About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Thematic orientation of the collection: integration of higher education and science of Ukraine to the European and world educational and scientific area.

Problematics of the publication:

  • implementation of the Law of Ukraine “On Higher Education” (normative and methodical aspects);
  • state and prospects of the “triangle” of knowledge in Ukraine;
  • universities of innovative type in the context of world trends in higher education;
  • innovative approach in training new specialists in the context of ensuring their competitiveness;
  • innovative aspects of higher education in the period of reform, etc.

Peer Review Process

The peer reviewing procedure is applied for all articles submitted to the editorial board. The aim of the peer reviewing is to contribute to the strict selection of authors’ manuscripts for their publishing and introduction of specific recommendations regarding their improvement. The peer reviewing procedure is used for the maximum objective evaluation of the content of a research article, determination of their compliance with journal requirements, and supposes detailed analysis of merits and shortcomings of the materials presented in the article.

Only articles of scientific value are accepted for publication.

Ethical obligations of manuscript readers:

The reading of manuscripts is an important stage in the process of their publication. Each scholar is obliged to perform a certain reviewing work process.

All the articles submitted for publication should be reviewed by the author(s)’ supervisor, scientific institution wherein the work has been executed, and the journal’s board of editors.

The editorial board restricts behind itself the right to additionally appoint an independent reviewer for the submitted article.

The reviewer / reader should give an objective estimation of the quality of the manuscript, its clear statement and, also, define whether or not the manuscript answers the high scientific and literary standards. The reviewer / reader should respect the intellectual independence of the authors.

The manuscript sent for a review is considered a confidential document.

The reader should convincingly enough prove his conclusion.

The reader should draw the editor’s attention to any important resemblance of the submitted manuscript to any other published article or manuscript.

The reader should give his response to the manuscript in a due time.

The reader should not use or reveal the published information located in the given manuscript without its author’s / authors’ consent.

At the usual status quo, the reader does not know the author and the author of the manuscript does not know its reader.

The procedure for reviewing manuscripts of the collection of scientific works "International Scientific Herald". The editorial board determines the following procedure for reviewing manuscripts:

  1. The author provides an article to the editorial board, the article should meet the requirements of the policy of the journal and the rules of the preparation of articles and scientific papers before publication. Manuscripts that do not meet the adopted requirements are not registered and not accepted for further consideration, and author should be informed about this.
  2. Each article submitted to the editorial board undergoes two levels of peer review (scientific expertise) on the research profile: open - internal and external ("blind").
  3. Conducts reviews and appoints the editor-in-chief of the collection "International Scientific Herald". By appointment of the Editor-in-Chief, the appointment of reviewers may be assigned to a member of the Editorial Board. At the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief, some articles by renowned scholars, as well as authors specially invited by the editorial staff to write the article, may be exempted from the standard review procedure.
  4. The reviewers of the manuscripts can be both members of the editorial board of the scientific collection and third-party highly qualified specialists who have deep professional knowledge and experience in specific professional fields (usually doctors of science, professors).
  5. Internal review is carried out within seven days after the manuscript has been registered in the editorial board. In case of positive feedback from an internal reviewer, a copy of the manuscript is sent according to the scientific research profile to a "blind" review by leading experts in the field of article issues. After obtaining the consent of the scientist who carries out the "blind" review, the possibility of reviewing the materials (based on the correspondence of his own qualification of the direction of the study of the author and the absence of any conflict of interests), he usually conducts scientific examination of the article, usually within 14 days.
  6. The interaction between the author and the reviewers is done by e-mailing with the editor-in-chief of the journal "International Scientific Herald". At the request of the reviewer, and with the agreement of the editorial board working group, the interaction of the author and the reviewer can take place in direct personal contact (this decision is made only if the open interaction will improve the style and logic of presentation of the study material).
  7. If the reviewer points out the need to make certain corrections in the article - the article is sent to the author with the suggestion to take into account the comments in the preparation of the updated version of the article or justify their refutation. The author of the revised article adds a message that answers all the comments and explains all the changes made in the article.
  8. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the manuscript has the right to submit a reasoned answer to the editorial board. In such circumstances, the article is considered at a meeting of the editorial board. The editorial board may refer the article for additional or new review to another specialist. The editorial board reserves the right to reject the article in the event of the author's inability or unwillingness to consider the recommendations and comments of the reviewers.
  9. After receiving positive reviews, the manuscript is sent for literary and technical editing. The interaction of the author and the literary (technical) editor can take place in any form - in person, by email, by phone. Minor stylistic or formal corrections that do not affect the content of the article are made by a literary (technical) editor without agreement with the author.
  10.  The final decision on the possibility and expediency of publication is made by the editor-in-chief. After making a decision to allow the article to be published, the responsible secretary of the journal informs the author.
  11.  The recommendation for publication of the next issue of the journal (with content indication) is made by the Academic Council of the Uzhhorod National University and is recorded in the relevant protocol.