Post-Publication Discussion Policy
1. Policy Statement
The International Journal of Education and Learning Studies (IJELS), published by PT. Intelektiva Global Nusantara, recognizes post-publication discussion as an essential component of scholarly communication, academic transparency, and the continuous evaluation of scientific knowledge.
Publication does not mark the end of academic scrutiny. IJELS welcomes constructive, evidence-based comments, questions, critical assessments, and alternative interpretations of articles published in the journal.
This policy provides a transparent mechanism for scholarly discussion, author responses, clarification of published findings, and referral of potential errors or research integrity concerns for appropriate editorial action.
IJELS considers relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in managing post-publication discussions and corrections.
2. Objectives of Post-Publication Discussion
Post-publication discussion aims to:
- Promote constructive scholarly debate concerning published research and reviews.
- Encourage critical examination of research methods, data, analyses, and interpretations.
- Provide opportunities for authors to clarify or respond to substantive academic concerns.
- Identify possible errors or limitations that may affect published findings.
- Support transparency, reproducibility, and responsible scholarly communication.
- Protect the reliability and integrity of the permanent scholarly record.
3. Forms of Post-Publication Discussion
Evidence-based comments addressing the methods, findings, analyses, theoretical arguments, interpretation, or conclusions of a published article.
Responses from the original authors that address questions, provide clarification, or explain substantive methodological or interpretative concerns.
Substantive academic discussions that critically evaluate published work or provide additional perspectives relevant to education and learning studies.
Notifications concerning possible factual, numerical, methodological, bibliographical, or reporting errors identified after publication.
Confidential reports involving suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, duplicate publication, ethical violations, authorship disputes, or other serious publication concerns. These matters are handled under the journal's Research Misconduct and Retraction Policies rather than treated solely as ordinary academic comments.
4. Who May Participate
Researchers, academics, educators, reviewers, readers, institutions, and other relevant parties may submit scholarly comments or concerns regarding articles published in IJELS.
Formal scholarly contributions should normally identify the contributor's name, affiliation where applicable, contact details, and relevant competing interests.
Anonymous integrity reports may be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable evidence. The identity of a person reporting a concern will be handled with appropriate confidentiality.
5. Submission of Comments and Concerns
Post-publication comments may be submitted through the journal's official editorial communication channel.
Submissions should include:
- The title of the published article, authors, and DOI or article URL.
- The contributor's name, affiliation where relevant, and valid contact information.
- A clear explanation of the question, criticism, or concern.
- Relevant evidence, scholarly references, or supporting documentation.
- A declaration of any competing interests.
- A clear distinction between scholarly disagreement and allegations of possible misconduct.
Contributions must be written in respectful, academically appropriate language. Personal attacks, discriminatory statements, defamatory claims, unsupported accusations, and submissions unrelated to the article's scholarly content will not be accepted as formal academic discussion.
6. Editorial Assessment and Discussion Procedure
IJELS applies the following process when considering post-publication submissions:
- Receipt: The editorial office receives and records the comment, question, or concern.
- Preliminary Screening: The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor assesses academic relevance, specificity, evidence, and appropriateness of the submission.
- Expert Assessment: Independent academic advice or peer review may be requested when technical evaluation is necessary.
- Author Notification: Where appropriate, substantive scholarly comments are shared with the corresponding author of the original publication.
- Opportunity to Respond: The original authors are invited to provide clarification or a reasoned response within a reasonable period established by the editorial office.
- Editorial Decision: The editor determines whether the comment and response should be published, addressed privately, declined with reasons, or referred to another editorial policy.
- Publication and Linking: Accepted formal discussions are published or otherwise made accessible through the journal's official publication platform, with links to the original article where technically supported.
- Follow-Up: Any substantiated error or integrity concern is referred for appropriate corrective action.
Failure of an author to respond does not automatically prevent the editorial office from evaluating or acting on a credible concern.
7. Author Responses and Scholarly Dialogue
Authors of published articles are encouraged to engage constructively with legitimate scholarly criticism.
Responses should address the substantive issues raised, explain relevant methods or interpretations, and provide supporting evidence where appropriate.
IJELS may publish an accepted comment alongside an author response when suitable. Both contributions should identify the original article and remain accessible as part of the scholarly discussion record.
The editorial office may moderate further exchanges to avoid repetition, personal disputes, or discussions lacking additional scholarly value.
8. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions
When post-publication discussion identifies a potentially significant error or integrity concern, the matter will be evaluated under the journal's applicable Research Misconduct, Correction, and Retraction Policies.
A correction may be issued when an identifiable error can be corrected without invalidating the principal findings or conclusions.
An expression of concern may be issued when serious questions about the reliability or integrity of a published article remain unresolved.
A retraction may be issued when evidence establishes that the article's findings are unreliable, serious publication misconduct occurred, or other circumstances justify correcting the scholarly record through retraction.
Formal editorial notices should be clearly identified, explain the action taken, remain accessible, and be linked to the original article. The published Version of Record must not be silently altered to conceal substantive errors or editorial actions.
9. Fairness, Confidentiality, and Editorial Independence
Post-publication discussions and concerns are evaluated on scholarly merit, evidence, relevance, and publication ethics.
Editors must manage potential conflicts of interest and must not permit institutional affiliation, professional seniority, commercial interests, or personal relationships to improperly influence editorial decisions.
Confidential allegations are handled with reasonable care for the rights of all parties. Individuals facing substantive allegations should be given an appropriate opportunity to respond before conclusions are reached, where circumstances permit.
Contributors may seek reconsideration of an editorial decision by identifying relevant new evidence or a significant procedural concern through the journal's complaints and appeals mechanism.
10. Documentation, Transparency, and Policy References
The journal maintains appropriate editorial records of substantive post-publication communications, assessments, author responses, and resulting decisions.
Published formal discussions, corrections, and other editorial notices should be linked to the relevant scholarly record and assigned appropriate publication metadata where supported.
IJELS considers the following guidance:
- Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Guidance
- Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
IJELS supports constructive, evidence-based post-publication discussion to strengthen the transparency, accuracy, credibility, and continuing development of scholarly knowledge in education and learning studies.
