E-learning journal list

From EduTech Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Introduction

The goal of this list compiled by Robert Stoyan (TECFA) is to provide all information that is needed to decide where you want to publish an e-learning paper. Included are both dedicated e-learning journals and other journals regularly publishing on e-learning.

At some point we shall try to add some information about importance. Importance could be impact factors but also other criteria, such as adoption by a well established sub community of reasearchers. We cannot reproduce Reuters impact factors for copyright reasons. We may, at some point, retrieve IF from other sources, i.e. the journal home page.

Order of entries is by impact factor (Thomson-Reuters journal citation index. The top end (impact over 1.2) is rather complete, below that there are many omissions currently. To be improved.

See also:

1 Educational Psychology Review

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: "We average about 32 days" (answer from editor, 2011)
  4.  % accepted: 30-40% (answer from editor, 2011)
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences): same day

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): from 8 papers, about 6 are reviews and 2 other. Most of the other are replication of existing studies, a few (maybe 1 of 20) are a special category "Research into Practice" - to explain a well supported educ. innovation to practitioners. They declare not to publish empirical research (other than replications)
  2. topics: "educational psychology", not further specified. bad from e-learning perspective: only some 2 papers out of 16 are e-learning (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency:
  5. Article length: 8500 words (including references)
  6. Article sections:

Other comments


2 Educational Psychologist

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/0046-1520.asp (2011)

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: "Our turnaround time has averaged less than 7 weeks this year, although there are some manuscripts that have been outliers. You can be fairly confident of receiving a decision within 3 months." (answer from editor, 2011)
  4.  % accepted: 20% (answer from editor, 2011)
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences): 4

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): "scholarly essays, reviews, critiques, and theoretical and conceptual articles" "not publish articles whose primary purpose is to report the methods and results of an empirical study" "not articles that are intended mainly as practical guides" (2011)
  2. topics: "all aspects of educational psychology". From 4 issues checked, there was a full special edition on e-learning, but no other paper on e-learning (2011) Asking the editor, if a paper on theory how to build educational games would be welcome, he made clear that this is within the scope of the journal (as the proposed abstract emphasized psychological and educational theory) but it is very far away from what they usually publish. Generally, from checking through several years, there was absolutely no paper on constructing any system or game for e-learning. There were papers on psychological / learning processes induced by such systems. (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: 4 (2011)
  5. length: "articles of varying lengths ... will be considered" (2011)
  6. sections:

Other comments

3 Learning and Instruction

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening: (20??)
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: (20??)
  4.  % accepted: 12% (2011)
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): empirical, no review since 2011
  2. topics: advanced scientific research in the areas of learning, development, instruction and teaching
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: 6 (2011)
  5. length: (20??)
  6. sections: (20??)

Other comments

  • Journal of the European Association for Learning and Instruction (EARLI)


4 Journal of Educational Psychology

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/edu/index.aspx (2011)

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review:
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): mostly empirical: "original research ... occasional publication of exceptionally important theoretical and review articles" (2011)
  2. topics: "primary psychological research pertaining to education". They are just now, in 2011, recruiting for a special issue on "advanced learning technologies" (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: 4 (2011)
  5. length:
  6. sections:

Other comments


5 International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening: (20??)
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: (20??)
  4.  % accepted: (20??)
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): original empirical investigations; extensions of important previous work; critical integrative theoretical and methodological contributions; and synthetic review articles.
  2. topics: research on and practice in all aspects of learning and education with the aid of computers and computer networks in synchronous and asynchronous distributed and non-distributed groups.
  3. online/print/both: (20??)
  4. Frequency: (20??)
  5. length: (20??)
  6. sections: (20??)

Other comments

6 Computers & Education

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: Typically within 2 months (2011)Â http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/347/preface1
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): count in one example issue: 8 empirical, 1 review and 0 other. Theory is apparently not wanted, they define themselves as "publish definitive contributions to serve as a reference standard against which the current state-of-the-art can be assessed" (2011)
  2. topics: anything about technology and learning (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: 8 issues per year (2011)
  5. length: "no maximum length for manuscripts" (2011)
  6. sections: for empirical papers: Introduction, Material and methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusions (articles adhere to this roughly, with free modifications as needed). For review papers: Freestyle (there is no guide, also articles seem divers). (2011)

Other comments

7 Journal of the Learning Sciences

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: "Our turnaround time is 3-4 months" (answer from editor, 2011)
  4.  % accepted: "about 12.5%" (answer from editor, 2011)
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences): same day

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics: "new insights about how people learn". multidisciplinary. "important ideas that can change our understanding of learning as well as the practice of education" (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: 4 (2011)
  5. length: "Manuscripts are typically around 15,000 words" (2011)
  6. sections:

Other comments

8 British Journal of Educational Psychology

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): "action research, case studies, critical reviews of the literature, experimental studies and surveys" (2011)
  2. topics:
  3. online/print/both:
  4. Frequency:
  5. length: "should normally be no more than 5000 words (excluding the abstract, reference list, tables and figures)" (2011)
  6. sections:

Other comments

  1. They have a price for phd students incl. 3 years after phd http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1111/(ISSN)2044-8279/homepage/ForAuthors.html (2011)

9 Learning and Individual Differences

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening: editorial rejection comes within 2 weeks of receipt (2011)
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: "Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 3 months" (2011)
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): "Standard Papers - reporting original research / Technical Reports - on methods, techniques and apparatus of general interest / Essay Reviews - short reviews on topical subjects of general interest / Forum Papers - short articles presenting new ideas, or responses to published material - with a hope of stimulating debate" (2011)
  2. topics: "understanding of individual differences within an educational context" (2011)
  3. online/print/both:
  4. Frequency:
  5. length: "no longer than 10,000 words for full length articles or 3,000 words for short reports (not including tables, figures, etc.)" (2011)
  6. sections:

Other comments

10 Instructional Science

http://www.springer.com/education+%26+language/learning+%26+instruction/journal/11251

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review:
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics: "deep understanding of the nature, theory, and practice of the instructional process and resultant learning" (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency:
  5. length: "the journal stands out by providing space for full and detailed reporting of major studies" (2011)
  6. sections:

Other comments

11 Journal of Computer Assisted Learning

Importance

  1. Rating: "JCAL is currently graded "A" by the European Science Foundation" (2011)

Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: "Average time from manuscript receipt to first full reviews = 70 days (shortest = 18)" (2008, http://www.jcal.info/)
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences): 2, 1

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): all these, other is here opinion and theory. All explicitly encouraged on http://www.jcal.info/aims_and_scope/index.htm
  2. topics: "whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange." "facilitating mutual understanding between researchers and practitioners" (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: bi-mothly (2011)
  5. length: empirical papers "normally be between 3000 and 7000 words", other papers can be longer.
  6. sections: for empirical papers: intro method results discussion. Other papers: not defined.

Other comments

12 Australasian Journal of Educational Technology

Importance

  1. Rating: AJET's 2010 ranking in the Australian Research Council's Tiers for the Australian Ranking of Journals is "Tier B", a demotion from the "Tier A" ranking accorded in 2009

Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: "Our normal aim is a three month 'turnaround' time for the review process" (2011)
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics: educational technology, information and communications technologies for education... (2011)
  3. online/print/both: online (2011)
  4. Frequency:
  5. length:
  6. sections:

Other comments

13 British Journal of Educational Technology (BJET)

Importance

Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4. Unspecified time, probably aveerage of editorial and review: "average first response 33 days (as at 12th January 2011)"
  5.  % accepted: 20% (2011)
  6. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics: Articles cover the whole range of education and training, concentrating on the theory, applications and development of educational technology and communications (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: Bi-monthly (2011)
  5. length: Papers are usually <4000 words (including references), but this is not taken too seriously, there are also articles of 5000 words and more. Abstract of 100-200 count probably extra. (2011)
  6. sections:

Other comments

14 ETD&R - Educational Technology Research and Development

Importance

Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): on their homepage they advertise empirical and "also review" (2011)
  2. topics: in addition to all normal e-learning contents, they also publish on development of technology for education (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: bi-monthly (2011)
  5. length:
  6. sections:

Other comments

15 Interactive Learning Environments

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~db=all~content=t716100701~tab=summary (2011)

http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/titles/10494820.asp

Importance

Review process

  1. Peer Review:
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics: Innovative learning situations, including adaptive systems, intelligent tutoring, conversational and advisory systems (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: 5 issues per year. Recently increased to 5 issues per year (growing journal) (2011)
  5. length:
  6. sections:

Other comments

16 Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology

Importance

Review process

  1. Peer Review:
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening: some 3 weeks (2011)
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: up to eight weeks. Literally they say: "reviewing process usually takes from three to eight weeks" (2011)
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics:
  3. online/print/both: online (2011)
  4. Frequency: quarterly (January, April, July, and October)
  5. length:
  6. sections:

Other comments

17 Learning Media & Technology

Importance

Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics: "submissions ... on contemporary debates" on "educational theory, practices, media and educational technologies"
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: 4 (2011)
  5. length: 4000 to 6000 words
  6. sections:

Other comments

18 International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET)

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review:
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics: Relevant trends and research results as well as the presentation of practical experiences gained while developing and testing elements of technology enhanced learning (2011)
  3. online/print/both: both (2011)
  4. Frequency: quarterly (March, June, September, December) (2011)
  5. length:
  6. sections:

Other comments

19 Journal of Technology, Learning and Assessment

Importance


Review process

  1. Peer Review: yes (2011)
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening:
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review:
  4.  % accepted:
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences):

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other):
  2. topics: "initiatives that combine technology, learning theory, and assessment" (2011)
  3. online/print/both: online (2011)
  4. Frequency:
  5. length:
  6. sections:

Other comments

20 Educational research review

Importance

Review process

  1. Peer Review: Yes
  2. Time needed for first editorial screening: (20??)
  3. Time needed for answer from peer review: (20??)
  4.  % accepted: (20??)
  5. how fast did editor answer emails (days, different experiences): not so fast...

What they publish

  1. article types (empirical / review / other): Only review (descriptive, meta-analyses...)
  2. topics: review studies in education and instruction at any level. The journal will accept meta-analytic reviews, narrative reviews and best-evidence syntheses
  3. online/print/both: both
  4. Frequency: (20??)
  5. length: (20??)
  6. sections: (20??)

Other comments

21 Links and discussion

21.1 Discussion

D. Schneider believes that impact factor is an interesting indicator for deciding where to publish or what a researcher is "worth" but by no means it should be the only criteria.

  • Impact factor depends on the number of people working in a field. E.g. Medical journals get higher rankings than psychology journals than "true" educational technology journals.
  • Impact factor depends on the citation scheme. In computer science, references take much less space and therefore people add more.
  • Impact factor favors conservative thought. Academics only read what they are familiar with and conservative research is easier to conduct ...
  • Real (mostly narrow minded) research articles get higher rankings since people who are engaged in real field work have less time to publish.
  • Etc. (there are many more reasons why considering an impact factor the only quality criterium is inappropriate.

21.2 Links

There are several other e-learning journal lists, they are longer, but contain little information per journal: