Peer reviewing scientific research
Run by School of Human and Behavioural Sciences
10.000 Credits or 5.000 ECTS Credits
Organiser: Dr Anthony Blanchfield
Overall aims and purpose
The main purpose of the module is to provide students with an in-depth understanding and critical appreciation of publishing peer revised scientific papers. This key skill is necessary for academics to be able to perform effectively. It is the aim of this module therefore to provide MRes students with the opportunity to engage in the peer review process specifically by acting as the reviewer and the reviewee on a theoretical manuscript submission.
This independent study based module will enable students to gain an in-depth understanding of the peer review process that is involved in manuscript publication. Consequently, students will first work closely with their supervisor to perform an initial review of a research article in the style of an academic peer review. For the second part of the module students will respond to reviewer comments regarding a specific document to thoroughly address points that have been raised by the reviewer. Collectively this will mean that the student gains critical practice regarding how to prepare their own manuscripts (e.g.,research proposal, dissertation) and how to critically review the research of others.
Pass: Fair understanding evident via reasonably well structured assignments however some irrelevance is present. Presentation of information contains several factual or interpretational errors. There will be somewhat limited evidence of sound critical thought and some (but limited) grasp of relevant study design and statistical issues. In addition to some ability to formulate arguments and justification there will also be only relatively limited evidence of effective problem solving when addressing points raised by a reviewer.
Merit: Some very good understanding evident via well structured and somewhat concise assignments. Good presentation of information which is mostly free of factual or interpretational errors. There will be some good evidence of critical thought as well as a good grasp of relevant study design and statistical issues. In addition to an ability to formulate arguments and justification there will also be evidence of some effective problem solving when addressing points raised by a reviewer.
Distinction: Detailed and comprehensive understanding evident via well structured, concise and highly focused assignments. Excellent presentation of information containing no factual or interpretational errors. Ample evidence of critical thought as well as a comprehensive grasp of relevant study design and statistical issues including their interplay. In addition to a clear ability to formulate robust arguments and justification there will also be an excellent demonstration of problem solving when addressing points raised by a reviewer.
Critically engage in the peer review research process
Critique contemporary empirical research in the advocated style of an academic reviewer
Express complex research-related issues/principles concisely
Address reviewer questions in the advocated style of a manuscript author
|COURSEWORK||review of manuscript||
In this assignment having agreed on a manuscript to review with your supervisor the student takes on the hypothetical role of a manuscript peer reviewer. To achieve this the student will critique the manuscript in the style that an academic peer reviewer might if they had been asked to act on behalf our a journal as a guest reviewer.
|COURSEWORK||response to review||
In this assignment you will now change roles by taking on the hypothetical role of the author who has submitted a manuscript for review. You will therefore adopt the style that an author might adopt when addressing peer-review feedback from a manuscript reviewer.
Teaching and Learning Strategy
This session will act an an introduction to the module and will allow students the opportunity to ask any questions about the module
This module is very much focused on independent learning and planning while working alongside your MRes supervisor. Students should use their private time to work on their knowledge of the peer review process, to work on actions that may have arisen from supervisor metings, and to prepare specifically for the assignments
Students should liaise with their MRes supervisor to select an academic paper to review. Supervision time between student and supervisor should be used meet for discussion about the selected paper, to discuss the more general aspects of the peer review process, and to discuss any draft work that precedes assignment submission.
- Literacy - Proficiency in reading and writing through a variety of media
- Numeracy - Proficiency in using numbers at appropriate levels of accuracy
- Computer Literacy - Proficiency in using a varied range of computer software
- Self-Management - Able to work unsupervised in an efficient, punctual and structured manner. To examine the outcomes of tasks and events, and judge levels of quality and importance
- Exploring - Able to investigate, research and consider alternatives
- Information retrieval - Able to access different and multiple sources of information
- Inter-personal - Able to question, actively listen, examine given answers and interact sensitevely with others
- Critical analysis & Problem Solving - Able to deconstruct and analyse problems or complex situations. To find solutions to problems through analyses and exploration of all possibilities using appropriate methods, rescources and creativity.
- Presentation - Able to clearly present information and explanations to an audience. Through the written or oral mode of communication accurately and concisely.
Subject specific skills
- research and assess paradigms, theories, principles, concepts and factual information, and apply such skills in explaining and solving problems
- critically assess and evaluate data and evidence in the context of research methodologies and data sources
- describe, synthesise, interpret, analyse and evaluate information and data relevant to a professional or vocational context
- plan, design, execute and communicate a sustained piece of independent intellectual work, which provides evidence of critical engagement with, and interpretation of, appropriate data
- apply knowledge to the solution of familiar and unfamiliar problems
- develop a sustained reasoned argument, perhaps challenging previously held assumptions
- demonstrate effective written and/or oral communication and presentation skills
- work effectively independently and with others
- take and demonstrate responsibility for their own learning and continuing personal and professional development
- project manage and execute practical activities using appropriate techniques and procedures whilst demonstrating high levels of relevant skills
- demonstrate an understanding of the philosophical basis of scientific paradigms
- demonstrate evidence of competence in the scientific methods of enquiry, and interpretation and analysis of relevant data and statistical outputs.
- develop transferable skills of relevance to careers outside of sport, health and exercise sciences.
- communicate succinctly at a level appropriate to different audiences.
- accurately interpret case study data