Review

Review Process

  1. The editorial board of the journal "PERSPECTIVES OF HIGHER EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT" (hereinafter referred to as the Journal) conducts a peer review of all materials submitted to the editorial office that are relevant to its thematic scope in order to provide an expert assessment. All scientific articles submitted to the journal undergo mandatory single-blind peer review (the authors do not know the reviewers and receive comments without the reviewers’ names).
  2. Reviewers are experts from the higher education expert team of Uzbekistan, as well as external experts among leading scholars and specialists in higher education who hold an academic degree in a specialty relevant to the reviewed article and have publications on the topic of the article within the last 3 years. The decision on selecting a specific reviewer for the article review is made by the chief editor.
  3. Each article is sent to two reviewers. If necessary, the chief editor may send the manuscript for additional review.
  4. The review period is 1-2 weeks.
  5. Only original works (not previously published in other publications) are published in the Journal. In certain cases, for highly significant and topical articles that have already been published in another foreign journal or conference proceedings, the editorial board may decide to republish and print the article in the Journal in the Uzbek language with the consent of the Author, Copyright Holder, Founder, or Publisher.
  6. Ethical Aspect of Peer Review. If there is a conflict of interest, the reviewer must inform the editorial office before starting to work on the article. The reviewer does not make conclusions about the quality of the article based on personal relations with the author. The reviewer does not disclose the article's content to third parties or use the information from the reviewed article for personal purposes. The reviewer uses only respectful and appropriate language regarding the article.
  7. After reviewing the manuscript, the reviewer provides recommendations regarding the article's future:
    • The article is recommended for publication in its current form;
    • The article is recommended for publication after addressing the reviewer’s noted shortcomings;
    • The article requires additional review by another expert;
    • The article cannot be published in the journal.
  8. If the review contains recommendations for correcting or improving the article, the journal’s editorial office sends the author the review text, suggesting they take these recommendations into account when preparing a new version of the article or provide a reasoned (partial or complete) rebuttal. The revision process should not take more than two weeks from the moment the electronic notification is sent to the author about the need for revisions. The revised article is sent back for review.
  9. If the authors refuse to revise the materials, they must inform the editorial office in writing or orally of their decision to withdraw the article from publication. If the revised version is not returned within a month of sending the review, and no communication regarding refusal to revise the article is received from the authors, the editorial office will remove it from consideration. In such cases, the authors are notified of the manuscript's removal due to the expiration of the revision deadline.
  10. If the authors and reviewers have unresolved disputes regarding the manuscript, the editorial board may send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the chief editor at an editorial board meeting.
  11. The decision to reject the manuscript is made at an editorial board meeting based on the reviewers’ recommendations. An article not recommended for publication by the editorial board will not be reconsidered. A rejection notification will be sent to the author by email.

Grounds for article rejection include:

  • The article does not match the Journal's thematic focus;
  • The article does not meet the Journal's submission requirements;
  • Most of the expert reviews are negative;
  • The editorial board’s decision, recorded in its meeting minutes;
  • Non-compliance by the author(s) with the current legislation of the Republic of Uzbekistan on copyright and intellectual property protection (in the presence of an expert opinion from a specialist in the relevant field).
  1. Once the editorial board makes a decision to accept an article for publication, the editorial office informs the author and provides the publication timeline.
  2. A positive review is not a sufficient basis for article publication. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the chief editor.
  3. Original copies of the reviews are kept in the journal’s editorial office for 3 years.

The requirements for articles, the peer review procedure, and rules for authors are posted on the official website of the Founder and Publisher on the Journal's page "PERSPECTIVES OF HIGHER EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT."