04 PRC and application stages

939 views
842 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
939
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Introduce all staff
  • 04 PRC and application stages

    1. 1. The Peer Review College and the application process Arts and Humanities Research Council V2, Jan. 2016
    2. 2. The Peer Review College
    3. 3. The AHRC Peer Review College (PRC) was established in 2004 with an initial membership of 460 research active academics. Membership currently stands at approximately 900. College members are experts drawn from academic and other organisations, covering the full range of arts and humanities research areas Members can belong to one or more groups: •academic •international •strategic •non-HEI •knowledge exchange •technical
    4. 4. Who are our reviewers? •AHRC Peer Review College (PRC) •Off-College Reviewers How do we select reviewers? •primary consideration is to find an appropriate match of reviewer expertise to the subject matter of the application •first choice is to find subject expert reviewers from within membership of the College •if there is no suitable match on the College, then we have the flexibility to approach subject experts from outside membership of the College •for some schemes or grants specialist reviewers from one of the College Groups will be appointed.
    5. 5. Membership of the PRC Membership period •members appointed for 4 years at a time, with reappointment considered based on reviewer performance and subject coverage •members can resign at any point, or can be removed by the AHRC if necessary. Workload •review quota of 8 per year, and no more than 4 per quarter (although some exceptionally do more than this). Technical Reviewers have a separate quota of 8 technical reviews per year. Availability •members can make themselves temporarily unavailable (time off from review requests) to allow for particularly busy periods, research leave, holiday, maternity/paternity leave, illness etc. Performance •acceptance/decline rate (including late responses, or where there has been no response) and requests to re-write (either due to lack of sufficient detail or inappropriate content) are monitored.
    6. 6. Benefits of PRC membership For the individual: •Membership of the College is an indicator of esteem within the Arts and Humanities Community. •Members gain insight into how to best frame their own research applications. •Opportunities to sit on Peer Review Panels and other bodies, and to engage with wider work of AHRC. For their organisation: •Esteem indicator for Research Organisations and individual departments. •College members are well placed to advise on internal assessment of funding applications prior to submission, and to mentor colleagues on peer review processes. For the AHRC: •The College is a valuable vehicle for engaging and consulting with our subject community. •The AHRC is provided with a professional and well motivated body of subject experts to supply reviews.
    7. 7. Stages of the application process
    8. 8. Main Stages of the Review Process- Part 1 Note: This overview is not applicable to all schemes, for which aspects of the full process will not be required. Proposals received in the office Peer Review College reviewers selected Proposals reviewed by Peer Review College members Quality sifting by AHRC based on PRC reviews. Proposals with two or more unfundable grades = unsuccessful. Proposals with at least two fundable grades proceed to PI response to peer reviews. Proposals checked by staff
    9. 9. Main Stages of the Review Process- Part 2 Note: this overview is not applicable to all schemes, for which aspects of the full process will not be required. Panellists individually review, comment on and assign grades to each proposal. Proposals, reviews and PI responses to peer reviews sent to panel members. Panel meetings: Grades and rankings decided, and feedback agreed where appropriate. Final funding decision made by AHRC Unsuccessful Successful Council Finances
    10. 10. Moderating and Assessment Panels The AHRC convenes two kinds of panels: •Moderating panels where panellists will not re-assess proposals. These panels moderate the reviews which have been received, along with the PI Response to those reviews, and use this as the basis for ranking. In order to do this, members need to use academic judgment based on the reviews and PI Response. •Assessment panels where panellists (re-)assess applications and also serve on the panel. The final funding decision is made by the AHRC, based on the recommendations of the panel.
    11. 11. AHRC Schemes Moderating panel route: Proposals received and checked 3 peer reviews Proposals received and checked PI response Moderating panels meet to agree grade and rank Funding decision Assessment by up to 3 panel members Assessment panels meet to agree grade and rank Assessment panel route: Funding decision
    12. 12. Further guidance available: • Research Funding Guides •Scheme Guidance • AHRC website • Je-S Help text • AHRC officers •Peer Review College handbook •Panellists’ Guidance documentation •PRC Newsletters for PRC members only.

    ×