Reviewing for Research Excellence: Expectations,Procedures and Outcomes

Abstract

This paper describes the process by which the Humanities and Social Sciences Panel of the Australian Research Council (ARC) gives effect to the principle of funding ‘research excellence’. A member of this Panel for four years, the author provides an account of the ARC Research Allocation Policy, what criteria assessors are asked to use in judging each research grant application, and the quality controls operating within the system. Peer review is identified as the central element in assessing the excellence of the research proposal, the possibility of a significant conceptual advance and the quality of the researcher(s).

Particular comment is made about the success of educational researchers in obtaining ARC funds for research and implications for the future.

Keywords

educational finance eligibility peer evaluation educational research federal aid research projects

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

R.C.

(1983). Reflections on the role of peer review in competitions for federal research. Educational Research, 12, 3–5

Australian Research Council. (1989). Committee to review higher education research policy: Report. Canberra: AGPS

Australian Research Council. (1991). Advice and instructions to applicants. Canberra: Department of Employment, Education and Training

Australian Science and Technology Council. (1991). Options paper. Canberra: AGPS

Cole

Rubin

L.C.

Cole

J.R.

(1978). Peer review in the National Science Foundation: Phase One of a study, Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences

The concise Oxford dictionary. (1976). (6th ed.). Oxford: Clarendon Press

Crane

(1967). The gatekeepers of science: Some factors affecting the selection of articles for scientific journals. American Sociologist, 2, 195–201

Gustafson

(1975). The controversy over peer review. Science, 190, 1060–1065

Higher education and training. (1988). (White paper). Circulated by the Hon. J.S. Dawkins, M.P., Minister for Employment, Education and Training. Canberra: AGPS

10.

Louttit

(1982). Peer review: A philosophically faulty concept which is proving disastrous for science, Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 5, 219–220

11.

The Macquarie dictionary. (1987). (2nd rev. ed.) Sydney: Macquarie University

12.

Neutze

(1989). Paper prepared by Prof. Max Neutze for the Grants Officers Seminar, Sydney, February, 1989

13.

Poole

M.E.

(1990a). Australia: Country report on educational research and funding. In Improving linkages between research and educational reform (pp. 30–41). Tokyo: National Institute for Educational Research

14.

Poole

M.E.

(1990b). Changes in the nature of research and development activities in education. In Taking charge of change: Restructuring the education industry. Proceedings of Conference sponsored by National Board of Employment, Education and Training, University College of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba (pp. 2–26)

15.

Poole

M.E.

(1991). The patterning and positioning of educational research. Radford Memorial Lecture, Queensland, November 1991

16.

Research for Australia: Higher education's contribution. (1989). Circulated by the Hon. J.S. Dawkins, M.P., Minister for Employment, Education and Training, Canberra: AGPS

17.

Sanders

H.J.

(1982). Peer review: How well is it working?, Chemical and Engineering News, 60, 32–43

18.

Seldin

(1990). How administrators can improve teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass