Submissions

Author Guidelines

The Curriculum Space Journal (CSJ) has adopted a CONTINUOUS PUBLICATION model, following the trend of scientific publications. With the implementation of continuous flow, all editions for the current year will remain open (In progress). As articles are accepted and formatted, they will be inserted into the incomplete edition.

1. CSJ does not charge fees for the submission and publication of articles.

2. The journal accepts texts for publication in the following categories:

I Articles

Description: The term "scientific articles" refers to productions resulting from empirical research and analyses that focus their discussion on the field of Education, specifically studies on curriculum, with a length ranging from 25,000 to 60,000 characters including spaces.

II Reviews

Description: Reviews are considered texts that emphasize works (books, collections, films, and documentaries) of relevance in the field of Education, with a focus on curriculum studies, whose length does not exceed 10,000 characters including spaces.

III Interviews

Description: This category includes productions with recognized researchers in the academic field, leaders of organized movements, artists, and other personalities contributing to the education debate, with a focus on curriculum studies.

3. Texts in Portuguese, Spanish, or English must be original.

4. Research or experience reports should be transformed into articles for publication in this scientific journal, following CSJ guidelines.

5. Submissions undergo preliminary selection by the scientific editor of the section to which the text is intended.

6. The selection of articles for publication is based on their contribution to curriculum studies, within the journal's editorial scope. The originality of the theme or treatment, the consistency and rigor of the theoretical-methodological approach, and the quality of the text are also essential.

7. Text files must be submitted only through registration on the journal's website (https://periodicos.ufpb.br/index.php/rec/index).

8. Author identification data must be entered directly into the appropriate fields on the article registration page and in the system in Portuguese, English, and Spanish.

9. Authors must include a brief curriculum description, up to three lines, following the model: "Ph.D. in Education from the Federal University of Paraíba. Faculty at the State University of Paraíba. Lattes Curriculum: https://lattes.cnpq.br/00000000000000."

Important note: Authors will receive an email with instructions for linking ORCID to the submission after text approval. This procedure is essential for text publication in the journal.

10. Two manuscript files must be attached: one without any information that could identify the authors and another identified.

11. Manuscripts derived from studies involving human subjects must have been approved by the Research Ethics Committee, as recommended by CSJ ethical guidelines (Ethical Issues item 1). Authors must insert a digital copy of the institution's Research Ethics Committee approval declaration as a supplementary document.

12. Manuscripts must have a maximum of three authors.

13. At least one author of the text must hold a Ph.D. degree.

14. Submission files must be in .doc or .docx format and not exceed 2 MB.

15. CSJ provides a template for file submission, which can be found below. Its use is mandatory for article compliance with journal standards.

- Template for Articles

16. In cases of plagiarism, redundancy (double publication), fabricated data, conflicts of interest, or ethical problems (e.g., violation of protected patents, experiments with animals or humans without proper ethical rigor), before or after manuscript publication, CSJ editors will take measures according to guidelines recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Authors will be given an opportunity to respond to any complaints/allegations, with all documentation related to the case archived.

17. CSJ reserves the right not to publish manuscripts with the same authorship (or co-authorship) within intervals of less than two years. Exceptional cases (e.g. Thematic Number Calls) will be analyzed by the editorial team.

18. Once approved, manuscripts submitted to CSJ may be published as articles, reviews, and interviews, provided the texts comply with the standard language in which they are presented. After approval, all texts may be subject to mandatory final textual review, the cost of which is the strict responsibility of the author(s) due to institutional budget constraints.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES

1. The Curriculum Space Journal (CSJ) is committed to ethical issues inherent in the evaluation and publication process of articles, reviews, essays, reports, or any other text disseminated by this journal. We follow the recommendations, decisions, and procedures of the Ethics Committee and other relevant documents, including:

a) CNS Resolution No. 466/2012 (Ethics in Research with Human Subjects);

b) CNS Resolution No. 510/2016 (Ethics in Research in Human and Social Sciences);

c) CNPq Document - Ethics and Integrity in Scientific Practice;

d) Document Ethics and Research in Education - Vol. 1 (ANPEd).

e) Document Ethics and Research in Education - Vol. 2 (ANPEd).

f) Document Ethics and Research in Education - Vol. 3 (ANPEd).

Adopted ethical principles and procedures:

a) Regarding the texts

• Authors are responsible for the content of their manuscripts, as well as for the copyright of images, videos, and any textual or supplementary elements in their articles.
• Texts involving research with humans must have been submitted to the Ethics Committee (CEP/CONEP system or another system). Authors are requested to attach the CEP's opinion as a supplementary document.
• Section editors, in the preliminary analysis, identify ethical considerations and submit manuscripts to the iThenticate program to check text originality.
• Section editors also request reviewers to verify ethical considerations and highlight in their reviews any previously published excerpts that have not been properly cited.
• Following the CNPq document (Ethics and Integrity in Scientific Practice), items 17 and 20 recommend that authors be those who have contributed significantly to the text and can describe their contributions when requested.
• If the research project that originated the study and later the article has not been submitted to an Ethics Committee, authors are recommended to justify the reasons for not doing so in the article and include an ethics section. We suggest the entry "Self-declaration of ethical principles and procedures," as proposed in the e-book Ethics and Research in Education: subsidies - Vol. 1, p. 205-211.
• Articles originating from studies involving groups considered vulnerable must observe ethical considerations throughout the organization process. We follow Elida Séguin's definition (2002, p. 12) characterizing minorities by the "non-dominant position they hold in the country they inhabit" and vulnerable groups as "power-vulnerable groups," which may constitute a significant contingent, such as women, children, the elderly, and people with physical disabilities, among others (Elida Séguin. Minorities and vulnerable groups: a legal approach. Press: Rio de Janeiro, Forense, 2002).

b) Regarding the evaluation process

• All manuscripts submitted to the Curriculum Space Journal undergo peer review using the blind peer review method, obtaining opinions from experts in the curriculum field. This process is clearly described in the "About" menu under "Peer Review Process"
• During the evaluation process, the text is a confidential document, with editors, reviewers, and others involved prohibited from quoting or circulating copies of the articles independent of the reasons.
• Opinions are constructed by filling out the pre-established form in the journal's system, with a space for comments that were not covered in the form, which should be as objective as possible.
• The selection of reviewers is conditioned by the absence of conflicts of interest declared by the reviewers in the evaluation form. If conflicts of interest exist, the evaluation process is not continued, or the opinion is disregarded by the editors and section editors.
• The journal understands that any form of plagiarism is not acceptable and uses anti-plagiarism review tools.
• The final decision on whether to publish a text or not lies with the editors and/or section editors.
• Whenever a text has academic quality and meets the criteria established by the journal, it is sent for blind peer review by at least two reviewers.
• Editors are available to address any ethical questions related to a submission.

c) Other principles

• Information about ownership, copyright, and/or management of the journal is clearly indicated in the "About" menu on the journal's website.
• This journal does not charge any submission, evaluation, or publication fees.

3. Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism Detection

Texts submitted to the Curriculum Space Journal will be checked by plagiarism detection software, using iThenticate to detect plagiarism in text files with an acceptance rate of 20%, provided they do not correspond to concepts and main ideas from other publications, whether self-authored or by third parties, not properly referenced. If plagiarism is proven, the manuscript will be returned to the author. Therefore, authors may receive occasional inquiries during the evaluation process regarding indications pointed out by the software used.

EVALUATION PROCESS

1. Guidelines for Evaluation: The evaluation process of Articles, Reviews, and Interviews submitted to the Curriculum Space Journal follows the peer review flow outlined below:

2. Form Analysis: In this phase, texts are submitted to the reading of at least two editors and evaluated for their compliance with the general criteria of the Curriculum Space Journal and the editorial line. Thus, texts that:

a) Are configured as experience or research reports;

b) Are solely configured as a literature review and are not in the essay section;

c) Are notably presented as a simple excerpt from a dissertation or thesis without proper adaptation to an article or essay;

d) Are presented as a research project or report;

e) Lack a sufficiently in-depth analysis of the proposed theme;

f) Do not have education, with a focus on curriculum studies, as the central axis of discussion;

g) Contain writing errors and structural issues that impede the understanding of parts or the whole;

h) Are purely descriptive and do not provide an analysis of the addressed issues;

i) Do not have the usual scientific article format practiced in education journals when submitted in the article or essay section;

j) Do not comply with the Curriculum Space Journal's guidelines for submitting articles, essays, interviews, reviews, or abstracts (formatting, citations, references, etc.);

k) If articles or essays, do not present results, formulations, or conclusions that contribute to the proposed theme;

l) If submitted as articles, lack empirical elements or sufficiently developed arguments to support conclusions;

m) Have a similarity percentage above 20%, provided they do not correspond to concepts and main ideas from other publications, whether self-authored or by third parties, not properly referenced.

Such works will be returned to the authors with the suggestion of reformulation for a new submission and evaluation by the Curriculum Space Journal on another occasion. Works that do not fit any of the above characteristics are considered suitable for the next phase.

3. Peer Review Regarding Merit: In this second phase, the Editorial Board of the Curriculum Space Journal sends the article without the author's identification to at least two reviewers in the specific thematic area of the work (members of the editorial board or ad hoc invited reviewers), from two different states or abroad. The evaluation takes into account the following criteria:

a) Contribution to the field of education and curriculum studies;

b) Originality of the theme and/or treatment given to the theme;

c) Argumentative consistency;

d) Rigor of the theoretical-methodological approach;

e) Overall quality of the text.

f) Reviewers may fully accept the text, accept it with requested revisions, or reject it. Any of these hypotheses is justified by a descriptive review.

g) When both reviewers reject the work, the article is returned to the author.

h) When both reviewers accept the work, it proceeds to the next phase.

i) When two reviewers give opposing evaluations, the text is sent to a third evaluator.

j) Finally, when one or both reviewers request revisions, the work is returned to the author, asking them to consider the reviews and revise the article within thirty days.

k) When the author resubmits the revised text, according to the reviewers' suggestions, it is reassessed and proceeds to the final phase.

4. Formatting the Work to the Curriculum Space Journal's Standards: Once accepted for publication, the work undergoes standardization before being finally submitted by the Editorial Board for publication.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

1. Conflict of Interest Definition: Conflicts of interest are understood as conditions in which a person involved in the editorial process of a manuscript holds conflicting or competing interests that could influence editorial decisions. Personal, political, financial, academic, or religious considerations may affect objectivity in manuscript evaluations (The COPE Report, 1999).

2. Regarding Conflicts of Interest:

a) Conflicts of interest should be reported not only by authors but also by all those involved in the editorial process of a manuscript.

b) Editors should avoid making decisions about manuscripts that conflict with their own interests, such as those submitted by authors from their department or research collaborators.

c) If editors have a conflict of interest, they should delegate decision-making to other editors.

d) Reviewers should consider any type of conflict of interest before evaluating the manuscript. Work relationships with the author should be considered (participation or having participated in a research project, maintaining or having maintained scientific collaboration with research groups, having a supervisory relationship with the author, having a financial interest in the project involved in the manuscript).