The ethical guidelines for the Maarif Schools International Journal of Educational Sciences (MM-IJES) are grounded in the Code of Conduct issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which is accessible at www.publicationethics.org.

The journal adheres to COPE's Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors as well as the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers.

Responsibilities of Editors

Equity and Editorial Independence

Editors assess manuscripts based solely on academic merit, including their significance, originality, validity of study, and clarity, as well as their alignment with the journal's focus. This evaluation is conducted without consideration of the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic background, nationality, religion, political beliefs, or institutional affiliations. Decisions about editing and publication are independent of external influences from government policies or other entities. The Editor-in-Chief retains complete control over the journal’s editorial content and publication timing.

Confidentiality

Editors and their staff are committed to maintaining confidentiality about manuscripts submitted to the journal. Information regarding a submission is disclosed only to the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher as deemed necessary.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and members of the editorial board will not exploit unpublished details divulged in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the explicit written permission of the authors. Any privileged information or insights gained through the editorial process must remain confidential and not be used for personal benefit. Editors will remove themselves from handling manuscripts where they perceive a conflict of interest resulting from connections or relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions involved with the submissions.

Publication Decisions

The editorial process ensures that all manuscripts considered for publication undergo rigorous peer review by at least two experts in the field. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on which manuscripts are suitable for publication, based on the reviewers’ evaluations, the manuscript’s relevance and impact, and compliance with legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Consultations with other editors or reviewers are part of this decision-making process.

Involvement and Cooperation in Ethical Investigations

When ethical issues arise concerning a submitted or published paper, editors, in collaboration with the publisher and/or the affiliated society, will take appropriate actions. All allegations of unethical publishing behavior are investigated, even if they are discovered years after publication. Editors follow COPE Flowcharts for handling cases of suspected misconduct. If ethical concerns are substantiated upon investigation, corrective actions such as corrections, retractions, or expressions of concern will be published.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

The peer review process is crucial in aiding editorial decisions and potentially helping the author improve their manuscript. It is an integral part of formal scholarly communication and fundamental to scientific endeavors.

Promptness

Reviewers who feel unqualified to review the research in a manuscript or know they cannot complete the review promptly should notify the editors immediately and decline the review to allow for the selection of alternative reviewers.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents and must not be disclosed or discussed with others unless authorized by the Editor-in-Chief under specific and exceptional circumstances. This applies even to reviewers who decline the review invitation.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively and articulated clearly with supporting arguments to facilitate authors in enhancing their manuscripts. Personal criticism is deemed inappropriate.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant works not cited by the authors and any significant similarity or overlap with the manuscript under review or any other known manuscript by the reviewer should be brought to the editors’ attention.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers with potential conflicts of interest pertaining to competitive, collaborative, or other connections with any of the entities related to the manuscript must notify the editors, declare their conflicts, and decline the review.

Unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used by the reviewer for personal research without the authors' explicit written consent, and any privileged information obtained must be kept confidential.

Author Responsibilities

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research must provide an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. The manuscript should include sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Reviews should be comprehensive and objective, and editorial opinion pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fabricating or knowingly presenting false information is unethical and unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be requested to provide the raw data of their study for editorial review and should be prepared to publicly share such data if feasible, ensuring it remains accessible to other professionals for at least ten years post-publication, with respect to the confidentiality of participants and legal rights concerning proprietary data.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure their works are entirely original and properly cite the work and words of others. Plagiarism in any form, including "passing off" another's work as one's own or copying substantial parts without attribution, is unethical and unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

Manuscripts describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is considered unethical. Where appropriate, secondary publication of certain types of articles may be justifiable, provided the conditions are met, and proper attribution to the primary publication is made.

Authorship Criteria

Only those who have made significant contributions to the conception, execution, or analysis of the study should be listed as authors. All those who have made substantial contributions should be acknowledged but not listed as authors if they do not meet the authorship criteria. Conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, must be disclosed early in the submission process.

Ethical Oversight

If the research involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with inherent hazards, these must be clearly identified. Studies involving animals or humans must adhere to institutional and legal requirements, and a statement regarding the approval from the relevant ethics committee must be included in the manuscript.

Participation in Peer Review

Authors are expected to engage in the peer review process and fulfill any related requests from editors, including providing raw data, clarifications, and evidence of ethical approval, and respond promptly to editorial decisions and comments.