All articles submitted to the editorial board of the "Pedagogical Sciences: Theory and Practice" are subject to review. (external and internal reviews). The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of the scientific article, its

compliance with the requirements of the journal and provides a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the materials of the article. Only those articles that are scientifically influential and contribute to solving actual problems and tasks are accepted for publishing. The purpose of the review is to facilitate the strict selection of author's manuscripts for publication and to make specific recommendations for their improvement. The main purpose of the review procedure is to eliminate instances of poorly-practiced scientific research.

To improve the quality of the review process it involves the members of the magazine editorial board and external reviewers who have an academic degree of a candidate or doctor of sciences and have sufficient experience in research in the relevant field.

The review procedure is conducted confidentially (double-blind reviewing, when the reviewers don't know the identity of authors, and vice versa). An interaction between the author and the reviewers is carried out by correspondence by e-mail through the responsible secretary of the journal "Pedagogical Sciences: Theory and Practice".

Review of articles in the scientific publication "Pedagogical Sciences: Theory and Practice" is not paid.

The length of the review should not exceed one month from the date the article was received by the reviewer.

With minor comments that require only editorial changes, and with the consent of the authors, it may be decided to accept accept the article for publication.

The final decision on the possibility of publishing the article is taken by the editorial board, taking into account the received review (reviews), as well as the motivated response of the author(s) of the article.

The editorial informs the author about results of the review by e-mail. In case of at least one negative review the paper is rejected, and the author is given the opportunity to review the text of the review, in particular, if he does not agree with the conclusions of the reviewer.


1. Compliance with the theme of the scientific profile of the journal.

2. Actuality and practical significance of the topic.

3. The title of the article reflects the content and purpose of this article.

4. The keywords are the subject of the article.

5. Scientific argumentation is logical and convincing.

6. The results of the study are presented methodologically correctly.

7. The conclusions fully and accurately illustrate the results of the study, showing that it is new and offers suggestions for future research.

8. Necessity of processing, reduction, expansion of some parts.

9. Visibility and informative of tables and illustrations.

10. Correctness of writing scientific terms and abbreviations.

11. Number and relevance of references and literary sources.


1. Accept the article in the provided form.

2. Accept the article subject to the elimination of a small number of shortcomings.

3. The article requires substantial processing.

4. Publication of the article is not possible.