It is often said that peer review is one of the pillars of scientific research. It is also well known that peer review doesn't actually do its job very well, and, every few years, people like me start writing articles about alternatives to peer review. This isn't one of those rants. Instead, I'm going to focus on something that is probably less well known: peer review actually has two jobs. It's used to provide minimal scrutiny for new scientific results, and to act as a gatekeeper for funding agencies.
What I would like to do here is outline some of the differences between peer review in these two jobs and the strengths and weaknesses of peer review in each case. This is not a rant against peer review, nor should it be—I have been pretty successful in both publications and grant applications over the last couple of years. But I think it's worth exploring the idea that peer review functions much better in the case of deciding the value of scientific research than it does when acting as a gatekeeper for scientific funding.
Drawing
on sociocultural theory, the present study investigated how children in an intensive elementary
level Grade 6 class for English as a second language (ESL) scaffolded each other while carrying
out cooperative learning tasks.
Dekita advocates participatory uses of Web applications in EFL/ESL teaching; we favor open approaches to language learning in which students get to engage the public Web instead of being locked into narrowly circumscribed online spaces. *** nice descript
Naboj is a dynamical website that lets you review online scientific articles. Right now the only articles that are available for review are those that have been posted at Los Alamos arXiv.
N. Herbert. ACE '07: Proceedings of the ninth Australasian conference on Computing education, page 63--71. Darlinghurst, Australia, Australia, Australian Computer Society, Inc., (2007)
Y. Simmhan, B. Plale, and D. Gannon. Concurrency and Computation: Practice & Experience, Special Issue
on The First Provenance Challenge, 20 (5):
441--451(April 2008)IF 0.636, CORE A.
Y. Simmhan, B. Plale, and D. Gannon. Concurrency and Computation: Practice & Experience, Special Issue on The First Provenance Challenge, 20 (5):
441--451(April 2008)IF 0.636, CORE A.
L. Ramakrishnan, Y. Simmhan, and B. Plale. International Conference on Computational Science (ICCS), volume 4487 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), page 1122-1129. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, (2007)CORE A.
L. Ramakrishnan, Y. Simmhan, and B. Plale. International Conference on Computational Science (ICCS), volume 4487 of LNCS, page 1122--1129. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, (2007)CORE A.
B. Cao, B. Plale, G. Subramanian, P. Missier, C. Goble, and Y. Simmhan. International Workshop on the role of Semantic Web in Provenance Management (SWPM), volume 526 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, page 1--6. CEUR-WS.org, (October 2009)
B. Cao, B. Plale, G. Subramanian, P. Missier, C. Goble, and Y. Simmhan. International Workshop on the role of Semantic Web in Provenance
Management (SWPM), volume 526 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org, (October 2009)
N. Lele, L. Wu, R. Akavipat, and F. Menczer. HT '09: Proceedings of the Twentieth ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, New York, NY, USA, ACM, (July 2009)
Y. Simmhan, and K. Gomadam. International Provenance and Annotation Workshop (IPAW), volume 6378 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), page 298-300. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, (2010)
Y. Simmhan, and K. Gomadam. International Provenance and Annotation Workshop (IPAW), volume 6378 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), page 298--300. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, (2010)
E. Gouli, A. Gogoulou, and M. Grigoriadou. Proceedings of the ED-MEDIA 2006, World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, (2006)
E. Gouli, A. Gogoulou, and M. Grigoriadou. Proceedings of the ED-MEDIA 2006, World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, (2006)
S. Harnad. Exploit Interactive, (May 2000)Earlier Shorter version: Harnad, S. (1998) The invisible hand of peer review. Nature online (c. 5 Nov. 1998) http://helix.nature.com/webmatters/invisible/invisible.html Longer version: Harnad, S. (2000) The Invisible Hand of Peer Review, Exploit Interactive, issue 5, April 2000 <http://www.exploit-lib.org/>: http://www.cogsci.soton.ac.uk/\char126harnad/nature2.html http://www.princeton.edu/\char126harnad/nature2.html.
P. Jordan. Proceeding of the 2007 conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education: Building Technology Rich Learning Contexts That Work, page 581--583. Amsterdam, The Netherlands, The Netherlands, IOS Press, (2007)