Contribution: Individuals listed as authors in the study must have made scientific contributions to the study. Individuals who have not made scientific contributions to the content should not be listed as authors in the study.

Republication: A study that has been previously published in another journal cannot be submitted to Marmara University Atatürk Faculty of Education Journal of Fundamental Education Research.

The ethical responsibilities of authors represent a strict standard in scientific research and publication. These standards include ensuring the originality and contribution of research, disclosing conflicts of interest, ensuring transparency in data provision and use, cooperating with journal editors, limiting resubmission of published work, and making changes to the author list. These responsibilities must be followed meticulously to protect the integrity of science and ensure the trust of readers. These ethical principles are the cornerstones of maintaining standards of reliability and quality in the scientific community.

Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of Editors
Editors, associate editors, and field editors of Journal of Basic Education Research should have the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the "COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" and "COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors" published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as open access:

Unbiased Evaluation: Editors should focus solely on the scientific content when evaluating manuscripts, without taking into account personal characteristics of authors such as ethnicity, gender, religious beliefs or political views.

Double-Blind Review: A fair double-blind review process should be applied to ensure objective evaluation of manuscripts.

Confidentiality: All information regarding submitted articles must be kept confidential until published.

Quality and Correction: Editors are responsible for the content and quality of the journal and must publish corrections when necessary.

Conflict of Interest: Editors should not permit any conflict of interest or competing interests between authors, other editors, or reviewers.

Authority to Appoint Referees: The editor has full authority to appoint referees and is responsible for the final decision regarding the publication of the manuscript.

Development: The editor must ensure the continuous development of the journal.

Decision Criteria: Editors should make decisions based on the importance, originality, validity, and clarity of expression of studies.

Blind Peer Review Process: The blind peer review and evaluation process should be clearly defined and deviations should be avoided.

Author Guidelines: A detailed guide for authors should be published and updated regularly.

Notification and Feedback: Authors should be provided with explanatory and informative feedback.

Personal Data Protection: Editors must ensure the protection of personal data of subjects or images included in studies and reject studies if the explicit consent of individuals is not documented. They are also responsible for protecting the individual data of authors, reviewers and readers.

Intellectual Property Protection: Editors must protect the intellectual property rights of published articles and defend the rights of journals and authors in the event of infringement. They must also take precautions to ensure that articles do not infringe the intellectual property rights of other publications.

Complaint Management: Editors should carefully review complaints from authors, reviewers or readers and respond to these complaints in an informative and explanatory manner.

Political and Commercial Concerns: The journal owner, publisher, or any other political or commercial element does not influence the independent decision-making of the editors.

Conflict of Interest Management: Editors should ensure that the publication process of the studies is completed independently and impartially, taking into account conflicts of interest between authors, referees and other editors.

Editors and associate editors are responsible for ensuring the integrity and reliability of the journal by adopting principles such as impartiality, confidentiality, quality management, conflict of interest management and personal data protection within the framework of ethical values.

Ethical Responsibilities of the Referee

Referees, who are a fundamental element in the academic publishing process, have an important role in determining the quality and reliability of the studies to be published. In this context, the responsibilities of the referees include the following:
Impartial Evaluation: Referees should focus only on the scientific content when evaluating the articles, without considering the personal characteristics of the authors.
Conflict of Interest: Referees should not have any conflict of interest or competition with the research, authors or sponsors.
Objectivity: Referees' decisions should be impartial and objective.
Indication of Related Publications: Referees should indicate publications that are relevant but not cited to the authors.
Confidentiality and Violation Notification: Referees should keep all information about the submitted articles confidential and report any copyright infringement or plagiarism to the editor.
Suitability and Requesting Forgiveness: If the referee believes that a manuscript is not suitable for his/her area of ​​expertise or cannot be evaluated quickly, he/she should inform the editor and request his/her forgiveness from the evaluation process.
Expertise: Referees should agree to evaluate only studies that fall within his/her area of ​​expertise.
Impartiality and Confidentiality: Referees should evaluate impartially and in accordance with the principle of confidentiality.

Reviewers must evaluate the ethics section of the journal in accordance with impartiality, objectivity, absence of conflict of interest, indication of relevant publications, confidentiality and violation notification, suitability and request for forgiveness, expertise and impartiality, and confidentiality.

When an Unethical Situation is Encountered,

If you encounter any unethical behavior or content in the Journal of Basic Education Research, outside of the ethical responsibilities mentioned above, please report it via e-mail to tead@marmara.edu.tr 

ARTICLE EVALUATION PROCESS
Articles submitted to Marmara University Atatürk Faculty of Education Journal of Fundamental Education Research (TEAD) are evaluated in the following stages through a two-way blind refereeing process, in which the identities of the authors and the referees are concealed from the reviewers:

Preliminary Review Process
Articles sent to Marmara University Atatürk Faculty of Education Journal of Fundamental Education Research (TEAD) are evaluated by the editors through a preliminary review. At this stage, articles that do not comply with TEAD's purpose, scope and publication policies, do not comply with the rules of language and expression, have deficiencies/errors in the research method, do not comply with ethical principles, are not original and have a high rate of similarity are rejected. Authors of rejected studies are informed within 10 days from the date of submission at the earliest. Studies that are deemed appropriate are taken into preliminary evaluation.

Similarity-Originality Checking
It is mandatory for the article submitted to Marmara University Atatürk Faculty of Education Journal of Fundamental Education Research (TEAD) and every article that reaches the publication stage to be checked for plagiarism in order to determine the similarity-originality status. Similarity-plagiarism checks are performed by the automatic similarity-plagiarism check provided by the Dergipark system ( intihal.net) when the authors upload their articles to the journal , and also by the editors using the iThenticate program. Articles with a similarity rate of more than 20% are rejected by the Editorial Board.

Preliminary Evaluation
For the preliminary evaluation of articles deemed appropriate, they are sent to the field editor related to the subject of the article. The article sent to the field editor is examined in terms of the titles to be included in the article; the introduction to the literature, method, findings and comments, discussion-conclusion and recommendations sections, the scope of the journal and publication policies, originality and up-to-dateness. The field editor reports the results of the review to the editor with a report. The editor rejects articles deemed inappropriate by the field editor in the preliminary evaluation. The field editor also sends the referee recommendations for the articles deemed appropriate to the editor with the review report. As a result of this review, the studies deemed inappropriate are returned to the author with the editorial evaluation report within 15 days at the latest. The studies deemed appropriate are taken into the referee evaluation process.

Referee Process
For candidate articles sent to the Journal of Basic Education Research, at least two referees are assigned according to the content of the studies and the referees' areas of expertise. Care is taken not to assign referees from the institution where the author(s) work, from those who have conflicts of interest or common interests with the author(s), from those whose fields are not related to the article, from the thesis advisor or from the thesis jury members. More than one article is not sent to the same referee for evaluation in one issue of the journal. Referees cannot share any process or document about the studies they evaluate.

Article Evaluation Criteria
Referees evaluate articles according to the following criteria:

Introduction: Whether the theoretical framework of the research topic and its equivalent in the scientific literature, the problem of the research, its aims/hypotheses are included in the introduction section.

Method: Whether the research model, limitations, sample/study groups, data collection tools (validity and reliability), data collection/implementation/experimental process, data analysis and explanations about the ethical process of the research are included in the method section.

Findings: Whether the problem of the study is explained with tables, figures, graphics/pictures that are related to its aim/hypothesis and that maintain integrity.

Discussion, Conclusion and Recommendations: Whether the findings obtained are discussed with the literature and author comments in the context of the research problem, purpose/hypothesis, whether the results are explained as the main ideas emerging in the focus of the discussions, whether the suggestions are appropriate for the discussion and conclusion of the study, whether they will contribute to the literature, whether they are aimed at future studies and applications in the field,

General Evaluation: It includes the referee's opinion on the content of the candidate study title, the proper use of Turkish, the provision of sources and references in accordance with APA 7 rules, the originality of the study as a whole, and its contribution to the educational literature and applications in the field.

Referee Evaluation Process

The referee evaluation process is a maximum of 3 weeks. The period may be extended if necessary upon the request of the referee. It is mandatory for the authors to make correction suggestions from the referees or editors on the article within 15 days. Referees can decide on the appropriateness of the author's corrections in a study and may request corrections from the author more than once if necessary. The author must complete the requested correction and improvement suggestions completely, descriptively and on time and upload them to the journal system. The opinions received from the referees are reviewed by the editor and his assistants within 1 week. Following this review, the editor communicates the results of the study to the Editorial Board.