Protected: Future Faculty 2020 Workshop Materials

Peer Review

Welcome to the Future Faculty Workshop Peer Review Materials Section. Here you will find all resources necessary to learn about crafting excellent teaching, research, and diversity statements, as well as how to give constructive feedback. Please explore this page to take advantage of all resources provided. Before beginning your peer review process, please read and sign the Privacy Agreement.

Privacy Agreement

Before moving forward with the peer review process, please click here to read and sign our privacy agreement.

 

How to Craft Compelling Teaching, Research, and Diversity Statements

Below are resources that describe how to create effective research, teaching, and diversity statements. Please review before you read your peers’ statements.

How to Give Constructive Feedback

Feedback is valuable but few scientists are trained to give it constructively

Many of us think that constructive criticism means saying something nice before you say something harsh. Though this can soften a blow, it misses deeper guidelines governing how to mitigate the sting of giving and receiving criticism. As scientists we have to read and critique materials often and the process can be quite intense. These guidelines can help.

 

Mutual Respect – Constructive criticism has to come from a place of respect while assuming best intentions. If everyone is a decent person doing their best, there can be no character indictment. We are better able to act on feedback if it comes from someone we respect, and respects us, who we believe has our best interests at heart.

 

Be Specific – Specific problems have specific solutions. Vague problems or dissatisfactions don’t have solutions, and they invite frustration or commiseration. Being specific is also the easiest way to avoid character indictment. When you stay focused on the specific issue, what might be motivating it, and how it can be resolved, you can avoid unproductive accusatory generalities. Even if you don’t have a solution in mind, describing the issue as specifically as possible will allow the recipient an opportunity to address it.

 

Keep, Discard, Improve – Giving constructive criticism is like editing: you need to define the stuff to keep (what is done well?), stuff to get rid of (what is not working at all?) and stuff to fix (what has some value but could be improved?). All of these components are critical. Focus only on the good and you lose the opportunity to improve. Focus only on the bad and you lose motivation.

 

Mindset: How can I help? – Giving feedback with a helpful mindset sets a good tone. Everyone wants to reach their full potential and succeed scientifically while working to improve professional prospects. Instead of considering what the other person can do for you, flip it around. What can you do to help them?

 

Based on guidance provided here: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2015.04.025

 

 

Instructions

Each FFW participant has been assigned to a group with two to three other participants to read, review, and critique one another’s faculty application statements. Prior to reviewing the statements, each reviewer should sign the privacy agreement, read the instructions on how to provide constructive feedback and review resources on how to write a research, teaching, and diversity statement. Keep in mind, that these are draft proposals, this is not meant to be a proofreading/editing exercise. Instead, focus on higher level feedback about the science, structure, and depth of the statements.  When reviewing each statement, you are looking for areas to improve, expand, contract, clarify, or restructure. It is okay, and encouraged, to praise an idea or well-written section as well as to offer suggestions for improvement.

The point of this exercise is three-fold: 1) to get 3rd party feedback on the proposal; 2) to learn how to critique and review the work of others; and 3) to make your proposal better by recognizing best practices and potential pitfalls. If you have any issues please email northeasternadvance@northeastern.edu.

Please follow the below timeline to ensure timely feedback within your peer review groups:

  • July 1st – Peer review groups are announced.
  • July 10th – Deadline for an initial meeting time to be finalized within groups.
  • July 22nd – Deadline for written feedback to be given on application materials.
  • July 27th – Deadline for oral feedback to be given to peers on application materials.
  • August 14th – Deadline to set a final meeting time to review updated materials.
  • August 24th – Deadline for written feedback on revised application materials.
  • August 31st– Deadline for oral feedback on revised application materials.

Use the following prompts to structure your feedback. Give written feedback to the authors prior to the discussion.

  1. In your own words, summarize the main research question, claims, and conclusions of the study.
  2. Does the statement provide future-focused next steps for how this research will move the field forward?
  3. Discuss the proposal’s strengths and areas for improvement and your overall recommendation.
  4. Other general feedback on this statement.

Use the following prompts to structure your feedback. Give written feedback to the authors prior to the discussion.

  1. Summarize the teaching philosophy components that this statement highlights.
  2. Does the author use concrete examples to illustrate each component?
  3. Does the statement have a theme, end strong on a high note, and focus on students?
  4. Other general feedback on this statement.

Use the following prompts to structure your feedback. Give written feedback to the authors prior to the discussion.

  1. Summarize your understanding of the applicant’s commitment to diversity and equity.
  2. Does the statement focus on commonly accepted issues of diversity and equity?
  3. What has the applicant done (or plan to do) to help individuals from underrepresented backgrounds?
  4. Other general feedback on this statement.