Peer-Review

General provisions.

The Journal "Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin" is the reviewed scientific edition.

Accepted for consideration manuscripts of articles sent for review to assess their scientific content several reviewers of the corresponding profile.

Manuscripts of articles (further – articles), acted in edition, have some stages of reviewing.

1. The expertise of the scientific level of the article performed by the editorial Board and managing editor in accordance with scientific specialization of the submitted paper (open peer review).

2. Scientific reviewing of article, its conformity to subjects of journal, to requirements to registration, assessment of completeness of the reviews carried out by the editorial Board of the electronic journal, editor-in-chief (single blind reviewing).

3. The manuscript is sent for review to one (or several) of the members of the editorial Board or the invited experts with scientific specialization is closest to the theme of the article (double-blind peer review).

The positive review is not sufficient grounds for the publication of the article.

The originals of all levels are stored at least 1 year in the editorial office of the scientific electronic journal "Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin".

 

The timing of the review

1. The beginning of the review. The beginning for the calculation of the period of review is the assignment of a registered article status "Accepted" (on the website records the date of reception of the manuscript for consideration). The status confirms the compliance of the manuscript with the requirements of adopted edition. (See. read more: the General order of publication)

2. The peer-review process. Accepted for consideration manuscripts of articles sent for review to assess their scientific content several specialists of the corresponding profile (at the same time is assigned a status - "under consideration"). The total period in accordance with the international practice and recommendations of international ethical committees to 1 month from the date of transfer of the manuscript for review.

3. A re-review. If you received the recommendations of the reviewers of the journal decided "to recommend taking into account corrections of deficiencies noted" that the author sent recommendations and issues for correction. The manuscript corrected by the author are again sent for review. The author should motivate the changes.

4. The acceptance for publication. The decision about acceptance for publication is based on received positive recommendations from the reviewers of the journal (at the same time are assigned the status "accepted for publication").

5. The refusal to publish. If you received the recommendations of the reviewers of the journal decided "not to recommend for publication", the author receives a reasoned refusal to publish. Manuscripts not recommended for publication, repeatedly are not considered.

 

Purpose of review

Defining the purpose of the review - all editors information for decision-making. The editors make a decision based on the reviewers ' advice.

The review also provides guidance on the deficiencies and inconsistencies of the manuscript to the assessment criteria. The review may contain recommendations to improve the quality of articles for publication, but the reviewers have no obligation to provide the authors with constructive, detailed justification of all inconsistencies. If in the opinion of the reviewer the manuscript under review does not meet the criteria for publication, then the review shall contain only the main causes of failure.

 

The main criteria of assessment

- represents whether the article is of interest to scholars and readers of the journal;

- the novelty of the content of the article, the author's contribution;

- as far as the content of the article corresponds to modern achievements in the relevant scientific field;

- as far as the presentation of the article meets the modern requirements of the methodology relevant branch of science.

- does the content of the article stated in the title;

- compliance with the structure of research articles (Full Articles);

- if the article has strong evidence for its conclusions;

- the scientific level of article, from the point of view of language, style, illustrative material, tables, charts, figures and formulas.