Focus and Scope
The Jagannath University Journal of Social Sciences (JnUJSS) is a double blind, peer-reviewed academic journal devoted to the field of Social Sciences. The journal is published half-yearly in January and July as two issues per annual volume by Jagannath University. The JnUJSS aims to publish high quality research articles that contribute to the advancement of the knowledge in the field of Social Science. The target audience of this journal are scholars, researchers, academicians, and the policy makers from the different fields. JnUJSS is the place for exchanging information and research results within all areas of Social Sciences and allied fields.
The Jagannath University Journal of Social Sciences (JnUJSS) scope includes but is not limited to the following fields:
Review Process
The Jagannath University Journal of Social Science (JnUJSS) is a double blind, peer-reviewed academic journal; it follows the following peer-review process:
Guidelines for Peer Reviewers
Here are a few questions that you might find useful to help the author improve their manuscript, including better aligning it with the journal’s focus, by writing your notes under them. Please delete/replace the “sample comments” after the questions. We welcome track changes and marginal comments that you might be able to provide in addition to the feedback.
Question 1: What is best done in the manuscript?
Sample Comment: The content of the article is relevant to readers of this journal. The writing is organized well and interesting to read. Results and discussion sections are done very effectively.
Question 2: What needs to be improved most?
Sample Comment: There is no real introduction/framing in the beginning; the long “background” sections should be condensed and rewritten as a framing/introduction section (the title “introduction” is unnecessary). The results section needs more explanation and fewer numbers.
Question 3: Does the manuscript's content fit the Journal? Do the subject and argument of the draft focus on higher education? Does the writer make the disciplinary and national/cultural/material context clear for interdisciplinary and global audiences? Is the issue timely and the main idea clear and interesting?
Sample Comment: Yes. Readers interested in educational discourse coming out of different disciplines and different cultures/contexts would find this article useful. The method of teaching described in the Chinese context here may not be easy to implement in other places, but the author is aware of this and provides broader insights about realigning testing with teaching for other contexts as well.
Question 4: Does it contribute new knowledge about higher education on the subject? Please note that most readers of the journal are scholars/teachers interested in learning about higher education from other educators across disciplines and across national/cultural borders.
Sample Comment: Not sure if the key idea of effective teaching with limited technology is "new" in itself; in fact, readers in more technologically well-resourced contexts may not find the manuscript very useful. However, it was refreshing to learn about a few specific methods of "leapfrogging" that teachers in Nepal use in the classroom. Reading this manuscript triggered some strategies for my own classroom here in Brazil.
Question 5: Is the thesis and/or purpose of the manuscript clearly stated early on? Does the author focus on the key idea/argument throughout the manuscript? If the statement of objective is hidden, delayed, or overly complex, point it out and give specific suggestions for foregrounding it.
Sample Comment: No. The author states the argument/thesis and purpose in the “abstract” but instead of a good introduction (framing, outline, preview), there are three separate sections that describe and provide a literature review on three separate ideas. The author doesn’t frame those ideas within the main argument/issue of the article at large, and he/she also doesn’t provide good connections from section to section. See comment #9 for the solution.
Question 6: Is there a logical focus and flow of the main idea throughout the draft? Because this journal has mixed audiences, writers must make their manuscripts highly “accessible,” showing a clear connection from the main idea/argument to each section. If you cannot easily see the “big picture” of the logical organization of ideas when quickly reading the manuscript, please tell the writer how you address the problem.
Sample Comment: Yes—except the fact that the author provides three sections that read like textbook chapters in lieu of a good introduction. The rest of the manuscript has parts whose roles in the big picture I could easily/quickly follow.
Question 7: Does the work build on a review of relevant literature? Would you suggest having a separate review of the literature, or would it be better to disperse citations in certain sections? Do you suggest more referencing to show/connect to current knowledge on the topic? Please pay attention to possibly missing citations.
Sample Comment: Yes. References are relevant and sufficient. In fact, the author overdoes this in the manuscript. See comment #2 above for how to reduce the number of citations.
Question 8: Do the evidence and arguments sufficiently support or explore the key issue? The manuscript as a whole must feel complete and convincing. If you think that the author needs to find more sources, add examples or explanations, or clarify some of the key issues, please advise. If something is overdone, please suggest deletion or condensation.
Sample Comment: Yes. Generally done well.
Question 9: Does the manuscript follow APA citation guidelines? We ask authors to follow the APA guidelines, so please point out errors and issues in that regard. Also, please point out if the abstract isn't roughly 120 words, captions/titles aren't provided for tables/figures, there’s no one-to-one match between in-text citation and references listed, block quotation isn't used for 40+ words, page and year aren't specified indirect quotations, section titles aren't telling, language and tone doesn't fit an academic journal, and the type of evidence and elaboration doesn't match the discipline and topic.
Sample Comment: There are a number of problems in this regard, as I have indicated by using track change and marginal comments.
Question 10: If you have any additional comments, please add them here.
Sample Comment: I think this manuscript if improved and published, could be a valuable contribution to this journal. The writer may not be highly experienced and his/her style less than advanced, but the subject and argument are important to share. Teachers, especially in developing countries around the world, would greatly benefit from learning about these smart pedagogical strategies of making a lot out of little technology. If you decide to move the manuscript forward and want to connect the writer to me as a "mentor reviewer," I am willing to help that way.
To expedite the publication process of the Jagannath University Journal of Social Sciences (JnUJSS), reviewers are required to submit the online Review Form on or before the agreed deadline. If reviewers are unable to meet the deadline, they should promptly contact Jagannath University Journal of Social Sciences (JnUJSS) to arrange an alternative date.
Reviewers are encouraged to focus their reports on objectively critiquing the relevance, originality, importance, and clarity aspects of the submission, including the soundness of the methodology and whether the conclusions can be supported by the results. Additionally, comments may be provided on innovation and the potential impact of the work. At the conclusion of their review, we kindly request reviewers to recommend one of the following actions:
However, it is important to note that the overall decision for publication will be made by the Editorial Board.
Publication Frequency
Jagannath University Journal of Social Sciences (JnUJSS) is published twice in a year (June and December) two issues (one volume) each year.
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.
Article Processing Fees
Our journal is free to everyone. Full text of all the contents is always available. There is no article processing charges (APCs) or submission charges. Our readers can copy, distribute, and use their attributed research for non-commercial purpose free of charge. Our journal retains copyright of the articles through a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0).
Source of Support
Faculty of Social Science of Jagannath University, Dhaka bears all the costs of publication of the journal. Editors work voluntarily without any payment or salary.
Publisher
Faculty of Social Science of Jagannath University, Dhaka-1100
Established by INASP in 2007. Managed by Bangladesh Academy of Sciences.
Bangladesh Journals Online (BanglaJOL) is a service to provide online publication of Bangladeshi journals. For more information about BanglaJOL and how to join the service, see the About page.
