Peer Review Process. “Evaluations shall include, but not be limited to, a peer review process. The peer review process shall be on a departmental or divisional basis, and shall address the forthcoming demographics of California, and the principles of affirmative action. The process shall require that the peers reviewing are both representative of the diversity of California and sensitive to affirmative action concerns, all without compromising quality and excellence in teaching.” (Ed Code Sections 87663[c] and [d])
Peer Review Process. The editor appoints two reviewers whose names are hidden from the authors. Authors' data is unknown to reviewers. The paper will be published in ACE provided that the two reviews are positive. If reviewers have any comments, the authors receive reviews to read and consider these comments. The editor decides whether the paper fulfill all requirements i.e. formal and scientific. Paper publication requires the author's final approval. As soon as the publication appears in print and in electronic forms on the Internet there is no possibility to change the content of the article.
Peer Review Process a. The Peer Review Committee will meet with the evaluee to discuss the surveys, Self- Evaluation, Session Observations, and prior Peer Review Reports (if necessary) and recommend a plan for professional growth. The plan will identify and address strengths and concerns. The committee and evaluee will propose activities to remediate identified deficiencies. This information is to be contained in the District standard peer review report that is forwarded to the director/xxxx. The Peer Review Committee chair and appropriate director/xxxx will discuss the report, and the report will be included and considered by the xxxx as part of the evaluation process.
Peer Review Process. The School District and Education Minnesota-Monticello will agree upon a procedure for teacher assistance, which shall be called the Peer Review Process. The School District and Education Minnesota-Monticello agree to use the Monticello Continuous Professional Growth plan.
Peer Review Process i. Peer observations shall be conducted by faculty familiar through training or experience with the assignment of the bargaining unit member undergoing evaluation. Training on the peer evaluation process and forms will be available for faculty.
Peer Review Process. The Department shall implement a process in collaboration with volunteer CSB to ensure that at least five percent of community mental health and substance abuse programs receive independent peer reviews annually, per federal requirements and guidelines, to review the quality and appropriateness of services. The Department shall manage this process to ensure that peer reviewers do not monitor their own programs.
Peer Review Process a. The Peer Review Committee will meet with the evaluee to discuss the Student Experience Forms, Individual appointment evaluations (in aggregate), Self- Evaluation, Classroom Observations, and prior Peer Review Reports (if necessary) and recommend a plan for professional growth. The plan will identify and address strengths and concerns. The committee and evaluee will propose activities to remediate identified deficiencies. This information is to be contained in a peer review report that is forwarded to the appropriate xxxx. The Peer Review Committee chair and the appropriate xxxx will discuss the report, and the report will be included and considered by the xxxx as part of the evaluation process.
Peer Review Process. A peer review process was incorporated into the stage of data analysis in order to provide an external check on the validity of the primary researcher's interpretations of the interview data. The peer reviewer went over the data at every stage of the analysis with an eye to scrutinizing the primary researcher's assumptions and providing feedback. Information was informally exchanged (e.g., via e-mail and telephone) with the peer reviewer/s every 7 to 10 days while face-to-face peer sessions were held 2 to 3 weeks where data was exchanged and ideas were discussed. The peer reviewer suggested new or alternative formulated themes, identified themes that the primary researcher had missed, challenged the primary researcher's interpretations of meaning, and brought significant points concerning the research sample and data analysis process to the fore. At times when the primary researcher disagreed with the suggestions of the peer reviewer, they worked to achieve consensus on the data analysis through a thorough discussion of the meaning of participant statements as situated within the context of the original narrative. Validity of the data analysis To ensure that standards for good research were met, strategies addressing the transferability, dependability, and credibility of the data were employed as procedures of verification. Transferability was assessed by the appearance of identical themes across narratives involving different persons in different scenarios. To ensure dependability, the peer review was employed to provide an external check of the data analysis procedures. To address credibility, the primary researcher and the peer reviewer independently reread and carefully examined the scale, the lists of formulated descriptors, the theme, and the exhaustive description to ensure that the themes did not distort or neglect aspects of the original narrative. Seeking the participants' feedback on the exhaustive description provided an additional assurance of credibility.
Peer Review Process. The following clauses shall be applicable in the event that the Network Agreement makes provision for a Peer Review Process:
Peer Review Process. PCL will conduct a peer review process (the “Peer Review Process”) involving professionals selected from among the North America wide PCL network who are not members of the Project Team. The Peer Review Process includes periodic due diligence regarding important design considerations, building functionality and construction costing analysis, and technical information to assist the City in life cycle costing, during both the Schematic Design Stage and the Design Development Stage but in any event prior to PCL making a Fixed Price Proposal. PCL’s statement regarding how the Peer Review Process will function is as follows:
