- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
Aim and Scope
Journal main themes:The disposal in Journal scientific articles which have analytic, scientific research, methodological, consultative, information character in different spheres of professional education, spreading of innovative methods and elaborations, applied by scientists and specialists on certain models of educational space, forming the innovative views of scientific community in the sphere of educational environment, assistance to state politics is directed to qualitative new level of professional competence training of students on different level and in different age.
Journal goals: to widespread the achievements in the area of professional education, to originate the contemporary conception of professional education philosophy, to seek optimal ways of development the contemporary domestic professional education, to analyze the actual questions of innovative professional education, to study the problems of theory and practice of education in professional education, to analyze the trends of development the global and regional aspects of modern professional education, to discuss the questions about the reformation of education, to promote the development of professional education on the high international level and to implement innovative methods and learning techniques in educational politics of Russian regions.
Section Policies
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Publication Frequency
4 issues per year
Open Access Policy
"Oncological Coloproctology" («Onkologicheskaya koloproktologiya») is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.
For more information please read BOAI statement.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
1 General provisions.
1.1 The document specifies the procedure of peer-reviewing and expert evaluation of manuscripts submitted to the peer-reviewed scientific journal “Professional education in the modern world” (see as Journal).
The Expert Committee consists of the members of Editorial Board and includes the leading scientists, non-member reviewers and professionals in the field of studies, which correspond to the list of research areas of scientific degrees: 09.00.00 – Philosophical Sc., 13.00.00 – Pedagogical Sc., and 19.00.00 – Psychological Sc. According to Decree No. 59 of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia of February 25, 2009.
1.2 Editorial Board includes the scientists from Russia, Germany, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Czech Republic and Poland.
1.3 Provision on peer-reviewing and expert evaluation of the manuscripts submitted to the peer-reviewed scientific journal “Professional education in the modern world” is evaluated at the meeting of Editorial Board and approved and endorsed by the Journal founder.
2 The manuscripts are submitted to the Journal according to the Regulations “On submission, acceptance, execution and registration of manuscripts for publication in scientific peer-reviewed journal “Professional education in the modern world” (last changes are endorsed by Editorial Board on November 18, 2015).
3 Editorial policy of the journal is based on general ethic principles of national scientific periodical publications. It considers ethical standards of editors and publishers endorsed by the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Editorial Board applies international copyright protection, legal standards and regulations of Russia and international publishing standards. Editorial Board suggests authors to apply the guidelines in the documents mentioned above. Editorial of journal “Professional education in the modern world” follows the requirements of scientific publication ethics and declares of no conflicts of interest.
4 Responsibility of Reviewers
4.1 All reviewers are specialists in the topics of reviewed manuscripts and have publications in the corresponding topics during last 3 years.
4.2 Reviewers must follow the standards of objectivity and express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers should avoid personal comments or criticism to an author. Reviewers who realize that their expertise is limited or cannot review a manuscript within a specified timeframe have a responsibility to make their degree of competence clear to the editor.
4.3 Reviewers are able to recommend a manuscript for publishing, publishing after refinement or not to recommend for publishing. In case of publishing after refinement or not publishing the reviewers should indicate the reasons in the review.
4.4 Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
4.5 Reviewers should indicate non-ethical and non-relevant references and check the manuscript for evidence of plagiarism. Reviewers’ evaluation that the material in the manuscript was published before should be supported by the exact reference. Reviewers should demonstrate similarity between a reviewed manuscript and any other article published by the author before (if there is such one).
4.6 Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
5 Procedure of reviewing manuscripts
5.1 Scientific publications submitted to the editorial of Journal are to be peer-reviewed and scientifically edited.
5.2 Journal is reviewed in 2 ways:
1) «double-blind reviewing» when a reviewer and an author do not know each other and their cooperation is provided by Editorial Board;
2) in exceptional cases «open peer-review» when both a reviewer and an author know each other.
5.3 Layout editor of the Journal should consider the manuscript and assess its suitability for the formatting requirements. Academic secretary should consider the work and assess its suitability for the journal to which it has been submitted using the general guidance. Editor-in-Chief puts forward a manuscript to expert evaluation, reviewing procedure provided by a member of Expert Committee or external reviewer, who is an expert or professional in this area. Reviewers should consider manuscripts during 3 weeks and forward a rejection slip or a review.
5.4 A review should contain timelines of the topic, scientific novelty and research originality; an abstract should be commensurate with its manuscript content; the material should be logical and contain the newest references (incl. foreign literature) on the topic of research; a manuscript should refer to original literature and literature in the foreign languages; the results should be performed in a rigorous manner; an article should be scientifically relevant and performed in an academic way; a review should reflect weak and strong points of a manuscript and its suitability for publication in the Journal (see: Attachment 1: Journal webpage: http://nsau.edu.ru/profed/en/about/Provision%20on%20peer-reviewing%20of%20manuscripts/).
5.5 Editorial board of the Journal forwards a copy of a review or rejection slip to authors or to the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia on request.
5.6 If a review is recommended for refinement, Editor-in-Chief forwards a review to an author and suggests considering the notes in preparation of a new version of a manuscript. The manuscript refined is forwarded for peer-reviewing again. In case of both rejections, Editorial Board does not consider a manuscript.
5.7 Editorial Board of the Journal makes the final decision about publishing a manuscript and states it in the protocol (Attachment 2). Editorial Board makes decision by majority of votes; in the event of a tie vote of the members of Editorial Board, Editor-in-Chief shall have the casting vote.
5.8 Editorial Board of the Journal, on behalf of Editor-in-Chief, forwards a letter (via e-mail) to an author (authors) about the data of publication. Editorial Board forwards a reasonable rejection to an author of rejected manuscript.
5.9 Editorial Board must not additionally explain the authors the reasons of rejection.
5.10 Editorial Board keeps the originals of reviews not less than 5 years.
Indexation
Articles in “Professional education in the modern world” are indexed by several systems:
- Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
- Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
- Base
- EBSCO
- ErihPlus
- EDS
Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal “Professional education in the modern world” are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org, and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)
1. Introduction
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: “Professional education in the modern world”
1.2.Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.
1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned “Professional education in the modern world” ) is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the “Professional education in the modern world” journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.
2.2.Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of “Professional education in the modern world” must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1.Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
3.2.Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of “Professional education in the modern world” and excuse himself from the review process.
3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.6.1.Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
3.6.2. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1.Reporting standards
4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
4.2.Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
4.3.Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.
4.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
4.6.Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
4.7.1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
4.7.2. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
4.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of “Professional education in the modern world” journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.
5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of “Professional education in the modern world” in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.2. The publisher should support“Professional education in the modern world” journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.
The section is prepared according to the files of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/).
Founder
- Novosibirsk State Agrarian University
Author fees
Publication in “Professional education in the modern world” is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Arcticle processing charges.
The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Plagiarism detection
“Professional education in the modern world” use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in “Professional education in the modern world” , authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in “Professional education in the modern world” we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
