clear_all

EDITORIAL POLICY

  • Purpose of the publication – to highlight and promote contemporary scientific research and disseminate scientific achievements. *Scientific Bulletin: Pedagogical Sciences* adheres to an open-access policy for users, based on the principles of free dissemination and exchange of scientific information. The editorial board of the journal adheres to ethical standards, drawing on the valuable experience of authoritative international journals and publishers. Authors bear full responsibility for the accuracy and content of their articles. The journal’s editorial policy is based on the following principles:
    • objectivity and impartiality in the selection of articles;
    • preserving all structural components of the article;
    • peer review of articles;
    • compliance with copyright laws;
    • adherence to the magazine's publication schedule.

    The editorial board of the journal condemns instances of plagiarism in articles and strives to take measures to prevent it. Efforts are underway to include the journal in catalogs and scientometric databases with the aim of integrating it into the global scientific information space and improving the publication’s ranking.

    Principles of Professional Ethics in the Work of the Editorial Board

    The editorial board of the academic journal*ScientificBulletin: PedagogicalSciences* isresponsible for the publication of authors’ works, which requires adherence to the following fundamental principles:

    • When accepting articles for publication, the editorial board is guided by the reliability of the data and the scientific significance of the submitted work;
    • The editorial board evaluates the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship, social status, or political views;
    • Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for consideration must not be used for personal purposes or disclosed to third parties without the author’s written consent. Information or ideas obtained during the editing process and related to potential benefits must be kept confidential and must not be used for personal gain;
    • The editorial board will not publish any information if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it constitutes plagiarism;
    • The editorial board responds to all complaints regarding manuscripts under review or published materials, and, in the event of a dispute, takes all necessary measures to restore any rights that have been violated.

    The peer review process

    The purpose of peer review is to improve the quality of the scientific articles published in the journal.

    The peer review process for the *Scientific Bulletin: Pedagogical Sciences* is conducted in the following formats:

    • open peer review by an official reviewer—an external expert in the relevant field (Ph.D.)—is conducted. The review is submitted to the editorial office by the author;
    • Single-blind peer review by a member of the editorial board—the reviewer knows the author, but the author does not know the reviewer.

    The review is conducted based on the following criteria:

    • the article’s relevance to the journal’s field of study and scope, as well as its academic standard;
    • the content of the article corresponds to the title;
    • the presence of the necessary structural components of the article;
    • whether the article's content offers any new insights.

    The peer review process runs from the article submission deadline until the start of the editorial board meeting (usually two weeks).

    The editorial board checks submitted articles for plagiarism using appropriate software.

    If the review indicates that the article requires revision, the author is given one week to make the necessary changes and resubmit the article. The revised version is then resubmitted to the reviewer for a decision. If the reviewer gives a positive evaluation and the editor-in-chief approves, the article is accepted for publication.

    Ethical Principles in the Work of a Reviewer

    The reviewer conducts a scholarly evaluation of the authors’ materials; consequently, their actions must be impartial, as reflected in adherence to the following principles:

    • A manuscript received for review is considered a confidential document and must not be shared with or discussed by third parties who have not been authorized to do so by the editorial board;
    • The reviewer is required to provide an objective and well-reasoned assessment of the research findings presented. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable;
    • Unpublished data obtained from manuscripts submitted for review must not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes;
    • A reviewer who believes they lack the necessary qualifications to evaluate a manuscript, or who cannot remain objective, should notify the editor-in-chief and request to be excluded from the review process for that manuscript.

    Principles that authors of scientific publications should follow

    The author (or group of authors) acknowledges that they are responsible for the originality and accuracy of the research findings, which requires adherence to the following principles:

    • Authors of articles must present reliable results from their research. Fabricated claims are unacceptable;
    • Authors must ensure that the research results presented in the submitted article are entirely original. Any borrowed passages or statements must be properly cited, with the author and original source clearly indicated. Excessive borrowing, as well as plagiarism in any form—including uncredited citations, paraphrasing, or claiming ownership of others’ research results—is unethical and unacceptable;
    • It is necessary to acknowledge the contributions of all individuals who have influenced the course of the research in any way; in particular, the article must include references to the works used in the course of the research;
    • Authors must not submit to the journal a manuscript that has been submitted to another journal and is currently under review, nor an article that has already been published in other sources (including online publications);
    • All individuals who made a significant contribution to the study must be listed as co-authors. It is not permissible to list individuals who did not participate in the study as co-authors;
    • If the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the article during the review process or after its publication, he or she must notify the journal’s editorial board as soon as possible;
    • The editorial board is not responsible for the opinions, judgments, findings, and conclusions expressed by the authors of articles published in the Scientific Bulletin. These do not necessarily reflect the views of the editorial board. The authors are responsible for the accuracy of the information in the articles, as well as for the correctness of titles, names, and quotations.