Editorial Policies

Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

This journal has adopted a double blind reviewing policy, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.

Referee is person who can provide a high quality review for the article which match his\her  area of expertise and have no conflict of interest.

Referee must treat the materials he\she receive as confidential documents. This means he\she can’t share them with anyone without prior authorization from the editor. Since peer review is confidential, he\she also must not share information about the review with anyone without permission from the editors and authors.

Review will help the editor decide whether or not to publish the article. Giving the overall opinion and general observations of the article is essential. The comments should be courteous and constructive, and should not include any personal remarks or personal details including referee name.

Referee should explain and support his\her  judgments so that both editors and authors are able to fully understand the reasoning behind his\her  comments.

The editor ultimately decides whether to accept or reject the article.  The editor will weigh all views and may call for a third opinion or ask the author for a revised paper before making a decision.

Author can contact the editor to find out whether the article was accepted or rejected.


  • Summarize the article in a short paragraph. This shows the editor you have read and understood the research.
  • Give your main impressions of the article, including whether it is novel and interesting, whether it has a sufficient impact and adds to the knowledge base.
  • Point out any journal-specific points – does it adhere to the journal’s standards?
  • If you suspect plagiarism, fraud or have other ethical concerns, raise your suspicions with the editor, providing as much detail as possible.
  • Give specific comments and suggestions, including about layout and format, Title, Abstract, Structure, Method, statistical errors, Results, Conclusion, language and References.

When referee make a recommendation, it is worth considering the categories the editor most likely uses for classifying the article:

  • Reject (explain reason in report)
  • Accept without revision
  • Revise – either major or minor (explain the revision that is required, and indicate to the editor whether or not you would be happy to review the revised article)


  1. Болбас Валерій Сергійович – кандидат педагогічних наук (13.00.01 – загальна педагогіка, історія педагогіки та освіти), доцент, перший проректор Закладу освіти «Мозирський державний педагогічний університет імені І.П. Шамякіна» (Мозир, Республіка Білорусь);
  2. Кириленко Світлана Володимирівна – кандидат педагогічних наук (13.00.07), начальник відділу інноваційної діяльності та дослідно-експериментальної роботи Інституту інноваційних технологій і змісту освіти Міністерства освіти і науки України (Київ, Україна);
  3. Лунячек Вадим Едуардович – доктор педагогічних наук (13.00.04), професор, завідувач сектора організації вечірньої форми навчання факультету підготовки магістрів державного управління Харківського регіонального інституту державного управління Національної академії державного управління при Президентові України (Харків, Україна);
  4. Михайличенко Олег Володимирович – доктор педагогічних наук (13.00.01), професор, завідувач кафедри методики викладання суспільних дисциплін Сумського державного педагогічного університету імені А.С. Макаренка (Суми, Україна);
  5. Сарієнко Владислав Костянтинович – кандидат педагогічних наук (13.00.01 –теорія та історія педагогіки), доцент, відмінник народної освіти, доцент кафедри природничо-математичних дисциплінДВНЗ «Донбаський державний педагогічний університет» (Слов’янськ, Україна).


Publishing Ethics

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals.

The journal welcomes original empirical investigations. The papers may represent a variety of theoretical perspectives and different methodological approaches. They may rest on the full spectrum of established methodologies, from laboratory experiments to field observations. The major criteria in the review and the selection process concern the significance of the contribution to the area of learning and instruction.

Editorial board is used the principles of ethics of scientific publications upon recommendations of The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)

Duties Of Editors

  • Publication decision
  • Fair play
  • Confidentiality
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
  • Involvement and cooperation in investigations

Duties Of Reviewers

  • Contribution to Editorial Decision
  • Promptness
  • Confidentiality
  • Standards of Objectivity
  • Acknowledgement of Source
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Duties Of Authors

  • Reporting standards
  • Data Access and Retention
  • Originality and Plagiarism
  • Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
  • Acknowledgement of Sources
  • Authorship of the Paper
  • Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
  • Fundamental errors in published works

Ulrichs Web

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge

Editorial board is used the principles of ethics of scientific publications upon recommendations of The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)



http://justclickit.ru/flash/alfa/alfa%20(859).gifTo receive the personal identifier of the author ORCID make registration on the site https://orcid.org/register, receive the digital code and give it to editorial board with the article.