编辑政策
宗旨及范围
The journal publishes original scientific articles on pedagogy and psychology for a deep and detailed study of current issues of academic science and specific proposals to improve the scientific potential of the country. The journal is for researchers and practitioners in general pedagogy and history of education, theory and technology of vocational training, pedagogical and social psychology, as well as for a wide range of readers interested in the issues of the development of education and psychology in modern society.
同⾏评审过程
The procedure for reviewing articles
The manuscripts submitted for publication in the journal are checked for the formal requirements and the journal profile compliance. Materials that do not fulfill these conditions are returned to the authors with a reasoned refusal.
In case of a positive decision of the preliminary examination, the manuscript is sent to the editorial board members according to the profile of the scientific research. In agreement with the editor-in-chief or his deputies, they send articles to external reviewers, who are scientists from Tambov or nonresident universities and scientific organizations.
The journal has a “double blind” peer review (reviewers receive the article without the authors’ names and coordinates, so-called “blind” version, which excludes subjective evaluation, the authors receive a review copy or a reasoned refusal without the reviewers’ names). The review period is 3 weeks. This period is controlled by the editorial and can be extended at the request of the reviewer.
Reviewers should agree to review only those manuscripts for which they have sufficient knowledge to evaluate, and which they can review within the proposed or mutually agreed time frame. The reviewer may refuse to review if they receive an article that does not comply with their scientific direction. If the reviewer refuses due to the lack of sufficient free time, they should recommend another specialist on the subject of the submitted material (for more information: Responsibility of the reviewer).
The review is confidential. The author of the reviewed work is allowed to read the text of the review. Upon receipt of a positive review without comments, the manuscript is accepted for publication, which is reported to the author. If the reviewer evaluates the manuscript positively but suggests some corrections, the editorial sends a review and the manuscript for revision to the author. The deadline for revision and correction after reviewers' feedback is within 2 months in the form of a revised version with a cover letter about all changes.
If a negative review is received, a reasoned refusal is sent to the author. The last name of the reviewer is not specified and further contacts between the author and the reviewer are carried out through the editorial of the journal.
If the author and the reviewer have unsolvable contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send it to another reviewer. In conflict situations, the final decision on publication is made by the editor-in-chief.
The editorial board provides manuscripts reviews at the request of the authors and expert councils of the Higher Attestation Commission. The editorial of the journal keeps reviews for at least 5 years.
Articles accepted by the editorial board are divided into categories under the scientific areas in which the journal specializes. Information about accepted articles is posted on the journal's website.
Short reports, letters to the editor, reviews, discussion materials, personalities, etc. are only subject to a preliminary examination by the members of the editorial board following their scientific directions and are not sent to external reviews.
REVIEWER’S CODE OF ETHICS
Reviewer:
1) agrees (reports this to the editor) to review only those manuscripts for which they have sufficient knowledge to evaluate, and which they can review in time;
2) provides the journal with accurate and truthful information about its personal and professional knowledge and experience;
3) respects the confidentiality of the review and does not disclose any details of the manuscript or review during or after review to anyone, except those persons authorized by the journal;
4) does not use the information obtained in the course of the review for own benefit or that of other persons or organizations, or to harm others or discredit others;
5) does not directly contact the authors without the prior permission of the journal;
6) informs the editorial board of possible conflicts of interest and apply for advice to the journal if they are not sure whether the existing situation constitutes a conflict of interest or not;
7) does not allow the content of the review to be influenced by the origin of the manuscript, nationality, religious affiliation, political or other views of its authors, or commercial considerations;
8) writes the review objectively and constructively, refraining from hostile or inflammatory statements, and defamatory or humiliating comments;
9) understands that, as a researcher, they also need constructive reviews of colleagues, and therefore reviews diligently, indicates relevant published works that are not referenced in the manuscript;
10) should be specific in its criticism and confirm with solid evidence and appropriate references its general conclusions, such as “this work was done earlier”, to help editors form correct assessments and decisions while respecting objective treatment of authors;
11) in the review reports a reasoned listing of positive qualities of the material, a reasoned listing of defects of the material, a general assessment of the material and a recommendation for the editorial board.
开放式获取政策
Статьи этого журнала доступны всем желающим с момента публикации, что обеспечивает свободный открытый доступ к результатам исследований и способствует прогрессу науки и медицины.