The journal "Acta Education" follows the principles of publication ethics set out in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Ethical obligations of authors:
1. By submitting a manuscript for consideration as an original article, the authors thereby confirm that the submitted material does not contain plagiarism and has not been published before, and is not under consideration by the editorial board of other publications. The author has the right to withdraw the manuscript at any stage of its consideration with mandatory notification to the editorial board.
2. Only persons who have made a significant contribution to the research and preparation of the submitted material should be indicated as co-authors of the article. The author with whom the correspondence about the publication is conducted is responsible for ensuring that all co-authors are indicated, as well as for ensuring that all co-authors see and approve the final version of the article and agree to submit it for publication to the journal.
3. The authors are aware of and are responsible for the novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research, for the selection and reliability of information contained in articles, citations, statistical and sociological data, etc. It is not allowed to use other people's texts without reference to the source and authorship of these texts.
4. If significant errors or inaccuracies are found in the published work, the author is obliged to notify the editor about this and cooperate with the editorial board in correcting them.
5. When arguing with other authors or publications, authors must comply with the norms of academic correctness.

Ethical obligations of the editorial board:
1. The editorial board of the journal is guided by the principles of science, objectivity, professionalism, impartiality.
2. Interaction with authors is based on the principles of courtesy, benevolence, honesty and transparency.
3. The editorial board of the journal checks all received manuscripts declared as original articles using the Anti-Plagiarism system. In case of detection of numerous borrowings, the editorial board acts in accordance with the COPE rules.
4. The editorial board guarantees the consideration of all materials submitted for publication without prejudice and ensures that they are independently reviewed while maintaining anonymity, when data about the authors and reviewers are hidden for both parties.
5. The editorial board does its best to find the most suitable and qualified reviewers in each field of research. The reviewers may be members of the editorial board or independent experts (external review).
6. The decision to publish the material is made taking into account the opinion of the reviewers. The presence of positive reviews is not a sufficient reason for accepting an article for publication. The final decision on publication is made by the members of the editorial board after the author has finalized the article based on the comments of reviewers and members of the editorial board. In conflict situations, the final decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
7. The editorial Board ensures confidentiality with respect to all issues related to the content and review of the manuscript.
8. The author has the right to express a reasoned point of view that does not coincide with the opinion of the editorial board.
9. The Editorial Board does not allow publications that contribute to the incitement of social, ethnic or religious discord.
10. The editorial board has the right to adjust the order of publications in accordance with the topics of the upcoming issues.

Ethical obligations of reviewers:
1. The main purpose of the review is to provide an objective assessment of the scientific characteristics of the work in order to help the editor–in–chief and the editorial board to make a reasoned decision on the expediency of publishing the manuscript, and the authors to improve the material proposed for publication.
2. The manuscript received for review should be considered by the reviewer as a confidential document. It cannot be shown to anyone or discussed with anyone, except in cases approved by the editorial board.
3. The reviewer's position should be reasoned and impartial.
4. The reviewer should draw the attention of the author and the editorial board to any meaningful similarity between the manuscript submitted for review and any other publication that he personally knows about. References to publications, observations, measurements or arguments, which, in the opinion of the reviewer, should be referred to by the author, should be accompanied by appropriate references to the original source.
5. Reviewers may not review manuscripts with respect to which there is a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation or any other relationship with any of the authors, projects or organizations with which the article is associated.
6. The reviewer has the right to refuse to review the proposed article if he feels insufficiently competent to prepare a review in this area or is unable to prepare the requested review within the agreed time frame. In agreement with the editorial board, the review period may be extended.
7. The reviewer has the right to request the manuscript for re-review.