Editorial Committee

The director of the journal is responsible for ensuring academic quality and prestige, verifying compliance with current regulations and attending the tasks related to the management of the processes of evaluation and editorial production. To fulfill these responsibilities, the Director will be assisted by Section Editors, Technical Secretariat, and Translation Team.

In the evaluation processes of contributions received, the Director, Section Editors, and the Technical Secretariat shall work in strict accordance with the principles of impartiality and confidentiality.

Editorial Board

The Editorial Board of Debates por la Historia is composed by leading academics from national and foreign institutions. They represent the Director's advisory body and their role is to guide all matters related to the editorial policy of the journal. They may also participate in the evaluation of contributions received.

In the performance of their functions, the members of the Editorial Board shall work with strict adherence to the principles of impartiality and confidentiality.

Author's Obligations

1. Authors of papers may submit only original and unpublished research. If several authors, they must be those who have participated or collaborated in the formation of the work in a meaningful way and must be a maximum of three per paper and one for reviews.
2. The authors shall not submit the same text simultaneously to other journals for possible publication.
3. Authors of publication reviews should base their work on a critical review of the material in question. These collaborations are expected to highlight the contributions to knowledge of the history of education of the revised publications.
4. The authors must ensure that the documentary evidence and the results presented in their papers are the product of an original work. It is imperative to identify all published and unpublished works of other authors that were used and that served as background to the paper under evaluation.
5. Authors must accurately refer to the origin of all their sources of information and must comply with the citation criteria set out in the Editing Rules.
6. The authors should cite the authorship and provenance of all tables and figures (graphs, diagrams, maps, drawings, photographs, etc.) that they include in their texts. In cases where applicable, the authors will be responsible of granting republishing rights.
7. The authors must submit their contributions in the format and under the procedure laid down in Presentation of proposals. 
8. In the event that the evaluations condition the publication of the contributions to the making of adjustments and corrections, the authors must make them within no more than 20 days. When the authors submit the corrected version, they will attach a brief detailing of the changes made to the new versions, or making annotations in the text of the work.
9. The authors, once they have received notification that their texts will be published, should grant the journal publication rights, using the formats provided by the Technical Secretariat.
10. The authors will be able to re-edit their paper after it was published in the journal, but they should always indicate that the original version was published in Debates por la Historia.

Obligations of the Editorial Committee and the Editorial Board

1. In first instance, all collaborations will be reviewed by the Technical Secretariat of the journal to verify compliance with the basic requirements established: theme approach, extension, adherence to citation standards, structure, format, among others.
2. The Director and the section editors will conduct a first reading of the proposals received to determine their relevance and compliance with academic quality requirements. Only in the case of publication reviews will they depend on this first reading to resolve whether they are accepted for publication in the journal.
3. In the case of papers that have been favorably evaluated at first reading, they will go to the peer review phase in the double-blind mode.
4. Peer review will be conducted by two subject matter specialists who may be members of the Editorial Board or recognized experts from national institutions and internships. In the event of a discrepancy between the two evaluations, a third evaluation will be requested.
5. Any evaluation shall be based on strict compliance with the principles of impartiality and confidentiality.
6. The responsibility for accepting or rejecting a collaboration shall be the responsibility of the director and shall be based solely on the outcome of the evaluations carried out by each of the individuals responsible for that process.
7. The Technical Secretariat shall inform the authors of the outcome of the evaluation within an average period of three months after its submission.
8. If there is conflict of interests because the authors are members of the Editorial Committee or the Editorial Board of the journal, the proposed text will be evaluated by experts not related to Debates por la Historia nor the institution to which the authors belong.
9. The Director and the Editorial Committee of Debates por la Historia reserve the right to disauthorize published works containing manifest and proven lack of reliability, derived from bad scientific practices such as the omission of bibliographic or documentary references, reproduction without mentioning the authorship of investigations of other authors, among others.

Obligations of the dictators

1. The dictators will evaluate the work objectively and confidentially. They should be aware that their task is an essential part of a process that guarantees the quality of the publication.
2. For the proposal evaluation process, the dictators will have the resources of the OJS platform and the Editorial Committee, through the Technical Secretariat, will be able to provide the necessary technical support for the operation of the tools provided by the site.
3. Those who consider themselves not qualified for the requested evaluation should report this situation to the journal's Director as soon as possible.
4. The dictators who warn of a conflict of interest if they intuit anyone who may be the author of the work evaluated must resign from the task and communicate this situation to the editor of the journal as soon as possible.
5. The dictators will carry out their assignment on the basis of academic criteria that favor originality, relevance, relevance of the findings, management of specialized theory, methodological rigor, congruence, argumentative clarity and quality of the writing. On this basis, the dictators will issue an assessment in which they will adequately argue their judgments to conclude with a recommendation that will conform to one of the following options: approved, approved with modifications or rejected.
6. The dictators may not use information or interpretations contained in the work under evaluation, prior to publication, without the consent of the authors.
7. The dictators shall undertake to carry out the evaluation within thirty days.