Peer-review process

Ethical guidelines

Editorial board of the collection "Dnipro Academy of Continuing Education Herald". Series: "Philosophy. Pedagogy" supports a certain level of requirements for the selection and acceptance of articles submitted to the editors. These norms are determined by the scientific direction of the collection and the standards of quality of scientific works and their presentation, adopted by the scientific community.

The editors call for adherence to the principles of the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications developed by the Committee for the Ethics of Scientific Publications (COPE).

Ethical obligations of the editors of the collection

The editor must review without prejudice all manuscripts submitted for publication, evaluate each as appropriate, regardless of race, religion, nationality, or the position or place of work of the author (s).

Information is not allowed to be published if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarism.

All materials submitted for publication are carefully selected and reviewed. The Editorial Board reserves the right to reject the article or return it for revision. The author is obliged to revise the article in accordance with the comments of reviewers or the editorial board.

The editor's decision to accept the article for publication is based on such characteristics of the article as the importance of the results, originality, quality of presentation of the material and compliance with the profile of the collection. Manuscripts may be rejected without peer review if the editor considers that they do not match the profile of the collection. In making such decisions, the editor may consult with members of the editorial board or reviewers.

Ethical obligations of authors

Authors must ensure that they have written completely original articles that have not been published before, and if the authors have used the work or words of others, this has been duly presented in the form of references or quotations in quotation marks.

Submitting an identical article to more than one journal is considered unethical and unacceptable.

The article should be structured, contain enough links and designed as required.

Unscrupulous or knowingly inaccurate statements in the article are unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Correspondence with the editors should ensure that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the article, as well as agree to its publication.

The authors of the articles are fully responsible for the content of the articles and for the very fact of their publication. The editors of the collection are not responsible to the authors for possible damage caused by the publication of the article. The editors have the right to remove the article if it turns out that in the process of publishing the article violated someone's rights or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics. The editorial board informs the author about the fact of deleting the article.

Ethical obligations of reviewers

To ensure the objectivity of the evaluation of manuscripts, the editors follow a double "blind" review.

Since the review of manuscripts is an important step in the publishing process and, thus, in the implementation of the scientific method as such, every scientist is obliged to perform a certain share of reviewing work.

If the selected reviewer is not sure that his / her qualifications correspond to the level of research presented in the manuscript, he / she should return the manuscript immediately.

The reviewer must objectively assess the quality of the manuscript, the experimental and theoretical work presented, its interpretation and presentation, and the extent to which the work meets high scientific and literary standards. The reviewer must respect the intellectual independence of the authors.

Reviewers should adequately explain and justify their judgments so that editors and authors can understand what their comments are based on. Any statement that an observation, conclusion or argument has been previously published should be accompanied by an appropriate reference.

The reviewer should draw the editor's attention to any significant similarity between this manuscript and any published article or any manuscript submitted to another journal at the same time.

Reviewers should not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations contained in this manuscript without the consent of the author.

In accordance with the requirements of para. 6, sub-paragraph 6 of the order of the Ministry of Education and Science № 32 of 15 January, 2018 "On approval of the Procedure for compiling the List of scientific professional publications of Ukraine" submitted for publication scientific articles are subject to high-quality independent review by scientists conducting research in the specialty to the List, or foreign publications included in the Web of Science Core Collection and / or Scopus, or have monographs or sections of monographs published by international publishers belonging to categories "A", "B" or "C" according to the Research School for Socio-Economic and Natural Sciences of the Environment (SENSE).

In accordance with para. 15 of this order, the Chairman and members of the editorial board are responsible for organizing the review of articles and the observance of academic integrity.

All articles received by the journal "Dnipro Academy of Continuing Education Herald", Series: "Philosophy. Pedagogy " undergo a review procedure which aims to assess the content of the scientific article as objectively as possible and provides a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the article.

Previously unpublished materials that correspond to the subject of the collection are accepted for publication.

The degree of compliance of the article received with the requirements for the preparation of manuscripts for publication in the collection "Dnipro Academy of Continuing Education Herald", Series: "Philosophy. Pedagogy".

The review process is carried out by members of the editorial board. The review procedure is anonymous for the reviewer and the author.

Reviewers evaluate the theoretical and methodological level of the article, its practical value and scientific significance. In addition, the compliance of the article with the principles of ethics is determined in scientific publications and recommendations are provided to eliminate cases of their violation.

Members of the editorial board do not participate in the consideration of their own manuscripts.