About the Journal

COVER

The Brazilian Journal of Research in Science Education (RBPEC) is a publication of the Brazilian Association of Research in Science Education (ABRAPEC) and aims to disseminate results and reflections from research conducted in the field of Science Education with ethics and efficiency, in order to contribute to the consolidation of the field, to the training of researchers, and to the production of knowledge in Science Education, which will support the development of educational actions responsible and committed to the improvement of scientific education and social well-being.

Currently, it is rated as A1 in the QUALIS CAPES  (2017-2020)evaluation of the fields of Education and Teaching.

e-ISSN: 1984-2686   ISSN:1806-5104

Access

The Brazilian Journal of Research in Science Education has open access and no charges for submission, reading and download of the papers. It uses the Open Journal Systems (OJS), an open and free code system for administration and publication of academic journals, that was developed and distributed by the Public Knowledge Project under a GNU General Public License. 

The journal follows the license Creative Commons (CC BY), that allows sharing and adaptation of the published material in any medium or format and for any purpose. In any case, appropriate credit must be given to the original material. For more details about how to do so, please read the terms of the licence, that are available from the previous link.

The Journal History

The Brazilian Journal of Research in Science Education was founded in 2001, and officially launched at the III Brazilian Conference of Research in Science Education (III ENPEC, held in Atibaia, SP, from 7 to 10 November 2001. Since then, it has been published regularly. Until 2018, it was published three times a year. From 2019, it is published continuously.

Since 2017, RBPEC is registered in the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) system and identify the name of each author to its Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCiD). Then, all the papers published from 2017 has its unique identificatory and the digital identificatory for its authors.

The previous editors were Drs.: Marco Antonio Moreira, from Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul and Eduardo Mortimer, from Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (2001 to 2005); Isabel Martins, from Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (2006 to 2010); and Alberto Villani and Cristiano Mattos, both from Universidade de São Paulo (2011 to 2015).

EDITORIAL POLICIES

Focus and Scope 

The Brazilian Journal of Research in Science Education (RBPEC) is the official journal of the Brazilian Association of Research in Science Education (ABRAPEC) and aims to publish original academic research papers in the Science Education area.

Academic research papers are those reporting empirical or theoretical studies, which bring clear contributions to the knowledge of the field. In both cases,

  • the adopted theoretical framework should be presented succinctly, but it should allow the reader who is not familiar with it to understand how its main concepts were used and to assess the relationships established from them;
  • the aims and research questions that guide the study must be explained in the text and justified;
  • a methodology according to which the study was conducted (in the case of empirical work, both for data collection and analysis) should be presented in a detailed and justified way;
  • in the case of studies that involve human beings, the ethical aspects that guide this type of research must have been observed and the way in which this occurred must be made explicit;
  • contributions to the field should be stated in a clear manner.

Any submission that contains experience reports or presentation of instructional material of any kind will not be reviewed.

Original papers are those not published in other media. They may have originated from academic papers and papers presented at scientific congresses, but the submitted text should never be (in whole or in part) equal to them. In the case of papers presented at congresses, the submitted text must clearly be an expansion of the initial one. Any submission identified as containing self-plagiarism will not be reviewed.

The Science Education area comprises the subareas of Environmental Education, Astronomy Education, Biology Education, Physics Education, Geosciences Education, Chemistry Education and Health Education. Considering that research in these subareas can relate to other areas (such as Epistemology, History and Philosophy of Science, Linguistics, Mathematics, Psychology and Sociology of Education, etc.), papers focused on some of them can be submitted as long as the interface and contributions to Science Education are clearly explained. Any manuscript related to any of the sub-areas mentioned above (but not to the Education area thereof), as well as general aspects of Education or other areas (but without a clear relationship or implication for the Science Education area) will not be reviewed.

The target audience of the Brazilian Journal of Research in Science Education is composed of researchers, undergraduate and graduate students of Science Education interested in research in the Science Education area.

Peer Review Process

This journal adopts the policy of double-blind peer review. This means that the referees do not know the identity of the authors and the authors do not know the identity of the referees who evaluated their text. This is extremely important to ensure the integrity of the evaluation process of the manuscripts.

The referees who analyze the submissions are Brazilian and foreign researchers with a doctorate and publishing experience in indexed journals. Referees who collaborate each year have their name published in the journal’s website.

In order for the evaluation process to be done in this way, the submitted text should not contain any information that would identify the authors, that is:

  • author(s) names and affiliations;
  • where the empirical work was carried out. This information should be replaced by something generic (for example, large city in northeastern Brazil);
  • references of the author (s). If it is necessary to insert some reference of the author(s), it should appear in the text as (Author, year) or (Author and collaborator, year) and in the list of references as general as possible. For example:

Author (year). Name of the journal in which the paper was published.

Author (year). Paper presented at a (national or international) conference.

Author (year). Nature of the academic work (Graduation Essay, Master's Dissertation, Doctoral Thesis).

  • acknowledgments that contribute to the identification of the author (s);
  • identification in the document properties. Such information must be removed prior to file submission. According to the GUIDELINES.

After the text is submitted, all of these aspects are checked.

  • In case of any identification, the submission is rejected with the indication that the text can be resubmitted without the elements that identify the author(s). In this case, the author(s) has(have) a deadline of 5 days to submit the unidentified version. If this does not happen, we understand that there is no further interest of the author(s) in publishing their work in the RBPEC.
  • In the event that the submitted text is outside the scope of the RBPEC and/or does not follow any of the Submission Guidelines (e.g. minimum number of pages, proper use of the bibliographic standard, etc.), the submission is rejected with due clarification. If the text is outside the scope of the journal, whenever possible, the editor indicates a more appropriate journal for that submission.

When the submission is accepted, the text is submitted to the analysis in the software that identifies plagiarism. If any problems are found, the submission is immediately rejected. In this case, the authors are informed of the reason for the rejection and receive the report generated by the software. If no problem related to plagiarism is found, the text is forwarded to two arbitrators selected by the publisher. These referees should be experts in the area and/or in the subject matter of the manuscript and should not have institutional or research group links with the author (s). The referees are instructed not include any identification in their comments or in any files attached to them. This is also checked before the comments are sent to the authors.

When the editor receives the comments of the two referees, the text submitted and those comments are read. From there, a final opinion is written containing the decision to be sent to the author(s). In case the comments of the two referees point to very different decisions, a third referee is invited to analyze the submitted text.

The possible results of the evaluation process are:

  • Acceptance

Criteria: The text presents a research work in the field of Science Education or in a field that is directly related to it; discusses a relevant topic; and brings contributions to the field of research in Education in Sciences. The justification(s) for conducting the study is(are) relevant and consistent with the literature on the field. The objectives and/or questions of research are contextualized in relation to the research of the field and are clearly formulated. The methodology (empirical or theoretical) is consistent with the research objectives and/or questions and has been properly implemented. The conclusions are related to the research objectives and/or questions and are supported by results presented in the data analysis or in the theoretical argument. The bibliographic references used are current and pertinent and the language used throughout the text is clear and correct.

Routing: In this case, the author(s) has(have) a deadline of 10 days to submit the final version, containing all information previously omitted to avoid identification.

  • Simple review

Criteria: The text meets the criteria for acceptance, but some minor adjustments are necessary in relation to specific aspects.

Routing: In this case, the author(s) has(have) 20 days to submit: a revised version, in which the modifications requested in the decision message must have been made; and a letter explaining how the requests of the referees or the editors were considered (or not). In the revised version, all altered parts should be highlighted with a color font other than black, in order to facilitate the process of analysis of the requested modifications. The revised version should not contain any identification of the author(s).

  • Major review

Criteria: The text presents a research work in the field of Science Education or in a field that is directly related to it; discusses a relevant topic; and brings contributions to the field of research in Education in Sciences. However, one or more aspects need to be modified significantly for the acceptance criteria to be met. Routing: In this case, the author(s) has(have) 20 days to submit: a revised version, in which the modifications requested in the decision message must have been made; and a letter explaining how the requests of the referees or the editors were considered (or not). In the revised version, all altered parts should be highlighted with a color font other than black, in order to facilitate the process of analysis of the requested modifications. The revised version should not contain any identification of the author(s).

  • Rejection

Criteria: The text does not present a research work in the area of Science Education or in an area that is directly related to it; or does not discuss a relevant topic. The manuscript does not contribute to the research area in Science Education because (i) there are many weaknesses in the study that gave rise to it; (ii) one or more weaknesses can not be improved (for example, due to insufficient data to discuss an important aspect); (iii) the conclusions are not supported by results presented in the data analysis or in the theoretical argument; or (iv) the conclusions are not discussed in the light of the proper literature, thus making the knowledge produced in the study clear.

In the last three years, we have tried to reduce significantly the time between submission and decision. Our goal is that this time be less than six months.

In cases where a deadline has been stipulated for the author(s) to submit another version of their manuscript, if the deadline expires without the author(s) to come forward, the submission is filed definitively.

As part of the process of producing the file for publication, the authors are asked to give a preliminary version of this file, in order to identify possible inaccuracies. After the authors approve this file, modification requests are not accepted in the published file.

Frequency

Each volume of the Brazilian Journal of Research in Education in Sciences (RBPEC) is published in a calendar year.

Until 2018, each volume of the Brazilian Journal of Research in Education in Sciences (RBPEC) was published in a calendar year in three regular numbers published quarterly. Papers accepted for publication were assigned to one of the available future editions. From 2019, the RBPEC adopts continuous publication, that is, the papers are published in the current volume as soon as the authors check the proofs.

At the discretion of the Editorial Board, the Brazilian Journal of Research in Education in Sciences (RBPEC) can publish thematic dossier, for which specific editors may be invited.

Open access policy

This journal offers immediate free access to its content, following the principle that providing free scientific knowledge to the public provides greater global democratization of knowledge. This means that all of its content is available at no charge to readers or their institutions. Under the Creative Commons 4.0 International License, readers may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or share the papers without permission from the publisher or authors.

Archiving

The Brazilian Journal of Science Education Research uses the LOCKSS system to create a distributed file system among the participating libraries and allows them to create permanent journal files for preservation and restoration. Learn more...

RBPEC Publication Manifesto on LOCKSS.

Check of plagiarism

When the submission is accepted, the text is submitted to the analysis in a software that identifies plagiarism. If any problems are found, the submission is immediately rejected. In this case, the authors are informed of the reason for the rejection and receive the report generated by the software. If no problem related to plagiarism is found, the text is forwarded to one of the associate editors, who identifies two reviewers. These reviewers should be experts in the area and/or in the subject matter of the manuscript and should not have institutional or research group links with the author(s) of the submission. The reviewers are asked to not include any identification in their comments or in any files attached to them. This is also checked before the comments are sent to the authors.

When the editor receives the comments of the two reviewers, the text submitted and those comments are read. From there, a final decision is written to be sent to the author(s). In case the comments of the two referees point to very different decisions, a third referee is invited to analyze the submitted text.

As part of the process of producing the file for publication, the authors are asked to correct the proof of the paper in order to identify possible inaccuracies. After the authors approve this file, modification requests are not accepted in the published files.

ETHICS OF PUBLICATION

The following rules guides the publication of the RBPEC on terms of ethics:

Authorship: All those identified as authors of a submission must have contributed to the research reported in terms of design of the study, gathering, analysis, and interpretation of data. All co-authors are responsible for the content of the paper.

Plagiarism: The Brazilian Journal of Science Education Research (RBPEC) follows the Code of Conduct and the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors internationally defined by the Committee on Ethics in Publications (COPE).

In order to ensure the originality of their submissions, authors should: (i) use quotation marks to clearly identify quoted verbatim text from another source; (ii) reference the quotations clearly in the text; (iii) include all references, in a complete format, in the list of references; (iv) obtain permission from the copyright holder for reuse previously published tables of figures; (v) avoid self-plagiarism, that is, cite the authors’ previous work when discussing any part of it.

In the case of identification of any error in a published paper, the original file is substituted by a new one, after approved from the authors.

Misconduct Cases: The identification of any type of misconduct by the authors (for example, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, simultaneous submission in more than one journal) is a reason for cancellation of the submission, and this may be followed by other measures with which the authors agree in the Declaration of Copyright. If the misconduct occurs after publication, the paper will be excluded from the volume in which it was published, and a file will be published explaining to the readers why the original file was deleted.

Conflicts of interest: Authors should declare any conflict of interest involving, for instance, research funding, financial support, any kind of external support for the conduction of the study reported in the submission.

Ethics in the conduction of the study: Authors are responsible for attending ethical issues during the research following good practices of science.

Publication charge

There are no submission and publication fees for this journal.