Reviewing Process

  1. Editorial Board of the Magazine accepts materials for peer-view, that contain results of original researches that differ by scientific novelty, theoretical and practical significance, and are framed as completed articles and reviews of new scientific issues on pedagogy and psychology as well.
  2. The articles sent to editorial board undergo blind peer view and the expert assessment of committee from the editorial board, according to scientific subject, which the article is based on. Each reviewer is a recognised specialist in the subjects of viewed materials and has scientific publications, issued during the recent 3 years, on the subjects of viewed materials.
  3. The article is accepted to publication in its initial form, if it gets a positive result in the process of blind peer-view and expert assessment of the committee. The article can be accepted after corrections, demanded by the reviewer as well. In this case the article is to be sent to the author for further elaboration, and must be sent back corrected together with the initial variant in 15 days. The article can be recommended for publication after corrections and the second review. To the article it is essential to attach a letter that will contain answers for all the remarks and clarifications to issues highlighted in the artcle.
  4. Editorial Board reverses the rule to disallow the article, supplying the author with a motivated refusal, based on the results of blind peer-view and parallel assessment of the committee. The decision to disallow an article is made in the session of Editorial Board according to recommendations of reviewers and expert committee. The articles that are not recommended for publication by the decision of Editorial Board are not accepted to the second peer-view. The report about a refusal to publish is sent to the author via e-mail. Reviews are stored in the editorial office of the issue within 5 years.
  5. The article, presented for publication, must have Universal Decimal Classification, a title, an annotation, key words; information about authors: degree (without contraction), academic title, position, work place (a complete title of organisation with legal address), (everything is in Russian and in English), contact details of the author: e-mail, phone number, home address (in case of several authors - contact details of all co-authors of the article). 
  6. An essential requirement for the positive peer-view is the presence of bibliographic list (in Russian and in English) to the article, showing scientific literature used in the process of writing the article. It must be in the format defined by the system of Russian index of scientific quotation.
  7. The text of annotation should show: research object, aim of work, research methods, final results and their novelty, field of application and recommendations.