Board 194: A Community-Driven Process for Developing NSF Review Panelists

Rebecca A. Bates, Lisa Benson, Randi Sims, Kelsey Watts, Karin Jensen, Evan Ko, Gary Lichtenstein

Research output: Contribution to journalConference articlepeer-review


Peer review of grant proposals is critical to the National Science Foundation (NSF) funding process for STEM disciplinary and education research. Despite this, scholars receive little training in effective and constructive review of proposals beyond definitions of review criteria and an overview of strategies to avoid bias and communicate clearly. Senior researchers often find that their reviewing skills improve and develop over time, but variations in reviewer starting points can have a negative impact on the value of reviews for their intended audiences of program officers, who make funding recommendations, and principal investigators, who drive the research or want to improve their proposals. Building on the journal review component of the Engineering Education Research Peer Review Training (EER PERT) project, which is designed to develop EER scholars' peer review skills through mentored reviewing experiences, this paper describes a program designed to provide professional development for proposal reviewing and provides initial evaluation results.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings
StatePublished - Jun 25 2023
Externally publishedYes
Event2023 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition - The Harbor of Engineering: Education for 130 Years, ASEE 2023 - Baltimore, United States
Duration: Jun 25 2023Jun 28 2023


  • Peer review
  • grant proposal review
  • professional development

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Engineering


Dive into the research topics of 'Board 194: A Community-Driven Process for Developing NSF Review Panelists'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this