Educazione: Journal of Education and Learning is a peer-reviewed international journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal — the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer reviewer, and the publisher Al-Qalam Institute — as well as allegations of research misconduct. It is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It directly reflects the quality of the authors’ work and the institutions that support them. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.

Al-Qalam Institute, as the publisher, takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and recognizes its ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. The Institute and Editorial Board will also assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where useful and necessary.

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing an article, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board use the best practices of COPE to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly, including an investigation of the allegation. A submitted manuscript found to contain such misconduct will be rejected; for a published paper, a retraction can be issued and linked to the original article.

The first step determines the validity of the allegation, whether it is consistent with the definition of research misconduct, and whether those alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest. If misconduct or other substantial irregularities are possible, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who — on behalf of all coauthors — is requested to provide a detailed response. Additional review and expert involvement (such as statistical reviewers) may follow. For cases where misconduct is unlikely, clarifications or additional analyses published as letters to the editor, often with a correction notice, are sufficient.

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions share the obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately — through corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions — the journal continues to fulfill its responsibility for the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

• Contribution to Editorial Decisions — Peer review assists the editor in decisions and may help the author improve the paper.
• Promptness — A referee who feels unqualified or unable to review promptly should notify the editor and excuse themselves.
• Confidentiality — Manuscripts must be treated as confidential and not shown to or discussed with others unless authorised.
• Standards of Objectivity — Reviews should be objective; personal criticism is inappropriate. Views must be supported with arguments.
• Acknowledgement of Sources — Reviewers should flag relevant uncited work and any substantial overlap with other published papers.
• Disclosure & Conflict of Interest — Privileged information must stay confidential; reviewers should decline manuscripts where conflicts exist.

• Reporting Standards — Present an accurate account and objective discussion, with enough detail and references to permit replication. Fraudulent statements are unacceptable.
• Data Access & Reproducibility — Provide raw data for editorial review where practicable, retain it for a reasonable time, and ensure reproducibility.
• Originality & Plagiarism — Ensure works are entirely original; others’ work or words must be appropriately cited or quoted.
• Multiple / Redundant Publication — Do not publish the same research in more than one journal; concurrent submission is unacceptable.
• Acknowledgement of Sources — Always give proper acknowledgement and cite influential publications.
• Authorship & Contributorship — Limit authorship to significant contributors; others should be acknowledged. The corresponding author ensures all co-authors approved the final version.
• Disclosure & Conflicts of Interest — Disclose any financial or substantive conflicts and all sources of financial support.
• Fundamental Errors — Promptly notify the editor of significant errors in published work and cooperate to retract or correct it.

• Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)
  Read the Copyright Notice →
• Peer-Review Process Policy
  Read the Peer Review Process →