Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT) was founded as an international journal from the
reflection of information technology (IT) especially for mathematics education
idea. We are intended to combine computers and mathematics as “information
technology for mathematics education” in this journal because of the fact that
a recent indication of the increasing range of work for researchers and
educators comes from two sources; computers and mathematics education. We are
fortunate that technology provides us with windows to look at education from
new ways. Due to this opportunity we can pose many appropriate research
questions and conduct many innovative research studies in our field.
These fields mainly include the topics as below:
Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT) will contain articles on these topics or related issues with these topics. These topics are dynamic and open to change. TURCOMAT as a journal in this field is also undergoing change and development. This journal will include articles that are international, scholarly, refereed and organized by editors. Surely, this journal will grow with your supports as readers and researchers. We are enfusiastically waiting your manuscripts for next issues. We have greatly enjoyed reading the articles submitted to the current issue of this journal. We have also greatly enjoyed meeting new authors to discuss their research approaches and conclusions.
Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT) is an open access, international and double blind peer-reviewed journal. Articles sent to TURCOMAT are requested to evaluate by two referees as long as suitable for our focus and content. Two positive decisions are required for an article to be considered for publication. In case one of the referees reviews the articles positively and the other negatively, Editorial Board examines referees reviews and may decide to send the article to a third referee to evaluate or return it to its author. If any of the referees accept the article with revisions requiring, Editorial Board makes the final decision and reserve the right to reject it in case revision are not made.
The manuscripts submitted to Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education (TURCOMAT) should satisfy the conditions indicated below. Otherwise, manuscripts will be sent back to the authors.
• The manuscript should not have been published previously or should not be under consideration for publication elsewhere.
• Manuscripts should be sent the system from “Submit a Manuscript” section after signing up. Please do not forget to register yourself as an “author”.
• The papers should be prepared with Microsoft Word Software or any software supported by Microsoft Office.
For further information, please see the “Manuscript Template”. You can make changes on the sample manuscript by keeping the same format.
• Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. In this context, journal allows to share the published scientific content in order to support and develop universal open access so long as giving reference and keeping content.
• To help authors publish their work as Open Access, any processing or article submission charges are not demanded.
The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.
TURKBILMAT Education Services authorized for the publication of the article. However, the authors reserve the following rights:
• The right to make copies for their own purposes, provided that non-commercial purposes.
• The right to use all or a portion. of the article for the author's future works, such as books and lectures, with the mention of the bibliography of the Journal.
• The right to use on their personel web pages (such as Academia) on condition of giving reference.
Peer Review Process
1. The candidate manuscripts submitted to the TURCOMAT are subject to strict peer-review process. All manuscripts are peer-reviewed by minimum two peers of the same field. Since 2009, the journal has followed strict double blind peer review policy to ensure neutral evaluation. During this review process, identity of both the authors and reviewers are kept hidden to disable biased evaluation. For each submitted manuscript, a section editor will be assigned. Submissions will be considered by the section editor and will be sent to the peer-reviewers if not rejected. TURCOMAT tends not to reject the manuscripts except lack of novelty, methodological content or weak presentation. Too often a journal's decision to publish a paper is dominated by what the scientific committee think is interesting and will gain greater readership — both of which are subjective judgments and lead to decisions which are frustrating and delay the publication. This journal will rigorously peer-review your submissions and publish all papers that are judged to be technically sound.
2. As soon as the reviewers deliver their opinion, FINAL decision about the manuscript (accepted or accepted with minor revision or major revisions required or rejected) will be sent to the corresponding author. Reviewers are asked if they would like to review a revised version of the manuscript. The editorial office may request a re-review regardless of a reviewer's response in order to ensure a thorough and fair evaluation. Reviewers who may have offered an opinion not in accordance with the FINAL decision should not feel that their recommendation was not duly considered and their service not properly appreciated. Experts often disagree, and it is the job of the editorial team to make a FINAL decision.
3. If one of the reviewers finds the manuscript not suitable for the journal, and the other advices major revisions, the Editorial Board may reject the paper or send the manuscript to a third referee.
4. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
5. Two positive decisions are required for an article to be considered for publication. In case one of the referees reviews the articles positively and the other negatively, Editorial Board examines referees reviews and may decide to send the article to a third referee to evaluate or return it to its author. If any of the referees accept the article with revisions requiring, Editorial Board makes the final decision and reserve the right to reject it in case revision are not made.
6. If the editors / section editors considers the article not suitable for publication in TURCOMAT, candidate manuscripts may be rejected without review.
7. The Editorial Board of the journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
8. The editor 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.
9. The editor confers with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
10. The reviewers evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. TURCOMAT is responsible for hiding any kind of information belongs to authors before publication.
11. The editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
12. Referees are asked to deliver their views clearly and with the support of scientific arguments. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers are encouraged to be honest but not offensive in their language (Unnecessarily harsh words may be modified or removed at the editors' discretion). It is expected that the reviewers should suggest the authors on how they can strengthen their paper to make it acceptable. Comments of the reviewers should be sufficiently informative and helpful to reach an Editorial Decision. As TURCOMAT, we strongly advise that a negative review should also explain the weaknesses of any manuscript, so that the concerned authors can understand the basis of rejection and they can improve the manuscript based on the comments of referees. Authors also should not confuse straightforward and true comments with unfair criticism.
13. In is no doubt, the evaluation process assists editorial board to make a final decision. The main target of the process is also assist authors to improve the quality of their papers.
14. Manuscripts received for review are treated as confidential documents.
15. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention for any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
16. Authors of contributions and studies research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
17. Authors should reflect the research process clearly. As it is known, TURCOMAT is devoted not only for academicians, but also teachers and teacher candidates. The results of any paper are expected to help audience of the journal so that they are able to benefit how to improve their teaching quality. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
18. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. TURCOMAT strongly opposes the practice of duplicate publication or any type of plagiarism. If you suspect any unethical practice in this manuscript, kindly write it in the report with some proof/web links. Studies which are carried out to reconfirm / replicate the results of any previously published paper with new data-set, may be considered for publication. But these types of studies should have a ‘clear declaration’ of this matter. Self-plagiarism, also referred to as ‘text recycling’, is a topical issue and is currently generating much discussion among editors. Opinions are divided as to how much text overlap with an author’s own previous publications is acceptable. We normally follow the guidelines given in COPE website. Editors, reviewers and authors are also requested to strictly follow this excellent guideline (Reference: Text Recycling Guidelines: http://publicationethics.org/text-recycling-guidelines). Plagiarized manuscripts would not be considered for publication. If plagiarism is found in any published paper after internal investigation, a letter would be immediately sent to all the authors, their affiliated institutes and funding agency, if applied and subsequently the paper will be retracted.
19. Authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication.
20. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
21. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Submission of a paper to this journal indicates that the author(s) have agreed the content of the paper. One author should be indicated as corresponding author for all publication related communications. All correspondence and proofs would be sent to the corresponding author, who will be treated as final representative voice for all authors regarding any decision related to manuscript, unless otherwise requested during submission. This journal would not be responsible for any dispute related to authorship of a submitted paper. Any change in the authorship (such as addition or deletion of author(s) or change in the sequence of author list) should be intimated to the editorial office through a letter signed by all authors before publication of the paper. In absence of any signed letter, approval of 'Galley proof' by corresponding author will work as 'certificate of final agreement of authorship'. Generally any change in the authorship after final publication, is not entertained and COPE guidelines are followed for any dispute.
22. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
23. 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.
24. TURCOMAT is published both, hard-copy and online. After publication of a manuscript, authors will be sent a hard-copy.
25. The manuscript should not have been published previously or should not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. However, TURCOMAT consider extended version of any work that has been presented at a conference or symposium (Significant amount of changes should be made before submission to the journal and proper citation of the conference paper is required).
26. It is compulsory for the authors to ensure that no material submitted as part of a manuscript infringes existing copyrights, or the rights of a third party.
27. TURCOMAT is determined to promote integrity in research publication. We have great respect and we generally follow the guidelines, given by Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) for any publication disputes, authorship disputes, etc. For these kinds of disputes, we generally visit and follow the COPE website and author(s) are also requested to do so. Excellent guidelines, related to COPE’s Code of Conduct and its advice to tackle cases of suspected misconduct, are available in this link (http://publicationethics.org/resources/flowcharts).
28. The copyrights of all papers published in this journal are retained by the respective authors as per the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License. (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
29. The research must meet all applicable standards for the ethics of experimentation and research integrity.
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
the author, the journal editor, the peer-reviewer, the publisher and the owner of Society-owned journals have responsibilities to meet expected ethical standards at all stages in their involvement from submission to publication of an article. In this direction, TURCOMAT is
Publication decision: Editors should be accountable for everything published in their journals and strive to meet the needs of readers and authors. Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the editorial board’s reviews and paper’s importance.
Review of Manuscripts: The editor ensures that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor, who may make use of appropriate means, to examine the originality of the contents of the manuscript and ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognizing that journals and sections within journals will have different aims and standards.
Fair Review: Editors should strive to ensure that peer review at their journal is fair, unbiased and timely. The editor ensures that each manuscript received is evaluated on its intellectual content without regard to authors’ sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc.
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. The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors should require reviewers to disclose any potential competing interests before agreeing to review a submission.
Reporting Standards: Authors should precisely present their original research, as well as objectively discuss its significance. Manuscripts are to be edited in accordance to the submission guidelines of the journal.
Originality: Authors must certify that their work is entirely unique and original.
Redundancy: Authors should not concurrently submit papers describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Author(s) should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have influenced their research.
Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited only to those who have made a significant contribution to conceiving, designing, executing and/or interpreting the submitted study. All those who have significantly contributed to the study should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author should also ensure that all the authors and co-authors have seen and approved the final submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion as co-authors.
Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain raw data related to their submitted paper, and must provide it for editorial review, upon request of the editor.
Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor.
Confidentiality: Manuscript reviewers, the editor and the editorial staff must not disclose any information regarding submitted manuscripts. All submitted manuscripts are to be treated as privileged information. Editors should provide guidance to reviewers on everything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material in confidence.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. 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.
Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts will be conducted objectively. The reviewers shall express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Promptness: If a reviewer believes it is not possible for him/her to review the research reported in a manuscript within the designated guidelines, or within stipulated time, he/she should notify the editor, so that the accurate and timely review can be ensured.
Conflict of Interest: All reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the funding bodies.
Withdrawal: Papers published will be withdrawn if authors noticed significant errors. Before accepting withdrawal request, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently. If a paper were withdrawn,
- Paper in journal database should be removed,
- Link in online publication site should be removed,
- Next phrase or similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in online publication paper list: (This paper was withdrawn because of some technical errors).
Replacement: Papers published can be replaced if authors send an updated paper. Before accepting replacement request, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently, and at least three reviewers should check the advances. If a paper were replaced,
- Paper in journal database should be replaced,
- Link in online publication site should be replaced,
- Next phrase or similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in online publication paper list: (This paper was replaced because authors sent updated version. Contact editor if you want to check old version).
- Old version should be kept separately, and if someone wants to check old version, editor can send the PDF to him/her.
- However, replacement is acceptable only one time, and only for technical advances.
Removal: Papers published will be removed if reviewers, readers, librarians, publishers or other subjects noticed significant errors or plagiarism. Before removing a paper, editorial board and Editor-in-chief should talk with authors sufficiently, and should provide enough time to have authors’ explanation. If a paper were withdrawn,
- Paper in journal database should be removed,
- Link in online publication site should be removed,
- Next phrase or similar phrase to announce the reason should be shown below the paper title in online publication paper list: (This paper was removed because of plagiarism).
Double Submission: If double submission was found or noticed from other sources, editorial board should check the status. If the double submission was confirmed as intentional thing,
- Review process will be terminated,
- The reason should be sent to reviewers, editorial board and authors,
- All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and these authors cannot submit any paper to TURCOMAT for three years.
Double Publication: If double publication was found or noticed from other sources, editorial board should check the status. If the double publication was confirmed as intentional thing,
- This should be reported to editorial board and authors,
- This should be sent to publisher published same (or very similar) paper,
- Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in chapter 4,
- All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and these authors cannot submit any paper to TURCOMAT for three years.
Plagiarism: If plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was found or noticed from other sources, editorial board should check the status. If the plagiarism (including self-plagiarism) was confirmed as intentional thing:
- This should be reported to editorial board and authors,
- This should be sent to publisher published same or similar paper,
- Paper will be removed according to the “Removal” part in section 4,
All authors’ name will be marked as black list, and these authors cannot submit any paper to TURCOMAT for five years.
All the Editors, authors, and reviewers, within we agree upon standards of proper ethical behavior and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines).
TURCOMAT Complaint Policy
TURCOMAT defines a complaint as the expression of being unhappy about a perceived failure during the submission, evaluation or publication process. We infer that the complainant is not simply disagreeing with a decision we have made or something we have published but thinks that there has been a failure of process - for example, a long delay or a rude response - or a severe misjudgment.
TURCOMAT is aware of the complaints stated below:
1) Authorship complaints
2) Plagiarism complaints
3) Multiple, duplicate, concurrent publication/Simultaneous submission
4) Research results misappropriation
5) Allegations of research errors and fraud
6) Research standards violations
7) Undisclosed conflicts of interest
8) Reviewer bias or competitive harmful acts by reviewers.
The best way to reach us is by email. Complaints should ideally be made to the person the complainant is already in contact with over the matter being complained about. If that is not appropriate please email email@example.com
Whenever possible complaints will be dealt with by the relevant member of the editorial staff. If that person cannot deal with the complaint he or she will refer it to a section editor or the executive editor.
Complaints that are not under the control of TURCOMAT editorial staff will be sent to the relevant heads of department. All complaints will be acknowledged within three working days. If possible a full response will be made within four weeks. If this is not possible an interim response will be given within four weeks. Further interim responses will be provided until the complaint is resolved. If the complainant is not happy with the resolution he or she can ask for the complaint to be escalated to the individual's manager or to the executive editor. If the complainant remains unhappy, complaints should be escalated to the editor, whose decision is final.
The copyediting stage is intended to improve the flow, clarity, grammar, wording, and formatting of the article. It represents the last chance for the author to make any substantial changes to the text because the next stage is restricted to typos and formatting corrections. The file to be copyedited is in Word or .rtf format and therefore can easily be edited as a word processing document. The set of instructions displayed here proposes two approaches to copyediting. One is based on Microsoft Word's Track Changes feature and requires that the copy editor, editor, and author have access to this program. A second system, which is software independent, has been borrowed, with permission, from the Harvard Educational Review. The journal editor is in a position to modify these instructions, so suggestions can be made to improve the process for this journal.
1. Microsoft Word's Track Changes
Under Tools in the menu bar, the feature Track Changes enables the copy editor to make insertions (text appears in color) and deletions (text appears crossed out in color or in the margins as deleted). The copy editor can posit queries to both the author (Author Queries) and to the editor (Editor Queries) by inserting these queries in square brackets. The copyedited version is then uploaded, and the editor is notified. The editor then reviews the text and notifies the author. The editor and author should leave those changes with which they are satisfied. If further changes are necessary, the editor and author can make changes to the initial insertions or deletions, as well as make new insertions or deletions elsewhere in the text. Authors and editors should respond to each of the queries addressed to them, with responses placed inside the square brackets. After the text has been reviewed by editor and author, the copy editor will make a final pass over the text accepting the changes in preparation for the layout and galley stage. 2. Harvard Educational Review Instructions for Making Electronic Revisions to the Manuscript Please follow the following protocol for making electronic revisions to your manuscript: Responding to suggested changes. For each of the suggested changes that you accept, unbold the text. For each of the suggested changes that you do not accept, re-enter the original text and bold it. Making additions and deletions. Indicate additions by bolding the new text. Replace deleted sections with: [deleted text]. If you delete one or more sentence, please indicate with a note, e.g., [deleted 2 sentences]. Responding to Queries to the Author (QAs). Keep all QAs intact and bolded within the text. Do not delete them. To reply to a QA, add a comment after it. Comments should be delimited using: [Comment:] e.g., [Comment: Expanded discussion of methodology as you suggested]. Making comments. Use comments to explain organizational changes or major revisions e.g., [Comment: Moved the above paragraph from p. 5 to p. 7]. Note: When referring to page numbers, please use the page numbers from the printed copy of the manuscript that was sent to you. This is important since page numbers may change as a document is revised electronically.
An Illustration of an Electronic Revision
The journal copy editor will edit the text to improve flow, clarity, grammar, wording, and formatting, as well as including author queries as necessary. Once the initial edit is complete, the copy editor will upload the revised document through the journal Web site and notify the author that the edited manuscript is available for review.
Before making dramatic departures from the structure and organization of the edited manuscript, authors must check in with the editors who are co-chairing the piece. Authors should accept/reject any changes made during the initial copyediting, as appropriate, and respond to all author queries. When finished with the revisions, authors should rename the file from AuthorNameQA.doc to AuthorNameQAR.doc (e.g., from LeeQA.doc to LeeQAR.doc) and upload the revised document through the journal Web site as directed.
The journal copy editor will verify changes made by the author and incorporate the responses to the author queries to create a final manuscript. When finished, the copy editor will upload the final document through the journal Web site and alert the layout editor to complete formatting.