Focus and Scope

The Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education (JMBE) is sponsored by the American Society for Microbiology (ASM; www.asm.org) a professional life science society with more than 43,000 members in the United States and abroad. JMBE publishes original, previously unpublished, peer-reviewed articles. The scientific scope of the journal is rooted in microbiology while branching out to biology. The educational scope of the journal is primarily undergraduate education; however, submissions that feature good pedagogy and good design used in kindergarten through high school education or graduate and professional (e.g., medical school) education will be considered for publication.

The journal's mission is to:

• Promote good pedagogy and design,
• Foster scholarly teaching, and
• Advance biology education research.

The Journal has unique features:

• Freely available and electronic content, reaching a wider audience than is traditionally possible through print journals and subscriptions
• Rigorously reviewed content; review criteria and editors are prominently displayed at the website, minimizing confusion and encouraging excellence
• Volunteer-driven, engaging biologists committed to educational excellence and innovation both nationally and internationally
• Editorial board guidance during the revision process, supporting a growing community of scholars

The Journal features six sections:

Research is for hypothesis-driven research in student learning. Implicit in articles for this section is documentation of sound assessment strategies that support research conclusions.

Perspectives is designed to place a particular, current topic of microbiology or biology education into perspective. Articles focus on a specific topic, problem, or approach of broad, general interest to science educators, but do not primarily discuss the author's own work.

Curriculum includes field-tested activities that foster active learning and other best practices in education. Activities may be used in the classroom, laboratory, and/or field or on-line in blended and distance-learning experiences. Manuscripts in this category must include evaluations of the activities, and these evaluations must demonstrate effective learning.

Tips and Tools promotes practical tips, suggestions, and advice for improving biology education.

Reviews includes reviews of books and media, Journal Watch, and Web Watch.

Section Policies

Research

Manuscripts in this category report hypothesis-driven research regarding teaching and student learning, and other facets of microbiology or biology education, including, but not limited to: 

• outcome-based learning activities and courses that convey important concepts about biological and microbiological communities, or processes or techniques used to study organisms;
• outcome-based learning activities, courses, and programs that are driven by societal issues;
• outcome-based learning activities, courses, and programs organized according to national standards and curriculum guidelines (e.g., recommended core curricula from ASM, HAPS, or APS for microbiology, anatomy, or physiology education, respectively, or concept inventories in biology, genetics, nature of science, and more);
• assessment of student learning or student interventions; and
• assessment of teaching approaches or program effectiveness in microbiology and biology education.  

Articles should range from 1,500 to 4,000 words in length.

All manuscripts submitted are reviewed using the JMBE Research Section Review Criteria.

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Perspectives

Articles in this journal section are intended to place into broader perspective a particular, current topic of microbiology or biology education. Articles will focus on a defined topic or problem of specific interest to science educators. Topics include assessment methods, student engagement, curricular changes, K-20 and graduate and/or professional education, approaches to various educational challenges, and other science education topics. Authors may also comment on current advances and future directions in microbiology and biology education.

Manuscripts (invited or independently submitted) must be previously unpublished and will be peer-reviewed. The manuscript should include the author’s reactions, responses, thoughts, prospects, or viewpoints, but should not primarily discuss her/his own work. Authors are encouraged to adopt a personal writing style, presented within a scholarly context that cites references, and framed by personal experience or insight. When emphasizing the opinions or viewpoints of the authors, the manuscript should remain balanced and include factual data to substantiate arguments. With rare exceptions, Perspectives should have no more than two authors.

Some examples of recent Perspective topics include: improving the integration of mathematics in undergraduate biology education; identifying why many students fail introductory science courses; using bioinformatics to involve undergraduates in basic research; incorporating microbiology in the nursing curriculum; developing an assessment plan; incorporating collaborative learning in the curriculum; implementing the ASM core curriculum in a microbiology majors' program; preparing for and demonstrating scholarly work; and, managing student research. 

Articles should range from 1,000 to 3,000 words in length. Before submitting a manuscript, please review carefully the Specific Author Guidelines: Perspectives Section.

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Curriculum

Manuscripts in this journal section include innovative classroom activities and laboratory exercises for teaching undergraduate biology and microbiology. All curriculum resources (i) are innovative and use pedagogical approaches that actively engage students, (ii) include detailed instructions and support materials, (iii) are field tested and provide evidence of student learning, and (iv) contain modifications and extensions to allow easy implementation by the broad range of faculty in undergraduate biology education. All curriculum resources must be appropriate for an undergraduate microbiology or biology classroom or laboratory.

Manuscripts for this category should range from 1,000 to 4,000 words in length not including supplementary materials (e.g., student instructions, faculty instructions, rubrics, sample tables, worksheets, and exams). Before submitting a manuscript, please read carefully the Specific Author Guidelines: Curriculum Section.

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Tips and Tools

Manuscripts in this journal section describe practical, technical, and feasible advice for improving teaching and learning in the microbiology or biology classroom or laboratory.  Brief, practical ideas for innovative and engaging ways to teach biological concepts are welcome.  This section provides a forum for sharing short and quick ideas or thoughts on best practices in microbiology and biology education that have not been rigorously tested.  Assessment of the topic is NOT required, and authors should feel free to solicit feedback and form partnerships to expand the depth and breadth of best practices. 

Topics may include assessment tools, class management approaches, discussion starters, field activities, in-class activities, laboratory activities, independent project ideas, service learning ideas, or study tools, among others.  Examples of previous tips include using colony lysis and PCR amplification for environmental bacterial identification, using popular fiction as a teaching tool in a microbiology course, ways to provide microbiology/biology career education, and using a crossword puzzle, art project, or music to teach microbiology. Queries are welcome. 

Articles should range from 800 to 1,100 words in length, with the goal of the text and figures fitting on two printed pages.  Abstracts are not required for Tips and Tools manuscripts. Before submitting a manuscript, please review carefully the Specific Author Guidelines: Tips and Tools.

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Reviews

Manuscripts in this journal section consist of reviews of new books, textbooks, computer simulations, videos, DVDs, CD-ROMs, websites, and other multimedia programs that facilitate undergraduate students' understanding about the microbial world. Suggestions for items to be reviewed are accepted throughout the year and must include the title, author, publisher, and distributor information, including cost. Reviews of journal articles (Journal Watch) and websites (Web Watch) are also welcome.

Articles should range from 500-600 words in length. Before submitting a manuscript, please review carefully the Specific Author Guidelines: Reviews.

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts are considered to be confidential and are reviewed by the editors, members of the editorial board, or qualified ad hoc reviewers. When a manuscript is submitted, it is given a number and sent to the editor. Corresponding authors are notified of this number. Always refer to this number in communications with the editor and the Education Department. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to inform the coauthors of the manuscript’s status throughout the review and publication processes.

The reviewers operate under strict guidelines set forth in "Guidelines for Reviewers" and are expected to complete their reviews within two weeks after receiving the manuscript. The corresponding author is notified, about six weeks after the submission deadline for the volume, of the editor’s decision to accept, reject, or require modification. When a manuscript is returned to the corresponding author for modification, it should be returned to the editor within one month; otherwise it may be considered withdrawn. A point-for-point response to the reviews must be included with the revised manuscript; an extra copy of the revised manuscript should have the changes highlighted.

Publication Frequency

JMBE volumes are published within a calendar year.  Each volume includes two issues.  The two issues will be available in May and December; the submission deadlines are December 1 and July 1 respectively.

Each year beginning in 2011, a showpiece publication, Highlights from JMBE, will feature selected articles from the previous volume and available for on-site distribution at the ASM General Meeting, ASM Conference for Undergraduate Educators (www.asmcue.org) and other educator meetings.

Guidelines for Reviewers

Reviewing a manuscript written by a fellow scientist is a privilege. It is also an exciting and enjoyable educational experience. However, it is also a time-consuming responsibility. ASM and its editors, authors, and readers therefore appreciate your willingness to accept this responsibility and your dedication. We hope that these Guidelines will help make your job easier.

General Policies and Procedures
Authors submit their manuscripts electronically via Open Journal Systems (OJS) to ASM. Each manuscript is reviewed by ASM staff for relevancy to JMBE and the section to which it was submitted. Should a question arise, the production editor will contact the editor in chief (or an appropriate editor), who then decides whether the manuscript should be transferred to another section of the journal, editorially rejected owing to scope, or retained for review by the section to which it was submitted. If retained, the manuscript is assigned to an editor, who in turn chooses one or more editorial board members or ad hoc reviewers to review it.

On receipt of the invitation to review, you should immediately:

· Read the editor's transmittal e-mail, which includes the article abstract, to determine whether the subject is within your area of expertise and whether you can complete the review in the stated time period.

· Log on to OJS and either accept or decline the invitation to review.

If you decline the invitation to review:

· Indicate why you are declining.

· You may not “transfer” your invitation to review the manuscript to a colleague.

If you accept the invitation to review, you will have access to the complete PDF of the manuscript and should immediately:

· Double-check the manuscript to determine whether there is any conflict of interest for you. The OJS system allows for a blind review process. To ensure the integrity of the blind peer-review submission, every effort is made to prevent the identities of the Authors and Reviewers from being known to each other. The Authors of the document should delete all identifying information referencing their names or institutions from the manuscript. Should there be an inadvertent reference in the paper that suggests there is any conflict of interest for you (with the authors, their institution, or their funding sources) please determine whether you can judge the article impartially. (See also last section of these Guidelines.)

· Quickly skim the relevant portions of the manuscript and verify that it fits within the scope of the journal.

If you have either a time problem or a conflict of interest, contact the assigning editor for instructions. The editor may extend your deadline or cancel the review assignment as appropriate. If your cursory examination reveals that the manuscript does not fit within the scope of the journal, indicate that in the For the Editor section of the review form.

Do not discuss the paper with its authors either during or after the review process. Although it may seem natural and reasonable to discuss points of difficulty or disagreement directly with an author, especially if you are generally in favor of publication and do not mind revealing your identity, this practice is prohibited because the other reviewer and the editor may have different opinions, and the author may be misled by having "cleared things up" with the reviewer who contacted him/her directly.

The manuscript provided to you for review is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Do not cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published and do not use the information that it contains for the advancement of your own research or in discussions with colleagues.

In your comments intended for the author, do not make statements about the acceptability of a paper (see the next paragraph); suggested revisions should be stated as such and not expressed as conditions of acceptance. Organize your review so that an introductory paragraph summarizes the major findings of the article, gives your overall impression of the paper, and highlights the major shortcomings. This paragraph should be followed by specific, numbered comments, which, if appropriate, may be subdivided into major and minor points. (The numbering facilitates both the editor's letter to the author and evaluation of the author's rebuttal.) Criticism should be presented dispassionately; offensive remarks are not acceptable.

Confidential remarks directed to the editor should be entered in the box labeled “For the Editor.” Advise the editor in this section of your recommendation for acceptance, modification, or rejection. The final decision regarding modification, acceptance, or rejection of a manuscript rests solely with the editor, so do not state your recommendation in the portion of the review that will be sent to the author.

After completing your review, click the Submit Review button. There is no need to make a copy of your review because it will be saved in your Reviewing History in OJS.

The Review

Adopt a positive, impartial, but critical attitude toward the manuscript under review, with the aim of promoting effective, accurate, and relevant scientific communication.

 

Please consider the following aspects when reviewing a manuscript:

· Significance to the target educational community

· Originality

· Appropriateness of the approach or evaluation/assessment

· Appropriateness of the statistical analyses

· Adherence to correct scientific nomenclature

· Appropriate literature citations

· Adequacy of experimental techniques or pedagogical approach

· Soundness of conclusions and interpretation

· Organization

· Adherence to the Instructions to Authors

· Adequacy of title and abstract

· Appropriateness of figures and tables

· Appropriateness of supplemental material intended for posting (if applicable)

· Length

· Whether it describes misuse of microbial systems or the information derived therefrom

· Appropriate Safety Considerations

You are not required to correct deficiencies of style, syntax, or grammar, but any help you can give in clarifying meaning will be appreciated. In particular, point out the use of scientific jargon, misspellings of chemical names, use of outmoded terminology or incorrect genetic nomenclature, and use of misspelled, incorrect, or outdated scientific names of organisms.

Your criticisms, arguments, and suggestions concerning the paper will be most useful to the editor and to the author if they are carefully documented. Do not make dogmatic, dismissive statements, particularly about the novelty of the work. Substantiate your statements. Reviewer's recommendations are gratefully received by the editor; however, since editorial decisions are usually based on evaluations derived from several sources, reviewers should not expect the editor to honor every recommendation. You will be asked to suggest acceptability as noted on the specific review form (e.g., accept; accept with revision; reject; modify, rereview required). Should you review manuscripts for more than one section of JMBE, note that their review forms and categories may vary.

· Very few papers qualify for an immediate, unconditional acceptance.

· There are many reasons to reject a paper. In general, if there are serious flaws in experimental design, incorrect interpretation of data, extensive additional experiments required, or any organizational or English usage flaws that prevent critical review of the manuscript, then recommend that the manuscript be rejected.

· If you feel that the deficiencies can be corrected within a reasonable period of time (1 to 2 months), then recommend modification.

ASM Publication Policies; Ethics

Although the staff at ASM and the journal editors may be able to note a breach of publication policy or ethical conduct after publication, we rely heavily on the reviewers to detect such problems before publication. JMBE publication policies are described in the “Guidelines to Authors” section of the journal website. Author Guidelines are updated each year in December. Examine them each year for changes.

Some of the items for which you should be alert include:

· Plagiarism – Plagiarism is not limited to the Results and Discussion sections; it can involve any part of the manuscript, including figures and tables, in which material is copied from another publication without attestation, reference, or permission. Note that wording does not have to be exact to be copyright infringement; use of very similar words in almost the same sequence can also be infringement. Data themselves are not copyrightable, but their presentation is.

· Missing or incomplete attestation – Authors must give appropriate credit to ideas, concepts, and data that have been published previously. This is accomplished by the inclusion of references. Missing, incomplete, or incorrect references must be brought to the editor's attention.

· Dual submission and/or publication – Be wary of attempts to submit/publish similar material more than once. This is often difficult to detect "before the fact," but checking literature citations, as well as having a critical eye, is helpful.

· Conflicts of interest – If you are aware of any commercial affiliations, consultancies, stock or equity interests, or patent-licensing arrangements on the part of the authors, bring them to the attention of the editor.

Note that similar conflicts of interest on your part must also be brought to the attention of the editor, who may, at his discretion, subsequently cancel your invitation to review the manuscript. If one of the manuscript authors is at your institution, there could be a perceived conflict of interest, and you should immediately contact the editor so that another individual can be invited to review the manuscript in your place.

In summary, you must communicate suspicions of policy or ethics problems directly to the editor, who in turn will contact the editor in chief. Under no circumstance should you contact the author directly. ASM has policies for investigation and resolution of such problems and these must be followed.