labeled. Captions should be typed and double-spaced.


The review should consider:

  • The intended audience for the book and who would find it useful;
  • The background of the book's author;
  • The main ideas and major objectives of the book and how effectively these are accomplished;
  • The soundness of methods and information sources used;
  • The context or impetus for the book - - political controversy, review research or policy, etc.;
  • A comparison with other works on this subject; A brief and clear description and summary of the contents provide an understanding of the scope and organization of the book. This is especially important when reviewing edited volumes with multiple sections with multiple authors.
  • The context or impetus for the book - - political controversy, review research or policy, etc.; A comparison with other works on this subject.
  • Constructive comments about the strength and weaknesses of the book. Questions that might guide the evaluation are:
    •  To which audience(s) will this book be most helpful? Why? What are the important contributions this book makes?
    • What contributions were problematic, weak, or not useful? What could have been added to enhance the book?
    • How is the book related to or how does it supplement current work on the improvement of education doctorate programs?
    • What did you like or dislike about the book? What is your recommendation?
  • Quotations that effectively provide a sense of the writing style and/or statements that are helpful in illustrating the author(s) points.
  • For edited books: dominant themes with reference to specific chapters as appropriate; and implications of the book for research, policy, practice, or theory.

The header of the review should include:

  • Author(s) or editor(s) first and last name(s) (please indicate if it is an edited book)
  • Title of book
  • Year of publication
  • Place of publication
  • Publisher
  • Number of pages
  • Price (please indicate paperback or hardcover) if available
  • ISBN
  • Example: David Boud and Alison Lee: Changing Practices of Doctoral Education. New York: Routledge, 2009. 260pp. Paperback: $35.00 ISBN 978-0-415-44270-1

The end of the review should include:

  • Your first and last name
  • Institution affiliation
  • A brief biographical note including your name, degree & field from what institution, and current position.

Any references should be included in APA style (7th edition).