Procedure for reviewing of the manuscripts submitted to the editorial office of the journal "Prepodavatel XXI vek"

1. All the received manuscripts corresponding to the remit of our journal are peer reviewed and appraised.

2. Authors submit the manuscript of the article issued according to "Manuscript Submission Requirements". The articles which do not meet the scientific subject area and the proper design of the journal aren't accepted to consideration.

2.1. The materials which do not meet these terms are returned to the authors with an indication of the reasons for rejecting the manuscripts.

2.2. The materials meeting these terms are directed for reviewing to the members of editorial board supervising this subject matter.

2.3. All our reviewers are acknowledged experts in corresponding scientific fields and have published papers in the area of reviewed paper within the last three years.

3. Reviewers are notified that the provided manuscripts are the intellectual property of the authors and refer to the information not subject to disclosure. Reviewers aren't allowed to make the copy of the articles for their own needs

4. The mode of confidentiality and regulations of "blind" (anonymous) reviewing is observed in the journal. Interaction of authors and reviewers is carried out only through editorial office employees.

4.1. A review is provided to the author of the manuscript without signing and indication of a name, position, place of work of the reviewer.

4.2. The review is provided according to the corresponding request of the expert council the higher attestation Commission of the Russian Federation.

4.3. Authors of submitted manuscripts receive from our Editorial Board a copy of peer review or substantiated refusal. If requested Editorial Board shall send copies of reviews to Minister of Education and Science of Russian Federation.

4.4. All reviews remain deposited in the editorial archive for 5 years. 

5. The review should reflect:

  • relevance of the theme and originality of its disclosure;
  • the most important aspects of the article, its theoretical and/or practical significance;
  • validity of the conclusions formulated by the authors;
  • correct use of the mathematical apparatus;
  • clarity and understandability for the narrative style;
  • completeness and correctness of the list of used sources.

In the final part of the review a clear recommendation of its publication as presented or about the need for its modification and processing of the following formulations has to be made:

  • to recommend the manuscript for the publication;
  • to recommend the manuscript for the publication with minor changes, without sending for repeated reviewing;
  • to recommend to consider the manuscript after eliminating by the author of the reviewer’s remarks, with the subsequent direction for the repeated reviewing;
  • to reject the publication of the manuscript.

6. The modified or revised articles are repeatedly sent for reviewing along with its initial version in the shortest terms. The article detained for the term of more than three months or demanding additional revision is considered as newly submitted. The manuscripts rejected by the results of reviewing aren't re-considered.

7. The decision to publish the article in a particular issue of the journal is made by the managing editor.

8. The managing editor communicates the decision to the author.

9. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author has the right to address the editorial office with a well-reasoned request to direct his manuscript to another reviewer by giving the relevant arguments. In this case, the editorial Board sends the manuscript to repeated reviewing or the author provides a reasoned refusal.

10. The maximum term of reviewing – from the date of submission till the rendering of the decision – makes 1 month.

11. The reviewing of articles is free of charge.

12. The editorial board reserves the right of reduction and scientific editing of the articles in coordination with the authors.


Article review samples in the journal "Prepodavatel XXI vek"

The review is made arbitrarily but has to contain the following components:

1. Full title of the article, scientific degree, rank, position and the author's name (for example: article review of PhD in history, associate professor, general history Department, Moscow State Pedagogical University, Ivanov Ivan Ivanovich).

2. Brief description of the problem statement addressed in the article.

3. Assessment of the following article components:

  • relevance of a subject and originality of its disclosure
  • the most important aspects of the article, its theoretical and/or practical significance;
  • validity of the conclusions formulated by authors
  • correctnesses of the use of mathematical apparatus;
  • clear and understandable narrative style;
  • completeness and accuracy of bibliographical references.


4. The recommendation to the publication in the following formulations:

  • to recommend the manuscript for the publication;
  • to recommend the manuscript for publication with minor changes, without sending for re-reviewing
  • to recommend to consider the manuscript after elimination by the author of remarks of the reviewer, with the subsequent re- reviewing;
  • to refuse the publication of the manuscript.

5. Academic title, academic degree, position and place of work of the reviewer

6. Signature (with seal).

Reviews are sent to the managing editor in electronic form. Once the signature of the reviewer is certified, reviews are transferred to the editorial office in printed form.