• 2.1. Author Guidelines
• 2.2. Copyright Transfer
• 2.3. Ethics Committee Approval
• 2.4. Blind Review and Evaluation Process
• 2.5. Online Study Submission Guide
• 2.6. Revision Guidelines and Submission Guidelines
• 2.7. Study/Manuscript Retraction
• 2.8. Appealing the Evaluation Result

2.1. Author Guidelines

The manuscripts to be submitted to the SQAE should be prepared using the following Manuscript Templates.

Turkish Manuscript Template | English Manuscript Template

Page Layout: A4 Vertical, Margins (Normal) (2.5cm on 4 sides)

The SQAE does not limit the number of pages or words in manuscripts. However, the Editorial Board or the Scientific Committee may state that a study can be shortened without losing its qualities.

Font Family: Palatino Linotype. Main headings should be written in 11 font size, and text should be written in 10 font size.

Each study should consist of the following main headings:

Title

The title of the study should reflect its content and be inclusive. The first letter of each word should be capitalized, except for conjunctions.

Abstract

This should clearly and concisely reflect the purpose, scope, method, results, highlights, and original value of the study. There is no word limit.

Keywords 

A minimum of five and a maximum of seven keywords reflecting the content of the study should be used.

Introduction

The basis of the study topic, summary information about the sections of the study, its equivalent in the scientific literature, the significance of the study, the research problem, and aims should be detailed in the introduction section.

Method

The study type, study group, data collection tools, validity and reliability, data collection techniques, data analysis, limitations, and ethics committee approval, if necessary, should be detailed in the method section.

Findings

The findings obtained in the study should be explained with relevant tables, figures, graphs, or images in a way that supports the purpose and problem of the study and maintains integrity.

Discussion*

To demonstrate the significance of the study, the findings should be discussed with reference to the literature and with author comments.

Conclusion*

The main ideas emerging from the discussions should be explained in the conclusion.

Recommendations*

Recommendations should be made in accordance with the discussion and conclusion of the study. This section should also include recommendations for future studies and practices in the field that will contribute to the literature.

Acknowledgments**

Acknowledgments should be made to individuals or organizations that made a small contribution to the research.

References

References should be prepared in accordance with the APA 7 citation principles. In-text references and citations should be given in accordance with the language of the full text. Turkish citation procedures and principles for Turkish full text and English citation procedures and principles for English full text should be taken into consideration.

The font family should be Palatino Linotype and line spacing should be 3 pt. The indent should be placed under the fourth letter.

Appendices**

Additional tables, figures, graphics, and pictures should be given on a new page after the bibliography. Each annex should be categorized as Annex 1, Annex 2, etc. and each annex should be titled separately.

*The Discussion, Conclusion, and Recommendations can be placed under a single title by the author(s) or can be given separately.

**If Acknowledgments and Appendices are included, these titles should be given as main headings.

Tables and Figures

The title and text of any tables and figures should be written following the structure in the examples in the Template.

Tables and Figures are preceded and followed by 12 pt spaces.

Table headings and text should be written in 10 pt.

The table and its number should be in bold, e.g. Table 1. Table Heading

If the figure is in the form of a graphic and an editable format, the title and internal text should be in 10 pt.

The figure and its number should be in bold, e.g. Figure 1. Figure Heading

If figures include a picture or a non-editable image, they should be transferred in Word at 300 DPI resolution, and the original figure should also be submitted.

EXAMPLES OF REFERENCES

Book

Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2014). Data analysis handbook for social sciences statistics, research design SPSS applications, and interpretation (20th ed.). Pegem Academy Publishing.

Citation: (Büyüköztürk, 2014, p. 194) 194)

In-Book Chapter

Bayır, D. (1997). An overview of USMARC implementation. B. Yılmaz (Ed.). In A gift to the 25th Anniversary of the Department of Librarianship (pp. 199-218). Hacettepe University, Department of Library Science.

Citation: (Bayır, 1997, p. 207)

Translation Book

Lewis, B. (2000). The Birth of Modern Turkey (M. Kıratlı, trans.). Turkish Historical Society Publications.

Citation: Lewis, 2000, p.12

Article

Karakelle, S. (2012). The links between metacognitive awareness, intelligence, problem-solving perception, and need for thinking. Studies on Quality Assurance in Education, 37(164), 237-250. https://doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3078

Citation: (Karakelle, 2012, p. 245)

Electronic Article

Karakelle, S. (2012). The links between metacognitive awareness, intelligence, problem-solving perception, and need for thinking. Studies on Quality Assurance in Education, 37(164), 237-250. Retrieved from http://egitimvebilim.ted.org.tr/index.php/EB/article/view/779/376.

Citation: (Karakelle, 2012, p. 240)

Dissertation

Mantar, E. (2003). Continuing education in librarianship: A review on university libraries in Ankara. [Unpublished master's thesis]. Hacettepe University.

Citation: (Mantar, 2003, p. 67)

Proceedings

Çakmak, T. and Körpeoğlu, H. (2012). Web content management within the organizational identity framework: A Study for Hacettepe University Department of Information Management web content management system. In BOBCATSSS 2012 Information in E-motion January 23-25, 2012 (pp. 91-93). Amsterdam: Hogeschool van Amsterdam.

Citation: (Çakmak and Körpeoğlu, 2012, p. 92)

Web page

UNESCO. (2013). World Heritage list. Retrieved from http://whc.unesco.org/en/list.

Citation: (UNESCO, 2013)

 2.2. Copyright Transfer

Manuscripts submitted to the SQAE for publication must be original studies that have not been previously published in any form or submitted for publication elsewhere.

Authors must agree to waive the copyright of their studies and transfer their copyright to the Association for the Evaluation and Accreditation of Teacher Education Programs [https://www.epdad.org.tr] upon submission for evaluation. The Editorial Board of the SQAE is authorized to publish the article. However, the following rights of the authors are reserved:

• Patent rights,
• All unregistered rights other than copyright,
• The right to reproduce the study for their own purposes, provided that they do not sell it,
• The right to use all or part of the study in the author's books and other academic studies, provided that the author cites the source,
• The right to make the study available on personal websites or in the open archive of the university, provided that the study is credited.

Authors submitting manuscripts to the SQAE should fill out the Copyright Transfer Form [Link]. The author(s) must sign the completed form with a wet signature. The signed form must be scanned and uploaded through the system. The wet signed form must also be submitted in printed form to the Association for the Evaluation and Accreditation of Teacher Education Programs, Merdivenköy, Mah. Karaman Sok. No: 2 K: 2/5, Kadıköy/İstanbul 34732, TURKEY by mail. Manuscripts of authors who do not submit the Copyright Transfer Form will not be published.

All manuscripts published in the SQAE are licensed under a Creative Commons Citation 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.tr). This license grants the SQAE the right to reproduce, share, and disseminate all published articles, data sets, graphs, and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, websites, blogs, and all other platforms, providing the source is cited. Open access is an approach that facilitates interdisciplinary interaction and encourages different disciplines to collaborate. In this regard, the SQAE provides added value to its field by providing more access to its manuscripts and a more transparent evaluation process.

2.3. Ethics Committee Approval

In social sciences, the Ethics Committee is a committee that evaluates research proposals submitted in order to protect the rights of human participants before, during, and after the research, to prevent them from being harmed, and to ensure that their informed consent is obtained. This committee examines research proposals in terms of the above-mentioned issues, and if it finds them appropriate, it grants Ethics Committee approval and issues a document to this effect.

• The Ethics Committee approval document must be submitted for all candidate manuscripts that require Ethics Committee approval.
• The flowchart at this address can be used to decide whether a study requires Ethics Committee approval: https://trdizin.gov.tr/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/TRDizin_etik_ilkeleri_akis_semasi.pdf.
• Researchers who are not affiliated with any institution should apply to the Ethics Committees of universities in their province/region before the data collection process of their studies and obtain an Ethics Committee approval certificate.
• For articles produced from theses, it is sufficient to submit the Ethics Committee approval obtained for the thesis. A separate Ethics Committee approval for the candidate manuscript is not expected.

*Institutional and individual research and application permissions obtained for research do not replace Ethics Committee approval.

2.4. Blind Review and Evaluation Process

Blind peer review is a method applied for the impartial evaluation of scientific publications. This method forms the basis of the objective evaluation process of scientific studies and is preferred by many scientific journals. Referee opinions are decisive for the publication quality of the SQAE. All manuscripts submitted to the SQAE are blinded according to the following steps:

Type of Blind Refereeing

The SQAE uses the double-blind method in the evaluation of all studies. In the double-blinding method, the identities of the authors and reviewers are concealed from each other.

Initial Evaluation Process

The manuscripts submitted to the SQAE are first evaluated by the editors. At this stage, manuscripts that do not comply with the purpose and scope of the journal, are weak in terms of language, expression and grammatical rules in Turkish and English, contain critical errors in scientific terms, have no original value, and do not meet the publication policies are rejected. Authors of rejected manuscripts will be notified within two months at the latest from the date of submission. Eligible manuscripts are sent to a field editor for preliminary evaluation.

Preliminary Evaluation Process

During the preliminary evaluation process, the field editors examine the introduction, literature, method, findings, conclusion, evaluation, and discussion sections of the manuscripts in detail in terms of originality and the journal's publication policies and scope. Manuscripts that are found to be inappropriate as a result of this review are returned with the field editor's evaluation report within one month at the latest. Manuscripts that are found appropriate are included in the refereeing process.

Refereeing Process

Manuscripts are peer-reviewed according to their content and the expertise of the referees. The field editor reviewing the manuscript recommends at least two referees from the SQAE referee pool according to their field of expertise or may suggest a new referee suitable for the field of study. Referee suggestions from the field editor are evaluated by the editors and the manuscripts are forwarded to the referees. Referees must guarantee that they will not share any process or document about the manuscripts they evaluate.

Referee Reports

Reviewer evaluations are generally based on originality, methodology, compliance with ethical rules, consistent presentation of findings and results, and literature review. This examination is carried out according to the following elements:

1. Introduction and literature: The evaluation report includes the presentation and aims of the problem addressed in the study, the importance of the subject, the scope and timeliness of the relevant literature, and the originality of the study.
2. Method: The evaluation report includes information about the suitability of the method used, the selection and characteristics of the research group, validity and reliability, as well as an opinion on the data collection and analysis process.
3. Findings: The evaluation report includes opinions on the presentation of the findings obtained within the framework of the method, the accuracy of the analytical methods, the consistency of the findings reached with the objectives of the research, the presentation of the tables, figures, and visuals, and the conceptual evaluation of the tests used.
4. Evaluation and discussion: The evaluation report includes a discussion of the topic based on the findings and an opinion on the relevance to the research question(s) and hypothesis(es), generalizability, and feasibility.
5. Conclusion and recommendations: The evaluation report includes an opinion on the contribution to the literature and recommendations for future studies and practices in the field.
6. Style and expression: The evaluation report includes an opinion on whether the title of the study covers the content, the proper use of English or Turkish, and whether the references and citations are given in accordance with the language of the full text in accordance with APA 7 rules.
7. Overall assessment: The evaluation report includes an opinion about the originality of the study as a whole, its contribution to the educational literature, and practices in the field.

During the evaluation process, referees are not expected to make corrections to the typographic features of the manuscript.

Referee Evaluation Process

The time given to the referees for the evaluation process is four weeks. Corrections received from reviewers or editors must be completed by the authors within one month in accordance with the Correction Guidelines (Link). Referees can decide on the appropriateness of a manuscript by reviewing the corrections made, and they can request corrections more than once if necessary.

Evaluation Result

The opinions from the referees are reviewed by the field editor within two weeks. As a result of this review, the field editor submits the final decision on the manuscript to the editors.

Editorial Board Decision

The editors prepare the Editorial Board's opinions on the manuscript based on the opinions of the field editor and referees. The Editorial Board opinions are sent by the editor to the author(s) together with the field editor and referee recommendations within one week. Manuscripts that receive a negative opinion in this process are returned without requesting a plagiarism check. The final decision for the manuscripts for which a positive opinion is given is based on the results of the plagiarism check reports.

How Long Does the Publication Evaluation Process Take?

The publication evaluation process for manuscripts submitted to the SQAE is expected to be completed in approximately six months. However, the period between the date on which the referees or editors request corrections from the author(s) and the date on which the author(s) complete the corrections is not included in these six months.

2.5. Online Study Submission Guide

Author(s) who wish to submit manuscripts for evaluation to the SQAE can do this by becoming a member of the journal management system on the journal website.

The author(s) should follow the instructions on the website to become a member and submit manuscripts.

2.6. Revision Guidelines and Submission Guidelines

Editors, field editors, and/or referees may request one or more revisions and improvements for the manuscripts under review in the SQAE.

The author(s) are obliged to complete the requested revisions and improvements in a complete and timely manner and providing explanations for the changes made. It is expected that they will do this with the awareness that the requested revisions and improvements are objective and aim to increase the originality of the manuscript.

The author(s) should upload the requested revisions and improvements to the system according to the relevant instructions.

2.7. Study/Manuscript Retraction

The SQAE is committed to holistic and complete publishing for researchers and librarians. It is aware that the way to achieve this is to publish credible original research articles. In accordance with the SQAE publication policies, the duties and responsibilities of the author(s) and the Editorial Board during the withdrawal of a study or manuscript are given below.

Authors

The author(s) must cooperate with the journal editor in retraction procedures if they become aware of an inaccuracy or error in their published, early view, or manuscript under review.

Author(s) who wish to retract their manuscript(s) under review are obliged to fill in the Retraction Form (Link) and send the scanned version with the wet signature of each author to the Editorial Board via e-mail at sqae@epdad.org. The Editorial Board reviews the retraction notification and responds within one week. Authors cannot submit their manuscripts to another journal for review unless the Editorial Board approves the retraction request of the manuscripts whose copyrights have been transferred to the SQAE at the submission stage.

 Editors 

The SQAE Editorial Board is obligated to initiate an investigation into copyright and plagiarism suspicions regarding a manuscript that has been published, is in early view, or is under review.

As a result of the investigation, if the Editorial Board determines that there is copyright and plagiarism in the manuscript under evaluation, it retracts the manuscript from the evaluation and returns it to the authors by citing the detected situations in detail.

If the Editorial Board determines that copyright infringement or plagiarism has occurred in a manuscript that has been published or is in early view, it will take the following retraction and notification actions within one week.

For a study in which an ethical violation was detected:

1. The phrase "Retracted" is added at the beginning of the title in the electronic display.
2. Instead of the Abstract and Full Text contents in the electronic display, the reasons for the retraction of the manuscript, and detailed evidence sources, if any, are published together with the notifications of the institutions and organizations to which the author(s) are affiliated.
3. A retraction notice is announced on the main page of the journal website.
4. The phrase "Retracted: Study Title" is added to the table of contents of the electronic and printed copy of the first issue to be published from the date of retraction.
5. Starting from the first page, the reasons for the retraction and the original citations referring to it are shared with the public and researchers.
6. The above retraction notices are sent to the organization(s) to which the author(s) are affiliated.
7. The above-mentioned retraction notices are forwarded to the institutions and organizations where the journal is indexed and to the National Library Presidency to be recorded in the indexing systems and catalogs.

In addition, the Editorial Board may inform the publishers or Editorial Boards of previously published studies by the author(s) of the manuscript(s) that an ethical violation has occurred, in order to ensure the validity and reliability of the published studies or so that they can be retracted.

2.8. Appealing the Evaluation Result

The author(s) reserves the right to object to the opinions of the Editorial Board and the Scientific Committee, which are conveyed as a result of the evaluation in the SQAE. The author(s) should send their objections to the opinions and comments made as a result of the evaluation of their manuscript(s) to sqae@epdad.org by email, using scientific language and citing their basis. The objections made are reviewed by the Editorial Board within one month (the field editor and referees of the manuscript may be asked for their opinions on the objections made) and the author(s) are provided with a positive or negative response. If the author(s)' objections to the evaluation result are accepted, the Editorial Board restarts the evaluation process by appointing new referees appropriate to the subject area of the study.