Publication Ethics of International Journal of Education Research and Development (IJERD)

This statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in our journals, including the authors, the editors, the peer-reviewers and the publisher Corolla Education Centre Foundation. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical International Journal of Education Research and Development (IJERD) for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed International Journal of Education Research and Development (IJERD) is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the authors, the journal editors, the peer reviewers, the publisher and the society.

Corolla Education Centre Foundation is as publisher of this Journal takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Corolla Education Centre Foundation and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication decisions

The editors of the International Journal of Education Research and Development (IJERD) are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Reviewers responsibilities

• Judgments should be objective;
• Reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors, and/or the research funders;
• Reviewers should point out relevant published work that is not cited;
• Reviewed articles should be treated confidentially;
• Reviewers should maintain the confidentiality of the review process;
• Reviewers should immediately alert the journal editor of any real or potential competing interest that could affect the impartiality of their review and decline to review when appropriate
• Reviewers should conduct themselves fairly and impartially;
• We are aware, of course, that academics will come from a particular school of thought and/or may have strong ties to a particular interest. All we ask is that reviewers strive to act fairly. If in doubt about whether a conflict exists, a reviewer should be transparent and seek the views of the journal editor.

Author's responsibilities

• Authors are obliged to participate in peer review process;
• All authors have significantly contributed to the research;
• Authors include statement that all data in article are real and authentic;
• Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes;
• Reported work is original and written by the authors;
• Reported work has not been previously published and has been submitted only to that journal;
• Where material is taken from other sources (including their own published writing), the source is clearly cited and, where appropriate, permission is obtained;
• The work does not infringe on the rights of others, including privacy rights and intellectual property rights;
• Data are true and not manipulated;
• Data are their own or they have permission to use data reproduced in their paper;
• Any real or apparent conflicting or competing interest is clearly stated upon submission of the paper (this would include funding assistance);
• Authors should adhere to all research ethics guidelines of their discipline, particularly where human or animal subjects are involved;
• Authors should contact the editor to identify and correct any material errors upon discovery, whether prior or subsequent to publication of their work;
• Authorship of the paper is accurately represented, including ensuring that all individuals credited as authors participated in the actual authorship of the work and that all who participated are credited and have given consent for publication.

Editorial responsibilities

• Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article. They always strive to meet the needs of readers and authors;
• Editors should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept;
• Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain about the content;
• When errors are found, editors should promote publication of a correction or retraction;
• Editors should preserve anonymity of reviewers;
• Editors should maintain and promote consistent ethical policies for their journals;
• Editors should oversee and act to enforce those policies as needed in a fair and consistent manner;
• Editors should ensure the confidentiality of the review process;
• Editors should exercise the highest standards of personal integrity in their work as editor of the journal, recognizing and planning for instances in which they could have a competing interest or the appearance of a competing interest;
• Editors should work with authors, reviewers, and editorial board members as necessary to ensure they are sufficiently advised regarding the journal’s ethics and publishing policies and that the journal’s stewardship on ethical matters is fair, unbiased, and timely;
• Editors should promote fairness and equality and oppose discrimination;
• Editors should promote transparency of and respect for the academic record;
• Editors should respect the confidentiality of others;

Publishing ethics issues

• Monitor/safeguard publishing ethics;
• Establish guidelines for retracting articles;
• Maintain integrity of the academic record;
• Preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards;
• Be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed;
• Guard against plagiarism and/or fraudulent data;

All authors are requested to disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations for the three years prior to the start of the submitted work that could inappropriately influence, or be perceived to influence, their work. Submission of an article implies that the work described has not been published previously (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture or academic thesis or as an electronic preprint), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication is approved by all authors and tacitly or explicitly by the responsible authorities where the work was carried out, and that, if accepted, it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, in English or in any other language, including electronically without the written consent of the copyright-holder.

Changes to authorship

This policy concerns the addition, deletion, or rearrangement of author names in the authorship of accepted manuscripts. Requests to add or remove an author, or to rearrange the author names, must be sent to the Editor-in-Chief from the corresponding author of the accepted manuscript and must include (a) the reason the name should be added or removed, or the author names rearranged and (b) written confirmation (e-mail, fax, letter) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement. In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed. Requests that are not sent by the corresponding author will be forwarded by the Editor-in-Chief to the corresponding author, who must follow the procedure as described above.

Role of the funding source

Authors are requested to identify who provided financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article and to briefly describe the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in the study design; in the collection, in the analysis and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) had no such involvement, then this should be stated.