Submission Preparation Checklist
As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
- The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
- The submission file is in Microsoft Word or RTF file format.
- When available, the URLs to access references online are provided, including those for open access versions of the reference. The URLs are ready to click (e.g., http://pkp.sfu.ca).
- If a peer reviewed paper or book review it has been submitted using the template provided. If submitting to a peer-reviewed section of the journal, please note that authors and institutions should be replaced by anonymising text, eg XXX
- The bibliographic requirements outlined in the Referencing section of the Author Guidelines are adhered to.
- If submitting to a peer-reviewed section of the journal, the instructions in Ensuring a Blind Review (see JIL Submission Guidelines below) have been followed.
JIL Submission Guidelines
The Journal of Information Literacy seeks innovative and challenging research articles and project reports which push the boundaries of information literacy thinking in theory, practice and method, and which aim to develop deep and critical understandings of the role, contribution and impact of information literacies in everyday contexts, education and the workplace.
Notes for authors of peer-reviewed papers
i. Scope and focus
Papers published in the sections ‘Articles’ and ‘Articles from LILAC’ undergo a process of peer review. These papers may be based in research or practice and should offer an original contribution to the wider community’s understanding of information literacy. Papers in these sections should be:
- research informed and evidence based
- designed around an arguable research question
- contextualised with reference to previous and current advances in IL thinking
- methodologically robust with a demonstrable research design
All peer-reviewed articles should offer a scholarly investigation into an aspect of information literacy. Descriptive reports of classroom or online practice which do not contain such a dimension are not suitable for the ‘Articles’ and ‘Articles from LILAC’ sections.
Papers should be between 3,000 and 8,000 words, excluding references.
ii. Practical guidance
Authors must use the article template, which can be found here. Papers are published in English and should use UK spelling.
The abstract should cover the following areas (however, please do not use these headings within the abstract):
- purpose of the study, including the aim and objectives and/or research questions
- research design and context
- key findings
- significance of the research in terms of:
- originality and contribution to the field of information literacy research
- the potential impact of the research for society
Finally, authors should include a list of at least four keywords that describe the main themes of their paper. While JIL generates its own controlled vocabulary to enhance the searching facilities of the site, we feel that authors would find the selection of their own keywords helpful in setting the key themes conveyed by their paper.
iii. Ensuring a Blind Review
To facilitate the blind review process, the name, title, affiliation and contact details of all authors should NOT be given on the title page and their institutions should NOT be identified anywhere else in the paper. Throughout the body of the paper, authors and institutions should be replaced by anonymising text, e.g. XXX.
Please also take the following steps:
- The authors must delete their names from the text, with XXX used in citations and references instead of the authors' names, article title, etc.
- With Microsoft Office documents, author identification should also be removed from the properties for the file (see under File in Word), by clicking on the following, beginning with File on the main menu of the Microsoft application: File > Save As > Tools (or Options with a Mac) > Security > Remove personal information from file properties on save > Save.
- With PDFs, the authors' names should also be removed from Document Properties found under File on Adobe Acrobat's main menu.
iv. Structure and argument
a. The focus of the paper should be clearly set out, together with its relevance to the IL debate.
b. Clearly articulate the main themes, aims and objectives of the study in a problem statement. Outline the research questions that guided the work from its inception and design through the analysis and findings to the conclusions, implications and applications.
c. The paper should provide a balanced and thoughtful review of previous related literature, placing the its contribution in context and indicating how it adds to what has gone before.
d. Whether the research is theoretical or applied, authors should give an account of the method(s) used to frame their thinking and approach, generate or collect their data (if appropriate), and guide their analysis, findings and discussion. Include an explanation of why this method was the most appropriate one for the investigation, and deal honestly with any limitations it may have had.
e. Demonstrate that the research was conducted ethically. Where appropriate, authors should describe how they protected their participants and met the requirements of their institution’s ethics committee. If the research has been assigned an ethics protocol number, please include it.
f. Make clear statements of the findings, conclusions, implications and applications as appropriate. Papers should examine their findings analytically (not simply describe them) and discuss their implications for both further research and wider social impact. Where appropriate, please relate the findings back to the themes and previous research discussed in the literature review.
g. Either in the discussion or conclusion, authors should critically reflect on their work, exploring any limitations and how it could have been improved. They should restate briefly whether and how the research has succeeded in attaining the aims and objectives set out initially, and how the research question(s) have been met. Recommendations for further work may also be included here.
The peer review process
JIL follows a double-blind peer review process, meaning that articles are read by at least two reviewers who have no knowledge of the author’s identity. To enable this, authors should ensure they follow the guidelines in section (ii) above on anonymising their work.
The role of the peer reviewer is twofold:
Firstly, to advise the editor as to whether the paper is suitable for publication and, if so, what stage of development it has reached. This is done by providing one of the following recommendations:
a. Accept with no changes
b. Minor revisions: accept if specified minor changes are made; no re-review is necessary
c. Resubmit for review: substantial changes are needed before the article is resubmitted for a second round of peer review with the same reviewers
d. Inappropriate for publication by JIL: this is generally because the scope of the article sits outside the journal’s remit or because the reviewer feels that no amount of editing would raise the article to the required standards.
Secondly, the peer reviewer will act as a constructively critical friend to the author, providing detailed and practical feedback on all the aspects of the article found in the review form. Where changes to an article are suggested, the rationale for the suggestion should be clearly explained and contextualised with reference to the field of information literacy research and its methods.
Reviewers will assess an article from the perspective of JIL readers at large and not just from their own viewpoint. This means that even if they personally like the article they should ensure that the topic is of relevance to a wider audience. Reviewers will also ensure that authors use language that is accessible to readers without specialist knowledge (for example in technical fields such as mobile technology or gaming). If the article employs a register that is overly specialist or technical, reviewers should highlight this problem and make recommendations on how to address it. In order to provide comprehensive, structured and workable feedback reviewers should use the review form.
Authors should ensure that any observation, derivation or argument that has been previously published should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the paper being reviewed and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge. Reviewers are also asked to identify and highlight relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
Feedback should be constructive, comprehensive and courteous, particularly if changes to the article reviewed are suggested. The role of peer reviewer is a privileged one and must be undertaken with empathy and integrity. Dismissive language, insufficient engagement with the work, and one-sentence feedback are not acceptable.
The route to publication
The peer-reviewed publication process consists of the following stages:
1. Initial submission: Author submits their article using the template supplied and through the journal’s online submission process.
2. Peer review: Article is reviewed and recommendations are made by the peer reviewers on the suitability of the submission and the extent of the changes required.
3. Feedback and revision: Feedback from the reviewers and the editor is sent to the author with suggested corrections, improvements and clarifications where needed. The author should consider these changes carefully, but should feel free to provide justifications for not changing the paper in line with the suggested amendments.
4. Submission of amended article: If the changes requested by the reviewers are substantial the article is sent back to them so that they can comment on the amended version of the article. If the requested changes are minor then the article goes directly to the editor who supervises the final editing stage.
5. Editing: This stage may occur a number of times depending on the extent of the changes required. If the changes made do not address the concerns made by reviewers and editor, the article may be declined at this stage. Final corrections by the editor is undertaken before the article is accepted for publication.
6. Copyediting: During this stage the copyeditor finalises the wording and layout in consultation with the author(s).
Notes for reviewers of books and other relevant literature
The journal publishes reviews of a wide range of media, including books, e-books, websites on the topic of information literacy and software fostering information literacy practices. Reviews should discuss appropriateness for the intended target audience, readability, currency, content and overall value.
The suggested length for reviews is 750–1,000 words. Please use the book review template which can be found here.
We welcome accounts of information literacy events, such as conferences, seminars and workshops that have taken place both in the UK and other countries. The suggested length for these types of contributions is 750-1,500 words, and authors may include photos of the event.
Please obtain the permission of any speakers or participants you wish to photograph, and bear in mind that pictures, like all material published in JIL, should be made available under a Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike licence.
Submissions for the Conference Updates section should be structured as follows: Title of the contribution, details of the author(s), short account. Please format report titles as follows:
- for annual or other regular conferences, use the name of the event as the main title, followed by the year (e.g. 'LILAC 2016: ...', 'LOEX 2017: ...') and with a subtitle of your choice;
- for one-off events, use the same format as above but omit the year.
Authors should ensure that the full date and location of the event or conference is given in the main body of the report.
Authors should submit the file in Word or RTF.
Contributions to this section include reports on projects or resources related to information, digital and learning literacies. Reports should be between 1,000 and 5,000 words, and may include images and diagrams. Longer reports (over 2,500 words) should include a brief abstract describing the purpose and context of the project.
The major difference between contributions to the Project Reports section and the Articles section is that articles must be driven by an arguable research question, as outlined above, whereas the Project Reports section enables authors to share good practice in developing a project or resource.
Reports should not simply describe classroom practice or routine course evaluation procedures. They should be situated in relation to an existing theory, model, framework or definition of information literacy, and should clearly demonstrate how the project or resource advances our thinking about IL, or showcases innovative practice in supporting its development.
If the project has been assigned an ethics protocol number, please include it.
Authors must use the article template, which can be found here.
Papers are published in English and should use UK spelling.
Students’ view of IL
Submissions for this section consist of papers drawn from research (theoretical or applied) undertaken by students as part of a postgraduate course in LIS or other cognate disciplines, such as education or media.
Contributions to this section should be structured as follows: Title, author, summary of the research undertaken (covering: outline of research and audience targeted, main findings and conclusion) and list of references. The suggested length is 1,000 words. Please submit the file in Word or RTF.
Authors must ensure that they present an accurate account of their research and that the work they submit is their own. Where they have used the words or ideas of others, they must quote or cite the original appropriately. Failure to do this may have serious repercussions (see the journal’s Publication Ethics and Publication Misconduct Statement for more details).
Referencing should be in APA style. See the website for the particular conventions used. Please include DOIs for sources where these exist.
It is the author’s responsibility to ensure that any material used in the article, such as photographs, images, charts or tables, may be used without infringing copyright. Authors must obtain permission to include any third-party content that is not openly licensed.
Submitting your work
All contributions must be submitted through the journal’s website to ensure that the editing process is appropriately recorded and managed. For this reason we regret that it is not possible to consider papers submitted directly to the Managing Editor, although prospective authors may contact her for a preliminary discussion on their submission.
Submissions to JIL must be previously unpublished and must not be under review or consideration by another journal. By submitting their articles to JIL the author(s) retain the copyright, but grant the right of first publication to the journal (including publication in print and electronic media). From December 2015 articles published in JIL are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike Licence.
To ensure the broadest possible audience for the Journal of Information Literacy the editorial team has set up a number of agreements which stipulate that the journal’s issues will be included on one or more subscription databases, although the articles will still be available free of charge and in full text format. If you wish to have your article excluded from these agreements please state so in the ‘Comments to Editor’ box on the submission form.