Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

A Pedagógiatörténeti Szemle is a forum of educational scientific discussion and informs about important Hungarian and international research results. The journal publishes papers and reviews from the field of historical pedagogy and its neighboring sciences.

Only original contributions can be submitted for examination and publication. When submitting the contribution, the author must ensure that the submitted manuscript is an original contribution (that is, it has not been submitted or published elsewhere). All rights, in particular the translation into foreign languages, remain with the authors. The authors of the published papers have the right, after publication in Pedagógiatörténeti Szemle, to issue a new edition of their study.

The manuscripts should be sent to the editor through this website. (Further indormation under INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS) The size of a manuscript must not exceed a maximum of 50,000 to 55,000 characters (including spaces, footnotes, and bibliography) for articles, and 150 to 180 lines (each of 60 characters) should not be exceeded for reviews.

The manuscripts go through a double-blind peer review process by two independent experts who decide on acceptance or rejection. In all cases, the authors receive written feedback on the results of the review process. For further preparation of the accepted contributions, the authors are contacted by the editorial staff.


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Unchecked Peer Reviewed


  • Németh admin
  • Béla Pukánszky
  • Beatrix Vincze
Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

The Editors and Editorial Board of Pedagógiatörténeti Szemle will review the studies, essays and pieces of research and submit them to an external evaluation.

The review and evaluation system for every piece of work will be carried out by means of blind peering or double-blind. Outside the Editorial Board, two experts in the field of study to be evaluated will check each study, essay or research and generate a detailed report based on criteria of scientific quality. The Editorial Board ensures that the reviewers are independent of the authors, ie. they are not affiliated with the same institution or research group. In case of discrepancy, a third expert will settle the disagreement.

The studies, pieces of research and essays sent for evaluation whose authorship corresponds to any of the members of the Editorial Board, whatever position they hold, will be under the judgment of five experts in the field of study to be evaluated outside the Editorial Board, keeping the identity of both authors and informants absolutely secret. In that case, at least four experts will be required to agree.

Those who would like to apply for a position as an external reviewer will be allowed to do it by using the section devoted to such purpose, by ticking the box Revisor/a when signing in, or simply by contacting the journal’s Editor (nobik@jgypk.szte.hu).

When accepting their position, evaluators will automatically become part of COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
External reviewers will receive a certificate of their work at the end of it, taking for granted that they perform their task according to the previously established requirements and guidelines and their report is submitted in a timely manner.

Reviewers will not accept any economic compensation in return for their reviewed articles.

Decisions about acceptance, rejection or change about the pieces of work received, based on the above-mentioned reports from external reviewers, will be announced to their authors within 180 days. In case the acceptance of a study, essay or research depends on the amendments suggested by the external reviewers, its author will be required to improve the original text. Once changes are introduced, the amended article will be submitted again to be evaluated by the Editorial Board.

The accepted originals will be identified by means of a DOI code and published in the first issue containing enough pages. Editors reserve their right to publish them.

Every study, research or essay accepted for publishing will be checked by copyeditors, who will make the appropriate comments on them.

The correction of proofs will be carried out by the authors themselves within the time set by the Editorial Board. In case authors do not reply before the deadline, editors will assume such task but always taking the originals as their reference.

Authors requiring a certificate of article acceptance will receive a provisional document signed by the journal’s Editor via email, valid until their articles are definitely published.

Pedagógiatörténeti Szemle is not responsible for the authors’ ideas, opinions and styles, although language accuracy and correction are always insisted on.

This Description is based on the review policy of Espacio, Tiempo y Educación.


Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.


Publication Ethics

Responsibilities for the authors

Authors are obliged to participate in all stages of the peer review process, respond to comments from reviewers and on the basis of these observations implement the proposed amendments. In doubtful cases, they can turn to the editors with specific suggestions, or they can decide not to publish the contribution.
Authors must not offer the identical or nearly identical text to other journals to publish.
Authors must follow the instructions for authors, and comply with the rules for citing.
By sending their contributions to the peer-review process the authors declare automatically that all the data contained in the contribution are true and authentic. If the author used the work and / or formulations of other authors, these must be properly cited.
If an author finds a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her already published article, he/she shall immediately inform the editors and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the contribution.

Responsibilities for the reviewers

If the reviewer does not feel to be qualified to review the contribution or knows that he/she cannot review it without delay, he/she informs the editors and does not enter the review process.
The reviewer is obliged to maintain objectivity.
The reviewer is obliged to argument his views clearly.
Each manuscript is considered to be a confidential document and should not be provided anyone and discussed with anyone without author´s permission.
The reviewer must not misuse the information referred to in the reviewed contribution for personal or other purposes.
Reviewers can refuse elaboration of the review because of a conflict of professional interests. A conflict of interest is considered to be:
professional, financial or personal benefit for a reviewer resulting from his/her approval or rejection of the reviewed contribution;
cooperation on the project in the past five years;
a fundamental difference of opinion on the main topic of the reviewed contribution;
If reviewers due to any of the above reasons do not refuse to elaborate his/her review, the editors consider that no conflict of interest exists.
Reviewers should advise the author about the lack of significant titles published on the topic. Reviewer should call the editors´ attention to any substantial similarity or overlap of the contribution with another published works, of which he/she is aware.

Editorial responsibilities

Editors are obliged to assure that all the contributions have been anonymously assessed by external reviewers.
Editors are accountable for any content of the journal and for quality of the published contributions.
Editors retain the objective approach to all the contributions submitted, i.e. in the decision-making process they are required to avoid conflicts of interest and honour the main selection criteria, which are:
the professional level and the importance of the contribution;
subject compliance with the focus of the journal.
Editors make every effort to preserve the impartiality of the review process so as not to reveal the identity of the author's manuscript to reviewers and vice versa.
In cooperation with the editorial board it solves possible appeals of authors against reviewers´ comments and other complaints.
Makes final decision to accept or reject the contribution to publication.

Responsibilities for the editorial board

Editorial Board strives to improve continuously the professional and formal aspects of the journal, promotes freedom of expression, in accordance with generally respected ethics is prepared after discussion to publish any actual corrections, retractions and apologies.
Editorial board has the authority to comment on the review process throughout its course.
Guarantees that the above mentioned rules are followed.

Publication ethics policyof Pedagógiatörténeti Szemle are based on the Publication Ethics of Historia scholastica.