Submissions

Author Guidelines

               The International Review of Multidisciplinary Research (IRMR) invites high-quality, original research submissions aligned with its focus on educational leadership, faculty development, institutional management, and digital transformation in higher education. All manuscripts undergo rigorous editorial screening and double-blind peer review by at least two independent experts to ensure standards, including robust methodology, ethical compliance, and global relevance.

Submission 

The following are the minimum requirements for the submission of articles:

1. Manuscripts must be unpublished and not under consideration in other journal publications
2. Prepared in IMRaD format (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion)
3. Abstract must be structured with a minimum of 150 and maximum of 250 words covering purpose, methods, results, conclusions.
4. Use APA 7th edition referencing (20-50 sources, prioritizing recent DOIs)
5. Ensure tables/figures are high-resolution (300 DPI), numbered, captioned, and permission-secured for reuse.
6. Word count must be 6,000-8,000 (excluding references)
7. Submitted in Microsoft Word with supplementary data files (if allowed) for archiving.​
8. The official template is used. Click on this link for the template.

Quality of the Article

 A quality article for IRMR meets standards through originality, methodological rigor, ethical transparency, and clear impact in educational leadership or digital transformation. These criteria ensure peer reviewers can validate claims and editors confirm global relevance.

Originality and Novelty

 The article presents new insights, data, or frameworks not previously published, addressing a specific gap in higher education literature (e.g., faculty promotion models in Philippine contexts). Avoid self-plagiarism; similarity index must stay below 15% and with minimum writing used by artificial intelligence.

​Structured Research Design

Follows the IMRaD format with a clear research question/hypothesis, detailed methodology (sampling, instruments, validity/reliability tests), and justified approach (e.g., mixed methods for institutional studies). Inclusion/exclusion criteria, sample size calculations, and limitations must be explicit to enable replication. In cases where the study used meta-analysis it should be stated explicitly.

Robust Evidence and Analysis

Results feature statistical significance (p-values, confidence intervals), unbiased data presentation via tables/figures (300 DPI, captioned), and logical discussion linking findings to theory/practice. Quantitative studies require power analysis; qualitative ones need triangulation and respondent validation.

Ethical Compliance and Transparency

Declare IRB/ethics approval, conflicts of interest, funding sources, and data availability. All authors contribute substantively, hold ORCIDs (at least one author) , and consent to CC-BY licensing; adhere to COPE for retractions or corrections.

Clarity and Scholarly Communication

Use concise, active language (APA 7th style, 15-40 recent references with DOIs), structured abstract (purpose-methods-results-conclusions), and 5-7 index terms/ keywords. Conclusions avoid overgeneralization, discuss biases, and suggest practical implications for academia.

Access the full copy of the guideline in the link below:

Author Guidelines

TEMPLATE GUIDELINES

               This guideline serves as the basis for both the initial and final reviews conducted by subject-matter experts. The template includes essential sections such as the title, abstract, introduction, methodology, results and discussion, and other components required for the official and final manuscript. Additional information to be collected includes the full names of all authors, their institutional affiliations, official email addresses, and ORCID iDs. Supplementary materials, such as datasets, codes, or other research outputs used in the study, shall also be submitted as part of the review process.

Contents of the Article

 Title

1. The title must clearly and accurately reflect the content, scope, and focus of the study.
2. Avoid jargon, discipline-specific acronyms, or abbreviations that are not widely recognized in the field.
3. Titles should be concise and to the point, ideally within 10–15 words.
4. An alternative title must also be provided (shortened title) for running header purposes.
5. The title must convey the key elements of the study: main variables, population/sample, methodology (if space permits), and central topic.
6. Editors or experts may request revisions to ensure the title is clear, concise, and aligned with the journal’s style before final acceptance.

Abstract

1. Start with 1-2 sentences on the research problem, context, and clear objectives or gap addressed. Use precise field-specific terms for quick relevance.
2. Cover study design, sample size, key procedures, and analysis in 1-2 brief sentences. Highlight essentials only—no extra details.
3. State main findings objectively with data trends or effect sizes (1-2 sentences). Include numbers where they add impact; skip minor stats.
4. Interpret results, note significance, applications, or limits (1-2 sentences). Tie back to goals without new info.
5. Keep standalone (no citations/abbreviations); use active voice, hit word limit (150-250), and ensure smooth flow.

 Author(s) Details   

1. List each author's full name in the format: Last Name, First Name, Middle Initial (e.g., Cruz, John A.). For multiple authors, separate names with commas.
2. Indicate institutional affiliations immediately following the author names, using full names without acronyms or abbreviations. Use superscript numbers to link multiple affiliations.
3. Provide ORCID iDs in the order corresponding to author names. ORCID registration is not mandatory but strongly encouraged for all authors.
4. In the final published article, ORCID iDs will appear as superscript links in the author byline and be listed in full at the footer of the first page.
5. Supply official institutional email addresses for all authors. Use emails registered with scholarly indexing services (e.g., Google Scholar) when possible to facilitate author profile linking and verification. The corresponding author's email will be designated separately.
6. For manuscripts with multiple authors and affiliations, use superscript numbers (e.g.,¹,²) after each author’s name to correspond to their respective affiliation(s), listed immediately below.

Article Details

1. Retain the default dates auto generated for submission (received), revision, acceptance, and publication. Editors will manage all date updates and modifications.
2. Provide a valid, active email address for the corresponding author. The submitting author is preferred as the corresponding contact for streamlined communication.

 Recommended Citation

1. The journal will assign and provide the official Digital Object Identifier (DOI) upon final publication. Authors need not supply DOIs or the citation during submission.

 Index Terms

1. Choose 5–8 relevant keywords that precisely reflect the study's core concepts, methods, and findings.
2. Avoid repeating words from the title or abstract; use synonyms and related terms instead.
3. Prioritize searchable terms commonly used in your field for better discoverability.
4. Use 2–4-word phrases when single words are too broad; separate with commas.
5. Test keywords in databases like Google Scholar to ensure they retrieve similar articles.

Introduction

The following are the suggested ways to develop an impactful introduction but not limited to.

1. Begin with 1-2 sentences on the topic's relevance to the discipline or real-world applications.
2. Provide a concise overview of major prior studies, focusing on established knowledge.
3. Note agreements or patterns across existing research to build foundation.
4. Point out conflicting results or methodological limitations in previous work.
5. Clearly articulate the specific unanswered question or underexplored area.
6. Connect the gap to theoretical, practical, or policy implications.
7. Justify why this research is timely and necessary now.
8. List 1-3 precise, focused questions the study addresses.
9. Specify primary and secondary goals using action verbs (e.g., "examine," "test," "compare").
10. End with a roadmap sentence outlining Methods, Results, and Discussion sections.

Methodology

1. Write subheadings for each major component (e.g., Participants, Materials, Procedure) to guide readers.
2. Justify key choices (e.g., "Random sampling was selected to minimize bias") briefly.
3. Report sample sizes, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and ethical approvals explicitly.
4. Include software/tools/versions used for analysis (e.g., SPSS v.27).
5. End with data treatment/analysis methods, stating significance levels (e.g., p<0.05).

Research Design

1. Specify design type (experimental, correlational, longitudinal) and rationale.
2. Diagram complex designs if helpful, but describe in text first.
3. Note control variables, randomization, or blinding procedures.

Quantitative Studies

1. Detail measures/instruments with reliability/validity evidence (e.g., Cronbach's α=0.85).
2. Describe sampling (e.g., n=250, power analysis for 80% power).
3. Outline statistical tests (e.g., ANOVA, regression) with assumptions checked.

Qualitative Studies

1. Explain data collection (e.g., semi-structured interviews, thematic saturation at n=15).
2. Describe coding/analysis (e.g., inductive thematic analysis via NVivo).
3. Note researcher reflexivity, triangulation, or member checking for rigor.

Mixed Methods

1. Sequence integration (e.g., convergent parallel: collect quant/qual separately, merge in analysis).
2. Justify mixing (e.g., quant for generalizability, qual for depth).
3. Detail joint displays (e.g., side-by-side results tables).

Basic Research

1. Focus on theory-testing: emphasize controlled conditions and variable operationalization.
2. Prioritize internal validity (e.g., lab protocols, standardized stimuli).

Applied Research

1. Highlight practical context: describe real-world settings, interventions, or scalability.
2. Include feasibility metrics (e.g., cost, time, stakeholder involvement).

Results and Discussion

1. Lead with key findings in order of importance or research questions. State numerical outcomes clearly (e.g., "Mean score was 4.2 ± 0.8") without explanation or opinion.
2. Group results under subheadings matching Introduction aims (e.g., "Primary Outcome," "Secondary Analysis"). Follow logical sequence: main effects, interactions, subgroups.
3. Use bridging sentences (e.g., "These results suggest...") to connect raw findings to interpretation. Avoid repeating numbers—synthesize patterns instead.
4. Compare results to prior studies: confirmations, contradictions, novel contributions. Explain discrepancies (e.g., "Unlike Smith et al., our larger sample reduced Type II error").
5. Note methodological constraints (e.g., sample size, generalizability) early in Discussion. Distinguish between study flaws and broader boundary conditions.
6. Connect findings to theoretical advancement, practical applications, or policy. Use forward-looking language (e.g., "These data support interventions targeting...").
7. Suggest specific next studies (e.g., "Longitudinal follow-up could examine..."). Avoid vague calls like "More research needed."

Conclusion and Implications

1. Restate primary findings briefly, linking back to research questions without repeating Results.
2. Highlight theoretical contributions and how they advance existing knowledge in the field.
3. Discuss practical implications, applications, or recommendations for stakeholders and policy.
4. Acknowledge study limitations honestly but frame them as opportunities for refinement.
5. Propose specific future research directions with testable hypotheses or expanded scopes.

Other Main Parts

The following can be added as main sections inside the article.

               Conceptual/ Theoretical Framework

1. Clearly define all core concepts and variables with precise, field-specific terminology before illustrating connections.
2. Base the framework on established theories from literature, citing 3–5 key sources to establish credibility.
3. Illustrate relationships (causal, correlational, moderating) using a diagram with arrows, boxes, and labels for immediate comprehension.
4. Explicitly link framework elements to research questions and hypotheses to show logical alignment.
5. Position the framework early (end of Introduction) and reference it throughout Methods, Results, and Discussion for coherence.

               Review of Related Literature

1. Group sources by concepts, chronology, methodology, or debates rather than summarizing studies individually.
2. Compare/contrast findings across studies; highlight patterns, trends, contradictions, and evolutions in the field.
3. Explicitly state unresolved issues your research addresses, linking back to your objectives.

               Software Methodology

4. Name the software, precise version (e.g., R 4.3.2), and source (e.g., CRAN repository or GitHub commit hash). Include installation commands or links for replication.
5. Link to persistent repositories (e.g., GitHub, Zenodo) with DOIs. State if code is open-source, version-controlled, or supplementary; include example snippets for critical functions.
6. Outline core algorithms, modifications, or custom scripts step-by-step. Reference standards (e.g., "Implemented via NumPy's eigendecomposition") and note computational environment (e.g., CPU/GPU specs).
7. Describe testing (e.g., unit tests, seed values for randomness), input/output validation, and runtime requirements. Provide seed values or Docker containers for exact replication.

               Other Parts

1. Incorporate parts of your research that can be the main or subsection of the article. See examples below.
   • Agriculture – Materials
   • Engineering – Prototype Design
   • Sports Science – Participant Protocols
   • Architecture – Contextual Analysis
   • Geology – Field Sampling

Tables

1. Number sequentially as Table 1, Table 2 (italicized, and centered).
2. Title in title case, descriptive yet concise (e.g., Demographic Profile of Respondents).
3. Use simple borders: horizontal lines for header, and bottom total; no vertical lines or shading.
4. Columns: Clear headers aligned (text left, numbers right), units in headers.
5. Place tables immediately after first mention in text; include N if applicable.
6. Sample table is provided below.
7. Number sequentially as Figure 1, Figure 2 (italicized, bold optional, centered above).
8. Title in sentence case, explanatory (e.g., Line graph showing yield trends over seasons).
9. High-resolution (300 dpi), grayscale or color as needed; label axes, legends clearly.
10. Include scale bars or error bars; source/caption below if adapted.
11. Reference in text: "As shown in Table 1, 78.67% were male."
12. ​Analyze trends: Report descriptives first (means, SD), then inferential stats (p-values, effect sizes).
13. Discuss outliers or subgroups narratively; avoid raw data dumps—synthesize for insights.
14. In Discussion, link back: "Table 1 demographics explain the age skew in results.

Acknowledgements

1. Thank only individuals and institutions who provided substantial support (e.g., funding, supervision, data access, technical or language assistance), but who do not qualify for authorship.
2. Use concise, formal sentences, avoiding overly personal or emotional language (e.g., “The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of…” rather than casual thanks).

Funding

1. List every funding agency, grant number, and award identifier (e.g., "This work was supported by the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) Grant No. 12345").
2. Specify involvement or noninvolvement (e.g., "The funders had no role in study design, data collection, analysis, or manuscript preparation").
3. Explicitly state "No external funding was received for this study" if applicable, to confirm self-funding or institutional support.

Competing Interests Statement

1. Explicitly state financial (e.g., funding, employment, patents), personal (e.g., family ties to sponsors), or professional (e.g., consulting roles) connections to study entities, products, or competitors within the past 3–5 years.
2. Employ clear templates like "The authors declare no competing interests" or "Author X received funding from Company Y, which had no role in study design." Avoid vague terms like "possible conflict."

Data Availability Statement

1. For studies that are willing to provide the data used in the study, Provide a direct link to the study's GitHub repository containing raw data, code, and analysis scripts (e.g., "Data and code are openly available at https://github.com/username/studyname (accessed [date]).").
2. State clearly if data cannot be shared publicly: "The data supporting this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request."
3. For author-requested data: "Readers may contact the corresponding author at [email] for access. Requests will be reviewed within 30 days based on journal data policy.".

References

1. The journal requires APA 7th edition (latest edition) for all citations and references.
2. Hanging indent (0.5 in.), double-spaced, no extra lines between entries.
3. Include a DOI for every source that has one, formatted as https://doi.org/xxxx (no period after).
4. Journal/book titles italicized, sentence case; article titles sentence case, no italics.
5. Every reference must be cited in the manuscript; prioritize peer-reviewed journals/books from the study.
6. A minimum number of 15 references is enforced.
7. Ensure diversity (e.g., 15+ journals, recent sources). Editors will verify all DOIs resolve and relevance to study claims.

Appendices

1. Host all appendix materials in the study's GitHub repository. Include the direct link and specific file paths.
2. Include extended methodologies, raw data excerpts, questionnaires, interview guides, detailed calculations, or additional statistical outputs not essential to primary arguments.
3. Label sequentially as Appendix A, Appendix B (italicized titles, centered). Reference in main text (e.g., "See Appendix A for survey instrument").
4. Reserve appendices for supporting materials only. Core findings, tables, and figures belong in Results/Discussion.
5. For studies that have no appendices state, “No appendices are attached in this study”

Technical Writing Requirements

1. Font Style: Use Cambria throughout the entire manuscript, including text, headings, tables, and figure captions.
2. Font Sizes and Colors (Hex #000080 for Dark Blue):
   • Title: 15 pt, Dark Blue, left
   • Author Details: 10 pt, Black.
   • Abstract & Keywords: 9 pt, Black.
   • Main/Subheadings (Levels 1-3): 12 pt (per level specs below), Dark Blue
   • Body Text & Captions: 9 pt, Black.
   • References: 9 pt, Black, hanging indent 0.5".
3. Heading Levels (APA 7th Edition, Title Case):
   • Level 1 (Main Sections, e.g., Method): Flush Left, Bold, 12 pt, Dark Blue.
   • Level 2 (Subsections, e.g., Participants): Flush Left, 12 pt, Italic, Black.
   • Level 3: Flush Left, Italic, 12 pt, Black.
4. Page Layout:
   • Margins: 1 inch on all sides.
   • Line Spacing: single-spaced throughout (including references).
   • Paragraphs: No indents
5. Tables and Figures (Chronological, Italicized Titles, Centered):
6. Tables: Horizontal lines only (header, rows if needed, bottom); no verticals/shading. Numbers right-aligned.
7. Figures: 300 dpi; Table 1 or Figure 1 below, centered.
8. Placement: After first text mention.
9. Submission Filename: [Short Title of the Article]_[Last name of Corresponding author]

To fully view the template guidelines, please access the link below

Template Guidelines

Download a copy of the Article Template by clicking the link below

Article Template