Publication Date
| In 2026 | 0 |
| Since 2025 | 0 |
| Since 2022 (last 5 years) | 0 |
| Since 2017 (last 10 years) | 0 |
| Since 2007 (last 20 years) | 1 |
Descriptor
Source
| Research Management Review | 1 |
Publication Type
| Journal Articles | 1 |
| Reports - Descriptive | 1 |
| Reports - Research | 1 |
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 1 |
Education Level
| Higher Education | 1 |
Audience
| Researchers | 2 |
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewed
Download full textMiner, Jeremy T. – Research Management Review, 2011
After months of waiting, the grant reviews came back: "excellent," "excellent," and "fair." What?! How can this be? Why is the third review so out of line with the first two? On more than one occasion a principal investigator (PI) has been frustrated not only by a negative funding decision but more so by the accompanying reviewer evaluation forms…
Descriptors: Research Administration, Grants, Feedback (Response), Evaluation Criteria
Pfeifer, R. Scott – 1987
Using a qualitative approach, documents were reviewed and teachers, peer evaluators, instructional supervisors, and administrators were interviewed in order to evaluate the effectiveness of peer evaluation programs in three school districts. Specifically, this study examines peer involvement in the summative evaluation of teachers in three school…
Descriptors: Case Studies, Elementary School Teachers, Elementary Secondary Education, Evaluation Problems
