The Chief Editor, Editorial Board and publisher of the European Journal of STEM Education believe that ethical guidelines should be respected and upheld in the publishing of all academic journals, and the ownership of intellectual property be recognised and acknowledged.

Statement on Diversity and Equality

As a journal, European Journal of STEM Education, as a founding principle of ethics, supports diversity, equality, and social inclusion, particularly in the representation of minority groups. We are committed to representing all peoples with fairness, dignity and respect, regardless of age, health or disability, gender, marital status, pregnancy and parental responsibility, race, ethnicity, religion and belief, social class, caste, or sexual orientation (or any other form of cultural or social axis of potential discrimination). In general, as academic publishers, we support the right to self-expression and freedom of speech, and we believe it is necessary and important to engage with difficult topics which will in some cases may cause offense to social or cultural groups. We also recognise and acknowledge that as a journal involved in developmental and societal debates, some content may occasionally prove to cause offense to members of the public. We strongly support the principal of supporting minority voices, particularly those who have been traditionally excluded from academic fora. As a journal, we strive to be anti-censorship and support the principles of open and honest debate within an academic context; nevertheless we will also aim to avoid causing unnecessary hurt or harm to minority social groups or cultures, particularly in the use of stereotyped or demeaning, reductive representations (whether in image or words). Authors should take care when publishing images of objects or subjects that might have cultural significance which potentially could cause offense. The Chief Editor on behalf of the Editorial Board and Lectito reserves the right to refuse articles that may cause offense or hurt and/or are perceived to be violations of human dignity.

Conflicts of interest

The scientific reliability of the published articles is important, and thus any conflict of interest on the side of the author, peer-reviewer or the editors should be declared and avoided. These conflicts of interest can be on the personal, financial, political, academic or religious level. Authors, peer-reviewers or editors should, whenever these are relevant to the content being considered or published, declare their interests and affiliations, so that the appropriate measures can be taken by the Chief Editor on behalf of the Editorial Board. If necessary and in exceptional circumstances, a qualifying statement can be made in the journal that a specific person has a personal, financial, political, academic or religious conflict of interest with the topic.

Where there is a declared conflict of interest, alternative peer reviewers will be sought. Authors can also be prevented to publish their article in the journal if there is a clear conflict of interest. The existence of a conflict of interest should however not prevent someone of being included in the list of authors, if they qualify for authorship.

Funding

Readers should know who funded the research project or the publication of a document. This can be public or private funding through a charity or government department, university or commercial company. And so:

• Funders of a paper, in the form of persons, organizations, research institutions, companies or any other form should be mentioned.
• The role of the research funders or any other research contributors in the design or preparation of the article should be mentioned, if they are not mentioned in the list of authors. They can, for example, be mentioned in acknowledgment.
• If a funder wants to publish a supplement or separate section in an alternative publication within 2 years of publication in European Journal of STEM Education, they should ask for the permission of Lectito. Applications will be handled on a case by case basis.

Authors

All contributors and their sources have to be properly acknowledged in the article’s publication according to guidelines. Guidelines on notes and references can be found here.

Authors of research papers should state whether they had complete access to the research data that supports the article and if not, they should state this in the article.

When the article is written by a group of authors, the individual authors who have direct responsibility for the manuscript should be mentioned. When a group author manuscript is submitted, the corresponding author should indicate the preferred citation or acronym of the group name as well the names of the individual authors.

COPE also provides extensive resources on authorship and authorship disputes, and we encourage anyone involved in editorial decisions to familiarise themselves with these resources.

Confidentiality

It is important that authors and peer-reviewers handle all information carefully and that informants and research subjects are protected in respect of confidentiality.

Across the scholarly disciplines, there are variations in practice and standards around privacy and confidentiality. In educational sciences, written consent of subjects or their parents/caretakers is important. This must be obtained where relevant, such as in questionnaire, observation or intervention studies, and must be available for the journal to see if requested. Authors should strive to treat the privacy of research subjects with as much care as possible and anonymise the data unless otherwise requested by the participant.

The journal's policy requires that authors who discuss a clinical trial, demonstrate that the clinical trial is registered in a publicly accessible database. Authors should include the name of the trial register and their clinical trial registration number at the end of their abstract. If you wish the editor[s] to consider an unregistered trial, please explain briefly why the trial has not been registered.

Peer Review Policy

Double Blind Peer Review

European Journal of STEM Education upholds sector standards of international excellence in academic publishing. This journal maintains a double-blind peer review policy, in which both the reviewers and the author/s are anonymous. To facilitate this, authors have to anonymize their manuscripts to ensure that their identity has not been given away in the article’s content.

Peer review is an important process of evaluation, designed to keep the quality of scholarly work high. The process aims to give constructive feedback to the authors, so that their work can become of the highest academic standard possible. Peer reviews are also helping editors to decide the paper’s suitability for publication in the journal. As a principle, European Journal of STEM Education will not accept peer reviews that contain harsh or discriminatory comments, that are unduly negative or could be unduly biased toward a specific ideological or disciplinary position, or due to a range of reasons that result in an over-critical judgment. We wish to support scholars, particularly those who are at an early stage of their research career or have not benefitted from training at an elite institution. Our peer review system is primarily designed to support authors in developing their work, and therefore peer reviewers must provide overall supportive and constructive criticism in aiding the author/s to develop and improve their submission and learn how better to compose a publishable article.

Timely Reviews

We ask reviewers to provide review reports in a timely manner, in order to help the journal to provide a high quality publishing service that benefits the global scientific community. Please contact the editorial office if you need a deadline extension of your review.

A Step by Step Reviewer’s Guide:

1. Investigate the article’s content in the light of the mission statement of European Journal of STEM Education and the guidelines for authors:
   • Does the article meet the submission criteria (aims, length, scope and presentation) of the journal?
2. Make an assessment of the article:
   • Is the research relevant?
     • Is the information sufficiently novel and of potential interest to an international readership of educational researchers, teachers, teacher educators and/or educational policy makers?
     • Does the research contribute to the body of educational knowledge and theory?
   • Is the methodology correct?
     • Is the research question clearly formulated and underpinned by a state-of-the-art description of what is already known through the literature?
     • Are the methods for answering the research question clearly defined and adequate?
     • Is the data analysis, be it quantitative or qualitative or mixed methods, accurate and in line with scholarly standards?
     • Are all conclusions justified and supported by the results?
   • What is the quality of the presentation?
     • Is the article clearly structured, using subheadings and suitable signposts?
     • Are the important concepts defined?
     • Is the English language level sufficient?
     • Have all the references and sources been presented in the publisher’s house style?
   • Is the article scientifically sound? 
     • Is the same information already published before, either by the same author or by another scientist?
     • Are the data robust enough to warrant the conclusions?
     • Are the references to other scholarly works sufficient and complete?
     • Is there a concluding paragraph discussing shortcomings, limitations, practical applications and suggestions for further research?
     • Is the article free of fraud, plagiarism or any other unethical behavior?
3. Write a review report:
   • Follow the steps on the review form.
     Keep in mind: As a reviewer, you may disagree with the author’s opinions, but if these are consistent with the available evidence, you should allow them to stand. If you provide feedback, you are required to give constructive criticism. Positive feedback as well as negative feedback can help an author to improve the manuscript.
   • Make a recommendation: 
     • Accept: if the manuscript can be published in its current form.
     • Accept after minor changes: if the manuscript needs revisions that you estimate are feasible by the authors, such as pertaining to definitions of concepts, references to recent literature, language issues.
     • Accept only after major revisions and a new review: for example, when the theoretical framework is inadequate; when the research questions are ill-defined; when the methodology is unsound; when important data is lacking; when more research or additional data analysis is necessary; when the conclusions are not warranted by the data; when the style of writing is unscholarly; and other issues you estimate will take a serious effort to address.
     • Reject: if the paper is not suitable for publication within this journal or if the revisions that would have to be undertaken are too fundamental.
4. Some things to keep in mind:
   • Use appropriate language in addressing your comments to the author. Carefully construct your comments so that the author understands fully what to improve. Generalized and vague statements should be avoided, along with negative comments that are not supported with arguments. Lectito editors never edit reviewer comments and thus we ask you to use appropriate language. Confidential comments to the editors can be made on the review form in the special box assigned for it.
   • The European Journal of STEM Education requires that reviewers give suggestions to the author how to improve clarity, succinctness and overall quality of the manuscript particularly in the case of required revisions or reject.

Confidentiality

Reviewers should not share the content of the manuscript, including the abstract, with someone else. Double blind peer review is a confidential process in which both the author and reviewer should be careful to keep the content confidential. Reviewers are requested to inform the editorial office if they prefer a colleague to write the review on their behalf.

Misconduct: dealing with misconduct and retraction

Misconduct is the intention to deceive readers by giving false data, result or interpretation. Hereby we follow principles of honesty and full transparency.  Research found to have fraudulent content or demonstrates evidence of misconduct thereby will be retracted. Where mistakes are considered minor or incidental then corrections are acceptable. We follow the retraction guideline of COPE.

In line with COPE guidelines, editors will withdraw a publication if:

• they have clear proof that the findings are inaccurate, fabricated or falsified;  
• the findings have been previously published elsewhere without sufficient acknowledgment to earlier sources, notification to the editor, permission to republish, or justification or if it contains material or data that is not authorized for use.
• if a copyright has been violated, or there is another major legal problem (eg, libel, privacy)
• if research found to be unethical. It is the editor's decision to take act.  Editors must take all complaints and suspicion of misbehaviour seriously, but they must also recognize that they may not always have the legal authority or the resources to launch significant investigations. So, if there is a judicial procedure about copyright violation or any other legal procedure retraction process will not be involved.

The retraction process will not be involved if it can be corrected. Authors should always be given a chance to reply to the claim.

Editors of the journal have the right to alert potential misconduct to appropriate agents (for example, funders, employers or the editorial board). Authors and peer-reviewers have the right to respond to allegations and for investigations to be carried out with due diligence. An allegation should be substantiated and proved right or wrong by the editors.

When errors affect the interpretation of information, the journal has the right to publish 'corrections' (errata), whatever the cause of the error. Likewise, the journal has the right to publish 'retractions' if work is proven to be fraudulent or 'expressions of concern' when there is a suspicion of misconduct. Depending on the size of the misconduct, the author's institution may be informed, and the author can be refused for a time to publish in the academic journals of Lectito.

The journal uses the software of iThenticate to detect plagiarism. Plagiarism or duplication of another text is forbidden even if it is an author's previous publication. No more than 10% of any new submission content may be previously published by the author/s previous works. Plagiarism includes misappropriation or theft of intellectual property by copying another's work (including the author’s own, if previously published). Authors must thereby avoid duplication of another's research and must always make explicit what the source of their information is. The way to refer to sources is set out by the submission guidelines of the journal. The journal has the right to refuse publishing articles that are suspected of duplicating another's work.

Duplication is not applicable to the copying of information from an unpublished university dissertation or thesis, posters or abstracts or results presented at meetings or conferences, provided that it is the author's own work. Results in databases and clinical trials registries can also be duplicated.

Authors that translate and publish material that has been published elsewhere should ensure that they have appropriate permissions. They should always identify the source of the original material.

In rare circumstances, we reserve the right to delete an item from online publication if we feel it is essential to comply with our legal duties. This includes, but is not limited to, situations in which we believe the article is libellous, breaches personal privacy or confidentiality laws, is the subject of a court order, or may constitute a major health danger to the broader public. In such cases we have the responsibility to inform the owner of copyright. In such cases where whole paper is deleted we will write an announcement explaining why the whole item was deleted which also explained in the next part, sanctions of misconduct.

Sanctions of misconduct

These sanctions may be conducted separately, mixed, in order or all together.  These sanctions are stated respectively:

• A letter to the author explaining misconduct, and asking for correction or explanation. 
• A letter of criticism for future misconduct. 
• A letter to head of the institution.
• Publication of a notice of redundant publication or plagiarism.
• A refusal letter to author to not accept future submissions.
• Retraction of paper.
• Informing other authorities and scientific journals.

Media Relations

Some scientific findings are in the interest of community, mainstream, and social media.  So, publishers, editors and writers can contact the media or publish findings on social media. While doing this they will give precise information, fair summary of work and exact findings to the media to prevent speculation. Publishers will also inform authors if journalists are invited to a meeting.

Advertising

Advertising may be an important source of revenue for many scientific publications.

On our online academic content platform, the publisher may allow for restricted, suitable, and occasionally targeted advertising. We have the right to refuse or delete any advertisement that we believe violates the ethical issues or influences editors, authors, and the public in a decisive way or violates any code of ethics.

In this direction we are careful that editorial procedures should not be affected by ad income: editorial and marketing management should be completely separated.

Misleading advertisements will be rejected, and editors must be prepared to publish comments that meet the same standards as the rest of the journal's content.

License & Copyright

Open Access

This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.

License & Copyright

Copyright on any article is retained by the author(s). Regarding copyright usage, please see below.

Authors grant Lectito Journals a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher.

Authors give any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its original authors and citation details are identified.

The article and any associated published material are distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0):

Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0)

Under the principles of the ‘Creative Commons’, anyone is free:

• to Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• to Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material
  for any purpose, even commercially.

Under the following conditions:

• Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

Click https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/  to find out more about it.

Copyright Usage

Any usage rights are regulated through the Creative Commons License. As Lectito Journals is using the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), anyone (the author, his/her institution/company, the publisher, as well as the public) is free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work as long as the original author is credited (see above). Therefore, specific usage rights cannot be reserved by the author or his/her institution/company, and the publisher cannot include a statement "all rights reserved" in any published paper.

This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, websites, blogs and other platforms by providing appropriate reference.

Publication Fee

The Open Access Publication Fee for the journal is currently waived.

Archiving & Data Policy

Authors are encouraged to self-archive the final version of their published articles into institutional repositories (such as those listed in the Directory of Open Access Repositories). For this purpose, authors are strongly encouraged to use the final PDF version published on the website of the journal.

To ensure that all articles will be permanently preserved and available a full archival copy of all articles published in the journal is deposited in electronic format into Portico and the National Library of the Netherlands (Koninkelijke Bibliotheek).

European Journal of STEM Education adopts "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International" license (click https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ to read the full-text legal code Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License). This license allows authors to use all articles, data sets, graphics and appendices in data mining applications, search engines, websites, blogs and other platforms by providing appropriate reference.

Useful Contacts

For all enquiries relating to the integrity of the journal’s content please contact publications@lectito.net. All queries will be handled sensitively and as confidentially as possible within the scope of any necessary subsequent investigation.

We recognise that there may be occasions when you may wish to remain as anonymous as possible.

For enquiries regarding advertising in any of our Academic products or platforms, including journal issues, contact yagiz@lectito.net.

To report counterfeiting, copyright infringement or suspected piracy, contact publications@lectito.net.