Social Policy Excellence - Peer Review or Metrics? Analyzing the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise in Social Work and Social Policy and Administration

2011 ◽  
Vol 46 (5) ◽  
pp. 526-543 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen McKay
Keyword(s):  
Social Work ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Research Assessment Exercise

scholarly journals Comment to: Do they agree? Bibliometric evaluation versus informed peer review in the Italian research assessment exercise

2016 ◽  
Vol 108 (1) ◽  
pp. 349-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Graziella Bertocchi ◽  
Alfonso Gambardella ◽  
Tullio Jappelli ◽  
Carmela Anna Nappi ◽  
Franco Peracchi
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Research Assessment Exercise

Reviewing Research, Making Proposals and Evaluating Science

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ken Peach
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Academic Life ◽  
Funding Agency ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Research Institutions ◽  
Research Assessment Exercise ◽  
Research Excellence Framework ◽  
Institutional Review ◽  
Proposal Writing

This chapter focuses on the review process, the process of writing a proposal and the evaluation of science. The usual way that science is funded these days is through a proposal to a funding agency; if it satisfies peer review and there are sufficient resources available, it is then funded. Peer review is at the heart of academic life, and is used to assess research proposals, progress, publications and institutions. Peer review processes are discussed and, in light of this discussion, the art of proposal writing. The particular features of making fellowship proposals and preparing for an institutional review are described. In addition, several of the methods used for evaluating and ranking research and research institutions are reviewed, including the Research Assessment Exercise and the Research Excellence Framework.

scholarly journals Peer Review in a Social Policy Course: Lessons Learned

10.18060/3160 ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 629-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shauna P. Acquavita ◽  
Carolyn J. Tice
Keyword(s):  
Critical Thinking ◽  
Social Work ◽  
Social Policy ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Thinking Skills ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Critical Thinking Skills ◽  
Work Education ◽  
Social Work Policy

Peer review is a tool that provides students with a sense of how their work is perceived by others. Built on refection and feedback, peer review assesses the quality of academic processes and products based on well-understood criteria. Peer review was implemented in a baccalaureate social work policy course to enhance writing and critical thinking skills. Students were surveyed on their experiences and indicated that peer review activities provided beneficial learning exercises. The information gathered suggests methods for future implementation of peer review in social work education.

scholarly journals Just an artifact? The concordance between peer review and bibliometrics in economics and statistics in the Italian research assessment exercise

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Alberto Baccini ◽  
Giuseppe De Nicolao
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Research Assessment ◽  
Research Assessment Exercise ◽  
Governmental Agency ◽  
Peer Reviews ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Individual Article ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
The One ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract During the Italian research assessment exercise (2004–2010), the governmental agency (ANVUR) in charge of its realization performed an experiment on the concordance between peer review and bibliometrics at an individual article level. The computed concordances were at most weak for science, technology, engineering and mathematics. The only exception was the moderate concordance found for the area of economics and statistics. In this paper, the disclosed raw data of the experiment are used to shed light on the anomalous results obtained for economics and statistics. In particular, the data permit to document that the protocol of the experiment adopted for economics and statistics was different from the one used in the other areas. Indeed, in economics and statistics a same group of scholars developed the bibliometric ranking of journals for evaluating articles, managed peer reviews and formed the consensus groups for deciding the final scores of articles after having received the referee’s reports. This paper shows that the highest level of concordance in economics and statistics was an artifact mainly due to the role played by consensus groups in boosting the agreement between bibliometrics and peer review. Peer Review https://publons.com/publon/10.1162/qss_a_00172

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document