As Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Faculty of Education Journal, we closely follow technological developments in scientific research and publication processes. In recent years, the use of generative artificial intelligence technologies (large language models such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, and visual production tools such as DALL-E, Midjourney) in academic studies has become increasingly widespread.

While these technologies offer new opportunities for researchers in areas such as idea development, language correction, and accelerating research processes, they also bring various challenges in terms of scientific integrity, originality, accuracy, and responsibility. Our journal aims to support the responsible and ethical use of generative AI tools while preserving the originality and scientific standards of academic works.

This policy has been prepared to explain the rules regarding the use of generative AI technologies in studies submitted to our journal, the responsibilities of authors, permitted and prohibited areas of use, as well as transparency and declaration requirements. Our policy aims to ensure high ethical standards and academic honesty in the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge in the field of educational sciences. This policy document will be regularly updated in line with technological developments and changes in academic standards. We kindly request our authors, reviewers, and editors to carefully review this policy and comply with the stated rules.

Principles and Responsibilities for Authors 

Authorship and Responsibility:

• Generative AI tools (ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, etc.) cannot be listed as authors or co-authors under any circumstances.
• Authors are personally responsible for all content, accuracy, integrity, and originality of their articles.
• The use of AI does not exempt authors from their scientific and ethical responsibilities.

Transparency and Declaration:

• All instances where generative AI tools are used in the article must be clearly declared.
• The declaration should be made in the "Methods" or "Acknowledgments" section of the article.
• The declaration should specify the full name of the tools used, version number, how and for what purpose they were used.

Permitted Areas of Use

1. Language and Readability Improvements:

• The use of AI for grammar, spelling, punctuation, and language fluency corrections in texts created by the authors is acceptable.
  Such corrections should not alter the original content, but only improve readability.

2. Idea Development and Research Planning:

• AI can be used as an auxiliary tool in developing research questions, brainstorming, and planning research design.
• However, the conceptual framework and methodology of the research should primarily be based on the author's own scientific approach.

3. Coding Assistance and Data Analysis:

• AI can be used as an auxiliary tool for writing code for data analysis. However, the accuracy and appropriateness of statistical analyses remain the responsibility of the author.

4. Organization in Literature Reviews:

• AI can be used as an aid in organizing and classifying existing literature. However, the comprehensiveness and accuracy of the literature review remain the responsibility of the author.

Restricted or Prohibited Areas of Use

1. Content Creation:

• It is unacceptable for any main section of the article, such as the abstract, introduction, literature review, or discussion, to be written entirely by AI.
• AI outputs should only be used as a starting point and should be extensively modified, developed, and verified by the authors.

2. Generation and Interpretation of Results:

• The use of AI for generating, reporting, or interpreting research results is not acceptable.
• The accuracy, integrity, and validity of data analysis results are directly the responsibility of the authors.

3. Source Creation and Citation:

• Creating imaginary or unverifiable sources or citing non-existent works using AI tools is strictly prohibited.
• All sources should be verified by the authors and properly cited.

4. Academic Writing and Argument Development:

• The argument structure, theoretical contribution, and main theses of the article should be developed by the author.
• AI can only be used as a supportive tool in these processes.

Warnings and Plagiarism Checks

1. Plagiarism and Erroneous Information:

• Generative AI tools may plagiarize from existing content or produce incorrect information, known as "hallucinations."
• Authors should carefully check, verify, and run AI outputs through plagiarism screening.

2. Data Privacy and Security:

• Uploading confidential, personal, or sensitive research data to generative AI platforms may create data security risks.
• Authors should review the privacy policies of the tools they use and take necessary precautions.

Procedures to be Applied in Case of Policy Violation

• If AI use is not declared or used contrary to the policy, the article may be rejected. Our journal uses various AI detection tools for content produced with generative AI tools
• If policy violations are detected in published articles, actions such as article retraction or publication of corrections may be applied.
• Repeated violations may result in the rejection of the author's future submissions to our journal.

Principles and Responsibilities for Editors and Reviewers 

As Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Faculty of Education Journal, we value that our editors and reviewers fulfill their roles in the evaluation processes with great diligence. The proliferation of generative AI technologies also affects evaluation processes. This section explains the principles and limitations that our editors and reviewers must adhere to when using generative AI technologies in article evaluation and review processes.

Policies for Editors

Confidentiality and Intellectual Property Responsibility:

• Editors should not upload unpublished articles or related files, images, and information to generative AI tools.
• Protecting the confidentiality of article contents and the intellectual property rights of authors is a fundamental responsibility of editors.

Use of AI in the Evaluation Process:

• Editors can use AI tools in the article evaluation process (e.g., eligibility check, reviewer selection) only as approved by the journal management.
• Any use of AI requires informing the authors.

Evaluation of Authors' AI Declarations:

• Editors should carefully review authors' AI usage declarations and request additional clarification if necessary.
• Evaluating the compliance of AI use with our journal's policies is the responsibility of the editors.

Management of Suspicious Situations:

• In suspicious situations regarding AI use, editors should openly discuss the issue with authors and request additional evidence if necessary.
• Situations requiring further evaluation should be forwarded to the journal's editorial board.

Following Policy Updates:

• Editors should regularly follow developments related to generative AI technologies and our journal's policy updates.

Policies for Reviewers

Confidentiality and Ethical Responsibility:

• Reviewers should under no circumstances upload unpublished articles or related materials sent to them for evaluation to generative AI tools.
• Such actions can pose a significant threat to confidentiality and intellectual property rights.

Use of AI in the Review Process:

• Reviewers should not use generative AI tools for article evaluation or analysis.
• Evaluations should be conducted based on the reviewer's own expertise and knowledge.

Limited Permitted Use:

• Reviewers may use AI tools only to improve the language and readability of their own evaluation reports.
• Even in this case, the reviewer is fully responsible for the accuracy and integrity of the report's content.

Detection of AI Use:

• Reviewers should try to detect possible undeclared AI use in the articles they evaluate and report suspicious situations to the editors.
• However, these detections should be based on objective evaluation criteria.

Evaluation Ethics:

• Reviewers should evaluate authors fairly regarding AI use, keeping our journal's policies separate from their personal preferences and biases.
• Criticisms related to AI use in evaluations should be constructive and in accordance with our journal's policies.

The strict adherence of our editors and reviewers to these policies is of great importance in preserving the integrity of our publication process and building trust between authors and readers. These policies will be regularly updated in line with rapid developments in AI technologies.

Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Creating Visuals, Graphics, and Tables

As Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Faculty of Education Journal, we adopt an approach that is open to technological developments. We are aware of the potential of generative AI technologies in creating visuals, graphics, and tables, and we acknowledge that these tools can contribute to academic studies. However, to protect scientific integrity and ethical principles, we adopt the following general principles and policy regarding the use of such technologies.

1. Transparency and Declaration:

• All visuals, graphics, and tables created using generative AI tools must be clearly indicated.
• The declaration should be included in the explanation under the relevant visual and should detail the name of the AI tool used, its version, and for what purpose it was used.

2. Scientific Accuracy and Responsibility:

• Authors are fully responsible for the scientific accuracy and appropriateness of visuals created with AI.
• All visual materials should accurately reflect the author's own research results and scientific understanding.

Permitted Areas of Use

1. Conceptual Diagrams and Explanatory Visuals:

• Generative AI can be used to visualize theoretical frameworks, conceptual models, or processes.
• Such visuals should correctly represent the author's own understanding and explanations.

2. Data Visualization:

• Authors are encouraged to use AI tools to visualize their own research data.
• These tools can be utilized to enhance the visual quality in the design of graphs, charts, and tables.

3. Illustrations and Representative Visuals:

• AI can be used to create representative visuals or illustrations to explain concepts in the field of educational sciences.
• Such visuals should help readers understand concepts and should not be misleading.

Situations Requiring Attention

1. Data Integrity:

• Data underlying graphics and tables containing real research data should not be manipulated.
• AI tools should only be used as aids in data visualization design, not for data generation.

2. Photographs and Realistic Visuals:

• If photographs representing real situations or events are created with AI, it should be clearly stated that they are representative.
• This is particularly important in visuals showing educational environments, student-teacher interactions, or real people.

3. Ethical Considerations:

• Generated visuals should comply with ethical principles and should not contain misleading, discriminatory, or stereotypical content.
• Cultural sensitivities and diversity should be respected.

Future Updates

This policy will be regularly reviewed and updated in line with technological developments and changes in academic standards. We encourage our authors to utilize AI tools by considering this policy and observing scientific integrity principles. As Burdur Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Faculty of Education Journal, we are committed to supporting innovative approaches in academic research while preserving scientific standards and ethical principles. We believe that maintaining this balance will enhance both the quality of our journal and our contribution to the scientific field.