THE GUIDELINES OF THE ETHIOPIAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES AND LANGUAGE STUDIES (EJSSLS)

The Ethiopian Journal of Social Sciences and Language Studies (EJSSLS), which is hosted by the College of Social Sciences and Humanities, of Jimma University, released its First Issue in June 2014. According to The Editorial of the first issue of EJSSLS, the journal had been established for three main reasons:

The first reason is the existence of a number of disciplines; diversified research based postgraduate programs, and large number of instructors who have been involved in research. Second, for the College, having its own journal encourages more instructors (from other universities also) in the area of social sciences and language studies to involve in research and publications. Researchers from this College have been publishing their manuscripts in the Ethiopian Journal of Education and Sciences and somewhere else for the college did not have its own journal. Though the Ethiopian Journal of Education and Sciences has contributed a lot in this regard, because of its limited capacity, scope and focus areas, it could not host manuscript contributors from the College of Social Sciences and Humanities as needed. Third, the college now has enough experienced researchers, assistant professors, and instructors who have terminal degrees. Hence, problems related to sustainability of publication, internal reviewers and editors have been reduced (Tesfaye, 2014, p.i).

In addition to addressing the three aforementioned reasons, the Journal was launched with the vision of being one of the most preferable journals in Africa and with the mission of disseminating quality publication to the wider readership. To make realizable these vision and mission, basic requirements such as well-equipped journal office, editorial board and international advisory board members were assigned, and constitution was ratified tentatively. The Journal at its inception had 8 editorial board members all from College of Social Sciences and Humanities of Jimma University representing the then departments.

Since its inception in June 2014 to the present reputable stage, the journal has passed through ups and downs; it has encountered challenges such as delay of review process, burden of the job on a few editorial board members, passivity of most of the international advisory board members, lack of incentives for the editors of the journal, manual management of manuscripts, attempts of hacking or downing of the webpage of the journal, absence of plagiarism checker, and resistance of most manuscript contributors to follow the journal’s guideline, to mention just a few but predominant ones.

Despite these challenges, because of the commitment of some of the editorial board members and some concerned internal and external reviewers, appreciative authors, supportive deans and administrative director of the College, the Journal has published a number of quality publications from Ethiopia and out of Ethiopia both online and in print, and now it has reached a stage of reputability. It has surpassed three volumes and six issues which is the minimal requirement for reputable journal (Promotion legislation of Jimma University, 2015). Consequently, the number of articles contributed to the journal started rising. All these imply the importance of improving the guidelines of the Journal. At the inception of the journal, its guideline was not complete; yet it was accepted by the editorial board just to launch the Journal. For example, it lacked policies related to correction and retraction of manuscript. Further, as compared to the Journal’s emerging stage, now it requires copy right modification, more supportive editorial board and international advisory board members, full time managing editor, copy editor, content and layout editor, and secretary, just to mention some. Hence, to better fulfill its vision and mission, it is important not only to improve the guidelines of the Journal based on the lessons that have been learnt from the past four years’ experiences, but also to endorse it.

After incorporating these additional elements, for further comment, the guideline has been dispatched to the editorial board members, some international advisory board members, and the consultant office of the University. After considering the given comments, it has come in its present form. But this does not mean that the guideline is complete; it will be improved further as needs arise.

Using this opportunity, I would like to thank all those who have contributed to the betterment of the guideline. I am also very grateful to Ato Birhanu Beyene (Jimma University, school of Law) and Dr. Birhanu Abera (Addis Ababa University) who supplied me with the materials that are very helpful in preparing the guidelines of the Ethiopian Journal of Social Sciences and Language Studies. Last, but not least, my heartiest thanks goes to Mr. Yosef Alemu, legal consultant of the University, Dr. Tesfaye Refera, Publication Director of Jimma University, and Mr. Chimdi Wakuma, law graduate, who gave professional comments on the content and structure of the guideline.

Tesfaye Gebeyehu
Editor-in - Chief
The Ethiopian Journal of Social Sciences and Language Studies (EJSSLS)

2. Nomenclature

The name of the journal shall be The Ethiopian Journal of Social Sciences and Language Studies (herein after referred as “the journal”).

Operational Definition
1. Author: An “author” is generally considered to be someone who has made substantive intellectual contributions to a published study. S/he must take responsibility for at least one component of the work, should be able to identify who is responsible for each other component, and should ideally be confident in their coauthors’ ability and integrity (Guidelines and Procedures for Publication and Extension (2013, p.6).

AC: AC means academic commission (herein after referred as the AC).
JU: JU means Jimma University (herein after referred as the JU).
CSSH: CSSH means College of Social Sciences and Humanities (herein after referred as the College).

Policy of the Journal
1. Open Access Policy

Publications are available immediately upon publication freely.

Vision and Mission

The vision of EJSSLS is to be one of the most preferable journals in Africa with the mission of disseminating quality publication to the wider readership.

Editorial Policy

Editorial policies are subjected to protect and strengthen the journal’s integrity and quality aiming reader's interest. All the articles are produced with respect to the scope of the journal based on their significance, novelty and usefulness to the Journals readership. Decisions on manuscripts are not affected by the author's origin, gender, religion, ethnicity, nationality, race or political beliefs. No government policies or agencies away from the journal will determine the decision. Decisions taken are strictly based on the articles validity and importance to the scientific readers.

Aims and Scope

Aims

It aims to provide a platform for the research community to share their findings, insights and views about all aspects of Social Sciences and Language.

Scope

The Ethiopian Journal of Social Sciences and Language Studies (EJSSLS) is an open access peer-reviewed journal published in both printed and online versions (The online version is free to access and download) two times in a year (June and December). The journal accepts the research papers from the diverse fields of social sciences, languages, and allied disciplines. The quality research in the areas of applied linguistics, communication, public relations, media studies, environmental studies, and related fields, is also invited for its publication in the journal. Papers can be submitted in the form of full-length original research, review articles, book reviews, commentaries, and Editorials - Policies, news and comment or letters to editor.

Readership

The primary audience of this publication would be academicians, research scholars, graduate students, and anyone interested in research.

Author Guidelines

Submission of a paper implies that all authors have seen and approved the manuscript and its contents, and that they are aware of the responsibilities connected to authorship. Signatures from all the authors are not required; it is the corresponding author’s responsibility to obtain agreement from all authors supporting the submission. The corresponding author will be notified upon receipt of a new manuscript and upon acceptance of a manuscript, and the editorial board corresponds only with the Corresponding Author, whose responsibility is to communicate with all other authors.

Declaration

Submission of a manuscript implies that it reports unpublished work and that neither itself, nor parts of it, have been published or are under consideration for publication elsewhere. By submitting a manuscript to the Journal, the authors guarantee that they have the appropriate authority from their employers and/or funding agencies to publish the work. Any related work under consideration, review, revision or accepted for publication elsewhere must accompany the submission if they are relevant to its scientific assessment. Authors should submit complete unpublished and original works, which are not under review in any other journals. When submitting the manuscript, the authors should declare that the manuscripts have not been published or are under consideration for publication elsewhere.

Conflicts of Interest

In the interests of transparency and to help editors and reviewers assess any potential bias, the Journal requires authors of original research papers to declare their specific contribution to the work (in a copy transfer form, see Appendix E) and any competing commercial interests in relation to the submitted work. It is difficult to specify a threshold at which a financial interest becomes significant, but as a practical guideline, we would suggest this to be any undeclared interest that could embarrass you were it to become publicly known. Referees and editors are also subject to Conflict of Interest regulations.

Submission Policy

Manuscripts should be submitted online in A4 paper in single spacing (for cost
minimization of the printed version). Signed manuscript submission form should
accompany the manuscript (it can be copied from the Journal’s Webpage)
To facilitate the rapid publication and reduce administrative costs, EJSSLS accepts only electronic submissions in word format.

Data Collection and Presentation

Presented data must represent the findings in a fair and accurate manner. This includes appropriate statistical analysis and image processing ( For further details, please refer to the General Guide to manuscript submission). The Editors deserve the right to request original versions of figures and the source data that were used to assemble the figure from the authors of a paper under consideration, or of a paper already published in The Journal.

Originality and Plagiarism
1. Originality

The editors require that any information published in the Journal represents a substantially novel contribution to the scientific record. Any manuscript submitted to The Journal should therefore not contain content that has been formally published in a peer reviewed journal or another citable form, whether in print or electronic. This includes websites, blogs and the news media. Any text, data, material, images, ideas or quotes should be attributed to the original source, even if it is by the same authors.

Plagiarism

The publisher and the Journal (EJSSLS) have a policy of “Zero Tolerance on the Plagiarism”. The plagiarism issue will be checked through two methods: plagiarism prevention tool (ithenticate.com) and reviewer check. All submissions will be checked by plagiarism checkers like iThenticate before being sent to reviewers.

Correction and Retraction Policy
1. Correction Policy

When any errors are noticed on published manuscripts, authors should inform the journal’s Editor-in-Chief and/or Managing Editor so that corrections are made at the journal’s discretion. EJSSLS encourage readers and authors to notify them (the board members) if they find errors, especially errors that could affect the interpretation of data or information presented in an article. Article retraction may be due to infringements of professional ethical codes, such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like. Occasionally, a retraction will be used to correct errors in submission or publication. If there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings or the reliability of the data, it is not appropriate to retract a publication solely on the grounds of an authorship dispute. The correction procedure depends on the publication stage of the article:

Online First publication

The Online First (or ‘published ahead of print’) version is considered the version of record, and not an opportunity to make changes prior to print publication. EJSSLS will consider replacing this version with an updated version which corrects the error and notifies that the change has been made (in a correction notice at the end of the article). The correction notice will be retained in the print version for record.

If the article has already appeared in an issue, a correction notice will be printed in the next available print issue. The online version of the article will link to the correction notice, and vice versa.

1.12.2. Retraction Policy

Retractions are considered by editors of EJSSLS in cases of evidence of unreliable data or findings, plagiarism, duplicate publication, duplicate submission (to different journals) , and unethical research. The editors of the Journal may consider an expression of concern notice if an article is under investigation. The retraction procedure depends on the publication stage of the article.

Online First publication

A new version of the article will be posted containing just the metadata, with a retraction note replacing the original text. A retraction notice will also be published in the next available print issue. The original text will remain accessible.

Publication in an issue or a continuous publication journal

A replacement version of the article will be posted containing just the metadata, with a retraction note replacing the original text. The PDF will be replaced with a version watermarked with “Retracted” but the original text will remain accessible. A retraction notice will also be published in the next available print issue.

In rare cases, the editors may have to remove the original content for legal reasons. In such cases the editor (s) will leave the metadata (title and authors) and replace the text with a note saying the article has been removed for legal reasons. A retraction notice will also be published online and/or in print.

Retraction notices are indexed and linked to the original records in EJSSLS Web.

Citation

Comprehensive and accurate citation of the relevant literature is essential. We require citation of the primary literature wherever appropriate. See General Guidelines for Manuscript Submission.

Language Policy

English is the language the Journal uses. Authors must use consistently either UK or American English. In the future, Ethiopian languages (e.g., Afan Oromo and Amharic) can be considered based on need and feasibility assessment.

Copyrights and Licensing

Copyrights: According to the Guidelines and Procedures for Publication and Extension (2013, p.13), 1.9.1.7., of Jimma University, JU owns the copyright of the published articles within JU hosted Journals, and authors of accepted manuscripts for publication in JU hosted Journal shall sign Copyright Transfer Agreement (Please see Annex 12 or Appendix E). In the same guideline JU makes the publications to be made available freely (open access).

Licensing: The journal follows an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).

Subscription Fee

The online publication is accessible freely. Authors are not requested to pay during submission for publication and to access after publication. However, for the print version, the subscription fee per issue and postage service varies for individual subscribers, institutional subscribers, and countries (local and overseas). The fee is determined based on the existing situation as publication and postage prices may vary from time to time or Issue to Issue.

Reviewing Process

EJSSLS follows double-blind system for peer-review. Reviewers can be from different or the same institute depending on reviewer availability (Internal and external, internal and internal, and external and external). The internal and external approach is the first option the journal follows.

Paper Selection and Publication Process

After receiving a manuscript, the Editor/managing editor gives code or identity number to the manuscript. The author and reviewers may use this in further correspondence for enquiries.
After receiving a manuscript, the Editor sends an E-mail of confirmation to the corresponding author within 1-3 working days. If the author does not receive this confirmation in this given time, s/he has to contact without delay the contact person/editor.
Initial decisions are held by Editors-in-Chief and submitted manuscripts will undergo unbiased preliminary assessment for the suitability to the scope of the journals.
As an extension to the process, the assessed manuscripts are returned to the author for revision if they are not relevant and consistent to the guidelines of the journal. This saves the precious time of the reviewers and speeds up the review process.
If/when the assessed manuscripts are found relevant and consistent to the policy or guide of the journal, they will be forwarded to at-least two expert reviewers in the field.
Both reviewers and authors’ identities remain anonymous. Reviewers are given 2-3 weeks to send their fair and constructive reviews to Editor, and Editors-in-Chief are aimed to take the final decision within 6 weeks from the manuscript submission.
The editorial board members decide accepting or rejecting a manuscript based on reports from at least two reviewers.
The result of review is notified by E-mail.
The authors revise paper provided that his/her manuscript is accepted.
After publication, the corresponding author will receive two copies of printed journals, free of charge.
E-journal in PDF can be downloaded freely from the journal’s webpage.

Source: https://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Journal_System, CC-SA

Structure of the Journal

Bodies of the Journal

The journal shall have such bodies as:

1)    Advisory board
2)    The Editorial board
3)    Managing Editor
4)    Secretary

The Editorial board

The number of members the editorial board shall be seven (Guidelines and Procedures for Publication and Extension, 2013, p.5). The board shall compromise: one Editor- in- Chief, one associate Editor-in Chief, and five editors. The Editor-in-Chief shall assign additional associate editors when the journal publishes separate sub-sections to be handled by a particular associate editor in chief.

The Editorial Board shall be directly accountable to the Collage AC.
The term of office for the editor – in – Chief shall be four years and for other editors three years.
A web site manager and a secretary are hired for the office work.
The editorial board shall, from time to time, contact and convince individuals with an outstanding contribution to the academic world or to the society to be members of the advisory board.

General Eligibility Criteria for Appointment to the Editorial Board

The eligibility criteria for appointment as an editor in the editorial board shall include the following:
•    Demonstrated scholarly expertise and ethical leadership.
•    A minimum of two publications is required.
•    Demonstration of excellence in the review process,
•    Stated commitment to attend meetings and to carry out responsibilities.

Nomination and Election Process

Editorial Board members shall be nominated and elected as follows:
The Social Sciences and Humanities Collage Academic Commission (AC) members must nominate from the academic staff fulfilling the eligibility criteria and elect from the nominated ones through a vote, and candidates who get ¾ and the highest of the votes of the attending AC members shall be appointed as member of the editorial board. In composing the editorial board, the AC shall ensure the members’ expertise on various fields and disciplines.

If a candidate is appointed by the AC Members, she/he shall serve for a specified term of three years except the editor-in-chief whose term of office shall be 4 years, and a member who is absent for 4 months shall be replaced by other member. Continued membership of the Editorial Board will be reviewed every four years for the editor- in chief and three years for other members by the AC. The AC can remove an editor including the editor in chief before his/her term expires when and if the editor is not in a position to discharge his/her responsibilities mentioned in this document and other relevant documents for any reason (e.g. Recklessness, absence, sickness, etc).

General Responsibility of the Editorial Board and Its Members

1.    Develop its own working procedures and revise, improve, or change authors’, editors’ and reviewers’ guide which are appended to this document and issue other guides of similar nature.
2.    Editors should hold the responsibility for the whole Journal content.
3.    Contribute to Journal development and management through generous relationship with other board members.
4.    Update reviewers and authors with new policies and guidelines.
5.    Assure the integrity in the published work.
6.    Encourage authors for submission of sound articles that falls within the scope of the journal.
7.    Editors should ensure the protection of individual data and maintain confidentiality.
8.    Every Editorial Board member should ensure submission of at least one manuscript in a year.
9.    Ensure constructive, fair and timely feedback to the authors for their contribution.
10.    Elevate Journal's reputation among their affiliated academic community.
11.    Represent and promote the journal at academic meetings and conferences.
12.    If or when appropriate, encourage authors whose primary language is not English to seek mentorship or assistance from a colleague prior to submitting a manuscript for review.

Editor-in-Chief‘s Responsibility

1. The Editor-in-Chief must have a minimum of three publications in a peer reviewed journals and an academic rank of an assistant professor or above.

2. The Chair of the Editorial Board is the Editor(s)-in-Chief.

3. The Editor-in-Chief has a vital role in the success of a Journal. He should guarantee the quality and integrity of the content found in the Journal. It is his/her primary responsibility to educate and communicate the vision to the authors, readers, editorial board members and publisher. The Editor-in-Chief should put consistent efforts to enhance quality and elevate the significance of published articles to the corresponding community.

4. Editor-in-Chief should take the whole responsibility of the Journal and she/he should be familiar with the subject literature, research design, statistics, publication ethics and standards. He/she should also possess extensive editorial and interpersonal skills.

5.    Should strive for the development of the Journal and suggest the publisher for further improvisations with additional policies.
6.    Should encourage submission of quality articles by writing Editorials on the Journal's performance.
7.    Should be responsible in selection and rotation of Editorial Board members, maintenance and development of Journal, participation in review process and look for appropriateness.
8.    Should conduct annual meetings and educate the Editorial Board members with updated information and new policies of the Journal.
9.    Set annual objectives and assign responsibilities to the Board members for peer review process and ensure their timely completion.
10.    Sets annual objectives on peer review process and timely publication, evaluate the performance of Board members and encourage promotions appropriately.
11.    Should act accordingly in taking action to improve the objectives that are not achieved timely.
12.    Generally, after the peer review process and initial editing, the manuscript comes to the Editor-in-Chief for the final approval. The final decision to accept or reject of an article will be held with Editor-in-Chief. She/he should cross check the content quality, writing style and construction, grammar, spellings, data presentation and organization prior to take the final decision.
13.    Should ensure that the manuscript is neither plagiarized nor published elsewhere. If the paper found plagiarized or infringed, the Editor-in-Chief has the right to reject the article straight away.

14. Should supervise and support the publisher in handling complaints and appeals, responding genuinely to ethical problems regarding publication of any duplicate or fraudulent work.
g) Associate Editor –in- Chief Responsibility

1. The Associate Editor-in-Chief must have a minimum of two publications in peer reviewed journals, an academic rank of assistant professor and above.

2. She/he assists the Editor-in-Chief in judging a manuscript to be accepted or rejected, supports in taking decisions and communicating with other Board members. S/he, fills the role of both serving as an editorial board member in review process as well as ensuring the publication of high quality papers in the Journal.

3. Senior Editor should assist the Editor-in-Chief and also involve in the peer review process.

4. She/he is responsible for the quality of Journal content and the published articles.

5. Encourage submission of high quality papers.

6. She/he provides fair and constructive feedback to the contributors, Editors and Reviewers.

7. She/he provides Editorials on the Journal performance and promoting new policies when introduced.

8. She/he assists Editor-in-Chief in conducting annual meetings and educates the Editorial Board members with updated information and new policies of the Journal.

9. She/he assists Editor-in-Chief in setting annual objectives and assigns responsibilities to the Board members for peer review process and ensures their timely completion.

10. She/he should ensure that the manuscript is neither plagiarized nor published elsewhere.

11. Should support Editor-in-Chief in handling ethical issues, complaints and appeals regarding the publication standards.

12. She/he suggests publisher with new policies and for the development of the Journal.

13. She/he needs to take up the role of Editor-in-chief when not available.

Editors’ Responsibilities

The Editor must have a minimum of two publications in peer reviewed journals and an academic rank of assistant professor or above.
The Editor has to assist both the Senior Editor and the Editor-in-Chief in guaranteeing the quality of content found in Journal and communicating its vision for the journal to authors, Editorial Board members, readers, and publisher. Associate Editor should be mindful with the policies of the Journal and publisher, Author guidelines, Editor Guidelines and Reviewer guidelines.
The Editor should guide the Authors, Editors and Reviewers with the guidelines.
She/he encourages submission of high quality articles in the Journal and assist Senior Editor in monitoring the content quality.
She/he participates in conducting annual meetings and other meetings.
She/he monitors the manuscripts for writing style, language, presentation according to the Journal's policy and instructions.
She/he should ensure effective peer review process and timely publication.
She/he should ensure the integrity of the Journal content and quality in the published articles.
She/he should ensure that the manuscript is neither plagiarized nor published elsewhere.
She/he suggests publisher with new policies and for the development of the Journal.
She/he should suggest eminent reviewers during the peer review process.
She/he should carry out any task assigned to him by the editors- in -Chief.

i). The Managing Editor

The Managing Editor who is accountable to the Editorial Board has the following duties and responsibilities.

The Managing Editor must have a minimum of two publications in peer reviewed journals and has a minimum of MA degree in Communication or related fields.
Be able to handle open journal system.
Holds and manages the office of publication.
Works closely with the Editor-in-Chief.
Calls for manuscript contribution periodically.
Collects manuscripts from contributors, acknowledges the receipt of them, and codes any manuscript for evaluation and edition.
Makes preliminary screening of manuscripts and presents suggestions for the Editorial Board in general and editor-in-Chief in particular.
Collaborates with editor- in- chief to determine issues’ content and topics
Distributes manuscripts selected for review to designated evaluators
Reminds manuscript evaluators to return the evaluated manuscripts within the allocated time.
Collects reviewed manuscripts from evaluators in electronic copies.
Disseminates comments received from evaluators back to manuscript contributors and collects final improved versions of manuscripts from contributors with explanation notes how the issues raised by assessors have been treated by the author(s).
Resolves issues that arise during the review process especially when contributors resist accepting comments given from manuscript assessors.
Makes communication tactfully with contributors and reviewers.
Communicates regularly with a progress report and asks questions or clarifications if necessary.
Sends again the improved manuscripts to the evaluators so that they check whether their comments have been incorporated especially when the manuscript is suggested for major revision.
Presents the selected manuscripts for publication to the editorial board members
Sends the selected manuscripts for publication to copy editor
Sends finally selected manuscripts for typesetting, checks that those manuscripts are properly typeset, and submits them to the selected online and print publisher.
Disseminates the Journal and makes sure that the copy of the Journal has been disseminated in hard copy to the concerned stakeholders.
Disseminates the Journal and makes sure that the copy of the Journal has been disseminated in soft copy (PDF) to the contributors.
Ensures the manuscripts are always available online.
Writes editorials of EJSSLS
Prepares agenda for the meetings of the Editorial Board in consultation with the Editor-in-Chief.
Records minutes of the Editorial Board.
Keeps confidential information related to manuscripts submitted to the Journal.
Supervises the activities of the office secretary.

j) Content and Technical Editor

The primary responsibility of the technical editor is to make sure that the Journal is technically accurate — no errors in the text or in any non-text elements (for example, illustrations and tables).The content and technical editor performs the following functions.

Checks and verifies all facts and references.
Ensures that the document’s structure reflects the hierarchy of the content (i.e., more important information should precede secondary information).
Ensures the readability of the manuscript.
Verifies that navigational aids such as cross-references and links are accurate and functional.
Checks illustrations and captions are correct.
Ensures consistency throughout the entire manuscript and the Journal.
Checks and verifies all graphics, figures, listings, tables and other non-text items.
Checks the images against the text and convert the final images to the appropriate output form (file type). Make sure the files are properly named.
Carries out technical editing in compliance with the formats of EJSSLS.
Oversees proofreading procedures and edit copy when necessary
Oversees the webpage of the Journal and updates it.
Edits the content of manuscripts in consultation with specialized experts of various disciplines, when necessary, to ensure that an article is up to the desired standard by the EJSSLS.
Compares the final version of the document with the marked-up version to make sure that all corrections have been made
Consults contributors, whenever necessary, for further clarification of content.
Checks that all the necessary information to understand a given manuscript is properly appended at the end of each paper.

k). Language and Layout Editor (Copy Editor)

A copy editor should be excellent in written English, including spelling and grammar. A copy editor makes sure that a text is readable, accurate and ready for publication. The language and layout editor performs the following activities.

Checks text to ensure it is well written and logically structured.
Ensures the text is in line with the EJSSLS’ format.
Ensures documents for grammar, spelling, punctuation, and style, and s/he provides guidance to authors to ensure accuracy, completeness, organization, logic, clarity, relevance, and stylistic consistency.
Edits the overall language of an article, corrects or improves so that it maintains the standard language in similar article of similar reputable journals.
Edits the discourse of a manuscript whether it is up to the standard of a research discourse.
Ensures that the language style and the overall organization of a manuscript are readable to the major target readership of the EJSSLS.
Monitors the diction, mechanics and syntax of a manuscript in such a way that it is readily comprehended by the target readership.
Checks that the overall layout of a manuscript including margins, line spacing and layout of the EJSSLS are properly maintained.
Checks that all the manuscripts have been organized as per styles and formats of EJSSLS.
Maintains the overall standards of the EJSSLS in terms of language and layout in general.

l). Manuscript Assessors

The manuscript assessors have the following duties and responsibilities.

Assess articles using the manuscript assessment format or checklist given in this publication guide.
Review the given manuscript within the EJSSLS’s set deadline for assessment and submit to the Managing Editor or the Editor-in-Chief.
Treats the manuscript as confidential.
Return the manuscript without review to Managing Editor or the Editor-in-Chief if the manuscript is not the area of their academic specialization, or if they think the manuscript is not anonymously sent to them, or if they lack time to review, without undue delay.
Will not retain or copy the submitted manuscript in any form; to comply with data protection regulations, as appropriate.
Respect the intellectual independence of authors.
Make known any conflicts of interest that might arise.
Provide professional supports for the quality of the Journal.

m). Secretary (Typist)

The secretary typist performs the following duties and responsibilities.

Has MA in TEFL/Communication.
Keeps information related to manuscripts of the Journal confidential.
Handles the secretarial activities of the publication office, such as organizing and keeping files, typing letters and reports, and dispatching outgoing letters, and recording incoming letters.
Maintains routine correspondences with Managing editor and Board Members.
Typesets the selected manuscripts for publication and makes them camera-ready for publication.
Follows up-to-date formats for typesetting and selecting the most appropriate design for the Journal.
Arranges appointments and editorial board meetings, and prepares materials for them;
Compiles or organizes manuscripts according to their types (e.g. accepted, pended, rejected; Original article, Review article)
Performs other duties being accountable to the Managing Editor.
Schedule appointments and update event calendars.
Prepares reports.
Handles incoming and outgoing telephones, mail and faxes.
Prepare memos, invoices, or other reports.
Checks whether the necessary Inc and papers for print are available.
Transfer comments on a print copy to soft copies.
Maintains databases and filing systems, whether electronic or paper.
Performs basic bookkeeping

n). Privileges of the Authors, Advisory Board, Editorial Board and Support Staff

The Journal shall be published bearing the names of the Advisory Board members, Editorial Board members, and support staff.
A copy of every issue of the Journal will be distributed to the Advisory Board members, Editorial Board members, support staff, and the assessors of the articles which appeared in the issue free of charge.
Two copies of the issue of the Journal will be given free of charge to the authors in which their articles appeared.
Owns recognition letter.

Amendments of the Constitution

This constitution may be amended only in accordance with the following procedure. First, a proposed amendment shall be introduced at a meeting of the editorial Board of editors by the editor-in-Chief. If the proposed amendment is approved by ¾ of the total number of editorial board members, next it shall be introduced to the Collage’s AC by at least 3 members of the AC or the Board of Editors. If the proposed amendment is approved by ½ of the AC members, the amendment shall come in to force. Then the Senate will be notified about the amendments through formal letter.

Ratification Date

This constitution shall become effective when approved by 3/4 of the total members of the Academic Commission on the meeting called for that purpose. This constitution has become effective as of ----------------------.

Information to Contributors

General: The vision of EJSSLS is to be one of the most preferable journals in Africa with the mission of disseminating quality publication to the wider readership. The Ethiopian Journal of Social Sciences and Language Studies (EJSSLS) is an open access peer-reviewed journal published in both printed and online versions (the online version is free to publish, to access and download) two times in a year (June and December). It aims to provide a platform for the research community to share their findings, insights and views about all aspects of Social Sciences and Language. The journal accepts research papers from the diverse fields of social sciences, languages, and allied disciplines. Quality research in the areas of applied linguistics, communication, public relations, media studies, environmental studies, and related fields is also invited for its publication in the journal. Papers can be submitted in the form of full-length original research, review articles, book reviews, pilot studies, commentaries, and Editorials - Policies, news and comment or letters to editor.

Submission: Manuscripts should be submitted in an A4 paper in single spacing (for cost
minimization of the printed version). Each paragraph must be indented for five spaces, and the space between paragraphs must be single.

Margin: The margin size is 1.5 inch from the left and 1 from right, top and bottom.
Online Submission: To facilitate the rapid publication and reduce administrative costs, EJSSLS accepts only electronic submissions in word. Manuscripts must be submitted online by logging in through http://journals.ju.edu.et/index.php/ejssls.

Article Length: Original manuscripts should not exceed 5000 words. Book review and
Article Review should not exceed 2000 and 4000 words respectively. Editorial preferably consist of no more than 1,000 to 1,500 words and usually do not have subheadings. Short communication should not exceed 4 pages.

Title: The title should be concise, short and informative. It should not exceed 12 words.

Author affiliation: Refer them to the foot note using number (s) in superscript. Where there are multiple first authorships, please indicate the contribution of each author at the end of the manuscript, just after the acknowledgment and before the reference section..

Abstract: This should be a single paragraph standing alone (not italic), and not exceeding 250 words. The abstract should state briefly background, the purpose of the research, instruments used to collect data, methods of analysis, the principal results and major conclusions as well as recommendation/implication.

Keywords: Up to six keywords, which may or may not appear in the title, should be given in alphabetical order, below the abstract, each separated by a slash (/).

Introduction: It is important to state the objectives of the work, to provide an adequate background, and to avoid a detailed literature survey or a summary of the results. The introduction should also justify why the study is important.

Literature review, Conceptual Framework: Which is optional, should identify the most relevant previous especially recent literature on the topic (but not in excessive detail) in order to position the paper and demonstrate how it will make a significant contribution. It (or a separate section) should set out (and justify) the theoretical or conceptual framework adopted in the paper.

Materials and Methods: The reader needs to know that the empirical data and/or other material are relevant, reliable and able to support robust conclusions, and that the methodology is appropriate, systematic and rigorous. Its sub sections include: Research participants, sample size, instruments of data collection (e.g., written questionnaires, interviews, observations) as well as methods used to enhance the quality of the measurements (e.g., the training and reliability of assessors or the use of multiple observations), and research design.

Results/Analysis: Results should be clear and conscience. The report of the analysis must be accurate, unbiased, complete, and insightful. This section should stand alone (should not be mixed with discussion) so that the researcher’s finding can be seen clearly. The Results section, and associated figures, tables should not be more than nine.

Discussion: The discussion should explore the significance of the results of the work. It should accurately interpret the results, but not be repetitive with the results section. Authors are encouraged to discuss their work in the broader context. Related published data must be appropriately discussed and cited. Avoid extensive citations and discussion of published literature. Speculation is allowed but should be clearly labeled as such.

Conclusion: This section should make clear the original contribution of the paper, discuss the policy or other implications of the findings, provide a critical assessment of the limitations of study, and outline possible fruitful lines for further research. It may stand alone or form a subsection of a Recommendation section.

Recommendation: Recommend based on major findings. This part also may be presented in Recommendation section that may stand alone or form a sub section of the Conclusion section. But EJSSLS prefers the former.

Acknowledgements
These should be placed at the end of the text and not in footnotes, and just before the reference section. Personal acknowledgements should precede those of institutions or agencies. Grant numbers are permissible. Dedications are discouraged. It must be brief.

Reference: EJSSLS follows the APA (author/date) referencing style (or a slight variation of it in which space lines are single, for example. Give your last name followed by date of publication (for Ethiopians name it is important to use the author’s name first and then his/her father’s name). For every in-text citation in the paper, there must be a corresponding entry in the reference list. Below are given examples of references.

Books:
Chmakova, S. (2015). Awkward. New York: Yen Press.

Journal Article

Dechasa Abebe (2019). Destructive outcomes of multinational companies in Africa: The case of HVA in the Awash River Valley of Ethiopia (1951-1975). Ethiop.j.soc.lang.stud., Vol.6.(1), pp.41-56.

Chapter, essay, or article by one author in a book or encyclopedia edited by
another:

Alwin, D. (2011). Scholarly foreword In R. Settersten & J. J. Angel (Eds.), Handbook of

Sociology of Aging (pp. Pp. v-vii ). New York, USA: Springer.

Unpublished works

Abdi Ayana. (2012). Who takes care of the elderly in Ethiopia when reciprocal

relationships breakdown? Unpublished MA thesis, Lund University.

Copyrights and Licensing

Licensing: The journal follows an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).

Notice: For further information, please see the policy of the journal online at
http://journals.ju.edu.et/index.php/ejssls.

Referees’ Guidelines

General Guide to Reviewers

Manuscripts should be critically evaluated for compliance with the following criteria:

novelty
Importance to the specific field
Strong evidence for the conclusions that are drawn

The most useful referee reports are those that set out clear, substantiated arguments and concrete recommendations for the improvements and experiments necessary to achieve suitability for publication.

Upon receiving a manuscript - To avoid unnecessary delays in processing manuscripts, please do the following immediately upon receipt of a manuscript for review:

Double-check the deadline to ensure that there have been no misunderstandings regarding timing, and contact the editor – in-chief immediately if you anticipate any difficulties in meeting it.
Skim the manuscript and consider whether there might be a conflict of interest for you (with the authors, their institution, and their funding sources) and whether you can judge the article impartially.
read the editor's letter carefully and be sure to note any points specific to the manuscript that the editor may have requested your opinion on
Confidentiality - Referees should treat the review process as being strictly confidential, and should keep the following guidelines in mind:

Manuscripts refereed for the Journal should not be discussed with anyone not directly involved in the review process.
If colleagues are consulted, they should be identified to the editors in the appropriate field in the referee submission system.
If experts from outside are consulted, referees should check with the editors beforehand to avoid involving anyone who may have been excluded by the editor or the authors.
Referees should, as a rule, not disclose their identities to the authors or to other colleagues since they may be asked to comment on the criticisms of other referees and may then find it difficult to be objective. Should they feel strongly about making their identities known to the authors, they should do so via the editor.

We strongly disapprove of any attempt by authors to determine the identities of referees or to confront them, and encourage referees to neither confirm nor deny any speculation in this regard.

WRITING A REPORT -As a general guideline, referee evaluations should mainly focus on the significance and conclusiveness of the study at hand, i.e. whether the findings and conclusions at the current stage might be considered sufficiently important in principle, and whether the presented data actually support these conclusions.

Referees are prompted to assess these two points directly via a ratings table, in which they can also indicate whether or not they would need to see an eventual revised version before acceptance, and whether a manuscript would be of such particular interest as to warrant highlighting.
Referees are asked to maintain a positive and impartial, but critical, attitude in evaluating manuscripts. Criticisms should remain dispassionate; offensive language is not acceptable. As far as possible, a negative report should explain to the authors the weaknesses of their manuscript, so that they can understand the basis for a decision to ask for revision or to reject the manuscript.
Similarly, positive reports should explain the reasons for why a study would be seen as an important advance of wider significance. Please keep in mind that comments to the authors will be included and published in the 'editorial proceedings' supplementary file in case of publication, even if they may have been pertinent only to an initial version of the eventually published manuscript.

The ideal report should include:

An initial paragraph that summarizes the major findings and the referee's overall impressions, as well as highlighting major shortcomings of the manuscript.
Specific numbered comments, which may be broken down into major and minor criticisms if appropriate (numbering facilitates both the editor's evaluation of the manuscript and the authors' rebuttal to the report).
The report should answer the following questions:

What are the major claims and how significant are they?
Are the claims novel and convincing?
Are the claims appropriately discussed in the context of earlier literature?
Is the study of interest to more than a specialized audience?
Does the paper stand out in some way from the others in its field?
Are there other experiments that would strengthen the paper?

For manuscripts that may merit further consideration, it is also helpful if referees can provide advice on the following points where appropriate:

How the clarity of the writing might be improved (without necessarily going into specific details of spelling and grammar)?
How the manuscript might be shortened?
How to represent earlier literature more fairly?
How to improve the presentation of methodological detail so that the experiments can be reproduced. To evaluate the manuscript, use the Referee's Evaluation Form (See Appendix C).

1.B. Referees’ Manuscript Evaluation Form

Title of the manuscript: _______________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Reviewer: Reviewer 1/Reviewer 2

Guidelines for reviewing manuscripts

Part A

Introduction/Background (15%)

Is context of the research clear and relevant?
Does introduction/background situate the problem in the light of the existing state of knowledge in the area of study and highlight the motivation for the study?
Is/are the problem/s clearly identified and easily recognizable?
Is there logical link between or among purpose of study, objectives and hypothesis?
Are objectives/ questions/ hypothesis clearly delineate and adequately describe what the author seeks to bring about as a result of his writing?

Grade:

Comments:

Suggestions for improvement:

Literature Review (20%)

Is the literature reviewed relevant and recent?
Does the literature provide clear support to key theoretical and methodological issues or questions being investigated?
Does the review identifies areas of controversy in the literature and shows the gap/s in the literature?
Is the conceptual /theoretical framework clearly articulated and serves as a tool to scaffold research, analyse the data, clearly set the constructs of the study and help to make meaning of subsequent findings?

Grade:

Comments:

Suggestions for improvement ___________________________________

Research Methodology and data analysis (25%)

Is there convincing support from literature provided for the choice of a particular research design?
Are data collections methods and procedures clearly justified and provided as well as linked to literature review?
Is the source of data reliable and accurate?
Are the data collected from primary and secondary sources?
Are the constructs of the study clear and appropriate?
Are data interpretations clear? Do they add further insight into the data?
Are data interpretations logically linked to results, discussions, conclusions and recommendations? Do they have accuracy and consistency?

Grade:

Comments

Suggestions for improvement:

Research Findings , Conclusions and Recommendations (30%)

Are results clearly and sufficiently discussed and backed by only relevant issues in the review?
Do results duplicate information in the data?
Do results clearly re-enforce claims made in the discussion?
Are discussion clearly backed by relevant issues in the review?

Are conclusions drawn logically from results and discussions and backed by relevant issues in the review?
Does the conclusion reflect on the objectives, theory and conceptual framework?

Do recommendations refer back to statement of problem and relate to conclusions?
Does it bring new/interesting perspective into existing debate or issues?
Does the paper have originality

Grade:

Comments:

Suggestions for improvement ___________________________________

Acknowledgments, presentation and language (10%)

Are acknowledgements for funding organizations clearly indicated?
Are acknowledgements for sources used clearly shown in the text and in the references?
Have the various sections of the research been clearly identified and presented?
Is the paper presentable enough to the reader without any language editing?

Grade:

Comments:

Suggestions for improvement ____________________________________________________________

Total Grade:

Check for the originality and whether it is already published or not.

General comments on whether the draft chapter is publishable or not?

Suggestions for improvement ________________________________________________________________________________________________

Part B

Based on my assessment of the basic criteria in Part A, my recommendation for this manuscript ₍_i_n_di_c_ate_y_o_ur_r_e_c_o_m_m_e_n_d_a_t_i_on_b_{y p}_u_tt_i_ng_a_{n X on t}_h_e_l_i_n_e_{s pr}_o_v_i_d_e_d_next_{to e}_a_c_{h o}_p_t_i_o_n₎_:

	Accept The paper is accepted as it is (for publication).
	Needs minor revisions Author(s) will be asked to revise the paper and resubmit, addressing reviewers’ comments. A second round of review will NOT be necessary. (Provided below).The revised paper will NOT go through another round of review.
	Needs major revision (Revise and resubmit) Author(s)willbeaskedtorevisethepaperandresubmit,addressingreviewers’comments (Provided below).A second round of review will be necessary. If your suggestion is major revision, are you willing review it again? (underline your choice) A. Yes B. No
	Reject The paper is not suitable for the Journal The paper is below the required standard