Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education

Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education as a refereed journal aims to contribute to the educational theories and practices, and covers the original research articles and compilations with a scientific quality at the national/international level. More specifically, Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education is a refereed academic journal, which publishes quantitative and qualitative research on current issues in all fields of education. Additionally, some of the critical and up-to-date topics related to education that are discussed from the theoretical perspectives, and the results of the practical studies are also published in the journal.

In Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education, original works of qualitative, quantitative and mixed-method studies of different fields of education (educational sciences, foreign languages ​​education, social science and Turkish education, fine arts education, basic education, science, and mathematics education, computer and instructional technology education and special education) are being published. It is expected that the studies to be accepted in the journal should provide new and unique contributions to the theoretical and practical aspects of education.

Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education (MEUEFD)

A. Publication Principles

1. Mersin University Journal of Faculty of Education (MEUEFD) includes theoretical and applied researches with an original content that can contribute to the theoretical and practical dimensions of education.
2. In order for articles to be published in MEUEFD, they must not have been published or accepted for publication elsewhere. Papers whose abstracts/abstracts have been previously presented at a scientific meeting may be accepted for evaluation, provided that this is clearly stated. Studies that have been fully presented/published in a scientific event are not included.
3. The authors named during the article application are responsible for the entire content of the study.
4. The evaluation process is kept confidential and not shared with third parties. Each study submitted to the journal is evaluated impartially by referees determined by the editors.
5. The editor-in-chief and editors keep the referee evaluation process confidential. In the evaluation process, no characteristics (religion, language, race, nationality, gender, seniority or institutional affiliation, etc.) other than the academic qualifications of the authors and referees are taken into account.
6. In case of an allegation that all or part of an article submitted to the journal is plagiarised, is in the process of being published in another source, or has been published, the editor conducts the necessary research. If the allegation is confirmed, the editor has the right not to publish the article.
7. Fee policy: No fee is charged for any transaction at any stage of the publication process at MEUEFD. In the evaluation process, editors and referees carry out all procedures on a voluntary basis within the framework of academic and social benefit responsibility.
8. Manuscript withdrawal: Authors may withdraw their manuscripts provided that they provide a reasonable justification to be accepted by the journal editorial office and sign the Manuscript Withdrawal Form

B. Evaluation Process

1. To submit an article to MEUEFD, authors must be a member (author) of the journal via the DergiPark system.
2. MEUEFD accepts articles written in Turkish and English.
3. While uploading their articles to the system, authors should include author name, title, institution, ORCID and e-mail information on the cover page.
4. The articles submitted to the journal must be passed through similarity screening software (Turnitin, iThenticate, etc.), and all pages of the report showing a maximum of 15% similarity, including bibliography, must be uploaded. In addition, the "Copyright Form" filled out and signed by the authors and the "Ethical Approval Permission Document" of the study must be uploaded to the system.
5. Authors should follow the evaluation process of their manuscripts on the system. Developments in the evaluation process are notified to the authors by the editors via the system. Therefore, authors should enter their current e-mail addresses into the system. Authors should contact the responsible editor when they want to get information about their work.
6. The manuscript received by the journal is firstly reviewed by the editor-in-chief and the editor in charge. In the preliminary review, the "quality" aspects such as originality, topicality, contribution to the field and practitioners, as well as the conformity of the article to the journal writing rules are evaluated in terms of "formal" aspects. Articles that do not meet the journal's acceptance criteria are not included in the evaluation process or the authors are asked to make changes. The decision on this matter is notified to the authors via the DergiPark system.
7. After the preliminary review, candidate manuscripts are sent to two referees who are experts in their fields and hold at least a PhD degree. Referees are given 15 days to accept the evaluation invitation and 20 days to complete their evaluations. These periods can be extended upon the request of the referees.
8. The referees complete their evaluations within the specified periods and send their reports and evaluation form. The invitations of the referees who do not respond to the referee invitation or the time given to complete the evaluation report are cancelled and the same process is repeated for a new referee. Therefore, the evaluation process may be longer or shorter depending on the referees' acceptance of the invitations and uploading their reports to the system.
9. It may take 6-8 months to finalise the evaluation process (positive-negative) in the journal. However, this time may be shorter or longer depending on the intensity of the journal.
10. At every stage of the process, a double-blind refereeing system is used in which the names of the referees and authors are kept confidential. The referees evaluate the manuscripts in terms of originality, timeliness, contribution to the literature, design of the research process (for research articles), discussion of the findings in terms of theories and practices in the relevant field, and reaching appropriate conclusions.
11. Attention is paid to ensure that all processes in the articles are reported in a clear, understandable and scientific language.
12. When the referee reports are completed during the evaluation process, the authors are contacted.
13. At the end of the evaluation process, the referees may "accept" or "reject" the article as it is or ask the authors to make "corrections".
14. In order for an article to be accepted for publication, at least two referees must give a favourable opinion. If one of the referee reports is "positive" and the other is "negative", the editor may send the manuscript to a third referee based on the referee reports, or may "reject" the manuscript if the criticisms of the referee are intense. In any case, referee reports and evaluation forms are shared with the authors.
15. The "corrections" suggested by the referees are notified to the authors. Authors are asked to complete the requested corrections or explain the reasons for not correcting the corrections. The manuscripts revised by the authors are uploaded to the system as a continuation of the same application procedures. You can download the ARTICLE CORRECTION FORM template from this link.
16. If the referees indicate in the evaluation form that they would like to see the manuscript after the corrections, the corrected version of the manuscript is resubmitted to the referees for evaluation (2nd round evaluation, 3rd round evaluation). If the referees do not wish to see the manuscript again after the corrections, the editors examine whether the referees' suggestions have been taken into consideration. If the requested or expected corrections are not made, the manuscript is "rejected".
17. When the evaluation process is completed positively, the manuscript is taken into the layout arrangement and reviewed in detail within the framework of journal writing rules, Turkish and English language review, APA6 writing principles. In this process, authors may be asked again to make arrangements in accordance with the journal format. After the approval of the authors after the final check, the article is placed in the publication queue. The articles in the publication queue are published in order of application and acceptance dates. Since a certain number of articles are published within the scope of MEUEFD, the decision regarding the number of articles to be published is under the authority of the Editor-in-Chief.
18. The authors are responsible for the content of the articles submitted to MEUEFD. It is assumed that all authors accept all responsibilities in the MEUEFD Declaration of Publication Ethics upon submission to the journal.
19. The suggestions of the referees and editors must be corrected and uploaded to the system within 30 days. The evaluation process of the articles without the necessary corrections within this period is terminated.

Mersin University Journal of Faculty of Education Declaration of Publication Ethics

MEUEFD is based on the ethical principles and recommendations of the following national and international organisations:
- Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
- International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE)
- YÖK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive
- Code of Ethical Conduct for Higher Education Institutions
- TUBITAK - Regulation on Research and Publication Ethics Board

C. Responsibilities of Editors

The editors of MEUEFD are responsible for the content and publication quality of the journal and in this context, they have the right to negotiate with the referees when making a publication decision. The editor-in-chief and editors of MEUEFD, within the framework of scientific and academic assumptions, are committed to the following in the evaluation process:

1. To provide a fair and equitable review and evaluation process for all articles,
2. To publish articles that can respond to the needs of researchers, readers and authors working in the field of education,
3. Not allowing unpublished material, personal information and data in the texts uploaded to the journal system during the application process to be used by third parties without the written permission of the authors,
4. To carry out the evaluation process in line with the principles of openness, transparency, scientificity and impartiality without any prejudice,
5. In the evaluation process, to act solely according to academic, scientific and social benefit criteria, regardless of the authors' "race, colour, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, nationality, political opinion, socio-economic" etc. characteristics,
6. To carefully examine the opinions, suggestions and complaints received from authors, referees or readers and to respond to them in an enlightening and explanatory manner,
7. Not to accept any academic, bureaucratic, commercial, political, etc. interference in the evaluation process,
8. To use timely, descriptive and academically mature language in communication during the evaluation process,
9. To answer the questions and information requests of journal authors, referees and readers about the journal processes in a short time,
10. To notify the relevant parties of the decisions taken at each stage of the evaluation process, together with their justifications,
11. To follow the evaluation process as soon as possible, in accordance with the journal standards, to minimise and finalise the problems,
12. Contributing to the improvement of the scientific quality of the articles by sending them to referees who are experts and researchers on the subject,
13. Not to send the manuscripts to referees with whom the authors may (may) have a relationship of interest,
14. Not to provide information to third parties about the content and evaluation process of the articles,
15. Concealing information that may lead to the identification of the author and referee during the evaluation process,
16. Not to interfere in any way with referee reports and decisions,
17. Not to store the information and documents uploaded to the Dergipark system by any method other than the Dergipark system during and after the evaluation process.

D. Responsibilities of Reviewers

1. The reviewer should evaluate the manuscript in accordance with the journal standards and academic acceptance. Otherwise, he/she should withdraw from the evaluation by notifying the journal editor.
2. In cases where he/she cannot or does not want to evaluate the manuscript due to reasons such as conflict of interest, lack of knowledge about the manuscript, personal or professional affinity, conflict of interest/conflict of interest, and time constraints, he/she should notify the editor.
3. Reviewed manuscripts should be treated as confidential documents, should not be shown to anyone other than those authorised by the editor, and should not be discussed with third parties. Privileged information and ideas obtained during the refereeing process should be kept confidential and should not be used for personal gain.
4. Referee criticisms should be made objectively, fairly and in accordance with scientific ethics. They should not reflect the personal opinions and views of the authors or the subject and content of the article.
5. Reviewers should express their opinions and suggestions about the study clearly and understandably in the report and cite scientific sources when necessary.
6. Reviewers should express and support their criticisms in such a way that the editor and the author can understand the points on which the criticisms are based.
7. Reviewers should express their opinions and criticisms in a scientific, constructive and courteous manner.
8. If there is another study that is very similar and overlapping with the evaluated article, the editor should be informed of the situation.
9. In cases where the content of the article is close to their own work and this may create a conflict of interest, the referees should send the manuscript back without reviewing it and inform the editor of the possible conflict or bias.
10. Reviewers should not have any conflict of interest with parties such as authors, funders, editors, etc.
11. Reviewers should assist editors in decision-making and should also be able to assist authors in improving manuscripts.
12. Reviewers should not exchange views on the manuscript with another researcher without the knowledge of the editor.
13. Reviewers should consider whether the manuscript has been conducted in accordance with ethical rules.
14. Reviewers should not expect to cite their own work or other studies in the field, but may recommend specific studies to the authors.
15. Reviewers should not use the manuscript in their own research before publication and should not allow others to use the manuscript.
16. Reviewers should evaluate the quality of the manuscript, the experimental and theoretical aspects of the work, its interpretation and presentation, adhering to scientific principles. They should respect the intellectual independence of the author.

E. Responsibilities of Authors

1. A study submitted to MEUEFD must be original and the authors must undertake that the text is original work that has not been previously published in any journal.
2. The data used in the study should be presented meticulously in the study. A study should contain sufficient detail and source information. Fraudulent and deliberate misrepresentation is unacceptable as it may lead to unethical situations.
3. Authors should strictly follow the journal template, spelling rules, and academic writing standards. In this context, they should fulfil the changes requested by the referee, editor or chief editor in a timely and meticulous manner.
4. All kinds of information, documents and changes related to the article requested by the journal editorial office from the authors should be sent via the system within 30 days at the latest and the editor should be informed. If the requests are not fulfilled within the deadline without a convincing justification, the authors are deemed to have withdrawn the article.
5. Authors should follow the current criteria of TR Index and organise their work within this framework.
6. "Ethics Committee Permission" must be obtained for all kinds of research conducted with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require data collection from participants using survey, interview, focus group study, observation, experiment, interview techniques.
7. In addition to ethics committee permission, it should be stated in the articles whether legal / special permission is required. If it is necessary to obtain these permissions, it should be clearly stated from which institution, on which date and with which decision or number number the permission was obtained. In addition, the relevant permissions must be obtained before the research is carried out and the necessary signatures must be present on the permission forms.
8. If the study requires the use of human or animal subjects, it should be declared that the study is carried out in accordance with international declarations, guidelines, etc.
9. In accordance with the personal data protection law, "Ethics Committee Permission" is required for retrospective studies.
10. For the use of scales, questionnaires, photographs belonging to others, permission must be obtained from the owners and this must be stated in the article.
11. In case presentations, it should be stated that the "Informed Voluntary Consent/Consent Form" has been obtained.
12. It should be stated that copyright regulations are complied with for the intellectual and artistic works used.
14. Authors should write completely original manuscripts and if they use the works and/or concepts of others, they should give appropriate citations.
15. By submitting an article to MEUEFD, authors guarantee that their articles are original and in accordance with ethical standards, that the references used are cited in full, and that they are not similar to other articles published or in the publication stage, except for the journal's acceptance limits. In this context, authors should upload a report stating that their work has a maximum of 15% similarity, including bibliography, by passing their work through a plagiarism detection software (ithenticate, turnitin, etc.) during the application.
16. Authors should not publish the text describing the same research in more than one article. It is unethical to submit the same study text to more than one journal at the same time.
17. References to other studies should be made appropriately (see JOURNAL TEMPLATE for detailed information). Authors must cite previous publications that affect the substance of their reported work.
18. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the problem, design, implementation, or interpretation of the reported work. All significant contributors should be listed in order of contribution. If there are individuals involved in various aspects of the research project, they should be declared or listed as contributors. The author responsible for the correspondence should ensure that all co-authors are included in the manuscript.
19. All authors are obliged to declare any financial resources or conflicts of interest that may influence the conclusions or interpretations of their work.
20. Authors are obliged to notify the editor of the journal immediately if they notice a significant error or omission in their manuscript and to co-operate with the editor for correction. Since MEUEFD is published through the DergiPark system, requests for changes should be made within 5 days at the latest from the date of publication of the journal. Authors have an obligation to co-operate with the editor to ensure that errors are corrected.
21. In the event that the author(s) realises an error or mistake regarding his/her work under review or editing, he/she has the obligation to cooperate with the journal editor in the withdrawal process. Author(s) who wish to withdraw their manuscript at the review stage are required to fill in the ARTICLE WITHDRAWAL FORM signed and scanned with the wet signature of each author and send it to the Editor of MEUEFD by e-mail. Unless the withdrawal request is approved by MEUEFD, manuscripts whose copyrights have been transferred cannot be sent to another journal for evaluation.

No fee is charged for any transaction at any stage of the publication process in MEUEFD. In the evaluation process, editors and referees carry out all procedures on a voluntary basis within the framework of academic and social benefit responsibility.