Journal of Educational Data Mining

Educational Data Mining is an emerging discipline, concerned with developing methods for exploring the unique types of data that come from educational settings, and using those methods to better understand students, and the settings in which they learn. Such data types include student traces within interactive learning environments, learner test data and artefacts used for assessment, didactic material available in electronic form for mining, and usage traces left by students and instructors in learning management systems of all kinds.

 

The journal welcomes basic and applied papers describing mature work involving computational approaches of educational data mining. Specifically, it welcomes high-quality original work including but not limited to the following topics:

• ►Processes or methodologies followed to analyse educational data
• ►Integrating data mining with pedagogical theories
• ►Describing the way findings are used for improving educational software or teacher support
• ►Improving understanding of learners' domain representations
• ►Improving assessment of learners' engagement in the learning tasks

From time to time, the journal also welcomes survey articles, theoretical articles, and position papers, in as much as these articles build on existing work and advance our understanding of the challenges and opportunities unique to this area of research.

 

Submissions that extend previously published conference papers are welcome provided that the journal submission makes a substantive new contribution (at least 1/3 new content) and any copyright permission on previous material is obtained. Submissions that are extensions of previously published conference papers must be accompanied by a cover letter outlining the new contributions.

 

All papers should describe the supporting evidence in ways that can be verified or replicated by other researchers to a large extent.

 

It is encouraged, though not required, for researchers to make their data sets, software code, and intermediate results available to the community for inspection and re-use.

 

Submitted papers should also detail the data mining/modeling/analysis component of the submitted work clearly and include discussions of the findings in relation to educational questions.

 

There are no charges for published papers.

All articles that are elected for a full review undertake rigorous peer review by three anonymous referees. Editors will aim for a prompt overall reviewing process. It is the policy of the journal that no submission, or substantially overlapping submission, be published or be under review elsewhere. Papers extending previously published conference papers are acceptable, as long as the JEDM submission provides a significant contribution beyond the conference paper and that the overlap is explained clearly in the JEDM submission, with the unique contribution(s) of the JEDM submission contrasted with that of the other paper(s).

 

Upon submission, the editor will verify that the article can be read and is within the scope of the journal. Then an Associate Editor will take responsibility for handling the review process. The Associate Editor sends the title and abstract of the article to JEDM's Editorial Board as well as other qualified referees, in order to solicit volunteers for a review. The full article is then assigned to three carefully selected and balanced reviewers following JEDM's reviewing guidelines. The Associate Editor will study the reviews that are returned, and make an overall recommendation to the Editor. Upon the receipt of all reviews, the Associate Editor compiles a summary review in consultation with the Editor, and the summary review is then sent to both the authors and reviewers in anonymous form. When revisions are requested, authors should upload a revised manuscript addressing the points raised in the reviews as well as a detailed cover letter outlining how each point has been addressed. A process map of the editorial process can be viewed here.

 

This extensive exploitation of electronic communication and electronic publishing benefits the authors, the editor, the reviewers, and the publisher. Reviewers do not receive papers unexpectedly, but are informed about incoming submissions and can pick those papers in which they are interested and which they are willing to review within a certain period of time. Both the quality and the punctuality of the reviews are thereby considerably improved. JEDM aims at evaluating papers within three months.

 

The reviewers will be asked to answer the following questions:

• ►How relevant is this submission to the scope of JEDM? (if applicable: to the targeted special issue?)
• ►How novel is the described research? Are the authors aware of related work?
• ►What is the scientific contribution of this submission? Is it clearly explained, in terms of how the paper advances the EDM field or contributes to related fields?
• ►Is the work technically sound? Are there enough methodological details? Are claims convincingly substantiated, either through theoretical argument or empirical data?
• ►Have the authors made their data sets, software code, and intermediate results available for inspection and re-use to the reviewers and, if appropriate, to the community? (not always required, but recommended when feasible)
• ►Do the authors describe the limitations of their approach in a satisfactory manner?
• ►How significant is the research? Will the paper be likely to have an impact on the community?
• ►Does the title of this paper clearly and sufficiently reflect its contents?
• ►Are the presentation, organization and length satisfactory?
• ►Can you suggest additions, amendments, or reductions in the paper?
• ►Are the illustrations and tables necessary and acceptable?
• ►Are the key words and abstracts/summary informative?

Publication Ethics and Misconduct

JEDM adheres to the ethical standards set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), including:

• ►The International Standards for Authors
• ►The Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
• ►The  Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors

Reviewers with competing interests and editorial team members with competing interests will remove themselves from the decision making process. When an editorial team member submits a paper, an external trusted special editor will be assigned to manage the entire review process and act as editor for that submision.  If the article proceeds to publication, it will be explicitly stated on the article that the editor who submitted the paper has had no involvement with the journal’s handling of this particular article, along with the reasons for this, and the name of the assigned editor. 

Authors are required to declare their compliance with JEDM's Author Guidelines and Submission Checklist, which includes declaring competing interests. In case of misconduct, plagiarism, or if a paper is found not to be original, it will be rejected or removed following the COPE retraction guidelines.

Complaints

Complaints should be reported via the journal contact information page. Complaints will be investigated according to recommendations by the Committee on Publication Ethics. If complainants are unsatisfied with the response they may contact the International Educational Data Mining Society.