Closing date 28 February 2008

 Assessment of your recent research track record  International peer review  Based on the quality of research outputs What is an NRF rating?

Why should researchers seek to be rated?  Benchmarking  Access to NRF funding for 5 years

 Applicants  Designated authorities at employing organisations  NRF staff (Evaluation Centre)  Specialist Committees Role players (1)

 Reviewers (local and international)  Assessors  Chairpersons  Higher level Committees (executive and appeal) Role players (2)

C, B, A Established researchers NRF rating categories Y, P, L Researchers who show promise to be come established

Not accepted Specialist Committee How is your application processed? (1) Submission of scholarly achievements Selection of 6 peers (reviewers) Joint meeting Specialist Committee Assessor Reviewers’ reports

How is your application processed? (2) Appeal Joint meeting ConsensusNo Consensus Inform Applicant Appeals Committee E xecutive E valuation C ommittee B, C, Y, L* A, P recommendation

Not accepted Specialist Committee Submission of scholarly achievements Selection of 6 peers (reviewers) Joint meeting Specialist Committee Assessor Reviewers’ reports

 Animal & Veterinary Sciences  Anthropology, Development Studies, Geography, Sociology & Social Work  Biochemistry  Chemistry  Communication, Media Studies & Library & Information Science  Earth Sciences  Economics, Management, Administration & Accounting  Education  Engineering  Health Sciences  Historical Studies  Information Technology Specialist Committees (1)

 Law  Literary Studies, Languages & Linguistics  Mathematical Sciences  Microbiology & Plant Pathology  Performing & Creative Arts, & Design  Physics  Plant Sciences  Psychology  Politics, Policy Studies & Philosophy  Religious Studies & Theology  L Committee Key research areas and types of research outputs Specialist Committees (2)

Tasks of Specialist Committees  Selecting reviewers  Assessing reviewers’ reports  Recommending a rating for each applicant based on reports by reviewers  Identifying feedback  Rating reports by reviewers  Advising NRF

Not accepted Specialist Committee Submission of scholarly achievements Selection of 6 peers/reviewers) Joint meeting Specialist Committee Assessor Peer/reviewers’ reports

 Applicants are given the opportunity to nominate their own peers.  They are also given the opportunity to indicate who should not be approached.  A mix of national and international peers is appropriate in most cases.  Ideological differences within disciplines in the social sciences and humanities could confound the selection of suitable peers, however, reports by peers in such instances should be identifiable and treated appropriately by wise panel members. Peers/Reviewers

Not accepted Specialist Committee Submission of scholarly achievements Selection of 6 peers (reviewers) Joint meeting Specialist Committee Assessor Reviewers’ reports

 Quality of research outputs over the last seven years  Standing as a researcher, nationally and internationally What are peers/reviewers asked to comment on?

Not accepted Specialist Committee Submission of scholarly achievements Selection of 6 peers (reviewers) Joint meeting Specialist Committee Assessor Reviewers’ reports

 Five best recent research outputs (last 7 years)  Ten best research outputs before that  Description of completed research  Self-assessment  Postgraduate students  Other research-based contributions  Ongoing and future research Information required by NRF from applicant  Personal details  Career profile  Qualifications obtained  Assessment panel(s) to consider application  Nominated reviewers  Application for L category?  Relevant biographical sketch  Research outputs of last seven years*

Research outputs of the last 7 years 1 Jan 2001 to 31 Dec 2007 Publications in peer- reviewed journals Books/chapters in books Peer-reviewed published conference proceedings Other significant conference outputs Patents, artefacts and products Technical reports Postgraduate students trained Keynote/Plenary addresses Other recognised research outputs

Applying online:

Types of rating applications New Re-evaluation by invitation Re-evaluation Special re-evaluation

 Evaluation and rating takes place every 5 years (for successful applicants)  The period under review is the past 7 years e.g. 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2007 Time Frames

The online application form … …has been accessible from 3 September 2007… NB Find out what your institution’s internal closing date is! …and the call will close on (Thursday) 28 February 2008

 Application in MSWord format (not for submission)  d%20template.doc  Guidelines and instructions for completing the application for evaluation and rating via NRFOnline  rfonline%20system%20closing%20date%20feb% doc  Brochure on the NRF’s evaluation and rating of the research performance of researchers in SA  007_July.doc  Online application form Sources of information

Evaluation Centre Contact Details fax no: and website: Postal address Evaluation Centre, National Research Foundation, PO Box 2600, Pretoria, 0001 PersonTelephone Ms Gudrun Schirge Ms Anita Basson Ms Wieneke Huizinga Mrs Patricia Leeson Ms Kealeboga Letlhaku Mrs Diane Monteiro Mrs Tasneem Parsotam Mrs Desiree Sassman Ms Kopano Setlhare012 Mrs Lizzy Ledwaba

Thank you Evaluation Centre website You are invited to visit the Evaluation Centre website to view the list of NRF rated researchers. This list can be searched according to names of rated researchers, research specialisations, institutions and rating descriptors.