scholarly journals Peer Review Regulation in the German Science and Research Association

2012 ◽  
pp. 227-234
Author(s):  
E. Vodyanitskaya
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Research Association ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
German Science ◽  
Science And Research

The article describes peer review procedures used by the German Science and Research Association. It gives thorough analysis of the stages of peer review and provides a number of critical comments to the procedure regarding provision of additional information to grant applicants, increased reimbursement of the reviewers, reveal of information about the reviewers.

scholarly journals THE ROLE AND PLACE OF GERMAN SCIENCE AND RESEARCH ASSOCIATION IN GERMANY’S SCIENCE POLICY

2013 ◽  
pp. 197-205
Author(s):  
E. A. Vodyanitskaya
Keyword(s):  
Science Policy ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
The State ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Research Association ◽  
Scientific Cooperation ◽  
Support Organizations ◽  
German Science ◽  
The Status ◽  
Science And Research

The article describes the role and place of the German Science and Research Association (DFG) as one of the leading science support organizations in the science policy of Germany. It gives a thorough analysis of its inner structure that includes such bodies as General Assembly, Executive Committee, Senate, Joint Committee and expert boards as well as the way of their formation and scope of their powers. The legal nature of DFG as a science support organization reveals through its goals and functions stated in the Charter. They are as follows: financial support of scientific and research projects, training of young scientists, international scientific cooperation and transfer of theoretical knowledge into practice. The German Science and Research Association also stands for equal possibilities for men and women in the academic community and consults the state bodies on the science policy. The author pays particular attention to the cooperation of the organization with the state and subjects (lands), including financial issues and participation of DFG in the federal state program «Exzellenzinitiative». Moreover, the author touches a debating point of correspondence of the status of the organization to its public activity as DFG is a private law association that includes universities and other science and research institutions as its members. Finally, the article gives a comparison of the German Science and Research Association to the similar organizations in other European countries, particularly to the Danish agency on science, technology and innovation and the French National research agency. The author comes to a number of conclusions respectively the procedure of peer review and need for effective remedies to appeal the rejected project.

scholarly journals Introduction to the Asian Qualitative Research Association Special Issue

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Safary Wa-Mbaleka
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Annual Conference ◽  
Research Association ◽  
Research Practice ◽  
Special Issue

Founded in 2015, the Asian Qualitative Research Association (AQRA) has become a leader in fostering qualitative research practice and education in the Philippines and beyond. Stating in 2016, AQRA has sponsored an annual conference featuring original qualitative research and scholarship. Past conference presenters were invited to submit their papers to The Qualitative Report (TQR) for peer review. As a result of this rigorous process, TQR is delighted to present this special issue in conjunction with AQRA.

scholarly journals Información de autor y estándares de calidad previos en revistas internacionales sobre educación científica

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (72) ◽  
pp. 139
Author(s):  
Francisco Javier Perales-Palacios ◽  
José Miguel Vílchez-González ◽  
José Gutiérrez-Pérez
Keyword(s):  
Science Education ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Educational Research ◽  
A Priori ◽  
American Educational Research Association ◽  
Quality Criteria ◽  
Quality Standards ◽  
Empirical Literature ◽  
Research Association

La literatura empírica sobre calidad de las revistas científicas ha puesto énfasis en criterios de calidad de proceso (evaluación de pares) y de producto (impacto y visibilidad). Menos atención se ha dedicado a los estándares, políticas de calidad editorial y guidelines previos a la revisión de manuscritos. El propósito de este artículo es describir y analizar estos criterios tomandocomo muestra de referencia las revistas sobre didáctica de las ciencias experimentales (Science Education) indexadas en Scopus y en Journal of Citation Reports editadas en lengua inglesa. Partiendo de los estándares de calidad de la American Educational Research Association, se ha revisado si las páginas web de las revistas contemplan estos criterios a priori sobre los requisitosque deben satisfacer los artículos. El trabajo concluye con una propuesta de mejora para las revistas del campo de la educación científica.The empirical literature on quality of journals has emphasized the quality criteria of process (peer review) and of product (impact and visibility). Less attention has been devoted to standards, editorial quality policies and guidelines employed prior to review of manuscripts.The purpose of this article is to describe and analyze these criteria, taking as reference a sample of reviews on Science Education published exclusively in English and indexed in Scopus and in the Journal of Citation Reports. On the basis of the quality standards issued by the American Educational Research Association, journal websites were examined to determineif these “a priori” criteria were actually employed. The paper concludes with a proposal for improving journals in the field of science education.

scholarly journals Peer review declaration

2021 ◽  
Vol 1206 (1) ◽  
pp. 011002
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Management System ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Similarity Index ◽  
Thermal Engineering ◽  
Final Decision ◽  
Research Association ◽  
Major Theme ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Review Management

All conference organisers/editors are required to declare details about their peer review. Therefore, please provide the following information: • Type of peer review: Single-blind / Double-blind / Triple-blind / Open / Other All papers have been reviewed by at least two reviewers and follow a double-blind peer review process. For the peer review, an editor has been assigned to the submitted paper as per the major theme of the conference, i.e., design engineering, thermal engineering and fluid science, material science and nanomaterials, production and industrial engineering. Four editors have been handling the review process by assigning two domain expert reviewers to each paper. The papers have been evaluated as per the quality criteria of IOP Publishing and the decisions were sent to the authors, such as: strong accept, accept, weak accept, borderline paper, and reject. The weakly accepted and borderline papers were sent back to authors for revision and resubmission was done through EasyChair. The resubmitted paper was again evaluated by the editor, and a final decision has been conveyed to the author. • Conference submission management system: Easychair Easychair was chosen as the conference paper submission and review management system for ICRAMEN 2021. All papers have been submitted and also reviewed by the Easychair account only. A revised submission was also accepted only by the easychair account. All email correspondence with the author was done through easychair email and also from [email protected]. • Number of submissions received: 52 We have received a total of 52 papers, out of which accepted and registered papers have been considered for presentation at the conference and publication in a journal. • Number of submissions sent for review: 50 Two papers were not considered for review due to late submission and was rejected by the editor. • Number of submissions accepted: 28 • Acceptance Rate (Number of Submissions Accepted / Number of Submissions Received X 100): 54% • Average number of reviews per paper: 2.2 • Total number of reviewers involved: 23 • Any additional info on review process: 1. The Plagiarism Checker X software has been used to check the similarity index of the papers. The similarity index of all the papers is not more than 20%. 2. ICRAMEN 2021 was a virtual conference, with all presentations delivered via the Zoom online platform. 3. All papers have been evaluated by the editor and reviewed by a minimum of two reviewers. Also, some papers are sent back to the author for further revision after the presentation at the conference to amend the corrections suggested by the session chair. • Contact person for queries: Dr. Manoj A. Kumbhalkar, Conference Chair, ICRAMEN 2021. President, Research Association of Masters of Engineering (RAME), India. [email protected], [email protected]

Production of New and Revised A.A.V.S.O. Charts

1979 ◽  
Vol 46 ◽  
pp. 368
Author(s):  
Clinton B. Ford
Keyword(s):  
Variable Star ◽  
Standard Form ◽  
Original Data ◽  
University Of Pennsylvania ◽  
Standard Format ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
The Gift ◽  
The University

A “new charts program” for the Americal Association of Variable Star Observers was instigated in 1966 via the gift to the Association of the complete variable star observing records, charts, photographs, etc. of the late Prof. Charles P. Olivier of the University of Pennsylvania (USA). Adequate material covering about 60 variables, not previously charted by the AAVSO, was included in this original data, and was suitably charted in reproducible standard format.Since 1966, much additional information has been assembled from other sources, three Catalogs have been issued which list the new or revised charts produced, and which specify how copies of same may be obtained. The latest such Catalog is dated June 1978, and lists 670 different charts covering a total of 611 variables none of which was charted in reproducible standard form previous to 1966.

Convergent Beam Electron Diffraction

1978 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 304-315
Author(s):  
G. Lehmpfuhl
Keyword(s):  
Electron Diffraction ◽  
Diffraction Pattern ◽  
Crystal Surface ◽  
Diffraction Spot ◽  
Crystal Thickness ◽  
Large Area ◽  
Electron Microscopic ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Microscopic Investigations

Introduction In electron microscopic investigations of crystalline specimens the direct observation of the electron diffraction pattern gives additional information about the specimen. The quality of this information depends on the quality of the crystals or the crystal area contributing to the diffraction pattern. By selected area diffraction in a conventional electron microscope, specimen areas as small as 1 µ in diameter can be investigated. It is well known that crystal areas of that size which must be thin enough (in the order of 1000 Å) for electron microscopic investigations are normally somewhat distorted by bending, or they are not homogeneous. Furthermore, the crystal surface is not well defined over such a large area. These are facts which cause reduction of information in the diffraction pattern. The intensity of a diffraction spot, for example, depends on the crystal thickness. If the thickness is not uniform over the investigated area, one observes an averaged intensity, so that the intensity distribution in the diffraction pattern cannot be used for an analysis unless additional information is available.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document