Privacy Statement

PUBLICATION ETHICS

The publication of the article in a peer-reviewed journal is the main model for the editorial board of the “Bulletin of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. Series "Pedagogy". Developing the regulations concerning the publication ethics the editorial board was guided by the recommendations of the Publication Ethics Committee: COPE and PERK, as well as by the experience of foreign and Ukrainian professional communities, research organizations and publication editorial boards. The following guidelines can provide a substantial help for professional scientists as well as post-graduate students and young researchers.

The editorial board of the journal adheres to the following rules to support publishing ethics:

1. The editorial board is responsible for all the materials published in the Bulletin. All the materials submitted for publication (articles, surveys, reviews, etc.) are subject to a thorough selection and a “bilaterally blind” peer-reviewing (a reviewer and an author do not know each other’s names). The editorial board has the right to reject an article or return it for revision. In such a case an author is obliged to finalize the article according to the comments of peer-reviewers or editorial staff.
2. The editorial board shall without any prejudice consider all the manuscripts submitted to the editorial office, properly evaluate them, without regard to race, religion, nationality, position or place of work of the author(s). Editors must make fair and impartial decisions concerning a manuscript quality independently of commercial or other interests, and provide with an objective peer-reviewing.
3. Editors may reject the manuscript without review if they consider that the materials content is beyond the journal’s scope.
4. The editorial board of the Bulletin states that falsification, plagiarism and selfplagiarism, the same content materials submittance by the author to more than one journal, multiple presenting of similar information in several articles, the false attribution of authorship, and deception of the public with respect to the true contribution of the author in the publication are unacceptable.
5. The editorial board has the right to withdraw published materials provided violation of someone else’s rights or the accepted standards of scientific ethics has been discovered (in case it is legally proven). If it is the case the editors shall inform the author of such materials, and the organization where the research was done about the fact of the materials withdrawal.
6. The editor-in-chief and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than those involved in the professional evaluation of this manuscript. An article may be published in the journal only after the positive decision of the editor-in-chief.
7. The editorial board members, authors and peer-reviewers shall notify of their interests that could affect the objectivity when editing and reviewing the materials. Such interests may be, amongst others, of financial, personal, political, religious and intellectual nature. The reviewing procedure must be objective. Both the editor and the reviewers should respect the intellectual property of the author.
8. If the editor is provided with compelling evidence about fallacy of the major content or conclusions of the work published in the journal, he/she must contribute to the publication of an appropriate notification, indicating this error and, if possible, correct the latter. Such notification can be written by the person who has discovered the error, or by an independent author.
9. An author may express his wish not to involve some reviewers for consideration of the manuscript. However, the editor-in-chief may decide to involve one or more of those reviewers, if he/she is convinced that their opinions are significant for an impartial review of the manuscript. Such a decision can be made, for example, in case of serious contradictions between this manuscript and the previous work of a potential reviewer.
10. The responsibility of each author, editor-in-chief, peer-reviewer, publisher and organisations is to prevent false scientific publications.

Ethical duties of authors

1. The research, the materials of which are published in the Bulletin, must be done in compliance with the current legislation and ethical standards. The main duty of the author is to provide an accurate account of the work performed, as well as an objective discussion of its significance.
2. Authors shall present their results clearly and unambiguously, so that their findings can be confirmed by other scientists, without fakes in receiving data and their manipulation.
3. Authors take full responsibility for the content of the articles as well as the fact of their publication.
4. An author shall cite the publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work, and those that can quickly introduce the reader to the earlier papers, important for understanding the research. It is necessary to minimize citing works which are not directly related to this research subject, except for surveys. An author is obliged to conduct a source search to find and cite the original publications that describe the research that is closely related to this material. It is also necessary to specify the appropriate source of critical materials used in this work, if they have not been received by the author by himself/herself.
5. All the authors must follow the current requirements for publication of manuscripts. Plagiarism itself and its representation as the original work as well as submission to the editorial office previously published articles are unacceptable. In case of plagiarism discovery the authors of the submitted materials take all the responsibility.
6. An experimental or theoretical research may sometimes serve as a basis for scientifically correct and objective criticism of the other researcher. The published articles may include such criticism in certain cases. Personal criticism cannot be considered as appropriate under any circumstances.
7. The individuals, who have made a significant contribution to the submitted work and who share responsibility for the results may be listed as co-authors. The author, who submits the manuscript for publication, is responsible for ensuring that the list of co-authors includes all and only those individuals who meet the criteria for authorship. In the article, written by several authors, the one who has submitted to the editorial office his contact information, and documents, and is in correspondence with editors, takes the responsibility for other authors’ consent for its publication in the journal of scientific papers.
8. Authors shall inform the editor of any possible conflict of interests which could be influenced by the publication of the manuscript results.
9. Authors shall clearly indicate the sources of all quoted and cited information and properly make references to the scientific sources used in the work, in compliance with the requirements of DSTUGOST 7.1: 2006.
10. The editorial board has the right to refuse publication of an article in case of non-compliance with these requirements.

Ethical duties of reviewers

1. Manuscripts reviewing is of a “double-blind” character.
2. Manuscripts review is an essential component in the process of publication and lies at the heart of the scientific method; every scientist shall do a fair share of reviewing.
3. All the materials submitted for publication must be reviewed by the supervisor of the author (s), academic institution where the work was performed, by a member of the editorial board of the journal, and also by two peer-reviewers.
4. Reviewers must assess the quality of the manuscript, the experimental and theoretical work, its interpretation and presentation objectively, as well as consider if the work meets high scientific and literary requirements. Reviewers must respect the intellectual property of authors. Reviewers shall not use or disclose unpublished information, arguments, or interpretations, which a manuscript contains without the express written consent of the author.
5. All the members of the editorial board, including the editor-in-chief and his deputy act as reviewers.
6. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents by reviewers.
7. Reviewers shall express their views clearly with supporting arguments so that editors and authors can understand the motivation of their comments. Any statement that an observation, conclusion, or argument had been previously published should be accompanied by the relevant citation / reference.
8. Reviewers shall mark any cases of incomplete citation by authors of other scientists which are directly related to the work under review. Reviewers should also call to the editor’s-in-chief attention to any substantial similarity between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper or manuscript submitted concurrently to another journal.
9. Reviewers must provide a joint conclusion with their signatures on time.