A. Publication Principles
1. Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education (MEUJFE) includes theoretical and applied research with original content that can contribute to the theoretical and practical aspects of education in its issues.
2. For articles to be published in Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education (MEUJFE), they must not have been previously published, submitted for publication, or accepted elsewhere. Papers whose abstracts/extended abstracts have been presented at a scientific meeting may be accepted for the review process, provided this is clearly stated. Works that have been fully presented/published at a scientific event will not be included.
3. The authors mentioned during the article submission are responsible for the entire content of the work.
4. The review process is kept confidential and is not shared with third parties. Each work submitted to the journal is impartially reviewed by referees designated by the editors.
5. The chief editor and editors keep the peer review process confidential. During the review process, no characteristics other than the academic qualifications of the authors and reviewers (such as religion, language, race, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation, etc.) are taken into account.
6. When there is an allegation that an article submitted to a journal contains plagiarism in whole or in part, or is in the process of being published or has already been published elsewhere, the editor conducts necessary investigations. If the allegation is substantiated, the editor has the right to refuse publication of the article.
7. In the publication process of MEUJFE, no fees are requested at any stage. Editors and reviewers conduct all operations voluntarily, adhering to principles of academic and societal responsibility throughout the evaluation process.
8. Authors may withdraw their articles from consideration by providing a reasonable justification accepted by the journal's editorial board and signing the Article Withdrawal Form.
B. Evaluation Process
Article Submission
During the submission process, authors must ensure compliance with all items listed below. Submissions that do not adhere to this guide will be returned to the authors:
1. Articles in both Turkish and English are published in the Journal of Mersin University Faculty of Education.
2. Articles must be prepared according to the journal's writing guidelines. Therefore, authors should review these guidelines beforehand and use the "Article Template" file for submissions.
3. Articles should be uploaded into the system in two files: one formatted according to the journal's template that includes all author information, and another file that does not reveal authors' identities. Additionally, authors must upload a signed "Copyright Transfer Form" and an "Ethical Approval Permission Document" (obtained prior to conducting the relevant research and containing the necessary signatures).
4. A report indicating that articles submitted to the journal show a maximum of 15% similarity in plagiarism detection software must be uploaded into the system. For quotations from the same source, including the author's own publications, the similarity rate should be below 3%. Moreover, manuscripts that have completed the peer review process and deemed suitable for publication undergo a further plagiarism check by the journal.
5. Studies not prepared using the Article Template and lacking an "Extended Abstract" for Turkish studies or an "Extended Summary" for English studies will not be considered for evaluation. The "Extended Summary" must be at least 1500 words.
6. The Journal of Mersin University Faculty of Education publishes articles and academic analyses related to contemporary educational theories and practices. The journal values the contributions of educators engaged in any sub-discipline or interdisciplinary studies within the field of education. In this context, the scope of studies aligned with MEUJFE’s focus is outlined below.
These studies should:
• Adhere to the scientific writing principles and competencies of the relevant field, contributing significantly to the field's literature.
• Include data analysis techniques appropriate to the research objectives.
• Justify the selection of research type and the quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods used in this research type.
Article Acceptance and Rejection Processes
• Articles that do not fall within the scope of the journal upon initial review, deemed methodologically inadequate, or lacking required documents (such as ethics approval, copyright transfer, etc.) will be rejected.
• Articles rejected by two reviewers following the peer review process will be rejected.
• Articles whose authors fail to make requested revisions by the editors (chief editor, subject editor, language editors) and do not respond promptly to correspondence will be rejected.
• Articles found to violate ethical principles will be rejected.
• Articles discovered to have been submitted to another journal for publication while under review by the Mersin University Journal of the Faculty of Education will be rejected.
Initial Review Stage
The submitted manuscript undergoes an initial scrutiny by the secretariat (checking compliance with journal template, uploading mandatory documents, etc.). Subsequently, the editorial process commences, where the content of the submitted study is evaluated for its alignment with the scope of MEUJFE, originality, relevance, and its contribution to the field and practitioners — assessing its qualitative aspects. Manuscripts found not to meet the journal's acceptance criteria are either not considered for further evaluation or are requested revisions from the authors. Decisions regarding this are communicated to authors through the DergiPark system.
Evaluation Stage
Throughout the process, a double-blind peer review system is employed where the identities of both reviewers and authors are kept confidential. Reviewers assess the manuscripts based on their originality, relevance, contribution to the literature, research design (for research articles), discussion of findings in relation to relevant theories and practices in the field and reaching appropriate conclusions.
1. After the initial review, candidate manuscripts are sent to at least two expert reviewers who hold a minimum of a doctoral degree in the relevant field. Reviewers are given 7 days to accept the review invitation and 15 days to complete their evaluations, which may be extended upon request.
2. Reviewers submit their reports and evaluation forms within the specified deadlines. Invitations to review or deadlines for completing review reports are canceled if reviewers fail to respond within the allocated time, and the process is repeated for a new reviewer. Therefore, the duration of the evaluation process may vary depending on reviewers' acceptance of invitations and timely submission of reports.
3. The completion of the review process (positive or negative) in the journal can take an average of 6-8 months. However, this timeline may be shortened or extended based on the journal's workload.
4. It is ensured that all processes in manuscripts are documented in a clear, understandable, and scientific language.
5. Authors are contacted when reviewer reports are completed during the evaluation process.
6. At the end of the evaluation process, reviewers may accept the manuscript as is, reject it, or request revisions from the authors.
7. For a manuscript to be accepted for publication, it requires positive opinions from at least two reviewers. In cases where one reviewer provides a positive opinion and the other provides a negative opinion, the editor may send the manuscript to a third reviewer based on the reviewer reports, or reject the manuscript if the criticisms from the revising reviewer are substantial. In any outcome, reviewer reports and evaluation forms are shared with the authors.
8. Authors are informed of corrections suggested by reviewers. Authors are required to complete the requested corrections or provide reasons for not making them with explanations. Revised manuscripts reviewed by the authors are uploaded into the system as part of the same submission process continuation.
9. If reviewers specify changes they wish to see in the evaluation form after corrections, the revised version of the manuscript is sent back to the reviewers for re-evaluation (2nd round evaluation, 3rd round evaluation). If reviewers do not wish to see the study again after corrections, whether the reviewer suggestions have been considered is examined by the editors. If the requested corrections are not made, the manuscript is rejected.
Publication Stage
1. Once the review process is completed positively, the manuscript undergoes typesetting and is meticulously reviewed according to the journal's writing guidelines, plagiarism assessment, Turkish and English language editing, and APA 7 writing principles. During this stage, authors may be requested to make further adjustments to ensure compliance with the journal's format. After final checks and obtaining approval from the authors, the manuscript is queued for publication. Articles queued for publication are arranged based on their submission and acceptance dates. The decision regarding which issue a manuscript will be published in within MEUJFE’s scope is at the discretion of the chief editor, considering the specific number of articles to be published.
2. Authors are responsible for the content of manuscripts submitted to MEUJFE. By submitting to the journal, it is assumed that all authors accept full responsibility as outlined in the MEUJFE Publication Ethics Statement.
3. Recommendations from reviewers and editors must be addressed within 15 days and uploaded into the system. Manuscripts that are not corrected within this timeframe will have their evaluation process terminated.
C. Editors' Ethical Responsibilities
MEUJFE editors are responsible for the content and publication quality of the journal, and in this context, they have the right to negotiate with reviewers when making publication decisions. The chief editor and editors of MEUJFE commit to the following principles within the framework of scientific and academic standards during the evaluation process:
1. Ensure a fair and equitable peer review process for all manuscripts.
2. Publish articles that meet the needs of researchers, readers, and authors in the field of education.
3. Prohibit the use of unpublished materials, personal information, and data uploaded to the journal system during submission without written permission from the authors by third parties.
4. Conduct the review process with transparency, openness, scientific rigor, and impartiality, without any bias.
5. Base decisions during the review process solely on academic, scientific, and societal benefit criteria.
6. Thoughtfully and clearly respond to feedback, suggestions, and complaints from authors, reviewers, or readers.
7. Reject any form of academic, bureaucratic, commercial, political, or other interference during the review process.
8. Use timely, clear, and academically mature language in communications during the review process.
9. Address questions and information requests related to journal processes from authors, reviewers, and readers.
10. Inform relevant parties of decisions made at each stage of the review process along with the reasons behind them.
11. Expedite the review process promptly and in accordance with journal standards, minimizing delays and ensuring completion.
12. Enhance the scientific quality of manuscripts by sending them to expert reviewers and researchers in the relevant field.
13. Avoid sending manuscripts to reviewers who may have conflicts of interest with the authors.
14. Maintain confidentiality regarding the content of manuscripts and the review process with third parties.
15. Conceal information that could reveal the identities of authors and reviewers during the review process.
16. Refrain from interfering with peer review reports and decisions in any way.
17. Store information and documents uploaded to the DergiPark system during and after the review process exclusively within the DergiPark system, without using any external methods.
D. Responsibilities of Reviewers
1. Reviewers should evaluate the assigned manuscript in accordance with the journal's standards and academic norms. If unable to do so, they should withdraw from the review process and notify the journal editor.
2. Reviewers must inform the editor if they cannot review a manuscript due to reasons such as lack of expertise in the field, potential conflicts of interest, personal or professional relationships, or time constraints.
3. Reviewed manuscripts should be treated as confidential documents, not to be disclosed to unauthorized persons by reviewers. Reviewers should refrain from discussing manuscripts with third parties and should keep privileged information and ideas obtained during the review process confidential, avoiding personal gain.
4. Reviewer critiques should be objective, fair, and adhere to scientific ethics. Reviewers should refrain from reflecting personal opinions or biases in their evaluations of the manuscript's content, topic, or context.
5. Reviewers should express their opinions and suggestions regarding the manuscript clearly and comprehensibly in their reports, citing scientific sources when necessary.
6. Reviewers should articulate their criticisms in a manner that editors and authors can understand and support the points on which their critiques are based.
7. Reviewers should provide their opinions and criticisms in a scientific, constructive, and courteous manner.
8. If reviewers become aware of another study closely resembling or overlapping significantly with the evaluated manuscript, they should inform the editor.
9. Reviewers should promptly return manuscripts without review and inform the editor of potential conflicts of interest or bias if the content closely aligns with their own work, which could create a conflict of interest.
10. Reviewers should ensure they have no conflicts of interest with authors, funders, editors, etc.
11. Reviewers should refrain from discussing the manuscript with other researchers without the editor's knowledge.
12. Reviewers should consider whether the research and reporting adhere to ethical standards.
13. Reviewers should not have expectations regarding citations to their own work or others' work, but may recommend specific studies to authors.
14. Reviewers should not use or allow others to use the reviewed manuscript in their own research before it is published.
15. Reviewers should evaluate the manuscript's quality, experimental and theoretical aspects, interpretation, and presentation according to scientific principles, respecting the authors' intellectual independence.
E. Authors' Ethical Responsibilities
1. A submission to MEUJFE must be original. Authors must affirm that the manuscript represents original work that has not been previously published in any journal.
2. Data used in the study must be presented meticulously. A manuscript should include sufficient detail and citation information. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unacceptable due to ethical concerns.
3. Authors must adhere strictly to the journal template, writing guidelines, and academic writing standards. In this context, any changes requested by the reviewers, editors, or chief editor must be promptly and carefully addressed.
4. Authors must submit any requested information, documents, or changes related to their manuscript to the system within the specified timeframe and inform the editor accordingly. Failure to comply with requests within the specified timeframe without a convincing reason will be considered as the authors withdrawing their manuscript.
6. Ethical Committee Approval must be obtained for all types of research involving data collection from participants using qualitative or quantitative approaches such as surveys, interviews, focus groups, observations, experiments, or interviews.
7. Manuscripts must indicate whether legal or special permissions were required. If such permissions were necessary, the source institution, date of approval, and decision or reference number must be clearly stated. Relevant permissions must have been obtained before conducting the research, and the necessary signatures must be present on the permission forms.
8. If the study involves the use of human or animal subjects, authors must declare that the study was conducted in accordance with international ethical declarations, guidelines, etc.
9. Retrospective studies require Ethics Committee Approval according to the Law on Protection of Personal Data.
10. Permission must be obtained from owners for the use of scales, surveys, photographs belonging to others, and must be acknowledged in the manuscript. Compliance with copyright regulations for intellectual and artistic works used must be stated.
11. For case reports, it must be stated that "Informed Consent Form" has been obtained.
12. By submitting manuscripts to MEUJFE, authors guarantee that their manuscripts are original, adhere to ethical standards, ensure that references to sources are complete and appropriate, and do not overlap with published or under-review articles beyond 15% similarity including bibliography. In this context, authors must submit a report indicating that their study has been passed through a plagiarism detection software (such as iThenticate, Turnitin, etc.) and that it has a maximum of %15 similarity rate with references at the time of submission.
13. Authors should not include personal information in the manuscript; they can refer to themselves, but in the main text, references should be made as "author, year" (Author, 2013, for example) or regardless of the number or real names of the authors, as "Author et al., year" (Author et al., 2013, for example).
14. Authorship should be limited to persons who have made a significant contribution to the problem, design, implementation, or interpretation of the reported study. All contributors who have made significant contributions should be listed according to their contribution rates. If individuals who have been involved in various aspects of the research project are present, they should be declared or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure the inclusion of all contributing authors in the study.
15. All authors are responsible for disclosing any financial sources or conflicts of interest that may affect the conclusions or interpretations of their study.
16. Authors are obliged to promptly notify the journal editor and collaborate with the editor to correct any significant error or omission in their study when they notice it after publication on the MEÜEFD DergiPark system. Change requests must be made within 5 days of the journal publication. Authors have a duty to work with the editor to correct errors.
17. Authors who identify any mistakes or errors in the assessment or editing stage should cooperate with the journal editor in case of withdrawal process. If the authors who wish to withdraw the study from the evaluation stage must fill in the scanned Article Withdrawal Form signed with wet ink by each author and send it to the MEUJFE Editor via e-mail. The MEUJFE should not send manuscripts whose copyrights have been transferred to another journal without the approval of the request for withdrawal.
Reporting Unethical Behavior to the Editor
In Mersin University Journal of Education Faculty (MEUJFE), if there is any unethical behavior related to editors, reviewers, authors, or if there is an unethical situation encountered during the evaluation process, early preview, or published article, it should be reported via email to egitimdergisi@mersin.edu.tr.
Open Access Policy
The content of articles published in Mersin University Journal of Education Faculty is freely accessible to users and institutions. Users of the journal may read, download, copy, and link to the articles published in this journal without asking permission from the publisher or author, provided they do not use the materials for commercial purposes and give appropriate credit, under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license.
Copyright Regulation
Once articles are published in the journal, the publishing rights belong to the journal. All articles published in the journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) license, which permits sharing by others.
December 22, 2025
Page
726-741
