Submissions

Author Guidelines

The works must be sent through the electronic system. To do this, it is necessary to enter Access with login and password. If you do not have a login and password, you must register.

Every contribution submitted to Schème first undergoes a preliminary assessment by the Editors, which analyzes the suitability of the works according to their editorial line, described in the Focus and Scope.

The review system is double blind (Double Blind Review): the names of the reviewers will remain confidential, also omitting the names of the authors before the reviewers.

All evaluators are doctors with experience in research and teaching. The principle adopted for the recruitment of these evaluators values the specialty and a broad knowledge in the area.

The criteria for evaluating the articles take into account the relevance of the theme, originality of the contribution in the thematic areas of the Journal, clarity of the text, adequacy of the bibliography, structuring and theoretical development, methodology used, conclusions and contribution offered to the knowledge of the area.

Only one evaluator will be used per submitted work, but if the author disagrees with the opinion, he may request the Journal's Editors, with a reasoned justification, to submit the work to a new reviewer. If the second reviewer issues an opinion contrary to that of the first reviewer, the work will be submitted to a third reviewer. The final opinion is the result of a simple majority of the three opinions.

Authors considered by the Editors of notorious knowledge will not be evaluated by referees. The authors of notorious knowledge are professors and researchers with a deep and broad academic career, considered by the academic-scientific community as a unanimous reference in the area. 

To maintain greater diversity, Schème does not publish more than one article with the same authorship (including co-authorship) in the same issue, nor does it publish articles by the same authorship (including co-authorship) in an immediate issue to the one previously published. The author or co-author who published in an issue must wait at least a gap of one issue to publish a new article.

The contents of works published in Schème are the sole responsibility of their authors. Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal the right of first publication, with the work licensed as stated in the Open Access Policy.

The average time to complete an assessment is 3 months.

Editorial Flow

Schème's editorial workflow follows the following process:

Submission: enter Access with login and password to submit the text.

Editor Review: Editors verify that the text meets the Focus and Scope and Author Guidelines, and may be rejected or returned for adequacy.

Evaluation: the text is sent for double-blind evaluation according to the selection criteria and procedures described in the Guidelines for Authors.

Revision: the approved texts will go for textual and formal review, the approved texts with modification will be sent to the authors for adjustments, and the unapproved texts will be communicated to the authors.

Production: formatting the final versions of the approved texts and launching the site number.

Publication Modalities

Schème publishes the following types of academic work:

Articles: original and unpublished, results of studies and research related to the area, which have not been and are not being submitted to other Journals.

Reviews: original and unpublished of relevant works in the area, on the contents of national works, with up to 1 year of publication, and of international works, with up to 4 years of publication.

Translations: original and unpublished texts of relevant texts in the area, accompanied by their originals and authorization for publication by the author and/or publisher.

Interviews: original and unpublished by researchers with relevance in the area or in their specialty; must be submitted to the editors who will analyze the interview in accordance with the Journal's editorial policy; the editors will have full autonomy to accept or reject them.

Research Group Reports: original and unpublished, and must contain a presentation of the group, its trajectory and its relevance to studies in Genetic Epistemology in Brazil or abroad.

Debates: original and unpublished, with the aim of presenting ideas and reflections of debates between researchers recorded in writing or transcribed from videos or audios.

For other types of publications the publishers should be consulted.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors are required to declare any financial or personal relationships with other people or organizations, i.e., to indicate the funding source whenever the research is funded. This information is relevant so that we can assess whether there is a conflict of interest that might inappropriately influence the bias of the paper.

Indication of authorship contribution

After the entire editorial process, the editors may, if necessary, request a description of the individual contribution of each author to the production of the research and the manuscript in the final version at the end of the manuscript.

Ethics Committee

Schème asks the author to inform if there is approval by the Ethics Committee in the case of research with human beings.

Publication Rules

The submitted texts must meet the following formal aspects provided by the Brazilian Association of Technical Standards (ABNT):

Articles

Can be written in Portuguese, English, Spanish, Italian or French.

They must contain from 10 to 35 pages (including title, title, abstract, abstract, keywords, keywords, notes and references).

Texts must be typed on A4 sheet, Book Antiqua 12 font, 1.5 line spacing, justified alignment.

Every article must be preceded by: title and subtitle (if any), separated by a colon; full name of the authors, the institution to which they are linked and their electronic addresses (e-mails) and ORCID for authors and co-authors; an abstract in the language of the text, which must not exceed 450 words, followed by keywords (3 to 5); title in English (if the language of the article is English, it is necessary to put the title in a second language), and an abstract, followed by keywords.

Quotations of up to three lines must be enclosed in double quotes; single quotes are used to indicate a quote within a quote. Quotations with more than three lines must be highlighted with a 4 cm indent from the left margin, in Book Antiqua 11 font, single-spaced and without quotation marks. Deletions in citations should be indicated by ellipsis in square brackets, and interpolations or comments should be enclosed in square brackets. To emphasize excerpts from the citation, they should be highlighted, indicating this change with the expression "our emphasis" in parentheses, after the citation, or "author's emphasis", if the highlight is already part of the work consulted.

Some examples:

Direct quote:

In a few words, you will find in these pages the exposition of an epistemology that is naturalistic without being positivist, that highlights the activity of the subject without being idealistic, that also relies on the object without ceasing to consider it as a limit (existing, therefore, , independently of us, but never completely achieved) and that, above all, sees in knowledge a continuous elaboration […]. (PIAGET, 1983, p. 5).

Scientific knowledge of what depends on experience always consists in constructing abstract schemes or models of that experience, in exploring, through logic and mathematics, the relationships between the abstract elements of these models, in order finally to deduce from them properties that correspond with sufficient precision, to directly observable empirical properties. (GRANGER, 1994, p. 70-71, author's emphasis).

Footnotes, which can be reference, explanatory or include indications, observations and additions to the text, must be numbered sequentially in Arabic numerals, with the call number in a high position in the text, after the punctuation that closes the citation, and repeated at the beginning of the corresponding note. The text of footnotes must be typed in Book Antiqua 10 font.

At the end of the text, the references consulted should be indicated. A generic sequence of the essential elements of a reference can be represented as follows: AUTHOR. Title. Translator (if applicable). Location: Publisher, date.

Some examples:

Books:

INHELDER, B.; PIAGET, J. Da lógica da criança à lógica do adolescente: ensaio sobre a construção das estruturas operatórias formais. Trad. Dante Moreira Leite. São Paulo: Pioneira, 1976.

Book chapters:

BRENELLI, R. P. Espaço lúdico e diagnóstico em dificuldades de aprendizagem: contribuição do jogo de regras. In: SISTO, F.F. (org.). Dificuldades de aprendizagem no contexto psicopedagógico. Rio de Janeiro: Vozes, 2001. p.167-189.

Articles:

MAIA, L. A. Educação pelo FORA: pedagogia e filosofia da diferença. Aprender - Caderno de Filosofia e Psicologia da Educação, UESB, Vitória da Conquista. v. 2, n. 1, p. 9-21, jan./jun. 2004.

Articles in electronic Journals:

MONTOYA, A. O. D. Pensamento e Linguagem: percurso piagetiano de investigação. Psicologia em Estudo, v.11, n.1, 2006. Disponível em: http://www.scielo.br/pdf/pe/v11n1/v11n1a14. Acesso em: 23 maio 2007.

Works in Annals:

BORGES, R. R.; ASSIS, O. Z. M. de. A experiência prática de um trabalho construtivista na cidade de Barcelona-Espanha com a inclusão: um projeto pedagógico de qualidade para as creches. In: ENCONTRO NACIONAL DE PROFESSORES DO PROEPRE, 23., 2006, Águas de Lindóia. Anais: Educação e Inclusão Social. Campinas: FE/UNICAMP, 2006. p. 117-129.

Theses/Dissertations:

GUIMARÃES, K. P. Processos cognitivos envolvidos na construção de estruturas multiplicativas. 2004. 197 f. Tese (Doutorado em Educação) - Faculdade de Educação, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, 2004.

The cases not covered above must use the other guidelines of the ABNT NBR10520/2002 citation standards and ABNT NBR6023/2018 reference.

Example of an article published in Schème

Reviews

They must be 2 to 5 pages long;

They can be from national books on philosophy with up to one year of publication;

They can be from international books on philosophy with up to four years of publication.

Example of a review published in Schème

Translations

They must be 5 to 35 pages long;

They must be accompanied by their originals and authorization for publication by the author and/or publisher.

Example of a translation published in Schème

Interviews

They must be submitted to the editors who will analyze the interview in accordance with the Journal's editorial policy.

The editors will have full autonomy to accept or not the same.

Example of an interview published in Schème

Research Group Reports

They must be submitted to the editors who will analyze the report in accordance with the editorial policy of the Journal.

If necessary, you can go through a reviewer.

Example of a report published in Schème

Debates:

They must be submitted to the editors who will analyze the report in accordance with the Journal's editorial policy.

If necessary, you can go through a reviewer.

Example of a debate published in Schème

Errata and Retraction Policy

COPE (here) and Council of Science Editors (here) guidelines are followed for the correction of articles. Based on these sources, there are three methods for correcting scientific literature:

1. Errata - refers to amendments or changes to parts of the article. Corrections can be in the title of the article, names of the authors and typographical or diagramming errors;
2. Retraction - refers to partial corrections of the article due to methodological errors, incorrect data analysis, scientific misconduct or non-reproducible research. There is also the possibility of removing the entire article from the Journal's page;
3. Expression of Concern - Refers to the publication of a disclaimer by the editor when there is concern about the reliability of an article, but insufficient information is available to warrant a retraction.

Editors will review all communications that point to issues with a publication, whether minor or significant. Requests for corrections must be sent to the email: scheme.marilia@unesp.br.

If editors confirm the claims, they may ask authors to correct errors or occasional errors, or they may request retraction of a publication, based on COPE (here) and Council of Science Editors (here) guidelines for correction. of articles.

Editors may request publication retraction when:

1. a) Authors refuse to correct errors or mistakes when requested by the editors;
2. b) There is clear evidence that the research findings are unreliable, whether as a result of robust error, invention (eg of information) or falsification (eg manipulation of images);
3. c) There is plagiarism, self-plagiarism or redundant publication;
4. d) Research findings have been previously published elsewhere and there is no citation, communication of fact to editors, permission to republish or justification;
5. e) Contains information or materials without authorization for use;
6. f) Copyright has been infringed or there is some other relevant legal issue (eg use of images without permission);
7. g) Presents unethical research;
8. h) It was published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review;
9. i) The authors did not report a relevant conflict of interest that, in the editors' perspective, would have unduly affected the interpretations of the manuscript or the recommendations of the editors and reviewers.

Editors will not consider retracting a publication when:

1. a) There is a dispute over the authorship of the publication, but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the research findings;
2. b) The main research findings are still reliable, and a correction can correct eventual errors;
3. c) The editors have inconclusive evidence to support the retraction or are awaiting additional information, such as that from institutional research;
4. d) Authors' conflicts of interest were communicated to the Journal after publication, but from the editors' perspective they did not influence the article's interpretations or conclusions.

The request and writing of the correction must be made by the author responsible for the article. If there is disagreement between the authors about what is being corrected, the Journal editor becomes responsible for writing the correction. The errata, retraction or expression of concern will be published as soon as possible, with the article remaining on the Journal page with the respective correction indication.