Strengthening Peer Review in Federal Agencies That Support Education Research (2004) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Executive Summary
Executive Summary
Pages 1-8
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
The agenda for that event, a full transcript of the day's presentations and discussions, and a paper we commissioned to lay the groundwork for our deliberations are all available on the web at http:// www7.nationalacademies.org/core/Peer%20Review.html. A long-standing tool of science policy in the United States, peer review is widely recognized as the preferred method for judging the merits of proposals for research funding.
|
From page 2... ...
For federal agencies that support education research, we recommend that in addition to these considerations, peer review should be explicitly designed, managed, and evaluated to promote two key objectives: to identify and support high-quality scientific research in education and to promote the professional development of the field. Adopting these objectives as guideposts will enable agencies to think strategically about the merits of, and trade-offs associated with, particular practices and design options.
|
From page 3... ...
Two broad types of diversity are relevant to assembling high-quality panels and to promoting education research quality through peer review: diversity of scholarly perspectives and diversity of groups traditionally underrepresented in education research. Engaging researchers who approach the topic under consideration from a range of perspectives can enrich peer review deliberations by bringing together a diverse set of expertise around a common set of issues and problems.
|
From page 4... ...
In addition, since the field of education research is in the early stages of developing scientific norms for peer review, this important process could be complicated or slowed by the participation of individuals who do not have a background in research. We do see the potential benefits of including practitioners and community members on panels evaluating education research funding applications for identifying high-quality proposals and contributing to professional development opportunities for researchers, practitioners, and community members alike.
|
From page 5... ...
The value of risk-taking and innovation should be reflected in funding decisions. This can be accomplished in a number of ways: by including "innovation" or a related construct in the evaluation criteria for the reviews, by allowing agency decision makers to fund applications "out of order" to support riskier proposals, or by retaining a funding mechanism outside the peer review process that is designed to support highly innovative work.
|
From page 6... ...
Similarly, interactions between agency staff and prospective applicants can serve as a communication channel between these two key groups in education research. Since agency staff are important actors in the education research community generally and in the peer review process specifically, their role requires careful consideration.
|
From page 7... ...
AGENCY MANAGEMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE Effective organizational practices and strong infrastructures are essential to any well-functioning peer review system, including those supported by federal agencies that fund education research. Organizational excellence should be supported by a focus on evaluation, and agencies should consistently analyze the extent to which their practices support stated goals.
|
From page 8... ...
We offer this brief treatment to encourage its use as a tool for promoting important objectives in the improvement of education research and to provide a framework for research policy makers charged with overseeing peer review systems designed to assess proposals for education research funding. Despite its flaws, peer review is a system worth preserving and improving.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.