Editorial Policies

Section Policies


  • Checked Open Submissions
  • Checked Indexed
  • Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process


Editorial responsibility. Responsible editors are responsible for everything published in the scientific publication. We strive to: meet the needs of authors and readers; continually improve the publication of each issue; adhere to procedures that ensure the quality of published materials; to defend the freedom of author's thought; to introduce the principles of academic integrity; prevent the discrediting of intellectual and ethical standards by commercial interests; always ready to make corrections, explanations and apologies if needed.

Relations with authors. The decision of the responsible editors to accept or refuse the article to publication should be based on the significance of the article, its originality, clarity of presentation, reliability of the information presented in it and its relevance to the subject of the scientific journal. Responsible editors should not change the decision to publish articles except when the publication can cause serious misunderstandings. The procedure for reviewing articles by other scholars is clearly defined, and the editors are ready to justify any significant deviation from the described procedure. The scientific publication has a clearly defined mechanism for filing the appeal by the authors of the decision editors. Responsible editors are obliged to publish full requirements to the authors of the articles, to inform about the date of submission of the article to the editorial board and the decision to publish.

Relations with reviewers. Responsible editors should publicize full requirements for reviewers, including the requirement to keep the reviewed material confidential. They have the right to require the reviewer to disclose any information about a possible conflict of interest before giving consent to a review. Responsible editors should follow the procedure for protecting the anonymity of reviewers if they do not use an open review system, which should be informed both by authors and reviewers.

In addition, editors have the right: 1) to encourage reviewers to write comments on ethical issues or the likelihood of malicious behavior in connection with the conduct of the review procedure; 2) ask reviewers to comment on the degree of originality of the article under consideration and to pay attention to the possibility of duplicate publications or plagiarism (compilation); 3) Provide, whenever possible, to reviewers tools to improve access to the publications directly relevant to a peer-reviewed article (for example, hyperlinks to quoted articles and bibliographic searches); 4) to inform authors about all comments about their articles made by reviewers, if they do not contain offensive remarks or slander; 5) to note the contribution of reviewers to the activities of the scientific journal; 6) analyze the quality of work of reviewers and take measures to ensure that it is carried out at a high level; 7) develop and maintain a database of reviewers, update it on the basis of analysis of the results of their work; 8) refuse to cooperate with those reviewers who constantly write incorrect, untimely or poor-content reviews.

Relations with members of the editorial board. Responsibilities of the responsible editors are: 1) to create procedures that ensure that the articles of the members of the editorial board are considered as equally unbiased as the articles of other authors; 2) determine which of the members of the editorial board can actively contribute to improving the management of scientific journal; 3) clearly explain to members of the editorial board their functional responsibilities, which include: performance of the functions of representatives of the scientific journal; support and promotion of the scientific journal; search for the best authors and the best articles; analysis of articles submitted for publication; execution of orders on writing editorial papers, reviews and comments on scientific works in the field of pedagogical sciences.

Editing and review processes. Responsible editors should ensure fair, unbiased and timely review of articles that are proposed for publication. They must apply procedures that allow the confidentiality of materials submitted to the scientific publication to be reviewed during the review, in particular: to ensure that the experts included in the editing process (review) have sufficient qualifications and awareness in relevant issues, recommendations and facts on reviewing and managing scientific publications; Be aware of recent reviews on reviews and new tools that can be applied in the process of writing a review; choose the methods of review that are most suitable for the scientific publication; periodically analyze approaches to reviewing for possible optimization.

Providing of the quality. Responsible editors should take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality of their published material, as well as apply procedures for detecting falsified data, to form a scientific journal style on the basis of objective methods.

Protection of personal data. Responsible editors must comply with the law of confidentiality in the jurisdiction to which they are directly related. In addition, in any case, they should always protect the confidentiality of individual information obtained during the research or other professional activities.

Actions in the event of suspicion of malicious behavior. Responsible editors should take certain measures in the event of suspicion of malicious behavior or accusation in it. This duty applies to both published and unpublished materials. Ethically, they are required to respond to such cases. First of all, responsible editors should to require for clarification from the authors of such articles. If they receive an unsatisfactory response, they should contact the employer or the relevant organization with a request to investigate.

Ensuring scientific reliability in publications. Mistakes or deceptive assertions must be corrected as soon as possible with further communication to the general public. Responsible editors should take all measures to verify the reliability of archived published material, as well as to check whether the published material is securely archived, to apply systems for prompt access by authors to original research materials.

Intellectual Property. Responsible editors should be attentive to intellectual property issues and interact with the publisher when dealing with potential violations of intellectual property laws and agreements. In their competence, they use tools for detecting plagiarism in articles submitted to a scientific journal, sponsor authors who have been infringed or those who become victims of plagiarism (for example, to request a recall of articles or removal of materials from a website).

Complaints. Responsible editors must respond quickly to complaints and do their utmost to satisfy the inquiries of those who are not satisfied with the complaint.

Conflicts of interest. Responsible editors should have procedures to resolve their own conflicts of interest, as well as conflicts of interest of their employees, authors, reviewers, and members of the editorial board. The scientific journal has a well-documented mechanism for submitting articles from their editors, staff members and members of the editorial board to ensure impartial consideration.

2014 22   29 Том 328
2015 9   22 29
2016 1   02 3-4
2017 1 2 3 4
2018 1 2 3-4


Journal Content