Share your thoughts on remote study sections
The COVID-19 pandemic has forced federal agencies that fund scientific research to move their grant-application review panels online. The National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation have used remote study sections in the past, and the ASBMB public affairs office heard mixed reviews about those endeavors. Now that the need for social distancing has resulted in widespread adoption of remote grant-application review, we feel it’s important to record reviewers’ experiences contemporaneously and then, at a later date, share those comments with funding agencies so that the remote-review process can be optimized.
We invite you to use this simple form to share your thoughts on your remote study section experience.
Here are some of the questions we have, but don’t feel bound to them. We welcome any and all comments about your experiences.
- Do you think the quality of review will change as a result of remote interactions? How so?
- Do you think remote participants are more or less likely to contribute to discussions? Why?
- What is lost by not having face-to-face interactions?
- What is gained?
We intend to share your comments with both the scientific community and federal agencies. We also hope to develop recommendations for improving remote grant review.
We hope you will take a few minutes to share your thoughts, and we strongly encourage you to share this platform with your colleagues of all disciplines.
Together, we can help the community in a time of need.
Join the ASBMB Today mailing list
Sign up to get updates on articles, interviews and events.
Latest in Policy
Policy highlights or most popular articles
Still unclear why university expelled 15 Chinese researchers
The University of North Texas has said only that the decision followed briefings by federal and local law enforcement.
ASBMB joins amicus brief
Society and other nonprofits raise concerns about racial profiling by federal investigators and prosecutors’ attempts to criminalize administrative errors.
Science-related legislation to watch
One bill would provide $26 billion in emergency funding for agencies that support research; another would protect against foreign influence in research.
We are here because we choose to be
Five months into a pandemic with arguably the world’s worst response, the United States can no longer take the easy way out and blame only politics for our downfall. We’re to blame, too.
NSF foreign influence probes net nearly two dozen
Meanwhile, feds charge Ohio State researcher with fraud and drop theft charges against Emory professor.
U.S. seeks to kick out and ban foreign students
Harvard and MIT sue government to stop rule change targeting F-1 and M-1 visa holders at or heading to institutions offering only online courses this fall because of COVID-19.