Enter search term
whole site this section

Peer review

This page summarises the systems of peer review used by the British Academy, under the following headings:

• Assessment procedures
• Assessment criteria
• Feedback
• Summary of peer review effort, per scheme

Further detailed information about each scheme can be found via the links in the side bar on the left of this page, under Guide to Awards.

Note on terms used

Referee: scholar nominated by the applicant who can comment knowledgeably on the proposal. The applicant is encouraged to discuss their proposal with the referee(s) before submitting an application. The applicant is responsible for ensuring that the statement from the referee reaches the Academy by the due date.

External evaluator: scholar nominated by the applicant who can comment knowledgeably on the proposal. The applicant is asked to name four, from whom the Academy will select two to evaluate the proposal. The applicant should not contact those named, other than to obtain their permission to be nominated. Applicants should not discuss the details of their proposal in any way with those nominated as potential evaluators. The Academy is responsible for obtaining the statement from the external evaluator. The Academy may invite peer-review comment from others than those nominated by the applicant.

Assessor: subject specialist, usually a Fellow of the Academy, who assesses the application in the light of references and external evaluations (where used).

Selection Panel: sub-Committee, usually composed of Fellows of the Academy, which reviews the comments and recommendations of assessors, and prioritises applications before submission to the final award committee.

Final Award Committee: cross-disciplinary Committee, usually composed of Fellows of the Academy, which meets to decide on awards.

Assessment procedure for all schemes

The general procedure is that proposals are assessed by subject specialists in the light of references and any external evaluations. Assessors’ comments and recommendations are forwarded to a final award committee, which considers the applications and decides on awards to be made in the light of the quality of the competition and the budget available. There may be an interim stage where applications are reviewed by a selection panel.

Assessment criteria

For all Academy schemes, academic merit is the primary criterion. The following describes the full assessment criteria for each scheme.

Senior Research Fellowships | Postdoctoral Fellowships | Small Research Grants | British Academy Research Development Awards | Overseas Conference Grants | British Conference Grants | Country Specific Agreements | Special Area Programmes | Visiting Fellowships

Senior Research Fellowships

(a) Has the applicant already published work of intellectual distinction?
(b) Is the proposed research project of outstanding academic merit?

Where the interpretation of material, written or oral, in a foreign language is crucial to the achievement of the research objective, assessors may take into account evidence of the investigator(s) competence in the relevant language(s).

Please note that academic merit is the primary basis on which assessment will be made. Only at the final stage of selection, with reference to applicants who are all felt to be of equally outstanding academic merit, will the subsequent considerations play a bigger role in the decision-making process.

(c) How pressing is the applicant’s need for the research leave applied for?
(d) What is his/her entitlement to sabbatical leave, what are existing leave prospects and how do these affect the applicant’s need for an award?

Postdoctoral Fellowships

• Is the proposed research project of outstanding academic merit?
• Has the candidate demonstrated the capacity to make a significant contribution to research in the chosen field through his or her work and/or publications to date?
• Does the candidate have the potential to go on after the award to a successful academic career?
• In considering candidates who do not meet the normal requirements on eligibility, has a convincing case for exemption from the requirements been advanced?
• Is the candidate proposing to work in a suitable host institution?
• How strong is the case for support in comparative value for money terms?

Assessors may take into account evidence of language competence where the understanding of material in a foreign language is crucial to the achievement of the research objective.

Candidates should be aware that the selectors will ask to see suitable examples of written work from those candidates who have been particularly favoured in the first stage of the competition in order further to inform their judgements. Suitable written work will normally include either a short published article or an extract from a doctoral thesis. Candidates will be advised of the importance of the submission showing originality, displaying the skills that would be brought to bear if the Fellowship was awarded and illustrating the substance of their work, not giving a broad overview. Any special case made for endangered or emerging subject fields may be taken into account at the final stage of assessment.

Small Research Grants

Assessors will evaluate the proposal on the basis of its academic merit, taking into account

• its originality,
• its relationship to, and the volume of, research already in the field,
• the scholarly importance of the research proposed,
• the suitability of the methodology,
• the feasibility of the research programme,
• the specificity of the scheme of research,
• the presentation of the application, and
• intended outcomes.

Assessors will evaluate the ability of the investigator(s) to undertake the proposed research, taking into account

• their track record in terms of publication,
• their academic age and
• stage of career.

The primary assessment of quality will be based on the specific research objective of the proposal, and whether the methodology and research programme outlined are likely to lead to successful achievement of the objective. The details of how the objective will be achieved - whether through research visits, use of research assistance, workshops, or any combination of eligible activities/costs - will be assessed only in relation to each individual application. No preference will be shown between individual or collaborative modes of research. There are no quotas for different types of application, and no comparisons will be made across applications on the grounds of their operational and financial specifications. For projects involving partners from other countries, assessors may take into account the availability of partner funding: in cases where partner funding is likely to be scarce, assessors may give priority to those projects which are likely to contribute to capacity building and lead to benefits for the wider scholarly community.

Assessors may take into account evidence of language competence where the understanding of material in a foreign language is crucial to the achievement of the research objective.

Comparative judgements about value for money may be taken into account at the final stage of assessment.

British Academy Research Development Awards

External evaluators will assess the proposal on the basis of

• the scholarly importance of the research proposal and the contribution that it will make to the relevant subject areas
• the ability of the applicant(s) to carry it out
• the value of the outcomes envisaged from the research
• whether the project can reasonably be expected to be completed within the timescale
• the estimated costs provided by the applicant

The reports from external evaluators are forwarded to assessors, and the contents contribute to the following assessment process.

Assessors will evaluate the proposal on the basis of its academic merit, taking into account

• its originality,
• its relationship to, and the volume of, research already in the field,
• the scholarly importance of the research proposed,
• the suitability of the methodology,
• the feasibility of the research programme,
• the specificity of the scheme of research,
• the presentation of the application, and
• intended outcomes.

Assessors will evaluate the ability of the investigator(s) to undertake the proposed research, taking into account

• their track record in terms of publication,
• their academic age and
• stage of career.

The primary assessment of quality will be based on the specific research objective of the proposal, and whether the methodology and research programme outlined are likely to lead to successful achievement of the objective. The details of how the objective will be achieved - whether through research visits, use of research assistance, workshops, or any combination of eligible activities/costs - will be assessed only in relation to each individual application. No preference will be shown between individual or collaborative modes of research. There are no quotas for different types of application, and no comparisons will be made across applications on the grounds of their operational and financial specifications. For projects involving partners from other countries, assessors may take into account the availability of partner funding: in cases where partner funding is likely to be scarce, assessors may give priority to those projects which are likely to contribute to capacity building and lead to benefits for the wider scholarly community.

Assessors may take into account evidence of language competence where the understanding of material in a foreign language is crucial to the achievement of the research objective.

Comparative judgements about value for money may be taken into account at the final stage of assessment.

Assesors will take account of the information provided by the applicant concerning the level of effort to be devoted to the project by the principal investigator and co-investigator(s) in each year as well as the list of other expenses, to enable them to judge whether the level of resource (PI time, RA time, other direct expenses) is appropriate to achieve the aims of the project. This will contribute to their assessment of the feasibility and specificity of the proposal.

Comparative judgements about value for money may be taken into account at the final stage of assessment. Where the primary focus of the application is on research leave, the strength of the case, including information on any recent or forthcoming leave already funded, may be taken into account at the final stage of assessment. Any special case made for endangered or emerging fields may be taken into account at the final stage of assessment.

British Conference Grants

Assessors will evaluate the proposal on the basis of its academic merit, taking into account

• the scholarly importance of the proposed conference,
• its likely impact upon the subject area,
• the focus of the conference programme and theme(s),
• the scholarly standing of and contribution to be made by the named key speakers, and
• intended outcomes.

Assessors may also pay attention to issues such as

• the presentation of the application form,
• the projected spread of attendance, and
• value for money.

Overseas Conference Grants

Assessors will evaluate the proposal on the basis of

• the significance of the conference,
• the academic quality of the paper to be delivered, and
• the relevance of the event to the applicant’s research interests.

Information on any additional contribution may also be taken into account to help determine the merits of a case.

Assessors may also pay attention to issues such as

• value for money,
• plans for publication,
• the academic age of the applicant, and
• previous Overseas Conference Grants from the Academy

Country-specific Agreements

Assessors will evaluate the proposal on the basis of its academic merit, taking into account

• its originality,
• its relationship to, and the volume of, research already in the field,
• the scholarly importance of the research proposed,
• the suitability of the methodology,
• the feasibility of the research programme,
• the specificity of the scheme of research,
• the presentation of the application, and
• intended outcomes.

Assessors will evaluate the ability of the investigator(s) to undertake the proposed research, taking into account

• their track record in terms of publication,
• their academic age and
• stage of career.

Assessors may take into account evidence of language competence where the understanding of material in a foreign language is crucial to the achievement of the research objective.

In addition to the aspects considered by Assossors, the Final Award Committee will consider the proposal in relation to the Agreement for which application is made, taking into account

• the appropriateness of the partner institution
• the feasibility of the programme (ie the degree to which the partner institution can be expected to organise it)
• the importance of or necessity for the involvement of the partner institution
• the degree to which the visit might fulfil any appropriate strategic or other aims relevant to the Agreement

Special Area Programmes

(UK-Africa Partnerships, UK-Latin American/Caribbean Link Programme)

Assessors will evaluate the partners involved in the application, taking into account

• the partners engaged in the proposal and the match between their interests
• the appropriateness of the planned activities for developing the partnership
• the degree to which collaboration within the partner area is encouraged
• the ways in which knowledge development on both sides is encouraged
• the evidence of support from institutional authorities in both the UK and abroad
• the outcomes of the partnership, both academic (publication, website, training, etc) and in terms of plans for continued links

Assessors will evaluate the research proposal around which the partnership is developed on the basis of its academic merit, taking into account

• its originality,
• its relationship to, and the volume of, research already in the field,
• the scholarly importance of the research proposed,
• the suitability of the methodology,
• the feasibility and specificity of the research programme,

Assessors will evaluate the ability of the principal investigator(s) to manage the proposed partnership, taking into account

• their track record in terms of publication,
• their academic age and
• stage of career.

Visiting Fellowships

Assessors will evaluate the application on the basis of its academic merit, taking into account

• its originality,
• its relationship to, and the volume of, research already in the field,
• the scholarly importance of the research proposed,
• the suitability of the methodology,
• the feasibility of the research programme,
• the specificity of the scheme of research,
• the necessity for or benefit to be expected from a visit to the UK
• the presentation, and
• intended outcomes.

Assessors will evaluate the ability of the Visiting Fellow to undertake the proposed research, taking into account

• any track record in terms of publication,
• their academic age and
• stage of career
• the opportunities available in their country of origin
• previous visits to the UK or, where appropriate, other developed countries
• the academic relationship with the UK host

Assessors will evaluate the support offered by the UK host to the Visiting Fellow, taking into account

• the degree of engagement with the visitor and the project
• the scale and nature of support offered
• explanations of mutual benefit expected to result from the visit.

In addition to the aspects considered by assessors, applications may, where appropriate, be considered by Area Panels in addition to the Final Award Committee. Area Panel specialists will give particular attention to regional aspects which affect the application, including

• difficulties of resource and access in the Fellow's home institution which may affect the application
• the Academy's strategic or other aims relevant to the country from which the Fellow comes
• the potential for long-term links to be maintained between the Visiting Fellow and the UK host and institution.

Feedback

For Research Development Awards, applicants are supplied with feedback (where provided) from the external evaluators concerning the strengths and weaknesses of their proposal (category B in the table below). There is currently no PI ‘right to reply’.

In all other schemes, feedback is provided only if the assessors or the final award committee have specific comments to relay to the applicant concerning the conduct of the proposed research, or any constructive advice regarding re-framing of the proposal to improve the quality of a future resubmission (category A in the table below).

Summary of peer review effort, per scheme

Scheme	No. references required	No. external evaluations required	Selection Panel	Feedback
Senior Research Fellowship	1	0	Y	A
Postdoctoral Fellowship	2	0	Y	A
Small Research Grant	1	0	N	A
Research Development Award	1	2	N	B
Overseas Conference Grant	1	0	N	A
British Conference Grant	1	0	N	A
Country-specific Agreement	1	0	V	A
Special Area Programmes	1	0	Y	A
Visiting Fellowships	2	0	V	A

V = varies according to Agreement