1. Purpose and goals — Student Research Work (НИРС) is designed to draw students into independent scientific and creative activity alongside their studies, developing research skills, critical thinking and the ability to work with scientific literature and data from an early stage of their programme.

2. Forms of student participation — students take part through scientific circles and clubs run within departments, individual and group research projects attached to coursework or diploma work, participation in University, republican and international olympiads and competitions, and presentation of results at scientific conferences and seminars.

3. Organisation and supervision — НИРС is coordinated at department and faculty level, with each student project assigned a faculty research adviser; departments track student participation as part of their own annual research planning and reporting (see Research Activity & Planning).

4. Recognition and incentives — students who place in competitions, publish research, or otherwise distinguish themselves in НИРС can be recognised through University awards, certificates and — where a programme allows it — credit or grade recognition; results are logged in the department's annual research report (Appendix 4: participation in НИРС in Kazakhstan, CIS countries and abroad).

1. Purpose and scope — this Regulation governs the organisation of scientific research activity (НИР) at department, faculty and University level, covering scientific-pedagogical personnel, research projects, student research (НИРС), conference participation and publishing activity.

2. Categories and funding sources — research projects are tracked by funding source, distinguishing state-budget funding (Гос. бюджет) from funding under economic contracts (Хоз. дог.), alongside the number of patents and inventions obtained per project.

3. Planning cycle — each department, faculty and the University as a whole prepares an annual research plan (see the Annual Research Plan template) covering staffing, research projects, student research, conference participation and publishing activity for the coming academic year.

4. Reporting cycle — at the end of the academic year, the same structure is reported against in an annual research report (see the Annual Research Report template), signed off by the department head/dean/head of the research unit.

Annual plan on the research work of the department / faculty / University for the ______ academic year, approved for the department by the dean, for the faculty and University by the Vice President for Research and Development.

1. Scientific-pedagogical personnel — accurate data on the University's teaching staff is provided: number of full-time staff positions; professors; doctors of science; candidates of science; associate professors (VAK); PhD holders; master's degree holders; staff who completed an internship in the reporting year; staff who defended candidate or doctoral dissertations; and general information about departments (Appendices 1–2).

2. Research work (NIR) projects (Appendix 3) — an explanation is given for each project: project abstract, aim of the work, and results of the work, including full funding volume broken down by state-budget and economic-contract sources, and the number of patents/inventions obtained.

3. Student research work (NIRS) — participation of University students in scientific competitions, olympiads and conferences (Appendix 4).

4. Participation in conferences, competitions, seminars (international, republican, regional, inter-university) — staff participation in scientific and scientific-practical events with scientific reports, in grant competitions, and organisation of round tables, seminars, competitions and conferences (Appendices 8, 10). Publishing activity — information on published monographs, scientific articles in conference proceedings and scientific collections; publications by staff in Kazakhstan, CIS countries and abroad; articles and textbooks published in impact-factor journals and under the Ministry of Science and Higher Education's approval mark; and the number of protective documents (patents) obtained (Appendices 5, 6, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14).

Appendices 1–15 (blank forms attached to the plan, filled in by each department/faculty): 1 — scientific-pedagogical personnel data; 2 — grant-award participants ("Best University Teacher" and other grants); 3 — NIR research activity by project, funding source and patents; 4 — student НИРС participation in Kazakhstan, CIS and abroad; 5 — staff publications in Kazakhstani and foreign journals; 6 — staff publications in English in Kazakhstan and abroad; 7 — articles in impact-factor journals; 8 — round tables, seminars and conferences held; 9 — list of monographs; 10 — participation in international conferences, seminars and exhibitions; 11 — publications in journals recommended by KOKSON RK; 12 — publications in other republican media; 13 — joint student/master's/doctoral publications with a supervisor; 14 — protective documents (patents, certificates) obtained; 15 — information on the department/faculty's teaching-and-research laboratory base.

Annual report on the research work of the department / faculty / University for the ______ academic year, approved for the department by the dean, for the faculty and University by the Vice President for Research and Development. The report follows the same numbered structure as the annual plan, reporting actual outcomes against each planned item.

1. Scientific-pedagogical personnel — the same staffing data as the plan (staff numbers, degrees, internships completed, dissertations defended) is reported as actuals for the year just ended.

2. Research work (NIR) projects — actual project outcomes are reported: abstract, aim and results achieved, funding actually received by source, and patents/inventions actually obtained.

3. Student research work (NIRS) — actual student participation and results in competitions, olympiads and conferences for the year.

4. Conferences, competitions, seminars and publishing activity — actual staff participation in scientific events, and actual publications (monographs, conference-proceedings articles, journal articles, impact-factor publications and patents obtained) achieved during the reporting year.

1. Purpose and composition — the Dissertation Council is the University body responsible for reviewing and defending doctoral dissertations; it is formed from qualified doctors of science, professors and PhD-holding specialists in the relevant research field, appointed by University order.

2. Defence procedure — a dissertation is first reviewed at an extended department/council meeting, then goes to public defence before the Dissertation Council, where the candidate presents their research and answers questions from the Council and reviewers.

3. Dissertation requirements — the dissertation must represent an independent research contribution with genuine scientific novelty and practical significance, meeting the University's publication and academic-integrity requirements before it can be scheduled for defence.

4. Decision and appeal — the Council reaches its decision by vote following the defence; outcomes and any procedural disputes are handled according to the University's academic-governance and appeal channels.

1. Purpose and the 180-credit pathway — doctoral study combines theoretical coursework, research and practice over a pathway totalling 180 academic credits, structured around an individual work plan drawn up under the guidance of a scientific consultant.

2. Consultants and supervisor requirements — each doctoral student is assigned a domestic scientific consultant and, typically, a foreign scientific consultant, both meeting the qualification requirements set for doctoral supervision; the individual plan is reviewed and approved at department, faculty council and University Academic Council level.

3. Attestation, dissertation and publication requirements — a doctoral student reports on plan completion at department meetings at the end of every semester and undergoes formal attestation twice a year; the doctoral dissertation must be an independent research work developing theoretical propositions that qualify as a new scientific achievement, or resolving a scientific problem, or setting out scientifically grounded technical, economic or technological solutions.

4. Ethics, extended meeting and defence — the dissertation is reviewed at an extended department/council meeting before proceeding to public defence before the Dissertation Council, with research ethics compliance checked throughout; a student who completes theoretical study but not the research component may retake the research credits and defend the following year on a paid basis, and a student who completes theoretical study but misses the defence deadline has their doctoral study period extended on a paid basis.

1. Student, programme and consultants — the title page records the doctoral student's full name; the code and name of the educational programme; the training direction; the start and end of the doctoral study period; the domestic scientific consultant (full name, position, academic degree); and, where applicable, a foreign scientific consultant. The dissertation topic is stated in full, and the plan is reviewed and approved in turn at a department meeting, then a faculty council meeting, then the University Academic Council.

2. What the plan must cover — the Individual Work Plan (ИПРД) is drawn up by the doctoral student under their consultants' guidance, based on the standard curriculum, the programme's working curriculum and the catalogue of elective disciplines, covering the whole study period. It includes: the individual study plan (ИУП); research/experimental-research work (topic, direction of research, deadlines and form of reporting); practice (programme, host institution, deadlines and form of reporting); the doctoral dissertation topic with justification and structure; the dissertation completion plan; and a plan of scientific publications and internships, including abroad.

3. Timing, copies and approval — the plan is drawn up between 1 and 30 November and finalised by 1 December of the current academic year, prepared for the whole study period (with annual updates if needed) in three copies: one held by the research/innovation unit (УНИ), one by the graduating department, and one by the doctoral student.

4. Research-work requirements — the doctoral student's research (for PhD programmes) must match the core problem area of the educational programme under which the dissertation is defended; be relevant, with genuine scientific novelty and practical significance; be grounded in current theoretical, methodological and technological achievements in the field; rely on modern data-processing and interpretation methods using computer technology; and be carried out using current research methods.

1. Approval and identification — the form is titled "Individual Plan/Report of Doctoral Student Work (monthly)" and is approved by the Vice President for Development and Research; it is itself approved at a meeting of the University's Research Council, with the protocol number and date recorded.

2. Funding basis and department — the form records the student's full name, educational programme (code and title, with the domestic scientific consultant), and the funding basis of study (grant, fee-paying/compensation, or targeted), along with the department or research unit responsible.

3. Research topic and consultant — the topic of the scientific work (dissertation) is recorded, together with the domestic scientific consultant's full name, academic degree, academic title, and place of work and position.

1. Identification — "Checklist 1" records the date, the educational programme, the student's full name, course and group, and states: "the report must meet the following criteria" for the semester's research work.

2. Evaluation criteria and scoring bands. Each criterion below is scored 0–10 points, within four overall performance bands — Excellent (95–100), Acceptable (70–94), Needs correction (50–69), Unacceptable (0–49):

1) match between the stated topic and the actual content of the work;

2) completeness of the literature review and relevance of the sources used;

3) independence of the scientific research on the approved topic;

4) quality of the defence presentation (clarity, literacy, use of professional terminology, quality of demonstration materials, etc.);

5) level of understanding of the topic;

6) consistency of the material presented with the declared results.

1. Student and consultants — the "Internship Plan" records the doctoral student's full name, the educational programme (code and title), the domestic scientific consultant (full name, academic degree/title, position), and, where applicable, a foreign scientific consultant (full name, degree/title, position, university and country).

2. Host institution and duration — the plan records the host institution/organisation, city and country where the internship takes place, its start and end dates, and the number of days, hours and credits it carries.

3. Academic work planned — the plan sets out which courses (lectures, practical sessions, laboratory work) the doctoral student plans to attend or deliver during the internship, alongside the research work to be carried out.

1. Identification and approval — "Report of PhD Doctoral Candidate for 20__" is approved by the department head and discussed at a department meeting, with the protocol number and date recorded; it records the PhD candidate's full name and the code and name of the doctoral educational programme.

2. Topic approval and study period — the dissertation topic and the University Academic Council protocol number and date under which it was approved are recorded, together with the doctoral study period under the PhD programme.

1. Purpose and eligibility — the Small Grants Projects scheme provides internal, University-funded seed grants for research projects proposed by faculty, staff and, where a programme allows, students, aimed at supporting early-stage or exploratory research that can later attract external funding.

2. Application process — applicants submit a project proposal (topic, aims, expected results, budget and timeline) within an announced call window; proposals are registered and routed for review by the research administration.

3. Evaluation criteria — proposals are assessed by a review committee against scientific merit, novelty, feasibility within the grant period, and relevance to the University's research priorities, similar in spirit to the scoring approach used for doctoral progress checklists.

4. Reporting requirements — grant holders must file a final report on the use of funds and the research results achieved, feeding into the department's/University's annual research report under the Research Activity Regulation.

1. Scope and mission — Science Journal is the University's own research publication, providing a venue for faculty, staff and doctoral/graduate students to publish original research across the University's academic fields.

2. Editorial board — the journal is run by an editorial board of qualified academics who oversee its scientific direction, review policy and issue planning, in line with the University's broader research governance.

3. Submission and review process — manuscripts are submitted to the editorial board and go through a review process before acceptance, checking scientific quality, originality and fit with the journal's scope.

4. Publication ethics — submissions are expected to meet the same academic-integrity standards as the rest of the University's research output — no plagiarism, honest authorship attribution, and disclosure of any conflicts of interest — consistent with the Academic Integrity Policy.