About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Acta Didactica is a transdisciplinary, peer-reviewed, open access electronic journal designed to provide a scholarly forum for research on Teaching and Learning in and across subjects in the Nordic countries. The journal publishes theoretical and empirical contributions within the fields of the Teaching and Learning of Subjects, Teacher Education and Teachers’ professional development. Our main focus is on subject learning in primary and secondary education.  Articles focusing on the pre-school level and/or on general education normally fall beyond the scope of ADNO. We publish articles in Scandinavian languages (Norwegian, Swedish, Danish) and in English. There is no publication fee.

Acta Didactica occasionally publishes special issues on relevant topics within the journal's focus areas. We welcome proposals for special issues. The proposal should include a justification of the choice of topic, a more detailed account of the topic of up to 500 words, a description of the assumed readership and potential contributors, a suggested time schedule and the names of suggested guest editors. Proposals for special issues are sent to the editor-in-chief and evaluated by the editorial staff.

Journal history

The journal was established and first published under the title Acta Didactica Norge in 2007.  At the start of 2020 the journal changed its title to Acta Didactica Norden in order to better reflect the geographical area that the journal covers. The journal was indexed in Scopus that same year. 

Peer Review Process

Submitted manuscripts are first evaluated internally by the editors to determine whether the submissions fall within the journal’s aims and scope and meet basic standards for academic publishing. Submissions judged to be suitable for publication will be reviewed by two external reviewers in a double-blind peer-review process; reviewers are anonymous to the authors and each other, and the authors are anonymous to reviewers. Reviewers write an evaluation of the manuscript, focusing on the following points:

• The relevance of the manuscript: Does the manuscript address central issues within the relevant field of research? Is there a clear problem statement?
• Originality: Does the manuscript contribute with new knowledge to the field?
• Validity: How reliable and valid are the results? Does the author make use of suitable theories and sound methodological choices?
• Literature review: Is the literature review sufficiently comprehensive and up-to-date? Does the author refer to recent and relevant international (and national) research literature?
• Structure and clarity: Is the article well written and appropriately structured?
• Tables & figures: Are tables and figures easy to read and do the captions give sufficient information?
• References: Do the references follow the APA format? 
• Recommendation: The reviewers conclude their report by indicating whether they believe the manuscript should be accepted for publication, revised (with minor or major revisions) or rejected.

Based on the review reports, the editors make a decision whether the manuscript should be accepted or rejected, or whether authors should be given the opportunity to revise the manuscript and submit a new version.

Re-submitted manuscripts following minor revisions are evaluated by the editors, together with the author’s responses to comments from the review round. Re-submitted manuscripts following major revisions go through a new review process, typically by the same reviewers as in the first round. In some cases new reviewers are invited.     

Publication Frequency

Articles in regular issues of the journal are published consecutively as soon as they are ready for publication.

In the case of special issues, articles are collected and published together.

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. No fees are charged for publication or subscription. See also Copyright notice.

Requirements for co-authorship

Each author should have participated sufficiently in the work to take public responsibility for its content. All co-authors should have been directly involved in all three of the following:

• planning and contribution to some component (conception, design, conduct, analysis, or interpretation) of the work which led to the paper;
• writing a draft of the article or revising it for intellectual content; and
• final approval of the version to be published. 

The first author is ultimately responsible for ensuring that all other authors meet the requirements for authorship as well as ensuring the integrity of the work itself. The first author will serve as the corresponding author.

These criteria are largely based on the Vancouver rules

Publication ethics and malpractice policy

ADNO’s publication ethics and malpractice policy builds on COPE’s international standards for authors (Wager & Kleinert, 2011) and editors (Kleinert & Wager, 2011). Authors who want to publish in the journal must adhere to COPE’s standards for authors. In summary, these say that:

• The research being reported should have been conducted in an ethical and responsible manner and should comply with all relevant legislation.
• Researchers should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation.
• Researchers should strive to describe their methods clearly and unambiguously so that their findings can be confirmed by others.
• Researchers should adhere to publication requirements that submitted work is original, is not plagiarised, and has not been published elsewhere.
• Authors should take collective responsibility for submitted and published work.
• The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals’ contributions to the work and its reporting.
• Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest should be disclosed.

Authors have a responsibility to ensure that their publications are honest, clear, accurate, complete and balanced, but journal editors also have responsibilities for ensuring the integrity of the research literature and they are accountable for what they publish. ADNO editors work within the COPE’s international standards for editors (Kleinert & Wager, 2011). In summary, this means that editors make fair and unbiased decisions independent from commercial consideration, they ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process, and action is taken as soon as any suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct come to their knowledge. Any deviation from the COPE’s international standards for authors that comes to the editors’ knowledge will be dealt with accordingly, guided by COPE’s flowcharts (which can be found here).

References
Wager E & Kleinert S (2011). Responsible research publication: international standards for authors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 50 in: Mayer T & Steneck N (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp 309-16). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7).

Kleinert S & Wager E (2011). Responsible research publication: international standards for editors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Chapter 51 in: Mayer T & Steneck N (eds) Promoting Research Integrity in a Global Environment. Imperial College Press / World Scientific Publishing, Singapore (pp 317-28). (ISBN 978-981-4340-97-7).