This is the most common type of journal manuscript used to publish complete reports of research data. It can be a scientific article and / or a research article. The format of the original research includes such sections as “Introduction”, “Methodology”, “Results”, “Discussion”, “Conclusions”, “Acknowledgments”. The total volume of the manuscript. The number of words is 4.000-6.000 words.

• Author’s manuscripts
These articles provide summaries of original research data that the editors believe will be of interest to many researchers and are likely to stimulate further research in this area. Because they are relatively short, the format is useful for academics whose results are time dependent (for example, those working in highly competitive or rapidly changing disciplines). This format is often severely limited in size, so some experimental details cannot be published until the authors have written a complete manuscript of the original study. These documents are also sometimes referred to as Briefs. The format of the author’s manuscript includes an introduction, reference texts and additional texts, the main text with subheadings. The number of words is 2.000-3.000 words.

• Review articles
Review articles provide a comprehensive overview of research on a specific topic, as well as a vision of the state of this area and its direction. Reviews typically cite about 30-50 primary research articles. The review article is not original research. It reviews previous research and collects data and evidence from it. The purpose of the review should be to organize and synthesize past work around a chosen topic to accelerate the accumulation and assimilation of recent knowledge in the existing body of knowledge. The format of the review article includes “Introduction”, “Methodology”, “Results”, “Discussion”, “Conclusions”, “Acknowledgments”.
The number of words: 2.000-4.000 words.

• Methodologies or methods
These articles present a new experimental method, test, or procedure. The described method can be either completely new or offer a better version of an existing method. The article should describe the obvious progress compared to what is currently available. The format of the review article includes “Introduction”, “Methodology”, “Results”, “Discussion”, “Conclusions”, “Acknowledgments”. The number of words is 2.000-4.000 words.

• Essay, reflection
These works presuppose subjectively colored reflections of a predominantly scientific research nature in connection with a particular topic, which, as a rule, is acutely relevant and can be formulated in a question form. Essays, reflection should reflect a clear statement of the essence of the problem posed, competent formulation of thoughts, independently conducted analysis of the problem using concepts (stable and alternative) and analytical tools, structuring information, using the main categories of analysis, highlighting causal relationships, illustrating concepts with appropriate examples ( including from fiction, journalistic, scientific literature), arguing their conclusions, which generalize the author’s position on the problem posed. The format of the essay, reflection includes: “Introduction”, “Analysis”, “Conclusions”. The number of words is 500-1.000 words.

• Thesis of the article
The abstracts contain a summary of the research process and / or the formulation of the main results of scientific research, which is provided by the author to the scientific community. Abstracts may refer to research materials previously published in research papers, articles and / or monographs, or other scientific publications in impact factor journals. The format of the abstract of the article includes “Introduction”, “Results”, “Conclusions”. The number of words is 1.000-2.000 words.

1. All papers, received by the editorial board KAZGUU Liberal Arts Digest(“K L A D”), pass the initial check-up stage of a double-blind review. Correspondence between the author and the reviewer takes place via e-mail of the journal.
2. “K L A D” has the right to appoint the editorial board inviting SLA faculty or acknowledged academic specialists in the sphere.
3. Reviewers follow the rules of publication ethics established by the editorial board.
4. Appointed reviewers can refuse to analyze the manuscript in case there is a conflict of interest.
5. Reviews are written in free form; however, they clarify the following compulsory aspects:Does the paper correspond with the profile of the journal?Is the topic relevant?
Does the paper possess any theoretical and practical significance?Is the author’s approach novel?Is the style scientific and clear?
6. We will normally send you anonymous reviews of your paper within 10-20 days; however the period could be changed trough the review process by the decision of REC.
7. The reviews contain one of the following recommendations:

• publish the paper as it is;
• publish the paper after it has been improved according to the recommendations of the reviewers if the author agrees to make such improvements;
• publish the paper only after it has been improved according to the recommendations of the reviewers;
• reject the manuscript with the right to resubmit it;
• reject the manuscript with no future resubmission.

8. Your manuscript might have to undergo an extra review if considered necessary.
9. In case the editor e-mails you a list of suggested improvements, you can accept them or to give a substantiated refusal.
10. The review is sent to the author without specifying the name of the reviewer.
11. Please e-mail your improved variant back to the editor within 10 days; otherwise your manuscript will have to start from square one.
12. Your improved version has to be accompanied by a cover letter as a separate file (Name_answer) where you will have to respond to the criticism and explain all the improvements you have made in your paper (Name_paper_improved). Please highlight all the improvements in the text.

For example:
Yemelyanova E_answer.doc
Yemelyanova E_monuscript_revised.doc

13. If the reviews are negative, you will be sent a substantiated rejection letter signed by the chief editor or the secretary.
14. The chief editor considers the final edited version of every paper, reviews, and the author’s response and makes the final decision (approved / returned to the author for further revision / rejected). After that, the editor will inform you about the final decision of the chief editor within 10 days.
15. Should you need a copy of the reviews, do not hesitate to send us your request. Mind that the copy will be anonymous.
16. Original reviews are stored in the editorial office for 3 years.
17. In case the authors do not respond to the constructive feedback from the reviewers or the editor, the manuscript is likely to be rejected.

Compliance with publication ethics is a requirement for all participants in the editorial and publishing process – authors, editors, reviewers, publisher.
The editorial board of “K L A D” is guided by the developments of the Committee on Publication Ethics (UK), Elsevier Publishing House (Netherlands) and M.S. Narikbaev KAZGUU Academic Integrity Guidelines, as well as the requirements for scientific publications for inclusion in the list of publications,recommended by KKSON RK.

Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author (s).
Information or ideas obtained during the review and associated with possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.

The editorial board of the “KAZGUU LIBERAL ARTS DIGEST” journal use a plagiarism detection software Turnitin to screen the manuscript for originality.The uniqueness of the text to be published in KLAD should be no less than 100% and do not contradict the requirements of APA style 7 edition of AmericanPsychologicalAssociation and COPE.
In case of plagiarism, the editorial board apply for REC to decide.

Publication fee in “K L A D” is 5000 tenge
The editors do not charge fees for the revision, and publishment only from undergraduate authors of KAZGUU academic programmes. These papers are published at the expense of M.S. Narikbaev KAZGUU University.

The names, e-mails, and other personal data provided by the Author(s) when registering on this site will be used exclusively as part of the publication process.
Personal data about the authors indicated in the materials of the article sent to the editorial office for consideration and publication is to be published in the public domain.
When registering a user (as a reader, reviewer, author) on the site, only those personal data should be indicated that the user is potentially willing to provide when uploading an article among the information about the author for publication in the public domain.

1. A set of files is provided to the editorial office by e-mail rec_sla@kazguu.kz or through an application on the website.
2. More than two articles by one author in one issue of the journal are not allowed.
3. Submitted articles can be returned to the author for revision or rejected due to inconsistency with the profile of the journal, unacceptable volume, negative double-blind review comment or non-compliance with the rules of registration.
4. All articles submitted to the editorial office are checked in the “Turnitin” system, the submitted materials must have at least 100% originality of the text.
5. All articles submitted to the editorial office undergo double-blind peer review, which analyzes the relevance of the topic, scientific novelty and originality of decisions, evidence base, rigor and unambiguousness of conclusions, scientific equipment, quality of illustrative material, and are published by decision of the editorial board of the journal.
6. The editorial board has the right to make abbreviations and editorial changes in the text of the manuscripts.
7. Articles are included in the issue only after a positive decision of the editorial board. Articles are published in order of priority, that is acceptance for publication does not imply publication in the next issue of the journal.
8. Author(s) voluntarily provide information about themselves to the editorial office for the purpose of their open publication in the journal along with the publication of the article.

1. Title of the article (bold, font14 pt., alignment – centered). The title should be short and not contain any abbreviations.

2. Information about authors – (including the indication of the main author). Surname, name of the author(s) with affiliation (font 14 pt., alignment – centered), name of the university, city, country.

3. Abstract (no more than 250 words) and keywords. The structure of the abstract includes the following mandatory points: the purpose of the research, the research methodology, the originality (value) of the research and research results. Except the essays and reflection papers.
Key words – 4-6 words or phrases.

4. The main text according to the selected type of publication.

5. Bibliography according to American Psychological Association (http://www.apastyle.org/) APA style 7 ed.

6. To publish the article, please submit the manuscript on time in compliance with the following requirements: font “Times New Roman” or “Times New Roman KZ”, size 14, with single line spacing. Page parameters: margins – top and bottom – 2.5 cm, left – 2.5 cm and right – 2.5 cm. Requirements should be complied in accordance with APA style 7 ed.

7. The main text should be scientifically, stylistically, and technically edited according to the requirements of your manuscript, as mentioned above.

STUDENT SATISFACTION WITH QUALITY ASSURANCE OF ACADEMIC PROGRAMS: STUDENTS’ VOICE

Kuznetsov E.A.
PhD, professor of the School of Liberal Arts at M.S. Narikbayev KAZGUU University,
Nur-Sultan, Kazakhstan

Abstract

Over the past 11 years, Kazakhstani higher education has been involved in reforms of the Bologna Process implementation. New amendments to the law on academic freedom, oriented universities to the consumers’ voice, and accountability according to the Standards and Guidelines for Quality Assurance. Consumer orientation is becoming a fundamental principle in organizing the educational process, with constant evaluation of student satisfaction with academic programs. Such an issue is unusually strict at private universities that do not present scholarships and wish to keep leading positions in terms of academic competition. This research presents the experience of one private Kazakhstani university in monitoring student satisfaction with academic experience, and the extent students’ voice is accounted for in the quality assurance process. The study used a quantitative method, which included a survey focused on students’ satisfaction of five areas, including program content and teaching process, assessment, and feedback, and learning environment. Considering the ECTS, PLUM regression, and ANOVA analysis are conducted to determine the predictors that influence students’ satisfaction and reveal the difference between the year of the study. The results showed that students are mostly dissatisfied with their academic experience as they have no clear instructions and rubrics before the assessment and clear feedback after it, together with the opportunity to implement their knowledge in real life. Moreover, students’ voice is not heeded by the students’ committees in quality assurance, as they exist mostly on paper in university’ annual report. The results of the research will help the university authority understand students’ needs and fulfill the gap between primary stakeholders and program designers in building mutual trust and recognition in internal quality assurance of academic programs.

Keywords: quality assurance, student satisfaction, academic programs, student’s voice