Submission 

Authors are requested to submit their papers electronically by using the Eurasia Proceedings of Science, Technology, Engineering & Mathematics (EPSTEM) online submission and review web site. This site will guide authors stepwise through the submission process. Authors are requested to submit the text, tables, and artwork in electronic form to this address.

Ethics in publishing 

The articles may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Authors alone are responsible for the contents of their articles. The journal owns the copyright of the articles. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of the research material. All authors are requested to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations regarding the submitted work.

Language
Papers are accepted only in English.

Word Count.

Although there is no specific word limit for manuscripts, authors are encouraged to write concisely.

File Type

File should be saved in Word .doc or .docx file type.

Page Setup

• Please use margins of 2.5 cm (1 inch).
• Please use A-4 page size.
• Please use font style as Times New Roman.

Title Page

• Please use 14-point bold for your article title, with an initial capital letter for any proper nouns. Please margin the article title to the center.  
• All the authors of a paper should include their full names, affiliations, postal addresses, telephone and fax numbers and email addresses on the title page of the manuscript. One author should be identified as the Corresponding Author. Please use one line for all author names and one line for all author information.
• An informative 10-point bold abstract (100 to 200 words) presenting the main points of the paper and conclusions.
• Please include descriptive keywords (4 to 5). Separate keywords with a comma. Capitalize the first letter of each keyword (e.g., Science education, Survey development).

Main Text

• Please use 10-point font size.
• Please margin the text to the justified.
• Manuscripts should be single-spaced.
• Footnotes and endnotes are not accepted. All relevant information should be included in main text.
• Do not indent paragraphs; leave a space of one line between consecutive paragraphs.
• Do not underline words for emphasis. Use italics instead.
• Both numbered lists and bulleted lists can be used if necessary.
• Before submitting your manuscript, please ensure that every in-text citation has a corresponding reference in the reference list. Conversely, ensure that every entry in the reference list has a corresponding in-text citation.

Headings

• Subdivide text into unnumbered sections, using short, meaningful sub-headings. Please do not use numbered headings.
• Please limit heading use to three levels.
• Please use 12-point bold for first-level headings, 10-point bold for second-level headings, and 10-point italics for third -level headings with an initial capital letter for any proper nouns.
• Leave one blank line after each heading and two blank lines before each heading. (Exception: leave one line between consecutive headings.)
• Please margin all headings to the left.

Tables and Figures

• Please embed tables and figures in appropriate areas within the document and center them horizontally. Tables and figures should not exceed the given page margins.
• Provide captions (maximum length: 6 to 8 words) for each table or figure. Centre the caption above the table and below the figure. Please reference the table or figure in the text.
• Please do not use vertical lines in tables.
• For figures, GIF and JPEG (JPG) are the preferred formats.

Acknowledgements or Notes
Please collate acknowledgements or notes in a separate section at the end of the article before the references.

References

• Manuscripts are submitted in APA style. Please refer to the latest Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association.
• At the end of the article, please list all references in alphabetical order (based on authors’ last names).
• Please use the first-level heading: “References”

Examples of APA style:
Do not number in-text citations. Provide the last name(s) of the author(s) and the date of publication in parentheses. If the author’s name appears within the sentence, then provide only the date of publication in parentheses.

Examples:

Citation 
According to Jones (1998), APA style is a difficult citation format for first-time learners.
APA style is a difficult citation format for first-time learners (Jones, 1998).

Journal article 
Harlow, H. F. (1983). Fundamentals for preparing psychology journal articles. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 55, 893-896.
Scruton, R. (1996). The eclipse of listening. The New Criterion, 15(30), 5-13.

Article in a Magazine
Henry, W. A., III. (1990, April 9). Making the grade in today's schools. Time, 135, 28-31.

Newspaper article 
Schultz, S. (2005, December 28). Calls made to strengthen state energy policies. The Country Today, pp. 1A, 2A.

Book, authored 
Calfee, R. C., & Valencia, R. R. (1991). APA guide to preparing manuscripts for journal publication. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Book, edited 
Duncan, G. J., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (Eds.). (1997). Consequences of growing up poor. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.

Edited Book with an Author or Authors
Plath, S. (2000). The unabridged journals. K. V. Kukil (Ed.). New York, NY: Anchor.

Edition Other Than the First
Helfer, M. E., Kempe, R. S., & Krugman, R. D. (1997). The battered child (5th ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Article or Chapter in an Edited Book
O'Neil, J. M., & Egan, J. (1992). Men's and women's gender role journeys: A metaphor for healing, transition, and transformation. In B. R. Wainrib (Ed.), Gender issues across the life cycle (pp. 107-123). New York, NY: Springer.

Dissertation, Published
Lastname, F. N. (Year). Title of dissertation. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Name of database. (Accession or Order Number)

Dissertation, Unpublished
Lastname, F. N. (Year). Title of dissertation. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Name of Institution, Location.

Conference Proceedings
Schnase, J. L., & Cunnius, E. L. (Eds.). (1995). Proceedings from CSCL '95: The First International Conference on Computer Support for Collaborative Learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Internet reference 
Angeli, E., Wagner, J., Lawrick, E., Moore, K., Anderson, M., Soderland, L., & Brizee, A. (2010, May 5). General format. Retrieved from http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/

All articles sent to EPSTEM journal will be evaluated after the Turnitin Plagiarism Detection Program. The similarity rate for Turnitin is 20%. However, in quantitative studies with high statistical density, up to 30% similarity rates can be accepted. Standard templates used in statistics can hold high rates in similarity reports. Whether there is plagiarism in a paper is determined by the editor according to the plagiarism report. The EPSTEM’s Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement is based, in large part, on the guidelines and standards developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The relevant duties and expectations of authors, reviewers, and editors of the journal are set out below.


Responsibilities of Authors

By submitting a manuscript to EPSTEM, the author(s) warrant that the manuscript is their own, original work and that it has neither been published previously nor is currently being considered for publication elsewhere. They also warrant that the sources of any ideas and/or words in the manuscript that are not their own have been properly attributed through appropriate citations and/or quotes.

An author should not normally publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in multiple journals or publication venues. Such redundant publication is generally considered to constitute unethical publishing behavior, and if discovered may result in a manuscript under consideration being rejected, or a published article being retracted.

Authors of manuscripts reporting on original research should present an accurate account of the work performed, accompanied by an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. The fabrication of results and the making of fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and may be cause for rejection or retraction of a manuscript or published article.

Where the manuscript reports on commercial software, hardware, or other products, authors must include a declaration at the beginning of the manuscript in which they must either state that no conflict of interest exists or describe the nature of any potential conflict. All sources of financial support for the research should also be disclosed in the manuscript.

The author(s) of a manuscript agree that if the manuscript is accepted for publication in EPSTEM, the published article will be copyrighted using a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license. This license allows others to freely copy, distribute, and display the copyrighted work, and derivative works based upon it, under certain specified conditions.

Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission to include any images or artwork for which they do not hold copyright in their articles, or to adapt any such images or artwork for inclusion in their articles. The copyright holder must be made explicitly aware that the image(s) or artwork will be made freely available online as part of the article under a Creative Commons “Attribution 4.0 International” license.

The authors’ names should be listed on the article in order of their contribution to the article, and all authors take responsibility for their own contributions. Only those individuals who have made a substantive contribution should be listed as authors; those whose contributions are indirect or marginal (e.g., colleagues or supervisors who have reviewed drafts of the work or provided proofreading assistance, and heads of research institutes/centers/labs) should be named in an “Acknowledgments” section at the end of the article, immediately preceding the Reference List. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the article, and that all listed co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and agreed to its publication.

Where an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in an article of his/hers that has been published in EPSTEM, he/she has an obligation to promptly notify the editors and cooperate with them to correct the article or retract it as appropriate.


Responsibilities of Reviewers

EPSTEM’s reviewers perform work for the journal on a volunteer basis. Given that most of these individuals are in full-time employment, their reviewing activities for EPSTEM must, by necessity, not be their top priority. Reviewers are free to decline invitations to review particular manuscripts at their discretion, for example, if their current employment workload and/or other commitments make it prohibitive for them to complete a review in a timely fashion and to do justice to the task in the available time frame. They should also not accept manuscript review assignments for which they feel unqualified.

Reviewers who have accepted manuscript assignments are normally expected to submit their reviews within one month. They should recuse themselves from the assignment if it becomes apparent to them at any stage that they do not possess the required expertise to perform the review, or that they may have a potential conflict of interest in performing the review (e.g., one resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, institutions, or companies associated with the manuscript).

Privileged information or ideas obtained by reviewers through the peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents, and must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the EPSTEM Editor.

When conducting their reviews, reviewers are asked to do so as objectively as possible, refraining from engaging in personal criticism of the author(s). They are encouraged to express their views clearly, explaining and justifying all recommendations made. They should always attempt to provide detailed and constructive feedback to assist the author(s) in improving their work, even if the manuscript is, in their opinion, not publishable.

Reviewers should identify in their reviews relevant published work that has not been cited by the author(s), together with any instances in which proper attribution of sources has not been provided. They should call to the responsible editor’s attention any major resemblances between a manuscript under consideration and other published articles or papers of which they are aware, as well as any concerns they might have in relation to the ethical acceptability of the research reported in the manuscript.

Responsibilities of Editors

EPSTEM has ultimate responsibility for deciding if a manuscript submitted to EPSTEM should be published, and in doing so is guided by the journal’s policies as determined by the EPSTEM editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with the Associate Editor and other members of the editorial team, as well as with reviewers, in making publication decisions.

The editors will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, color, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). They will not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the EPSTEM editorial board members, as appropriate. Additionally, the editors will make every effort to ensure the integrity of the blind review process by not revealing the identity of the author(s) of a manuscript to the reviewers of that manuscript, and vice versa.

When evaluating a manuscript for publication, in addition to considering standard criteria pertaining to the rigor of the manuscript, the quality of its presentation, and its contribution to humanity’s stock of knowledge, the editors will also seek evidence that ethical harms have been minimized in the conduct of the reported research. They will question whether the benefits outweigh the harms in the particular study’s case. Since EPSTEM welcomes the submission of manuscripts from any country, it is necessary to recognize that laws and regulations regarding research ethics and ethical approval vary worldwide. As such, the editors may need to seek clarification in this regard with the author(s) and request that they supply a letter from the relevant institutional ethics committee or board that approved the research.

The editors will be guided by CORE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing an expression of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in EPSTEM. They are committed to working closely with research organizations and institutions in line with CORE’s advice on Cooperation between Research Institutions and Journals on Research Integrity Cases.