Data Availability Statement

The reproducibility of research claims is an integral part of published research. Research claims are based on data from which results were obtained and conclusions were drawn. Without access to the original data, scientific claims may be difficult (if not impossible) to reproduce. Mandatory data availability statements consolidate information about data relating to the manuscript, regardless of whether the data is in repositories, available on request, attached to supplementary information, or included in source data files.

Note: We strongly recommend anonymizing authorship in data, as the journal uses double-blind reviews. Many repositories have features to support this process, providing access to reviews via links that do not include author information. These links provide private access before the data is made publicly available.

Appeals and complaints

This procedure applies to appeals against editorial decisions, complaints about the failure of processes, such as long delays in considering submissions, and complaints about publication ethics. A complaint should first be addressed to the editor-in-chief (editors-in-chief) responsible for the journal and/or the editor who handled the article.

1. Complaints about scientific content, e.g. appeals against the rejection of an article

The editor-in-chief or managing editor considers the authors’ arguments and the reviewers’ reports and decides whether:

• the rejection decision should be upheld;
• another independent opinion is required;
• the appeal should be considered.

The complainant is informed of the decision with an appropriate explanation. Decisions on appeals are final, and new submissions take precedence over appeals.

2. Complaints about processes, e.g. the time needed for verification

The editor-in-chief, together with the managing editor (where applicable) and/or the contact person at the company (where applicable), will investigate the matter. The complainant will receive appropriate feedback. Feedback is shared with relevant stakeholders to improve processes and procedures.

Withdrawal of a published article

In the event of a serious breach of ethical principles relating to a published article, said article will be withdrawn from the journal’s website and social media profiles, and a brief explanation will be posted on the site where the article was previously published. An attempt will also be made to remove the article from all other sources where it has been published (e.g., reference databases), stating the reasons for this decision.

Citations

Research and non-research articles (e.g., opinion pieces, review articles) must cite relevant and significant literature to support the claims made.

Manipulation of citations will result in the rejection of the article and may be reported to the author’s institution. Similarly, any attempts by reviewers or editors to encourage such practices should be reported by the authors to the publisher.

Authors should take the following guidelines into account when preparing their manuscript:

• Any statement in the manuscript that is based on external sources of information (i.e., not on the authors’ own new ideas or findings or general knowledge) should include a citation.
• Authors should avoid citing derivatives of original work. For example, they should cite the original work rather than a review article that cites the original work.
• Authors should ensure that their citations are accurate (i.e., they should ensure that the citation supports the claims in their manuscript, and should not misrepresent a work by citing it if it does not support the point the authors wish to make).
• Authors should not cite sources they have not read.
• Authors should not preferentially cite their own publications or those of their friends or institutions.
• Authors should avoid citing works from only one country.
• Authors should not use an excessive number of citations to support a single point.
• Authors should not cite advertisements or promotional material.

Editorial Board members, guest editors and editors

Editorial Board members, guest editors and editors are required to declare any conflicts of interest and may be excluded from the peer review process if such conflicts arise.

In addition, they should exclude themselves from handling manuscripts in cases where there is a competing interest. This may include (but is not limited to) previous publications with one or more authors and sharing the same institution with one or more authors.

If an editor, guest editor or member of the Editorial Board is listed as an author, we recommend that they declare this in the section on competing interests in the submitted manuscript. If the persons listed are authors or have other competing interests in relation to a specific manuscript, another editor, guest editor or member of the Editorial Board will be appointed to take over responsibility for supervising the review. These submissions are subject to exactly the same review process as any other manuscript.

Members of the Editorial Board and guest editors may submit articles to the journal. These submissions are not given priority over other manuscripts, and the editorial process is the same as for other authors.

Funding

Please use “Funding” as the heading (see template):

• Partial financial support was received from [...].
• The research leading to these results was funded by [...] under grant agreement No. [...].
• The study was funded by [...].
• This work was supported by [...] (grants No. [...] and [...])

Decision on publication

The editor-in-chief is responsible for all material published in the journal EDUKACJA. Its editors decide whether to seek an external review for a submitted article and then whether to accept it for publication. These decisions should be made after careful consideration of the article and reviews, impartially, and without undue delay. The editors correspond with the author of the submitted article in order to improve its substantive and formal quality and communicate their decisions in a manner that does not undermine the author’s dignity.

Fair play

Articles are evaluated on the basis of their quality and significance for science and the journal, regardless of the author’s origin, nationality, ethnic affiliation, political views, gender, race or religion.

Confidentiality

The Editorial Board of the journal is obliged to maintain the confidentiality of information obtained at every stage of the publication process. Editors, like reviewers, are obliged not to disclose information about the content of edited articles to third parties. Editors and reviewers may not use information contained in unpublished articles without the express written consent of the author.

Ethical standards and responsibilities of reviewers

The Editorial Board of EDUKACJA attaches great importance to the quality of reviews of submitted texts. Reviewers play a very important role in supporting the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions in the publication process.

Reviewers should only agree to review works in which they have sufficient knowledge to enable them to provide an appropriate opinion within the specified time. Reviewers are obliged to maintain the confidentiality of the review and not to disclose details of the work or the review. Reviews should be an objective and constructive assessment of the reviewed work. Expressing offensive or derogatory comments about the authors is inappropriate behavior.

Summary of requirements

The above information should be summarized in a statement and included on the title page when submitting the work, which is separate from the manuscript in a section entitled “Statements”. Placing all statements in one place allows for consistent and uniform verification of information by the editor-in-chief and/or reviewers and may speed up the review process. Declarations include funding, conflicts of interest, approval of ethical requirements, availability of data, materials and/or codes, and statements on the authors’ contributions. These statements should be included on the title page.

Once an article has been accepted for publication, the production department will place the relevant statements in a clearly marked section that is easily visible to readers.

If all authors have the same (or do not have) competing interests and/or funding, a single general statement suffices.

These guidelines are based on the recommendations of the COPE Committee on Publication Ethics contained in the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers, and the publication Dobre praktyki w procedurach recenzyjnych w nauce [Good Practices in Review Procedures in Science] (Ministry of Science and Higher Education, Warsaw, 2011).