Publication Ethiccs

The Educator Development Journal (EDJ) is a journal that aims to be a leading peer-reviewed platform and authoritative source of information. We publish original research papers, review articles, and case studies focused on Education and Learning and related topics that have not been published elsewhere in any language nor are they being reviewed for publication anywhere else.

Author Assignment

Reporting Standards: Authors must present an accurate report of the original research conducted as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers must present their research results truthfully and without falsification, falsification, or improper manipulation of data. A manuscript must contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the work. False or intentionally inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts must follow the journal submission guidelines.

Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written completely original work. Manuscripts may not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editor has agreed to do joint publication. Relevant previous works and publications, both by other researchers and those of the authors, must be properly acknowledged and referenced. Primary literature should be cited whenever possible. Original words taken directly from other researchers' publications must be in quotation marks with the appropriate citation.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication: Authors generally should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Authors are also expected not to publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts that describe the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Authors must acknowledge all data sources used in the research and cite publications that were influential in determining the nature of the work reported. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others should always be given.

Authorship of Papers: Authorship of research publications must accurately reflect an individual's contribution to the work and its reporting. Writing should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, conduct or interpretation of the research being reported. Others who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. In cases where the main contributor is listed as the author, contributors who made a less substantial, or purely technical, contribution to the research or publication are listed in the acknowledgments section. The author also ensures that all authors have seen and approved the version of the manuscript submitted and the inclusion of their names as co-authors.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: All authors must clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed as influencing the outcome or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Work: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor of the journal or publisher and work with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Editor's Task

Publication Decision: Based on the editorial board's review report, the editor can accept, reject, or request modification of the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive the decision. Editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and limited by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors must be responsible for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of published records.

Manuscript Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. Editors must organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should describe their peer review process in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding people with conflicts of interest.

Fair Play: Editors must ensure that every manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for intellectual content regardless of the gender, gender, race, religion, nationality, etc. of the author. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and impartial decisions is to uphold the principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors have a strong position in making publication decisions, so it is critical that this process is fair and impartial.

Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. Editors must critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where necessary.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Journal editors will not use unpublished material disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research without written permission from the author. Editors may not be involved in making decisions regarding papers that have a conflict of interest

Reviewer Task

Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. The document may not be shown or discussed with others except with the permission of the editor.

Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the study. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author. Any statement that states observations, derivations, or arguments have been previously reported must be accompanied by relevant citations. Reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they discover an irregularity, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, become aware of substantial similarities between the manuscript and concurrent submissions to other journals or published articles, or suspect that an error may have occurred. either during research or writing and submission of manuscripts; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not investigate privately further unless the journal requests further information or advice.

Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be carried out objectively and reviewers must express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should follow the journal's instructions regarding the specific feedback required and unless there is a good reason not to. Reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors improve their manuscripts. The reviewer should clarify any suggested additional investigations that are essential to support the claims made in the text under consideration and which would only strengthen or expand the work

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competition, collaboration, or other association or association with any author, company, or institution associated with the paper. In the case of a double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author, notify the journal if this knowledge raises a potential conflict of interest.

Accuracy: Reviewers must provide responses within a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers only agree to review manuscripts if they are reasonably confident that they can return the review within a proposed or mutually agreed upon time frame, promptly notifying the journal if they require an extension. If the reviewer feels that it is impossible to complete the manuscript review within the allotted time, this information must be communicated to the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to other reviewers.