Peer Review

Procedure for Reviewing Articles for Publication in the Scientific Journal “Auezov University”

1. Organization and Procedure of Article Review

1.1. Articles submitted by the author(s) to the journal “AUEZOV UNIVERSITY” are subject to
mandatory double-blind peer review.
1.2. The following articles are not subject to peer review:
- articles by members of the National Academy of Sciences of the Republic of Kazakhstan;
- articles recommended for publication by scientific congresses, symposia, or conferences.
1.3. Reviewers are appointed by the journal’s editorial office from among members of the
University’s expert committee in accordance with the scientific field of the article
1.4. The Editorial Board has the right to assign the review of an article to leading specialists in
the relevant field.
1.5. An author (or co-author) of the article may not serve as its reviewer.
1.6. In disputable cases, an article may be sent for additional review.
1.7. The article shall be returned to the author for revision in accordance with the reviewers’
comments.
1.8. The decision on the possibility and advisability of publication is made on the basis of the
reviewers’ conclusions and the decision of the Journal Editorial Board.
1.9. The author(s) shall be informed of the Editorial Board’s decision to publish or reject the
article.
1.10. Upon written request, the author(s) of a rejected article shall be provided with a reasoned
explanation for the rejection.
2. Requirements for the Structure and Content of the Review
2.1. The review must include an evaluation of:
- the relevance of the article’s content to the journal’s scope and subject area;
- the consistency between the content and the topic stated in the title;
- the relevance, originality, and novelty of the topic addressed;
- the appropriateness of the chosen methodology to the stated objectives;
- the validity of the problem formulation and the depth of its analysis;
- the compliance of the topic, methods, and results with current scientific and technological
developments;
- the level of informativeness;
- the theoretical coherence and degree of structure of the presented material;
- the validity of the conclusions;
- the practical significance of the reported scientific results.
2.2. The content of the review must be:
- critical and analytical;
- well-reasoned and substantiated;
- objective and evaluative;
- advisory in nature (aimed at improving the article).

Review Form

To the Editorial Board of “AUEZOV UNIVERSITY” Journal

REVIEW
of the article (title of the article)