REVIEWING PROCEDURE articles of scientific journal "Bilim"

 All scholarly articles received from the editorial board of the scientific and pedagogical journal "Bilim" undergo a mandatory confidential double (blind) review (reviewers do not know the authors, and the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers). Reviewing of manuscripts of scientific articles in the editorial board of the journal is carried out in order to maintain its high scientific-theoretical and practical level.

The order of reviewing of manuscripts submitted for publication in the scientific and pedagogical journal "Bilim":

1. Scientific article is checked for the presence of borrowed text through the system "Anti-plagiarism-Kazakhstan. Expert", after which the responsible secretary sends a scientific article for reviewing.
2. For the blind review the responsible secretary sends the articles without the authors, to specialists of the relevant profile of the list of reviewers.
3. Reviewers must be recognized experts in the topic of the article under review.
4. The co-author of the article under review, scientific supervisors of candidates for a scientific degree, cannot be a reviewer.
5. Reviewers are notified that the manuscripts submitted to them for review are the intellectual property of the authors and belong to the information that is not subject to disclosure.
6. The reviewer is obliged to evaluate the manuscript within 2-3 weeks.
7. As a result of the peer review of a scientific article, the reviewer may:

         - recommend the article for publication;

          - recommend rejecting the article.

8. Comments and suggestions of the reviewer (without specifying his/her personal data) are forwarded to the author.
9. If the review contains recommendations to correct and improve the article, the editorial board sends the text of the review to the author with the offer to consider these recommendations in the preparation of a new version of the article or reasonably (partially or entirely) refute them.
10. The article revised by the author is sent back for reviewing.
11. If the author refuses to revise the materials, he should notify the editorial board in writing or verbally about his refusal to publish the article. If the author does not provide a revised version of the article after one month from the date of sending him the reviewer's response, the editorial board removes the article from registration. In such situations the author is notified about the deregistration of the manuscript in connection with the expiration of the period given for revision.
12. If the author and reviewers have an insoluble contradiction about the manuscript, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at the meeting of the editorial board;
13. The decision to refuse to publish the manuscript is made at the meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article that is not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board will not be reconsidered. A message about the refusal to publish is sent to the author's personal account.
14. The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for the publication of the article. The editorial board makes the final decision on the advisability of publication. In conflicting situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
15. The editorial board does not discuss its decisions with the authors.