SDU International Journal of Educational Studies applies the most advanced principles on ethical issues, errors or abandonment. It is one of the most important responsibilities of the editorial team to avoid giving up the publication of the works. No type of unethical behavior is acceptable. SDU International Journal of Educational Studies is insensitive to any form of abuse of other studies. The content in the studies submitted to the journal is deemed to have been declared original (original sources).
The obligations set out below for editors, authors and reviewers are based on the "Journal Editors Code of Conduct" (COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors). Editors, authors and referees are obliged to comply with journal application and evaluation procedures.
Publishing Decisions: The editor is responsible for making the decision to publish the submitted articles. The editor evaluates the article recommendations without considering the ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, nationality or political views of the authors. The editorial decision is based on the importance, originality, clarity of the study as well as the validity of the study and the suitability of the journal for its purpose.
Confidentiality: The editorial team cannot share appropriate information about the work with the responsible writer, referees, editorial board members, and individuals or institutions other than the broadcaster.
Disclosure and opinion disagreements: Unpublished content in the article recommendation cannot be used by members of the editorial team for their own research purposes without the written permission of the author.
Obligations of Referees
Duration: Referees should report this to the editor and refrain from the evaluation process when they do not consider themselves sufficient about the content of the article proposal or think that they cannot evaluate it within the specified time.
Confidentiality: Any article proposal sent for evaluation purposes should be accepted as a confidential document.
Non-flammability standards: Evaluations should be made unbiased. Individual criticism of the author should not be made. Referees should express their views clearly, along with supporting arguments.
Representation of references: Referees should indicate relevant studies that have been previously published but not specified in the study. They should indicate whether appropriate citations are made from quotes from other sources. The referees should inform the editor about the similarities or similarities between the article proposal and the previously published works.
Disclosure and differences of opinion: Private data or thoughts seen in the evaluation process should not be used for personal benefit. Referees should not consider any conflict of interest or competition arising from authors, companies and institutions involved in the study.
Reporting standards: Authors should state their originality as well as their objectivity regarding the importance of their work. Article recommendations should comply with journal application guidelines. (See application areas)
Originality: The authors should state that their work is original.
Multiple, dysfunctional or repetitive studies: Authors should not refer to more than one journal at a time. It is also expected that the authors will not publish their work in another journal in the future.
Representation of the sources: The authors should indicate the sources of the data they use in their work, and reference should be made to the relevant studies required in the research.
Authorship: Authorship should be limited to a significant contribution to the conceptualization, patterning, implementation or interpretation stages included in the article proposal. In addition, the authors should confirm the accuracy of their information regarding the names and that all contributing authors see the article proposal.
Data Access and Protection: Authors should present unprocessed data related to article proposals to the editor and protect it for necessary cases.
Key errors in published work: At any time, when authors notice a significant error or uncertainty, they should report the error or uncertainty to the editor.