Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The International Journal of Gender Science and Technology (GST) is an open access, peer reviewed journal that welcomes contributions from practitioners, researchers and policy makers concerned with gender issues in and of science and technology, including engineering, construction and the built environment. Research in these areas is of interest not only to academics, but also to employers and educators involved in these sectors. We welcome contributions from a variety of disciplines and interdisciplinary perspectives and drawing on a wide range of theoretical frameworks.

 

Our aim is to help foster and provide a focus for constructive debate and interchange of ideas between key players and experts in this field - promoting the sharing of knowledge and new understandings.

 

GST enables those outside of academic institutions to have access to research data and results to inform strategies, responses and progress. Academic researchers will benefit from access to case studies and reports developed by practitioners and policy makers.

 

 

Section Policies

Research and theoretical papers

Empirical research and theoretical papers should be between 5000 - 8000 words in length

Reviewers will be asked to comment on:

(1) the overall suitability of a paper for the journal;
(2) the clarity of the writing, the organisation of the argument, the paper's ability to provoke and hold the reader's interest;
(2) the relevance to the journal's audience of the materials presented, the appropriateness of the methodology, and how the results have been analysed;
(3) the significance and originality of the paper for discussion and debate in its area of research.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Case Studies

 The purpose of the case studies in GST is to disseminate the lessons learned from SET initiatives and activities to employers, educators, practitioners of all kinds, as well as interested individuals,  and do this in an accessible and engaging way.  The tone of a case study should be informative and reflective rather than academic and scholarly although arguments should well made, and the audience's knowledge and experience respected.  This is not a space for simple dissemination of information about, or promotion of projects.  If you have no data about the impact of an innovation or activity, this would suggest that you are not yet ready to write a case study about it. Case studies will go through the process of single anonymous review and the reviewers of case studies will be practitioners rather than academics and researchers.  

Below is a guide for GST case studies; please regard this as a list of suggestions rather than a template to be followed. The case study you submit might not cover all the points listed below.  Also if you have an idea for a case study but are unsure about whether it is the kind of thing we want please contact us, we will be happy to discuss it with you. 

  1. Length - 2000 - 3000 words
  2. Examples of topics that might be presented as case studies:
    1. Projects and initiatives in educational establishments that seek to overcome gendered barriers to engagement with STEM subjects and/or increase the retention and success of learners.
    2. Policies and initiatives within companies and organisations that seek to address gender-based issues in relation to the support recruitment, progression and retention of scientists, engineers and technologists.
    3. Impact of individuals in leadership or role model positions
    4. Profiles of women whose contributions to SET have previously been ignored or overlooked
    5. Events, resources or other materials in the public domain that can be used by others working in the field
  3. Relevance Your audience need to know what they might learn from reading your case study. This should be a major theme of your piece and introduced early. Please give the context of the case study so that you reader can see how closely it relates to theirs and they will be better able to judge its relevance for themselves.
  4. Methodology - we would expect to see details of how any case study was conducted and information about sources of data you used for example evaluation surveys, interviews, focus groups. However, we are also happy to have your "opinion" when presented as part of a reflective piece of writing about an initiative, event or resources
  5. We expect case studies to be critical and evaluative rather than just descriptive. We are happy to have pieces about failed initiatives; they can be as useful to practitioners as those describing successful ones.
  6. Innovative. Case studies should describe something that is new and different - we are looking for pieces that will inspire others to try new ideas or methods.
  7. Impact. Your case study should demonstrate impact of some kind, if it has not run long enough for you to have any data about impact, or in the case of materials and resources data about usage, then it is probably too early for you to write a case study.
  8. Where appropriate you should include some references, if not there should be some recommendations for further reading, these may be links to website and other digital resources. They might also be links to practical texts.  They should be there to help your readers explore the issues further themselves, or enable them to see how they might adopt a similar initiative into their own practices.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Perspectives

The purpose of the perspectives section in GST is to provide a space for viewpoints and opinions which are not reporting new research but are reflecting on relevant issues in the area of gender and SET. Articles may come from employers, educators, or practitioners of all kinds, as well as researchers and should be written in an accessible and engaging way. The tone of a perspectives article should be informative and reflective rather than academic and scholarly. Arguments should well made, however, and the audience's knowledge and experience respected.

Perspectives articles will go through the process of single anonymous review.

Below is a guide for GST perspectives articles; please regard this as a list of suggestions rather than a template to be followed. The perspectives article you submit might not cover all the points listed below. Also if you have an idea that you think may be suitable for a perspectives article, but would like to discuss how to develop the idea for the GST audience, please contact us.

  1. Length - 2000 - 3000 words
  2. Examples of topics that might be discussed in a perspectives article:
    1. Overview of gender and SET issues from a particular country or geographical region
    2. Reflections on the implications of research already reported elsewhere
    3. Reflections on impact of strategies within companies and organisations to address gender-based issues in order to support recruitment, progression and retention of scientists, engineers and technologists.
    4. Viewpoints and opinions of individuals who are or have been influential in shaping gender and SET policy or practice
  3. Relevance Your audience need to know what they might learn from reading your perspectives article, why you are writing it and what viewpoint you are representing.
  4. We expect perspectives articles to be critical, analytical and thought provoking rather than just descriptive. They may represent optimistic or pessimistic viewpoints
  5. Impact. Your perspectives article should aim to create impact of some kind, offering some directions and recommendations for readers .
  6. Where appropriate you should include some references, if not there should be some recommendations for further reading, these may be links to website and other digital resources. They might also be links to practical texts. They should be there to help your readers explore the issues further themselves.

If you have a proposal for an article for this section, please contact Clem Herman (c.herman@open.ac.uk) attaching a brief overview of proposed content.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Reviews

Reviews of books, conferences and other resources that focus on the relevance of these resources for the GST audience. Reviews should be between 800 - 1500 words in length.

Do you know of any resources that might be of interest to the GST community? Please forward any suggestions for reviews of books and other resources to Clem Herman (c.herman@open.ac.uk)

If you are attending a conference/seminar that may be of interest to the GST community, and you are willing to write a review, please contact Clem Herman (c.herman@open.ac.uk)

Editors
  • Holly Hedgeland
Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed

Special Issue:Gender and Intersectionality in Engineering

Articles for Special Issue 2019

Editors
  • Alice Moncaster
  • Carol Morris
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Special Issue: Re-imagining who does STEM

This special issue is for papers presented at the Network Gender and STEM COnference in Eugene Oregon 2018

Editors
  • Lara Perez-Felkner
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Peer-reviews will be conducted by two reviewers.

We seek to ensure that the topics covered in the submission relate to the specialist area of at least one of the reviewers.

Reviewers will also be asked to consider whether or not the article is suitable for the GST audience. Before submitting their article authors should consider whether their article could be  made more understandable to an international and/or non-specialist readership.

We seek to provide authors with constructive, developmental reviews that will help them to produce publishable submissions, in future submissions if not the current one.

 Reviewers will make one of four recommendations:

  • Accept submission: no revisions are required other than those that would normally be carried out during the copy-editing/proof-reading process.
  • Revisions required: the submission would be acceptable for publication if minor revisions were made as outlined in your reviewers comments. The editorial team will be responsible for checking that the revisions have been completed satisfactorily.
  • Resubmit for review: the submission is relevant for the GST audience and has the potential to be of publishable quality. It requires major revisions and should be resubmitted for review.
  • Decline submission

We aim to complete the review process within six weeks from the date of submission. Authors should note, however, that submissions that do not follow the author guidelines may cause delays in the review process.

 

Publication Frequency

GST will be published three times a year:

Spring (Submissions by October 31st)

Summer (Submissions by February 28th)

 Winter (Submission by June 30th)

 

Open Access Policy

This journal 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.

 

Online tutorials

The links below will take you to brief online tutorials that give guidance on:

Creating a user account

http://pkp.sfu.ca/files/video/ojs_user_account_demo/ojs_user_account_demo.htm

Submitting an article:

http://pkp.sfu.ca/files/video/ojs_author_submission/ojs_author_submission.htm

 

Readers' comments

We hope the journal website will stimulate feedback and comment, providing readers with the opportunity to contribute to on-going discussions and debate. 

To comment on any of the published articles, please click on the 'add comment' link in the reading tools, which you will find in the right-hand sidebar of the article.

Comments will appear in the abstract section of the relevant article.