The procedure for reviewing articles sent to the editors of the publication under review
“Didactics of Mathematics: problems and research"

1. The editorial board of the journal "Didactics of Mathematics: problems and research" accepts articles and reviews on the subject of the journal for publication.

2. The authors of the articles are personally responsible for the presence of plagiarism elements in the texts of the articles, for the completeness and reliability of the stated facts and provisions, for the fact of their publication. It is allowed to publish no more than one article from one author in one issue. No fee is paid to the authors and no fee is charged for the publication of articles.

3. Articles submitted to the editorial board must be prepared in accordance with the Rules for Authors. Articles that do not comply with the Rules for Authors or the subject of the journal are not accepted for consideration.

4. All scientific articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal "Didactics of Mathematics: Problems and Research" and corresponding to its subject matter are subject to mandatory peer review for the purpose of their expert evaluation.

5. All articles that have been reviewed, in case of a positive review, are subject to scientific and technical editing. Editorial proofreading of articles is not sent to the authors.

6. When reviewing materials, an open review is applied. The secretary of the journal registers the article and sends it for review to one member of the editorial board and one member of the editorial board who has the scientific specialization closest to the topic of the article, who is a member of the editorial board of the journal in the relevant scientific specialty, as well as who has published on the subject of the reviewed article over the past 3 years. The author (co-author) of the reviewed article cannot be appointed as a reviewer.

7. The reviews of the members of the editorial board are sent to the editorial office electronically. The reviews of the members of the editorial board are certified in accordance with the procedure established in the institution where the reviewer works.

8. When evaluating an article, the reviewer takes into account the following: the correspondence of the article to the topic and category of the journal; the relevance of the materials presented; the correspondence of the title, annotation, goals and objectives to the content of the article; the correctness of the use of the results of other authors and the correctness of references; the quality of presentation and design; completeness, novelty and scientific significance of research; validity of the results.

9. In the conclusion of the review, one of the following recommendations should be indicated: the article is evaluated positively in its presented form and recommended for publication; the article is recommended for publication after a small author's revision; the article requires significant revision with subsequent review; the article does not correspond to the subject of the journal and is not of interest.

10. The reviewer submits a review to the editorial board no later than 1 month after receiving the article. In some cases, the terms of reviewing are determined by the executive secretary of the journal, taking into account the creation of conditions for the most expeditious publication of the article.

11. If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, the executive secretary of the journal sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them (partially or completely). The article modified (revised) by the author is re-sent for review.

12. After two reviewers have made a positive decision on the admission of the article to publication, a member of the editorial board draws up a review of the article, the executive secretary of the journal informs the author about this and specifies the publication dates. The text of the review is sent to the author by e-mail.

13. If the article is recommended for publication after a small author's revision, the editorial board sends comments to the authors of the article (without specifying the reviewer). The article sent to the authors for revision should be returned in corrected form as soon as possible. The revised article must be accompanied by a letter from the authors containing answers to all comments and explaining all the changes made in the article. An article delayed by the authors for a period of more than three months or requiring significant revision is considered as newly received.

14. The decision on publication, publication after revision/revision or rejection of the article is made by the editorial board of the journal.

15. In case of rejection of the article, the editorial board sends the authors a review (without specifying the reviewer) or excerpts from it, or a reasoned letter from the editor. The editorial board does not enter into a discussion with the authors of rejected articles, except in cases of obvious misunderstanding.

16. Reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for five years. At the request of the Ministry of Science and Education of the Russian Federation, the editorial board of the journal provides copies of reviews of articles.

17. Manuscripts are not returned to the authors.