IJTLHE: International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (IJTLHE) follows the Committee on Publication Ethics' (COPE) Core Practices, as well as relevant recommendations from other relevant organizations (see WAME). As such, the IJTLHE expects journal editors, authors, and reviewers to follow the ethical behaviors delineated below. Major points are included below, although referencing the COPE Core Practices for full details is encouraged.

Editor's Duties and Responsibilities

Publication Decisions

The editor is ultimately responsible for determining which submitted manuscripts will, and will not, be published. This decision will be based on the merit and intellectual content of the manuscript, including the manuscript's importance, originality, relevance, scope, and clarity, as well as adherence to the journal's Author Guidelines and Review Criteria. In addition, this decision will take into account legal issues/requirements, such as libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The edition may, in making a decision, consult with other editors or reviewers.

Fair Play

The editor will evaluate submitted manuscripts based on merit and intellectual content without regard to race, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor, and editorial staff, will protect the confidentiality of a submitted manuscript and its authors, and will not disclose information to anyone other than the manuscript authors, relevant reviewers and editors, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Conflicts of Interest

The editor, and editorial staff, will recuse themselves from involvement with submitted manuscripts for which they have a conflict of interest. These conflicts of interest may include competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with any of the authors, funding agencies, or products/services. In such cases, a different editorial board member will be assigned that manuscript to process.

Addressing Potential Misconduct

The editor will take seriously and address all reported or suspected acts of publication misconduct, even if the misconduct occurred years prior. The editor will enact reasonably responsive measures when presented with publication misconduct, which will generally include contacting the manuscript author and providing them an opportunity to respond, giving due consideration to the respective complaint or concern, and, if warranted, may lead to contacting relevant institutions or research bodies.

Associate Editor's Duties and Responsibilities

Contributions to Editorial Decisions

Peer review is an essential aspect of the formal scientific endeavor. Peer reviews assist the editor in making publishing decisions and increases the veracity and quality of the manuscript through feedback to authors.

Confidentiality

Reviewers will treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and refrain from sharing the manuscript or manuscript review with anyone outside the journal's editorial staff. In addition, unpublished materials resulting from the review process must not be used by the reviewer without written consent from the manuscript author.

Promptness

Prompt completion of peer reviews is essential to the publication process. Any associate editor who feels they are unqualified to review or unable to complete a peer review within seven days should notify the editor and decline the review opportunity as soon as possible.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers will identity relevant published work that should be cited, but is not, within a submitted manuscript. A reviewer should also notify the editor when a manuscript appears to be significantly similar to a previously published work.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews will be completed objectively, avoiding personal bias. Reviews should be based on merit and intellectual content. Referees should provide support for their feedback and evaluations. Personal criticism of an author is inappropriate.

Conflict of Interest

Reviewers with a potential conflict of interest &mdash competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with any of the authors, funding agencies, or products/services &mdash will consult with the editor. If a reviewer cannot provide an impartial peer review of a manuscript, they will recuse themselves from the review.

Reviewer's Duties and Responsibilities

Contributions to Editorial Decisions

Confidentiality

Promptness

Prompt completion of peer reviews is essential to the publication process. Any reviewer who feels they are unqualified to review or unable to complete a peer review within three weeks should notify the editor and decline the review opportunity as soon as possible.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Standards of Objectivity

Conflict of Interest

Author's Duties and Responsibilities

Reporting Standards

An author's manuscript of original research must accurately represent the study completed and the significance of the results. The data attained through the study must be accurately analyzed and represented. A manuscript must contain sufficient methodological detail and references for the work to be replicated. Fraudulent or knowingly false statements constitute unethical behavior.

Data Access and Retention

Authors must retain the raw research data for a reasonable number of years. This data may be requested by the editor as part of the editorial review process.

Originality

Authors must write wholly original manuscripts, citing others as their works are used in the manuscript. Proper acknowledgement of other's scholarly contributions, through citations and references, to the manuscript's theoretical foundation and empirical context is required. Plagiarism in any form constitutes unethical behavior.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications

Authors must not publish a manuscript addressing the same research and data set in more than one journal. Similarly, authors must not submit the same manuscript to two, or more, journals simultaneously.

Authorship of the Paper

Authors on a manuscript must have contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation/discussion of the reported study. Those who made such substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors, while those who made less-substantive contribution should recognized in the manuscript's acknowledgements. All authors are collectively responsible for the manuscript and must have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Human Subjects

The protection of human subjects is vital in human subjects research. When human subjects are involved in research it is up to the researcher to treat the subjects ethically. Authors must indicate that any human subjects research has been approved by the author’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) or by a relevant ethics committee. If requested by the editor, authors must be able to provide a statement or documentation from the IRB committee, or relevant ethics committee, of this approval.

Conflict of Interest

Authors must indicate in their manuscript any financial, collaborative, or personal relationships with other people, organizations, or companies that may be perceived as providing undue influence on their work. Specifically, all sources of financial assistance in designing, developing, or implementing the research, or preparing the manuscript, must be disclosed in the manuscript. This disclosure must include the nature of the relationship.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

Authors that discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work must promptly notify the editor and work with the editor to address the issue through retraction, correction, or notification, as deemed necessary by the editor. In addition, authors must work with the editor when such errors or inaccuracies are identified by a third party.