Publishing opportunity in the Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science
The official conference proceedings of The International Conference on Educational Technology and Online Education 2026 (ICETOE) will be published as a special issue of the Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science (HCMCOUJS). This collaboration will help ensure that accepted papers presented at ICETOE are reviewed and published within a reputable academic platform, offering both scholarly recognition and broad visibility.
The HCMCOUJS | ISSN 1859-3453 is a multidisciplinary, peer-reviewed, open-access journal dedicated to promoting the dissemination of high-quality research. Indexed in the ASEAN Citation Index (ACI), the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), and other academic databases, HCMCOUJS provides a credible platform for scholars to share their work with both regional and international audiences. The journal is guided by an editorial board of experienced researchers from universities and institutions worldwide and follows a strict double-blind peer review process. All articles are published in English, allowing for broader accessibility and engagement within the global research community.
Publication in the special issue of HCMCOUJS will provide:
- International discoverability: Indexing in ACI, DOAJ, and other databases ensures published work can be found and cited globally.
- Peer-reviewed recognition: A rigorous review process strengthens the credibility and impact of your research.
- Open access availability: Articles are freely accessible online, increasing readership and potential for citations.
- Long-term access: Inclusion in a recognized academic journal ensures lasting availability in the scholarly record.
All accepted conference papers will undergo peer review by the journal. Following abstract acceptance, authors will receive submission guidelines for HCMCOUJS. After review and revision, papers will be published in a special issue dedicated to ICETOE. This partnership aims to enhance the visibility and scholarly impact of ICETOE contributions. Conference participation allows authors to share work with peers and contribute to a lasting resource accessible worldwide.
Abstract review process
Assessment category definitions
| Score | Descriptor | Criteria |
| 5 – Excellent | Outstanding clarity, concision, and writing quality. | Highly relevant, thought-provoking, and timely content; fully worthy of presentation. |
| 4 – Good | Clear, concise, and well-written. | Relevant, thought-provoking, and timely content; worthy of presentation. |
| 3 – Average | Competently written but with minor clarity or presentation issues. | Relevant and timely content, though less thought-provoking than higher-rated abstracts; worthy of presentation. |
| 2 – Poor or Borderline acceptable | Reasonably well-written but with notable clarity, presentation, pertinence, or originality issues. | Comprehension may be hindered; it may be acceptable for presentation if substantial revisions are made, as recommended by the reviewer. |
| 1 – Very Poor | Unoriginal or irrelevant work; significant language or comprehension issues. | Unworthy of presentation; issues unlikely to be resolved through minor revisions. |
Acceptance/rejection process
Acceptance of each abstract is based on the combined scores of two reviewers. A minimum combined score of 6/10 from two reviewers is required for acceptance. If referred to a third reviewer, a minimum score of 7/10 is required.
| Outcome | Criteria | Decision |
| Automatic Acceptance | Both reviewers rate the abstract as Average, Good, or Excellent in any combination (combined score: 6-10/10). | Accepted for presentation. |
| Automatic Rejection | Both reviewers rate the abstract as Very Poor or Reject (combined score: ≤ 2/10). | Rejected |
| Third Reviewer Evaluation | 1. Both reviewers rate the abstract as Poor/ Borderline acceptable. 2. One reviewer gives a passing grade (Average or above) and the other a failing grade (Poor/Borderline Acceptable or below). | The third reviewer’s decision is final: – If Average or above → Accepted. – If Poor/Borderline Acceptable or below → Rejected. |
Notification of acceptance or rejection
Authors are usually informed of acceptance or rejection within weeks of abstract submission. Accepted authors will receive an email notifying them of the results, as well as an official Letter of Acceptance as a PDF.
Assessment criteria
The criteria below serve as a guide for evaluating abstracts and should be considered holistically by reviewers. At times, the significance of the topic may outweigh deficiencies in the presentation of the argument or the clarity of the English language. Conversely, flaws in research design or analysis may justify rejecting an otherwise acceptable abstract. Alternatively, a compelling hypothesis may offset methodological weaknesses.
Quality of Presentation.
Is the abstract clearly articulated? Are the study’s aims, methods, and findings readily comprehensible?
Quality of Research Design and Data Analysis.
Is the study design explicitly described? Are sampling methods adequately detailed, including inclusion and exclusion criteria? Is there potential for selection bias? Are measurement tools reliable and valid? Are confounding variables appropriately addressed? Are statistical analyses suitable for the design?
Conclusions
Are conclusions explicitly stated? To what extent are they supported by the data presented? Are conclusions appropriately restrained or overstated relative to the results?
Originality
Although challenging to assess within 250 words, does the abstract demonstrate novel concepts or methodologies, challenge existing paradigms, or introduce new approaches? If the study replicates or extends prior work, does it contribute genuinely new insights or robustly reinforce earlier findings limited by sample size or design?
Impact
Does the abstract address a significant issue? How does the study advance scientific knowledge? Do the results influence prevailing concepts or methodologies, and are they sufficiently robust to affect the behavior of researchers, educators, or policymakers?
Final paper submission
- All papers will be subject to a peer review process.
- Papers must be written and presented in English.
- Papers that are not presented at the Conference will not be included in the Proceedings Book.
- No changes could be made to the abstracts submitted after receiving acceptance.
- Full papers will be subject to a peer review process.
- Full papers that successfully undergo the peer review process will be published in the Proceedings Book.
- No changes could be made after the full paper submission deadline.
| For full paper submission, please follow the Full paper guidelines. | More details |
| Both reviewers rate the abstract as Average, Good, or Excellent in any combination (combined score: 6-10/10). | Go to EasyChair |
Selected full papers will be invited for evaluation. A review committee will make the selection. Please note that the selection of articles does not guarantee acceptance. Only those articles that complete the editorial and peer-review processes will be published.
Oral presentation
Each oral presentation is scheduled (15 minutes): 10 minutes for the presentation and 5 minutes for discussion.
Conference proceedings
- After registering, please upload your full paper via the online system for inclusion in the conference proceedings.
- Final papers are only accepted in Microsoft Word format. Before submitting your paper, please ensure that you have read the Final Paper Guidelines and formatted your paper correctly.
- The official Conference proceedings will be published online in a PDF format under an ISSN issued by the Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science.
Publication Process in the Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science
Authors are first invited to submit an abstract for consideration. Abstracts that are accepted through the review process will be eligible for presentation at the Conference. Upon acceptance of the abstract, the Organizing Committee will formally notify the authors and provide detailed guidelines for submitting full papers.
After completing the full manuscript, authors may choose one of the following publication options:
- Special Issue of the Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science (HCMCOUJS, ISSN 1859-3453), a peer-reviewed journal indexed in ACI, DOAJ, and listed by the State Council for Professor Title of Vietnam for scientific publication scoring (0-1.00 points).
- Conference Proceedings of the Conference.
Full papers submitted to the Special Issue will undergo a rigorous peer-review process in accordance with the journal’s standards. Papers that are not selected for publication in the Special Issue may be revised, if necessary, reviewed, and considered for publication in the Conference Proceedings.
Ethics and Review Policy
ICETOE 2026 upholds high standards of academic integrity. All submissions must represent original, unpublished work and must not be under review elsewhere. The conference reserves the right to use plagiarism detection software.
Plagiarism policy
- The conference will not accept papers that are under review, accepted, or published elsewhere.
- Authors are also expected not to submit their papers elsewhere during the conference reviewing period.
- All submitted articles should report original, previously unpublished research results, experimental or theoretical.
- Articles submitted to the conference should meet these criteria and must not be under consideration for publication elsewhere.
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies
- The conference follows https://journalofscience.ou.edu.vn/en/policies/ai-use.
- Authors are allowed to use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process before submission, but only to improve the language and readability of their paper and with the appropriate disclosure.
- This does not apply to the use of basic tools for checking grammar, spelling, references, and other similar purposes.
Who Should Attend
- Researchers and academics
- PhD candidates and graduate students
- Educational practitioners
- Policy-makers
- EdTech industry professionals