The instruction on the procedure for the examination of materials intended for open publication was developed in accordance with the law of the Kyrgyz Republic "On expert control" dated 23.01.2003 no. 30 (as amended by the laws of the Kyrgyz Republic dated 28.04.2008 No.73, 05.10.2011 No.161).

Scientific articles prepared in accordance with the requirements of GOST R 7.0.7–2009 "Articles in journals and collections. Publishing design", are submitted to the editorial office of the journal to the executive secretary, where they are registered, distributed according to the thematic profile and sent for internal review.

The manuscripts of all articles submitted to the editorial office are subject to mandatory reviewing. Reviewing involves scientists with recognized authority and working in the field of knowledge to which the content of the manuscript relates.

The reviewer may not be the author or co-author of the reviewed work, as well as scientific supervisors of applicants for an academic degree and employees of the department in which the author works.

If the editorial board does not have the opportunity to involve a specialist of the proper level in the field of knowledge to which the content of the manuscript belongs, the responsible editor turns to the author with an offer to provide an external review. At the discretion of the authors, an external review may be submitted when submitting an article, which, however, does not exclude the usual review procedure.

Reviews are discussed by the editorial board and serve as a basis for accepting or rejecting articles. The review is signed by a specialist with a transcript of the surname, first name and patronymic, a date, an indication of the academic degree, academic title and position held by the reviewer. The article sent to the editorial office may be accompanied by a letter from the sending organization signed by its head (deputy).

The article submitted to the editorial office is registered, and an individual number is assigned to it. Manuscripts designed without taking into account "General requirements and rules for the design of manuscripts of articles" are not considered.

The article is submitted to the reviewer without specifying any information about the authors. Reviewers have no right to take advantage of knowledge about the content of the work before its publication.

The review should objectively evaluate the scientific article and contain a comprehensive analysis of its scientific and methodological advantages and disadvantages. The review is compiled according to the standard form proposed by the editorial board (appendix 1) or in free form, with mandatory coverage of the following provisions:

- relevance of the submitted article;

- scientific novelty of the research direction;

- the significance of the statement of the problem (task) or the results obtained for the further development of theory and practice in the field of knowledge under consideration;

- adequacy and modernity of research methods;

- sufficiency of the research material;

- correctness of the discussion of the results obtained;

- compliance of conclusions with the purpose and objectives of the study;

- the admissibility of the volume of the manuscript as a whole and its individual elements (text, tables, illustrative material, bibliographic references);

- the expediency of placing tables, illustrative material in the article and their correspondence to the topic being presented;

- the quality of the article design: style, terminology, wording.

The final part of the review should contain reasonable conclusions about the article as a whole and a clear recommendation on the expediency of its publication in the journal or on the need for its revision.

In case of a negative evaluation of the manuscript as a whole (recommendation on the inexpediency of publication), the reviewer must justify his conclusions.

If the manuscript does not meet one or more criteria, the reviewer indicates in the review the need to finalize the article and gives recommendations to the author to improve the article (indicating the inaccuracies and errors made by the author).

The editorial board informs the author of the review result. Articles modified by the author are re-sent for review to the same reviewer who made critical comments, or to another at the discretion of the editorial board.

If the author does not agree with the reviewer's comments, he may apply for a second review or withdraw the article, which is recorded in the journal of registration.

In case of a negative review, the article is transferred to another reviewer, who is not informed about the results of the previous review. If the result of repeated review is negative, copies of negative reviews are sent to the author(s) with a proposal to revise the article.

The final decision on the expediency of publication after reviewing is made by the editorial board.

The following are not allowed for publication: - articles whose subject matter does not relate to the scientific direction of the journal; - articles that are not properly designed, the authors of which refuse to technically refine the articles; - articles whose authors did not revise the article based on the constructive comments of the reviewer.

The terms of consideration of articles - does not exceed one month.

The editorial board of the journal does not keep manuscripts that are not accepted for publication.

Manuscripts accepted for publication are not returned.