Focus and Scope

The journal’s scope includes publications reporting on research in the field of pedagogy, as well as interdisciplinary studies on education, upbringing and human development. It also embraces papers pertaining to different disciplines in the social studies and humanities, should the presented findings refer to educational issues or should the studies be conducted from the point of view of educational sciences. The journal particularly welcomes interdisciplinary approaches combining different theoretical and methodological traditions in analyzing educational phenomena. The Editorial Board accepts the original scientific papers presenting high cognitive, methodological and implementation value, both for the development of science, as well as educational and social practice responding to the current challenges and international research trends.

Lubelski Rocznik Pedagogiczny seeks to publish research findings referring to education, upbringing, teaching and learning-related processes across various social, cultural and institutional contexts. A special focus is placed on publications from the field of social pedagogy, special education, social rehabilitation, dedicated work, intercultural education/pedagogy, pedeutology, including in particular papers addressing the issues of social and vocational rehabilitation, social support, digitization and new technologies in education, etc. The journal’s scope of interests also involves studies on such issues as social inequality, marginalization and exclusion, as well as activities promoting the creation of available, just and participatory educational environments.

The journal publishes original research articles, review papers and methodological studies. Papers presenting innovative theoretical and methodological approaches, as well as findings of robust empirical studies addressing the present-day educational and social challenges are particularly acknowledged.

The journal seeks to provide an open access to results of scientific research conducted by Polish and international scholars, to support the trans-national knowledge transfer and to foster scientific debate on the present-day problems faced by education, upbringing and functioning in society. The journal’s special focus has been placed on research addressing issues of social and educational inclusion, equal opportunities and creating conditions promoting full participation of individuals and groups in the social and educational life.

Section Policies

Artykuły

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Revisions

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Materiały

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Sprawozdania

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

1. Every submitted paper undergoes a formal selection process during which it is checked for compliance with the required criteria. If the guidelines are not met, the paper may be sent back to the author for the introduction of minor changes or rejected in the event of major incompatibilities with the requirements set out by the journal.
2. Papers prepared properly in formal terms are subject to the initial selection process.
3. The initially selected papers are referred for review.
4. Editor-in-chief in consultation with other members of the editorial team selects the reviewers. Should a need arise, editor-in-chief asks for the opinion of competent members of the Research Council.
5. Every paper is reviewed by two external, independent and anonymous reviewers.
6. In order to avoid the conflict of interest, selected reviewers do not represent the same institution as the one to which the author is affiliated.
7. The identities of both author/s and reviewers are concealed from each other (double-blind peer review).
8. By accepting the request to review a manuscript submitted to Lublin Pedagogical Journal, the reviewer makes a Conflict of Interest Statement. Conflicts of interest arise from competitiveness, collaboration or other personal, financial or professional relationships of the reviewers with any of the authors or institutions to which the submitted manuscript is affiliated.
9. Reviewers prepare their reviews in electronic form using their individual accounts on the journal’s website https://journals.umcs.pl/lrp, and upload them in the journal’s system. The system does not allow for identification either of the author of the manuscript or the reviewer.
10. Reviewers prepare paper evaluations based on the review form and deliver their final recommendation in the form of a request to admit the text for publication or to reject it.
11. Reviewers may choose from the following recommendation options regarding the reviewed manuscript: accept submitted manuscript; required reworking; for repeated review; reject submitted manuscript.
12. In disputable cases or in the event of discordant reviews, the decision about admission for publication is made by the editorial team who is allowed to appoint an additional reviewer. Only manuscripts that received two positive reviews are admitted for publication.
13. The editorial assistant notifies the author about reviewer’s comments worded by the reviewer delivering the final recommendation.
14. Author of the paper must factually reply to all comments and requests provided in the review, using the available form.
15. The ultimate decision about admission of the paper for publication is made by the editor-in-chief having read the reviews, as well as author’s replies to Reviewers’ comments and reviewers’ recommendations.
16. An alphabetical list of reviewers is published once a year.
17. Paper reviews are archived.

Review Form

INSTRUCTIONS TO REVIEWERS

1. Consenting to review

Prior to consenting to review, reviewers should consider whether research problems addressed in the paper match their qualifications or research interests. In the event reviewers find that they lack sufficient knowledge allowing them to prepare a reliable and substantive opinion, they should decline to review.

2. Conflicts of interest

Conflicts of interest arise from competitiveness, collaboration or other personal, financial or professional relationships of the reviewer with any of the authors or institutions to which the submitted manuscript is affiliated. A prospective reviewer should not undertake to review papers in relation to which there are reasonable grounds to believe that a conflict of interest may emerge.

3. Meeting review deadlines

Reviewers should decline to review a manuscript, if they do not have sufficient time to meet the required deadline. The timeline for the review of one manuscript for Lublin Pedagogical Journal is 3 weeks.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES

Suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript

1. Reviewers should promptly inform the editor about suspected plagiarism by indicating relevant fragments in the manuscript.
2. If a reviewer reports suspected plagiarism, editor-in-chief follows a procedure in accordance with relevant guidelines determined by COPE (The Committee on Publication Ethics) https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts.

Suspected data fabrication in a submitted manuscript

1. If a reviewer suspects that data used in the submitted paper were fabricated, he or she should inform the editor about it and indicate specific fragments of the paper bearing evidence of this fact.
2. If a reviewer reports suspected data fabrication, the editor-in-chief follows a procedure in accordance with relevant guidelines determined by COPE (The Committee on Publication Ethics) https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts.

Suspected redundant publication

1. If a reviewer suspects that the reviewed manuscript shares the same components with a paper already published, he or she should promptly inform the editor of this suspicion.
2. If a reviewer reports suspected data fabrication, the editor-in-chief follows a procedure in accordance with relevant guidelines determined by COPE (The Committee on Publication Ethics) https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts.

Suspected undisclosed conflicts of interest

If a reviewer suspects an undisclosed conflict of interest in the submitted manuscript, he or she should inform the editor about it, who should follow a procedure in accordance with relevant guidelines determined by COPE (The Committee on Publication Ethics) https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts.

Ethical issue related to a submitted manuscript

If a reviewer suspects a specific ethical issue related to the submitted manuscript, he or she should inform the editor about it, who should follow a procedure in accordance with relevant guidelines determined by COPE (The Committee on Publication Ethics) https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts.

Objectivity of review

1. Reviews should be drawn up in an objective manner, with a focus on substance-related aspects of the academic work, and in accordance with the guidelines found in the review form valid at Lublin Pedagogical Journal.

2. A review should deliver an objective judgement on a manuscript. All comments included in the review should be constructive and apply to the merits. It is unacceptable to criticise an author as a person.

Publication Frequency

SCHEDULE
Text recruitment	Issue number *	Estimated publication date
No 1 (2026)	from 16th July to 30th  September, 2025	until the end of March 2026
No 2 (2026)	from 1st October to 31st  December, 2025	until the end of June 2026
No 3 (2026)	from 1st January to 31st March, 2026	until the end of September 2026
No 4 (2026)	from 1st April to 30th September, 2026	until the end of December 2026

 

Average time for initial manuscript review: 7 days
Average lead time for manuscript review: 28 days
Average time in which an article is published: 180 days

Open Access Policy

List of Reviewers cooperating with the journal

2021

Marzenna Adamowicz, Józefa    Bałachowicz, Eunika Baron-Polańczyk, Urszula Bartnikowska, Aneta Bołdyrew, Katarzyna Borawska-Kalbarczyk, Krystyna Chałas, Daniela  Cvitkovic, Agnieszka Cybal-Michalska, Małgorzata Cywińska, Maria Czerepaniak-Walczak, Katarzyna Ćwirynkało, Ewa Domagała-Zyśk, Anna FIdelus, Sławomir Futyma, Zenon Gajdzica, Grażyna Gajewska, Jarosław  Gara, Anna Gaweł, Józef Górniewicz, Urszula Gruca-Miąsik, Małgorzata Gruchoła, Beata  Jakimiuk, Anna Jakubowicz-Bryx, Zdzisława Janiszewska-Nieścioruk, Ewa Kochanowska, Mirosław  Kowalski, Daniel Kukla, Kinga Kuszak, Justyna Kusztal, Michał Kwiatkowski, Roman Leppert, Walentyna Łozowiecka, Joanna Łukasiewicz-Wieleba, Piotr  Magier, Joanna Majchrzyk-Mikuła, Piotr Majewicz, Wojciech Maliszewski, Katarzyna Markiewicz, Bożena Matyjas, Janusz Miąso, Irena Mudrecka, Inetta Nowosad, Katarzyna Olbrycht, Danuta Opozda, Krystyna Pankowska, Katarzyna Parys, Ewa Pasterniak-Kobyłecka, Rafał Piwowarski, Beata Przyborowska, Mieczysław  Radochoński, Agnieszka Regulska, Aneta Rogalska-Marasińska, Małgorzata Rosalska, Dorota Rybczyńska-Abdel Kawy, Sławomira Sadowska, Anna  Sajdak-Burska, Elżbieta Sałata, Dorota Siemieniecka, Barbara Skałbania, Ewa Skrzetuska, Ryszard Skrzyniarz, Jolanta Skutnik, Hanna Solarczyk-Szwec, Bernadetta Szczupał, Jolanta Szempruch, Sławomir Sztobryn, Mariusz  Sztuka, Urszula Szuścik, Aleksandra Tłuściak-Deliowska, Renata Tomaszewska, Manuela Valentini, Laszlo  Varga, Wojciech Walat, Anna Wiłkomirska, Ewa Wysocka, Anna Zamkowska, Ernest Zawada, Agnieszka Żyta, Artur Żywiołek

2022

Agnieszka Barczykowska, Urszula Bartnikowska, Maciej Bernasiewicz, Aneta Bołdyrew, Katarzyna Borawska-Kalbarczyk, Krystyna Chałas, Sławomir Chrost, Daniela Cvitkovic, Małgorzata Cywińska, Maria Czerepaniak-Walczak, Ewa Domagała-Zyśk, Anna Fidelus, Zenon Gajdzica, Grażyna Gajewska, Anna Gaweł, Elżbieta Górnikowska-Zwolak, Daria Hejwosz-Gromkowska, Zbigniew Izdebski, Beata Jakimiuk, Zdzisława Janiszewska-Nieścioruk, Ewa Karmolińska-Jagodzik, Hanna Kędzierska, Ewa Kochanowska, Marta Komorowska-Pudło, Mirosław Kowalski, Andre Kurowski, Kinga Kuszak, Michał Kwiatkowski, Piotr Magier, Joanna Majchrzyk-Mikuła, Piotr Majewicz, Krzysztof Maliszewski, Wojciech Maliszewski, Bożena Matyjas, Grzegorz Michalski, Inetta Nowosad, Danuta Opozda, Ewa Pasterniak-Kobyłecka, Katarzyna Plutecka, Beata Przyborowska, Agnieszka Regulska, Kissne Reka, Małgorzata Rosalska, Krzysztof Rubacha, Elżbieta Sałata, Ryszard Skrzyniarz, Hanna Solarczyk-Szwec, Joanna Szafran, Anna Szafrańska, Grzegorz Szumski, Urszula Szuścik, Bogusław Śliwerski, Marta Uberman, Manuela Valentini, Małgorzata Walkiewicz-Krutak, Anna Wiłkomirska, Anna Zamkowska, Marzenna Zaorska, Ernest Zawada, Agnieszka Żyta

2023

Beata Antoszewska, Józefa Bałachowicz, Agniszka Barczykowska, Eunika Baron-Polańczyk, Maciej Bernasiewicz, Aneta Bołdyrew, Beata Bonna, Krystyna Chałas, Daniela Cvitkovic, Małgorzata Cywińska, Maria Czerepeniak-Walczak, Katarzyna Ćwirynkało, Athena Danilidou, Andrea Dessardo, Ewa Domagała-Zyśk, Miroslav Dopita, Katarzyna Dormus, Zenon Gajdzica, Grażyna Gajewska, Jarosław Gara, Anna Gaweł, Seda Gokce Turan, Beata Gola, Józef Górniewicz, Daria Hejwosz-Gromkowska, Beata Jakimiuk, Anna Jakubowicz-Bryx, Sylwia Jaskulska, Małgorzata Kabacińska-Łuczak, Ewa Karmolińska-Jagodzik, Joanna Kic-Drgas, Ewa Kochanowska, Hanna Kostyło, Ludwika Konieczna-Nowak, Mirosław Kowalski, Jacek Kulbaka, Kinga Kuszak, Piotr Magier, Joanna Majchrzyk-Mikuła, Piotr Majewicz, Bożena Matyjas, Iwonna Michalska, Irena Mudrecka, Maciej Muskała, Monika Nawrot-Borowska, Ewa Ogrodzka-Mazur, Katarzyna Olbrycht, Danuta Opozda, Sławomir Pasikowski,  Ewa Pasterniak-Kobyłceka, Francesco Pira, Beata Przyborowska, Krzysztof Rubacha, Elżbieta Sałata, Ryszard Skrzyniarz, Magdalena Smoleń-Wawrzusiszyn, Hanna Solarczyk-Szwec, Anna Szafrańska, Bernadeta Szczupał, Jolanta Szempruch, Grzegorz Szumski, Urszula Szuścik, Bogusław Śliwerski, Renata Tomaszewska, Marta Uberman, Laszlo Varga, Manuela Valentini, Wojciech Walat, Małgorzata Walkiewicz-Krutak, Edyta Widawska, Anna Wiłkomirska, Barbara Winczura, Ewa Wysocka, Zuzanna Zbróg, Agnieszka Żyta

2024

Agnieszka Barczykowska, Urszula Bartnikowska, Józefa Bałachowicz, Jarosław Bąbka, Katarzyna Bieńkowska, Katarzyna Borawska-Kalbarczyk, Beata Borowska-Beszta, Hanna Cervinkova, Małgorzata Cywińska, Maria Czerepaniak-Walczak, Katarzyna Ćwirynkało, Andrea Dessardo, Ewa Domagała-Zyśk, Zenon Gajdzica, Anna Gaweł, Daria Hejwosz-Gromkowska, Anna Jakubowicz-Bryx, Zdzisława Janiszewska-Nieścioruk, Sylwia Jaskulska, Małgorzata Kabat, Hanna Kędzierska, Michał Klichowski, Karol Konaszewski, Mirosław Kowalski, Violetta Kopińska, Iveta Kovalčíková, Kinga Kuszak, Joanna Łukasiewicz-Wieleba, Elena Marin, Piotr Majewicz, Bożena Matyjas, Janusz Miąso, Renata Michalak,  Henryk Mizerek, Anna Młynarczuk-Sokołowska, Maciej Muskała, Ewa Ogrodzka-Mazur, Danuta Opozda, Sławomir Pasikowski, Ewa Pasterniak-Kobyłecka, Katarzyna Parys, Rafał Piwowarski, Piotr Plichta, Dorota Podgórska-Jachnik, Irena Polewczyk, Beata Przyborowska, Krzysztof Rubacha, Anna Sajdak-Burska, Barbara Surma, Anna Szafrańska, Jolanta Szempruch, Grzegorz Szumski, Urszula Szuścik, Aleksandra Tłuściak-Deliowska, Danuta Urbaniak-Zając, Manuela Valentini, Laszlo Varga, Edyta Widawska, Agnieszka Wołowicz, Agnieszka Żyta

2025

Józefa Bałachowicz, Sławomir Banaszak, Agnieszka Barczykowska, Jarosław Bąbka, Joanna Cewińska, Małgorzata Chrobak, Beata Cieśleńska, Małgorzata Cywińska, Katarzyna Ćwirynkało, Ewa Domagała-Zyśk, Zenon Gajdzica, Anna Gaweł, Ryszard Gerlach, Grzegorz Godawa, Nadia Horishna, Beata Jakimiuk, Beata Jachimczak, Zdzisława Janiszewska-Niescioruk, Elżbieta Jaszczyszyn, Anna Jakubowicz-Bryx, Alina Kalinowska-Iżykowska, Ewa Karmolińska Jagodzik, Hanna Kędzierska, Joanna Kic-Drgas, Michał Klichowski, Violetta Kopińska, Karol Konaszewski, Ewa Krause, Krzysztof Krejtz, Inmaculada López, Joanna Łukasik, Piotr Majewicz, Józefa Matejek, Anna Młynarczuk-Sokołowska, Irena Mudrecka, Jerzy Nikitorowicz, Anna Odrowąż-Coates, Danuta Opozda, Robert Opora, Anna Maria Passaseo, Sławomir Pasikowski, Pasterniak-Kobyłecka, Maria Gabriella Pediconi, Raluca Petrus, Piotr Plichta, Beata Przyborowska, Sławomir Przybyliński, Grzegorz Ptaszek, Emilia Raraujo, Agnieszka Regulska, Ewa Skrzetuska, Anna Slozanska, Sylwia Słowińska, Joanna Smyła, Anna Szafrańska, Jolanta Szempruch, Beata Szluz, Bernadetta Szczupał, Urszula Szuścik, Bogusław Śliwerski, Aleksandra Tłuściak-Deliowska, Renata Tomaszewska, Beata Topij-Stempińska, Hayriye Ulaş Taraf, Manuela Valentini, Agnieszka Wałęga, Anna Weissbrot-Koziarska, Edyta Widawska, Marcin Wlazło, Marzenna Zaorska, Anna Zamkowska, Agnieszka Żyta, Małgorzata Żytko

Publication ethics policy

Publication ethics developed by Lublin Pedagogical Journal have been based on COPE (The Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines setting out the best practices for journal editors. Editorial team of Lublin Pedagogical Journal journal has applied the guidelines developed by The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers).

Ethical guidelines to be observed in articles published in “LUBLIN PEDAGOGICAL JOURNAL” demonstrate editorial team’s mindfulness in maintaining ethical standards applicable to scientific publications and counteracting any misconduct in this respect.

All papers submitted for publication by “Lublin Pedagogical Journal” are checked for compliance with publication ethics, integrity and scientific merit.

All persons engaged in the process of publishing Lublin Pedagogical Journal journal (author, reviewers, editors, editorial team and publisher) undertake to observe the ethical guidelines at each stage of the publishing process.

Specific Responsibilities within the Editorial Team

1. Editor-in-Chief is ultimately responsible  for the content of the Journal, makes final decisions regarding publication of individual manuscripts, resolves suspected breaches of the Publication Ethics Principles, and represents the Journal in relations with the Publisher and external stakeholders.
2. Deputy Editor-in-Chief acts as the Editor-in-Chief during their absence and participates in the initial assessment of submitted manuscripts, their qualification for the peer-review process, and decisions regarding their publication.
3. Secretary of the Editorial Board keeps editorial records, monitors compliance with deadlines set out in the publication schedule, manages correspondence with authors and reviewers, and records all information related to the editorial and publishing process.
4. Other members of the Editorial Board and the Scientific Board provide advice on the Journal’s editorial policy, including the thematic scope of issues and proposed amendments to the Publication Ethics Principles. They are not involved in decision-making regarding individual manuscripts.
5. The current list of individuals performing the above-mentioned functions, together with their institutional affiliations, is published on the Journal’s website and is updated as soon as any changes occur.

Editorial Team Responsibilities

1. Observance of binding ethical standards and guidelines and counteracting any kind of misconduct.  Supervision over compliance with ethical standards throughout all stages of the publication process, with particular emphasis on research conducted in educational settings and studies involving vulnerable individuals and groups requiring special protection, including children, young people, persons with disabilities, and individuals at risk of social exclusion.
2. When making a decision about the publication of a manuscript, the Editorial Board takes into account reviewers’ comments and recommendations, compliance of the manuscript content with the journal’s scope, as well as the originality and innovative character of the addressed issues, from the perspective of pedagogy as a scientific discipline and its associated fields.
3. The Editorial Team adheres to the principles of research ethics and requires authors to declare that the research reported in their manuscripts has been conducted in accordance with recognised ethical standards, with due respect for the dignity, privacy, autonomy, and rights of research participants, and in compliance with applicable ethical regulations governing research conducted in educational, pedagogical, and social settings.
4. Manuscripts are evaluated only with regard to its substance. Race, gender, religion, background, citizenship or political beliefs of the authors must not impact paper evaluation.
5. Editorial team must not disclose any information about academic work submitted for publication to unauthorised persons. Persons authorised to have this information are: author, designated reviewers, members of the editorial team, editors and the publisher.
6. To prevent plagiarism or redundant publications, the editorial team of Lublin Pedagogical Journal have used iThenticate – Crossref Similarity Check plagiarism checker (https://www.ithenticate.com). Before sending the manuscript to reviewers, the Editorial team checks all manuscripts submitted for publication using iThenticate plagiarism checker.
7. In case of suspected plagiarism or redundant publication, the editorial team acts in accordance with the guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Flowcharts).
8. Editors must ensure smoothness of the review process by ensuring objectivity, honesty and timeliness while preparing the reviews.
9. Editor-in-chief, in agreement with other members of the editorial team, selects two independent and external reviewers having relevant qualifications. Should a need arise, editor-in-chief asks for the opinion of competent members of the Scientific Board.
10. Editors check for any potential conflicts of interest disclosed by the reviewers and suspicions of redundant publications, or other ethical issues occurring therein.
11. Editors supervise integrity of published scientific research, investigate any irregularities noticed in the text, and should a need arise, suggest corrections in the text.
12. In the event of any complaints regarding violations of ethical guidelines in relation to a submitted manuscript, editors take appropriate measures as prescribed on the website of Lublin Pedagogical Journal.
13. Editorial team respects the author’s right to obtain additional information and support from members of the editorial team with regard to formal preparation and submission of a manuscript.

Reviewer responsibilities

1. Before commencing assessment of the paper, each reviewer should determine their professional competences and practical possibilities to prepare the review within the determined deadline. Should reviewers have any doubts, they should refuse to complete the assignment.
2. By accepting the request to review a manuscript submitted to Lublin Pedagogical Journal, the reviewer makes a Conflict of Interest Statement. Reviewers are not allowed to review a manuscript, if there is a conflict of interest, or even if such a conflict is only likely to occur.
3. Reviewers should refuse to review a manuscript if they lack sufficient time to meet the deadline for its preparation.
4. If there emerge significant causes that could not be foreseen due to which the work will not be completed on time, the reviewer should notify the secretary of the editorial team of this fact. 
5. Reviewers must deliver their honest, reliable and impartial judgement on the academic work. Reviewer’s comments should be constructive and substance-related. It is unacceptable to criticise an Author as a person. For empirical research, reviewers are also expected to assess the adequacy of ethical procedures concerning participant recruitment, the acquisition of informed consent, and the protection of the welfare, well-being of research participants.
6. Reviewers are expected to evaluate whether the research presented has been conducted in accordance with ethical principles and standards applicable to the social and educational sciences, particularly with regard to studies involving children, young people, and other participants belonging to vulnerable groups or groups requiring special protection.
7. Reviewers keep details of the review confidential to unauthorised persons.
8. All reviews are delivered anonymously, and the editorial team fails to transmit Author’s data to the reviewers.
9. Reviewer should inform the editor of any suspected violation of copyright in the reviewed paper, fabrication of data, potentially redundant publication, as well as any other ethical issue related to the reviewed manuscript.
10. Reviewers are expected to deliver a clear final recommendation.

Author responsibilities

1. Editorial team of Lublin Pedagogical Journal allows for submission of authentic original author’s manuscripts. An author makes a declaration about authenticity of the submitted manuscript.
2. Whenever an author uses works and figures by other authors, this must be clearly stated.
3. In case of multi-author works, all authors must complete a declaration about their percent contribution to the development of the publication.
4. Authorship should be credited only to those individuals who made a significant contribution to the development of the manuscript, with provision of information what their contribution specifically involved, e.g. conceptualisation, investigation, results analysis, interpretation and discussion, etc.
5. Authorship of the paper cannot omit persons who made a significant contribution to the development of the manuscript.
6. Authors must make a statement attesting to the originality of the paper they have submitted, that it does not violate any third-party rights and it has not been published or submitted for publication in another journal.
7. Author’s duties include disclosure of all funding sources of the projects in the study, indicating the contribution of research institutions, associations and other entities (affiliation and/or relevant reference).
8. Authors are required to adhere to data-sharing policies. They may be requested to make available the raw data on which the submitted manuscript is based, subject to the principles of confidentiality, personal data protection, and the preservation of research participants’ anonymity.
9. In the case of articles reporting original empirical research, authors are required to specify the ethical principles relevant to their studies, including information on approvals and consent procedures required for research involving children, adolescents, persons with disabilities, and other vulnerable groups, as well as the procedures implemented to ensure voluntary participation and informed consent of research participants. Authors are furthermore required to ensure the anonymisation of data collected from participants in educational research.
10. Authors conducting research in educational, care, rehabilitation, or correctional settings are required to ensure the safety of research participants, the voluntary nature of their participation, and the protection of their dignity, privacy, and well-being.
11. Authors should aspire to use scholarly language that reflects the principles of equal treatment, non-discrimination, and respect for the social, cultural, and educational diversity of the individuals and groups under study.
12. Should authors discover significant errors or inconsistencies in their paper, they are obliged to immediately notify the editorial team of the journal of this fact, in order to withdraw the paper or correct the existing errors.
13. Authors are obliged to submit papers written in proper Polish or English.
14. Authors must submit a declaration about the use of artificial intelligence tools during writing of the submitted manuscript.
15. Authors must declare a potential conflict of interest – personal, financial, professional, political or religious, that may influence the judgement on their paper. In case of multi-author papers, such declarations must be made by all authors.

Complaints and re-examination requests

1. Any complaints about the journal or the editorial team of Lublin Pedagogical Journal should be submitted to the editor-in-chief to (stanislawa.byra@mail.umcs.pl) or to the deputy editor-in-chief to (monika.parchomiuk@mail.umcs.pl).
2. Issues complained about may include inappropriate performance of tasks related to the operations of the journal.
3. Complaints about the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief should be submitted to the Publishing House of Maria Curie-Skłodowska University [Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej] to (wydawnictwo@umcs.eu).
4. Complaints shall be processed and charges responded to within two months of the date of submission of a complaint.

Indexing

CEJSH, ERIH PLUS, CEEOL, DOAJ (Directory of Open Access Journals), ICI Journals Master List, EBSCO, Google Scholar

Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence

1. The Journal permits the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools solely in a supportive capacity. Full responsibility for the content of manuscripts, peer reviews, and editorial decisions shall at all times rest with a human author, reviewer, or editor.
2. Disclosure of AI use is not required where such use was limited to linguistic, stylistic, punctuation, or technical formatting corrections.
3. Disclosure is, however, required where AI tools have been used for the generation or substantial processing of content, the identification and selection of literature, the preparation of source summaries, the translation of substantial portions of text, or the analysis of empirical material. Such disclosure should specify the name of the tool used, its version, and the scope and purpose of its application.
4. An AI tool may not be identified as an author or co-author of a publication.
5. Authors bear full responsibility for any work prepared with the assistance of AI tools, including, in particular, the accuracy and reliability of the information presented, the correctness and authenticity of citations, and the completeness and accuracy of the bibliography.
6. Reviewers and members of the Editorial Board must not delegate the preparation of peer reviews, editorial recommendations, or publication decisions to AI tools.
7. Manuscripts, peer reviews, or any other documents related to the editorial process should not be entered into AI tools, as this may involve disclosure to a third party and could result in a breach of confidentiality.
8. The Journal does not rely on AI-detection tools as the sole basis for raising allegations against an author, recognising the limited reliability of such technologies. Where justified concerns arise, the Editorial Board may request clarification from the Author regarding the manner in which the manuscript was prepared.
9. Failure to comply with the above provisions may result in the rejection of a manuscript, the revocation of a decision accepting a manuscript for publication, or the retraction of an article that has already been published.

Content Archiving and Storage

1. Lubelski Rocznik Pedagogiczny ensures the long-term storage of and access to published academic content.
2. The Journal operates through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform enabling:

a) permanent storage of published articles,
b) archiving of publication metadata,
c) management of journal publications and resources,
d) maintenance of continuous access to digital content.

3. The Publisher performs regular backups of publication data and materials through the UMCS Digital Library, thereby ensuring the safety and storage of the Journal's scholarly output.
4. All published articles remain available in the Journal's archive in accordance with the principles of open and permanent access.
5. Should additional digital storage and archiving systems be implemented, relevant information will be published on the Journal's website.

ISSN: 0137-6136