Journal
The AILACTE Journal
Aims & Scope
Topics that are appropriate for the journal include teaching and learning strategies; diversity, equity, inclusion, and social justice; responding to state mandates; candidate and faculty recruitment; tenure track and the use of adjuncts and professors of practice; budget issues; candidate and program assessment; program leadership; clinical practice and partnerships; policy changes; program models; etc.
Submission Guidelines
Review Process
Manuscripts and all related materials are due. Submit materials online (on the AILACTE Journal webpage).
Manuscripts are processed. Initial screening is performed by editors. Manuscripts are peer reviewed by Journal Editorial Board members.
Scores are aggregated for each manuscript and rank ordered. Decisions are made about which manuscripts to publish.
Decisions are sent to authors with feedback. Authors asked to make minor revisions prior to publication.
Manuscripts are copyedited and prepared for publication. Galley proofs are reviewed and edited.
Journal is emailed to institutions, authors, Editorial Board, and the AILACTE Board.
Statement of Ethics
The AILACTE Journal upholds the highest standards of integrity, fairness, and objectivity. All editorial decisions are made impartially, free from conflicts of interest, and with respect for all contributors.
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy
AI tools that support authors in improving the clarity, grammar, language, or organization of their own work fall under “assistive use” and do not require disclosure. These tools function in a similar manner to spelling or grammar checkers and do not create substantive scholarly content.
Examples include AI tools used for:
Because these tools do not generate original scholarly content, authors are not required to disclose their use. However, authors remain fully responsible for ensuring that their submission is accurate, original, and meets standards of rigorous academic scholarship.
When AI tools generate or substantially contribute to text, images, code, data analysis, or other research-related material, their use must be clearly disclosed at the time of manuscript submission through a dedicated statement on AI use. A “substantial contribution” refers to any AI-generated content that influences the intellectual content of the manuscript, including interpretation, argumentation, synthesis of literature, or presentation of findings. Minor or assistive uses (e.g., grammar correction or sentence-level edits) do not constitute substantial contribution. When in doubt, authors should err on the side of disclosure.
Examples of generative AI use that require disclosure include:
Authors must verify the accuracy of all AI-generated outputs and check the original sources, including citations, factual claims, and interpretations. AI tools may produce inaccurate information or fabricated references; therefore, authors are responsible for confirming all sources and ensuring proper attribution to original works.
Disclosure Guidance
Generative AI tools must not be listed as authors. When generative AI has been used in the preparation of a manuscript, its use must be both disclosed and appropriately cited in accordance with APA guidelines. AI tools should not be treated as primary scholarly sources but may be cited to document their use. Authors should follow current APA guidelines for citing generative AI tools, including providing in-text citations and reference entries where applicable.
A disclosure statement should be included in a section titled “Declaration of AI Use” at the end of the manuscript, immediately before the reference list. If no AI or AI-assisted tools were used in the preparation of the manuscript, this section is not required.
Sample disclosure statement:
During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of AI tool] to [describe the purpose, e.g., improve language clarity, assist with data visualization, or support literature organization]. Following the use of this tool, the author(s) carefully reviewed and revised the content as necessary and accept full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, and originality of the final manuscript.
Certain uses of AI are inconsistent with the ethical standards of scholarly research and are therefore not permitted in submissions to the AILACTE Journal.
Prohibited uses include:
The use of generative AI by reviewers and editors in the peer-review process is strictly limited in order to protect confidentiality and scholarly integrity.
While reviewers are not expected to verify every reference exhaustively; they should exercise reasonable diligence when:
In the event references are questioned, reviewers may request that authors verify, correct, or provide access to original sources through their peer review.
If concerns arise regarding the undisclosed or inappropriate use of AI technologies in a manuscript or published article, the journal will conduct an investigation consistent with recognized standards of publication ethics, including requesting clarification or correction from authors. Failure to disclose significant AI-generated content may result in rejection of the manuscript or retraction of a published article.
The journal recognizes that detecting AI-generated content may not always be definitive. Concerns regarding AI use may arise through:
Any concerns will be evaluated using editorial judgment and supporting evidence, rather than relying on a single method of detection. If concerns arise regarding the undisclosed or inappropriate use of AI technologies, the Editor(s) will initiate direct communication with the author(s) to request clarification, original sources, drafts, supporting materials, etc. in an effort to resolve concerns.
Authors will be provided an opportunity to respond to concerns through the Peer Review process and, where appropriate, may appeal editorial decisions by providing additional documentation or clarification.