Submissions

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.

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.

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.

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)

Special Issue: Identifying Barriers and Building Bridges

Special Issue of papers from the Network Gender and STEM COnference 2022, focusing on barriers at various levels to female participation in STEM across educational stages and contexts, as well as bridges in the form of evidence-based pre- and interventions, programs, practices, and policies that can help to get and keep girls and women engaged in STEM.

The topics covered may contribute (but are not limited) to answer the following questions:
• Where and why do we still see gendered pathways in STEM? Which intraindividual differences, interindividual factors, educational processes, and structural inequalities act as barriers to female participation and help explain existing gender disparities in STEM?
• Which personal (e.g., competencies, self-related perceptions) and contextual resources (e.g., memberships in groups, organizations, societies, cultures) pave the ways to STEM fields?
• What is the role of social relationships in encouraging or preventing female students, including female students from minority groups, from pursuing and persisting in STEM domains?
• How can scientists, practitioners, and policy-makers contribute to dismantling gendered barriers and help building bridges to STEM? How can the sustainability of effective pre- and interventions, programs, practices, and policies be ensured?