Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

AHRC Peer Review Presentation – Dr Sue Carver

766

Published on

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

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
766
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
25
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Peer Review Process and the Peer Review CollegeSue CarverHead of Research Careers, Training and Peer Review20 January 2012
  • 2. Decision Making Structures 5 Principles that underpin our decision making structures• Appropriate engagement with stakeholders• Appropriate pace and flexibility of decision making• Delegating authority and trusting people to makedecisions• Better coordination of information flows to informdecisions• Reduction of real or perceived barriers tointerdisciplinary research
  • 3. Decision Making Structures Key areas• Sifting• Harmonised grading scale• Greater emphasis on peer review and PI Response• Prioritisation Panels• Open deadlines for Research Grants andFellowships• Training for College Members. Newsletters.
  • 4. How Research Organisations can help• In-house Peer Review using AHRC guidance for Peer ReviewCollege Members• Follow the review headings set out in the Research FundingGuide: • Quality and Importance • People •Management of the Project •Value for Money •Outputs, Dissemination, and Impact• Je-S Reviewer Protocols and Help Text to be available to all Je-S users
  • 5. Who are our reviewers?• AHRC Peer Review College (PRC)• Off-College Reviewers How do we select reviewers?•Primary consideration is to find appropriate match ofreviewer expertise to subject matter of the application.Important to keep JeS record up-to-date.•First choice is to find subject expert reviewers fromwithin membership of the College•If there is no suitable match on the College, then wehave the flexibility to approach subject experts fromoutside membership of the College
  • 6. The Peer Review College• AHRC Peer Review College (PRC) established 2004with an initial membership of 460 research activeacademics• Membership now stands at approx. 1350. Recentrecruitment to ensure coverage for Themes.• Members can belong to one or more groups: •Academic •International •Strategic Reviewers •Non- HEI •Knowledge Transfer •Technical
  • 7. Membership of the PRCMembership period•Members appointed for 4yrs at a time, with reappointment considered based onreviewer performance and subject coverage•Members can resign at any pointWorkload•Review Quota of 8 per year, and no more than 4 per quarter (although someexceptionally do more than this). Technical Reviewers have separate quota of 8technical reviews per year.Availability•Members can make themselves unavailable (time off from review requests) to allow forparticularly busy periods, research leave, holiday, illness etc…Performance•Acceptance/Decline rate (including late responses, or where there has been noresponse) and Requests to re-write (either due to lack of sufficient detail orinappropriate content) are monitored
  • 8. Benefits of PRC membershipFor the individual•Membership of the College is an indicator of esteem within the Arts and HumanitiesCommunity•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 widerwork of AHRCFor their organisation•Esteem indicator for Research Organisations and individual departments•College members are well placed to advise on internal assessment of fundingapplications 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 subjectcommunity•The AHRC is provided with a professional and well motivated body of subject expertsto supply reviews.

×