School & District Management

Review Process for U.S. Education Research Approved

By Debra Viadero — January 31, 2006 3 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

A national research-advisory board last week approved guidelines to govern the outside review processes that the Department of Education uses to screen and approve the studies and reports that it funds.

Taking a cue from federal science agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Agency, the guidelines call for standing panels of reviewers to screen many of the research proposals funded by the Education Department’s primary research arm, the Institute of Education Sciences.

They also formalize a special office within the institute that functions almost like the editor of a professional, peer-reviewed journal and coordinates reviews for most of the reports published with the Education Department’s imprimatur.

“This is a scientific review process that is truly independent of staff,” said advisory- board member Jon Baron, the executive director of the Washington-based Council for Excellence in Government. “It goes a long way toward establishing the institute’s credibility as an independent, nonideological source of authority on education research.”

Critics have long said the Education Department’s peer-review procedures are partly to blame for the low quality of federally funded education research. A department-commissioned report in 1999, for instance, said that such procedures were sometimes haphazard and that reviewers often lacked expertise in research methodology.

When the institute was created in 2002, federal officials began to set in place more-structured procedures for handling outside reviews. But, under federal law, those procedures have to be formally approved by the National Board of Education Sciences, a 14-member board whose members are nominated by the president. At its meeting last week, the board essentially approved most of the mechanisms already in place, adding some small changes of its own.

“What’s new here is the process of making these procedures transparent and available to the public,” said Gerald E. Sroufe, the director of government relations for the American Educational Research Association, a Washington-based group that represents 22,000 researchers.

Two Review Tracks

The guidelines approved on Jan. 24 set up procedures for two kinds of research-review processes—one for deciding which research proposals the department will fund, and one for signing off on reports on federally financed education studies.

Spanning about a year, the process for research proposals begins in March, when the department announces its research competitions. Panels meet to screen proposals twice a year, once in October or November and again in February or March.

Proposals are reviewed by either a standing peer-review panel or a single-session panel. Typically composed of 20 reviewers, the standing panels vet proposals for all the studies that fall under a particular topic area, such as reading or mathematics education. Serving anywhere from one to three years, most of the members of those panels have to be approved by the institute’s director, Grover J. “Russ” Whitehurst.

“Basically, we’re looking for highly qualified experts who are at least as good as the [principal investigators] who are applying,” said Mr. Whitehurst.

However, one panel member questioned whether reviewers should include experts in the content area as well as researchers.

“If the report or the proposal is about math, then there should be mathematicians,” said R. James Milgram, a mathematics professor at Stanford University. He said he and other professional mathematicians, in reviews of state and federal math assessments, have found mathematical errors in 20 percent to 25 percent of the questions.

But board members put off that issue until the panel meets again in May.

At members’ urging, the guidelines were amended to specify a process for “inviting” reviewers to disclose any methodological or ideological biases they have at the point when the review panels convene—a policy that other federal science agencies follow.

For reports produced by the institute’s four research centers, the guidelines call for two stages of review. The first stage occurs at the research centers themselves; the second takes place in the institute’s office of standards and review, under the newly approved procedures. Officials in that office either have the reports reviewed by staff or recruit outside experts—two or more for each report—to critique them.

Related Tags:

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Mathematics Webinar
Addressing Unfinished Learning in Math: Providing Tutoring at Scale
Most states as well as the federal government have landed on tutoring as a key strategy to address unfinished learning from the pandemic. Take math, for example. Studies have found that students lost more ground
Content provided by Yup Math Tutoring
Classroom Technology Webinar Building Better Blended Learning in K-12 Schools
The pandemic and the increasing use of technology in K-12 education it prompted has added renewed energy to the blended learning movement as most students are now learning in school buildings (and will likely continue

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

School & District Management Q&A School Libraries and Controversial Books: Tips From the Front Lines
A top school librarian explains how districts can prepare for possible challenges to student reading materials and build trust with parents.
6 min read
Image of library shelves of books.
mikdam/iStock/Getty
School & District Management Opinion ‘This Is Not What We Signed Up For’: A Principal’s Plea for More Support
School leaders are playing the role of health-care experts, social workers, mask enforcers, and more. It’s taking a serious toll.
Kristen St. Germain
3 min read
Illustration of a professional woman walking a tightrope.
Laura Baker/Education Week and uzenzen/iStock/Getty
School & District Management Letter to the Editor Educators Must Look to History When They Advocate for Changes
Educators and policymakers must be aware of the history of ideas when making changes in education, says this letter to the editor.
1 min read
Illustration of an open laptop receiving an email.
iStock/Getty
School & District Management Letter to the Editor Reconsidering Causes of Principal Burnout
The state and federal governments are asking us to implement policies that often go against our beliefs, says this letter to the editor.
1 min read
Illustration of an open laptop receiving an email.
iStock/Getty