About the Journal
Author fees
This journal charges fees to neither authors nor readers. It is Diamond Open Access.
Publisher Information
Bahir Dar University
Peer review
Each submitted manuscript is evaluated on the following basis: • Title and abstract (The title is clear and informative; represents the content and breadth of the study; abstract is complete and essential details: purpose, methodology, results, and conclusions- are presented).
• Background/introduction and Significance (The introduction clearly builds a logical case and context for the problem statement; the issue is significant- makes contribution to knowledge, methodology, or to the field of the study in general)
• Problem statement, conceptual framework (when applicable) and research question(s) (Problem is clear and well-articulated; conceptual framework is explicit and justified; research question (hypothesis where applicable) is clear, concise, and complete.)
• Readability (The paper is understandable to readers in a broad range of disciplines in the area of humanities; the language is clear and coveys the message.)
• Coherence (The paper delivers what's promised up front, the paper is structured logically, making it easy for the reader to follow the argument.)
• Methodology (The research design is concrete, clearly defined and described; the method is appropriate (optimal) for the research question; ethical issues are considered.)
• Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations/Implications (Results are appropriately interpreted and discussed; key findings stand out; practical or theoretical implications are discussed; guidance for future studies is offered.)
• Graphics (appropriateness and relevance of the tables, figures, illustrations, etc.,)
• Scientific Conduct (No instances of plagiarism; ideas and materials of others are correctly attributed; reference citations are complete; proper APA citation and referencing followed).
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
Ethics is a very important consideration in research and we require our contributors to have followed ethical issues in conducting their study and disseminating their research product.
When the research process involves human beings at any sage, which is most probably the case with research submitted to this Journal and most others on language education, the researcher must ensure that all necessary steps have been taken to appropriately follow relevant ethical guidelines in the institution where the study has been conducted.
This involves making sure that the participants have taken part in the research on a voluntary basis, that they have been informed of their role and the possible benefits and threats to them, that they have agreed to be included in the research process, that they have the right to withdraw whenever they wish, that every measure has been adopted to make personal information coming from them confidential, and the like.
Ethics also implies that the researchers should use the research findings for the benefit of those who have taken part in the research as the minimum compensation for their contribution.
Submitting a manuscript to more than one journal at the same time, not acknowledging funding sources, having conflict of interests with other contributors and co-researchers, including false and fabricated data in the paper, copying the works of other scholars without properly acknowledging them (plagiarism), publishing the same or almost the same work in different places are other examples of ethical breach which we recommend our contributors to take very seriously. As such, authors may be asked to submit a declaration with their manuscripts indicating that all ethical guidelines have been properly followed in their study.
Duties of authors
Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion' works should be clearly identified as such.
Data access and retention Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works and that the works and/or words of others, if used, have been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others.
Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
Acknowledgement of sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.
Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human or animal subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has/have approved them.
Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.
All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding.
Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Duties of editors
Publication decisions
The editorial team of this peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often depending on the suggestions coming from manuscript reviewers. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions.
The editorial team may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor-in-chief may confer with the associate editors or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play
An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Confidentiality The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the main journal.
Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations. Non-peer reviewed sections of their journal should be clearly identified.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations
An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society).
Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. Duties of reviewers Contribution to editorial decisions Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method.
Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Publication Scheduling
This journal publishes two issues in one volume per year.
