Publication Ethics

The Andean Journal of Education adheres to the standards of good editorial conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)[1]and to standards such as the Declaration of Helsinki[2] for studies involving people.

Ethical practices for authors:

  • The works sent to the review should be original and without any alteration.
  • Do not simultaneously submit the same article for evaluation in several reviews.
  • Always give credit to the people who have contributed to carrying out your research.
  • Explicitly declare that there are no conflicts of interest that could have influenced the obtained results.
  • For studies involving human subjects, authors must obtain approval from their institutional ethics committee and confirm that recognized standards have been followed to minimize harm to participants. Authors must obtain informed consent from human participants. They must also ensure the information they collect from participants does not contain any identifiable information and mitigate the risk of being able to assign data to specific individuals.
  • Indicate any financing from agencies or projects that your research article stems from.
  • Your academic literature review is always current and relevant, considering different knowledge streams.
  • Deliver texts that comply with the established publication norms.
  • Promptly collaborate with reviewers’ corrections and suggestions.

The responsibility for the content of the articles published in Revista Andina de Educación exclusively lies with the authors.

Ethical practices for reviewers:

  • Perform a critical, honest, constructive, unbiased review that guarantees the research article's academic quality.
  • Immediately notify if, for some reason, you cannot evaluate the article, either because it is not in your field of expertise or because you cannot comply with the evaluation report delivery within the established timeframe.
  • Always maintain confidentiality concerning the authorship of the article to review.
  • Evaluation reports are delivered in the established revision template and substantiate the evaluations that have led you to your decision.
  • Precisely indicate the bibliographical references of fundamental works that the author has possibly forgotten.
  • Inform the editors of any similarity between the research article and other published works.

The evaluation is always carried out anonymously. If the author’s identity, institutional affiliations, or any other information has been compromised for any reason that puts the document’s anonymity at risk, the reviewer should immediately notify the editors.

Editors’ commitment

  • Evaluate the articles based on the content’s academic merit without discrimination about the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnic origin, nationality, or political opinion.
  • The confidentiality of authors, articles, and reviewers is maintained during the process.
  • Editors are responsible for meeting deadlines for revising and publishing accepted works.
  • Guarantee the selection of the most qualified reviewers to issue an academic, critical, and expert evaluation of the work as unbiased as possible.

[1] COPE norms full text available at https://publicationethics.org/core-practices

[2] Declaration of Helsinki full text available at WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects – WMA – The World Medical Association