Rules of Reviewing Articles in the Scientific Magazine
The objective of reviewing is to participate in selection of authors’ manuscripts to be published in the scientific magazine and to offer in case of need certain recommendations to improve them. The review must estimate the scientific article objectively and contain the analysis of its scientific, methodical merits and demerits.
Reviewing is confidential (the article under review has no information about the author of the manuscript). Violation of confidentiality is possible only in case when the reviewer states unauthenticity or illegal borrowing of materials (without the reference to the source of borrowing) presented in the article.
Reviewing of the article is made within two weeks. Two reviews are written by different reviewers to one article.
The review is signed by the reviewer and given to the Publishing Department of YSPU named after K.D. Ushinsky and it is stored in the editorial staff.
Results of reviewing are presented at the meeting of the Editorial magazine before formation of the contents of the future edition. Solution on possibility to publish the article after reviewing is made by the members of the editorial board.
The volume of the review is defined by the reviewer’s preferences, however it is necessary that the review should reflect the following materials:
assessment of relevance and novelty of the article;
assessment of the theoretical and/or practical significance of the article;
conclusion about the level of structuredness of the material of the article;
conclusion about completeness of bibliography;
assessment of compliance of the narrative style of the text of the article to the style of the scientific magazine;
conclusion about existence/lack of the actual mistakes;
conclusion about compliance/discrepancy of methodologies / methods of research to work objectives;
assessment of reasonableness of interpretation of the received results;
assessment of validity of the conclusions presented in the article;
indication if requirements to the article typography are considered: compliance of volume of the article, presence of the summary in the Russian and English languages, presence of the bibliography and references to it in the text, presence of keywords;
conclusion about compliance to the subject (problematics) of the magazine.
The reviewer’s conclusion (is chosen from the mentioned above)
I, (family name, (first) name, patronymic), recommend / don’t recommend to publish the article (the title of the article) in magazine: without completion on condition of taking into consideration the reviewer’s remarks (without re-reviewing); on condition of completion and re-reviewing.
These criteria are only advisory in nature. Every certain article demands an individual approach to chose criteria for its assessment.
Head of the Publishing Department of
YSPU named after K.D. Ushinsky