The Peer Review College and the application process Arts and Humanities Research Council.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Useful tips for applicants when writing a grant application Arts and Humanities Research Council.
Advertisements

Arts and Humanities Research Council
B B1 We are the champions Louise Brent, risk manager, London Borough of Lambeth.
Funding Opportunities ENGINEERING AND PHYSICAL SCIENCES RESEARCH COUNCIL Caterina Mora and Vivienne Blackstone, Mathematical Sciences Women in Mathematics.
EPSRC Fellowships Dr. Anne-Louise Holloway Research Capability Imperial College London, 19 th June 2009.
Specialist leaders of education Briefing session for potential applicants 2013.
Specialist leaders of education Briefing session for potential applicants Application window now open 5 – 23 May 2014.
ULS FACULTY LIBRARIAN PEER REVIEW AND MENTORING Margarete Bower Chemistry Library.
PEER REVIEW OF TEACHING WORKSHOP SUSAN S. WILLIAMS VICE DEAN ALAN KALISH DIRECTOR, UNIVERSITY CENTER FOR ADVANCEMENT OF TEACHING ASC CHAIRS — JAN. 30,
Research Administrators Seminar NCGP update Dr Laura Dan Chief Program Officer 25 November 2013.
Regional Development Australia Fund Round Two Guidelines Overview This presentation is intended as an overview only. For the full guidelines visit
Mitigation and Extenuating Circumstances
Data-Sharing and Governance Consultation ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES.
Brunel University Briefing for External Examiners February 2013
School Deans appoint a pool of evaluators who are trained by the Centre for University Teaching The staff member whose teaching is being evaluated is informed.
What do reviewers look for in a research proposal? Research Councils’ review criteria Dimitra Koutsantoni Research & Knowledge Transfer Manager.
Promoting Excellence in Family Medicine Enabling Patients to Access Electronic Health Records Guidance for Health Professionals.
Access to HE Diploma Grading and Assessment University of the Arts London.
Towards a new member-led College of Teaching 1
Specialist leaders of education Briefing session for potential applicants Autumn 2013 An executive agency of the Department for Education.
The LCVP is funded by the Department of Education and Science under the National Development Plan A Teacher’s Experience of WSE LCVP Conference.
Dr Dilly Fung Head of Academic Development Accrediting Staff Professionalism In Research-Led Education.
NSW Department of Education & Training NSW Public Schools – Leading the Way SELECTION PANEL PROCEDURES FOR SCHOOL TEACHERS 2009 Procedural.
RED RIVER COLLEGE PLAR/RPL IN ACTION! Recognizing Prior Learning.
Quality Assurance Review for Staff of Pre-five Services Glasgow © COLEG.
Arts Council Awards. What is the Arts Council? Statutory Agency Arts Act 2003 Department of Art, Heritage and Gaeltacht Council Staff.
Who are we? And what is it that we do? LCC--Business Department Advisory Committee.
Specialist leaders of education Briefing session for potential applicants 2014.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA Outline LEARNING OBJECTIVES REVIEW TEAM AND COUNTERPARTS Team Composition Qualification PREPARATORY PHASE.
UNIVERSITY OF HUDDERSFIELD SUPPORTING PRE-SERVICE TRAINEES ON PLACEMENT Pre-service Mentor Training 2011.
School Deans appoint a pool of evaluators who are trained by the Centre for University Teaching The staff member whose teaching is being evaluated is informed.
Neighbourhood Planning. What is neighbourhood planning? Neighbourhood planning gives communities direct power to develop a shared vision for their neighbourhood.
Changes in the Faculty Review Process for United Academics Faculty Presenter: Patricia Linton, College of Arts & Sciences.
Curriculum at SCC and Role of the Senate Presented by Craig Rutan and Joyce Wagner SCC Academic Senate Fall 2013 Retreat.
Ulster.ac.uk A Revalidation Unit Co-ordinator’s Perspective Dr V. Naughton School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Life & Health Sciences (October 2015)
Professor Mark Llewellyn, Director of Research AHRC Strategic Reviewers’ Event.
Demand Management: Progress and Issues Gary Grubb Associate Director of Programmes AHRC
Applying for HEA Fellowship What happens after you’ve submitted your application.
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency. IAEA Outline LEARNING OBJECTIVES REVIEW TEAM AMD COUNTERPARTS Team Composition Qualification PREPARATORY PHASE.
Research Fellowships. Overview Introduction Why apply for a fellowship Finding the right fellowship The application process Assessment criteria for funding.
RCUK International Funding Name Job title Research Councils UK.
1 Oxford Professional Education Group Ltd Mastering Metrics An Introduction.
Neighbourhood Planning in Haringey Myddleton Road Strategic Group 7 th November 2013.
Being a Governor: Challenges and Expectation Jim Benson Secretary to Council Brunel University.
Preparing to Apply for Taught Degree Awarding Powers: Quality Assurance and Enhancement Dr Nick Holland – Academic Registrar Conservatoire for Dance and.
Introduction to the planning system for elected members​
Expectations of Our External Examiners
Specialist Leaders of Education Briefing for potential applicants
Center for Excellence in Applied Computational Science and Engineering
ARC – The Rejoinder Process
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
Their role within Schools and Colleges
2017 Workshop Tenure and Promotion Policy and Procedures Overview
Writing Competitive Research Funding Applications: Tips and Advice Early-Career Researchers Information Session Friday, 26th October, 2012 Dr Barry Dixon.
NSF/NIH Review Processes University of Southern Mississippi
Quality Workshop The Local Council Award Scheme is a great guide for good practice in our sector and a way for councils to build confidence in their.
TERMS OF REFERENCE - FINANCE COMMITTEE
Assigning evaluators Deans (Education) appoint a pool of evaluators who are trained by the Centre for Innovation in Learning and Teaching Dean (Education)
The Tenure Process at Babson College: The Fourth-Year Review
APPA – Term 3 Breakfast Session
2016 Tenure and Promotion Workshop Policy and Procedures Overview
The role of the ICT team.
How the RDS can support your application
Rubrics for academic assessment
NRF Evaluation & Rating
External Examiners’ Workshop
Their role within Schools and Colleges
Brunel University Briefing for External Examiners March 2014
Role of the Internal Verifier
Presentation transcript:

The Peer Review College and the application process Arts and Humanities Research Council

The Peer Review College

The AHRC Peer Review College (PRC) was established in 2004 with an initial membership of 460 research active academics. Membership currently stands at approximately 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

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.

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.

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.

Stages of the application process

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

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 PIs response to peer reviews sent to panel members. Panel Meetings: Grades and rankings decided, and feedback agreed where appropriate. Final funding decision made by AHRC UnsuccessfulSuccessful Council Finances

Prioritisation and Assessment Panels The AHRC convenes two kinds of panels: Prioritisation 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 can (re-)assess applications. The final funding decision is made by the AHRC, based on the recommendations of the panel.

AHRC Schemes Moderating Panel Route: Proposals received and checked 3 peer reviews Proposals received and checked PI response Prioritisation 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

Further guidance available: Scheme Guidance AHRC website Je-S Help text AHRC and SSC Officers Peer Review College e-handbook Panellists Guidance documentation PRC Newsletter for PRC members only.