For teachers and education researchers: publishing what you found

Education technology is sold on evidence of effect and adopted for reasons of cost, timetable and procurement. The people who can see the gap between those two things most clearly are teachers, and teachers are the group least able to pay an article processing charge.

So the evidence stays in internal evaluations, conference talks and threads, and the published literature keeps being written by the people with research budgets, who are frequently the people selling something.

What we publish

• Classroom and institutional studies of platforms, devices and software as actually procured, deployed and used, including the ones that were quietly abandoned.
• Assessment and academic integrity under generative AI, which is moving faster than the literature and needs careful empirical work rather than more opinion.
• Proctoring, learning analytics and the surveillance end of education technology.
• Teacher workload and professional judgement: what happens to a teacher's discretion when part of it is delegated to a system. Chronically under-published relative to its importance.
• Digital literacy, what learners and staff actually need to understand about the systems they are handed.

Practitioner research

We accept work from practising teachers and from school and college staff without academic affiliation. It is held to the same evidential standard as any other submission, not a lower one, and not, as sometimes happens, a higher one.

If you have a sound evaluation and limited experience writing it up for a journal, say so in your cover letter. We would rather work with you on the framing of a solid study than reject it for its prose.

Cost

None. No submission fee, no publication charge. Your article is free to read, which means the colleagues and school leaders who most need the finding can actually get at it, which is the whole point of having done the work.