Peer Review College Development Workshop as part of BAM2021 Conference

As part of BAM 2021 Conference

Tuesday, 31st August

16:00 - 17:00

Conference registration


Professor Yehuda Baruch of the University of Southampton, Dean of BAM’s Peer Review College, will welcome participants to this first workshop.

Introductory Session (Professor Sherry Sullivan and Professor Stephen Procter):

The peer review process is a hugely important part of academic life but it is often conducted in a very ad hoc manner. Some doctoral programs train students how to complete an effective review while others hope faculty learn how to complete reviews while on the job.  Professor Procter will address some of the basic issues around peer review.  What is it?  Who does it serve?  Why should I be involved in it?  Could we do without it altogether?  Professor Sullivan will provide some general guidelines for writing an effective developmental review. In the breakout session, we will address participants' questions on issues such as achieving the right balance between reviewing and completing one's own research, reviewer ethics, when to say yes or no to completing a review, differences in reviewing for conference versus journals, and common errors in writing reviews.  

For Research methods (Professor Mark Saunders)

The practice of reviewing methods and methodology sections and ‘methods papers’. This breakout session looks at the practice of reviewing methodology sections for quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods. It considers issues of sufficiency of detail, justification, and explores the appropriateness of methodological recommendations for transparency. It also look at reviewing methodological papers.

For Grants (Professor Zoe Morrison)

A grant application often signals the beginning of a new phase in a researcher or research team’s work and proposals include practical and technical aspects. We will consider the nature of grant application peer-review and some specific aspects you may wish to consider. We consider some potential green lights and red flags and how to spot them in your review process. We will also talk briefly about the role of the reviewer and the relationship between your review and the award of research funding. This session is intended not only for those hoping to review for funding panels, but also those who have an role in their organisation that includes prioritising and approving applications.

For BJM and other leading journals (Professor Geoff Wood)

The importance and practice of doing a review for a world leading journal.  This session highlights the expectations on reviewers from leading journals, what makes a good review, the differences between comments to editors and authors, ideal lengths of a review, what to look for in theory, what to look for in methods and presentation of results, and calibrating a contribution.  This will also include some reflections on reviewing conceptual work.