Information for referees

The Referee Guidelines are available as a PDF The Referee Guidelines PDF

Guidelines for Rutherford Discovery Fellowship Referees | Ngā aratohu mā te rōpū whiriwhiri

Background | He whakamārama

The Rutherford Discovery Fellowships were announced by the New Zealand Government in May 2010. With this scheme, the New Zealand Government is supporting the development of excellence and has moved to fill a major gap in career opportunities for the most talented early- to mid- career researchers. The Fellowships will develop and foster the future leaders in the New Zealand science and innovation system.[1] They will attract and retain Aotearoa New Zealand’s most talented early- to mid- career researchers and encourage their career development by enabling them to establish a track record for future research leadership. It is expected that Fellows, throughout their careers, will contribute to positive outcomes for Aotearoa New Zealand.

The application process is competitive, with ten prestigious Fellowships of five years in length, awarded annually. An important part of the decision process is the assessment of the applicant and their proposed research programme by external referees.

Your role as a referee is an integral part of the appraisal process. Your detailed comments help in the final assessment of the proposal and will assist the funding decisions undertaken by the interview panel when appointing the Rutherford Discovery Fellowships.

Conflicts of interest | Ngā take whai taharua

Referees cannot be seen as benefitting from recommending an application, i.e. they should not be involved in the proposed programme of research, be someone the applicant is publishing with, or be in their chain of line management. If possible, it is recommended that applicants use referees they have not co-published with within the last 5 years. However, as applicants’ circumstances are different, this is a recommendation only. In general, however, panellists will not consider a referee report if the referee can be perceived to benefit from recommending an application.

A referee is generally deemed to be conflicted if:

• They are a panel member in the current funding round.
• They work in the same department as the applicant(s).
• They work at the same Crown Research Institute AND are in the same team as the applicant(s) (the level of conflict will depend on the size of the organisation).
• They work at the same company as the applicant(s). The level of conflict will depend on the size of the company.
• They have co-authored publications with the applicant(s) in the last 5 years.
• They have a low level of comfort assessing the application due to their relationship with the applicant(s).

Referee suitability | Tōtika o te kaitautoko

A suitable referee will be able to comment on aspects of feasibility, significance, technical aspects and originality of the proposal, the ability of the researcher to carry out the research, and the potential of the research to contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field. To help in assessing your appropriateness as a referee, please consider the following:

• Whether you are qualified to comment on the proposal.
• Whether you wish to act as a referee for the applicant.
• Whether a conflict of interest exists in that you have a line management role over the applicant.
• Whether a conflict of interest exists in that you are, or could be, directly involved in the proposed programme of research.
• Whether the applicant is a relative or close friend.

If you choose to withdraw as a referee, please advise the applicant as soon as possible so another referee can be contacted.

Confidentiality | Mata

The contents of the referee reports are confidential in every respect. A referee report is submitted on the understanding that: (i) it will only be used in the appraisal process; (ii) it is confidential to the selection panels appointed by Royal Society Te Apārangi; and, (iii) that it will not be made available to the applicant or the public (this includes all comments and grades).

Referee’s comments | Ngā kōrero a ngā kaitaunaki

Your comments are essential in making final judgements on the applications, as the assessment panel consists of researchers from a broad range of disciplines. Comments should be consistent with the grades given. Grades without comments may be discounted by the selection panellists. Please keep the reference to a maximum of two pages.

Online web-based referee reports | Ngā pūrongo ā-paetukutuku tuihono

Referees will be emailed a Uniform Resource Locator (URL) link to a web-based portal to complete their report. If there are any difficulties, please contact the Rutherford Discovery Fellowship Secretariat at:

Rutherford.Discovery@royalsociety.org.nz

Vision Mātauranga

Vision Mātauranga is a policy about innovation, opportunity and the creation of knowledge that highlights the potential contribution of Māori knowledge, resources and people. As international referees may not have awareness of this policy, referees are not required to comment on this aspect of the application. However, referees with a good understanding of Vision Mātauranga are welcome to include Vision Mātauranga in their assessment of the applicant and the proposed research where applicable.

For your information, please note that applicants that have indicated alignment of their proposed research with one or more Vision Mātauranga themes, are allowed to use up to one extra page of the application’s section 9-12 to engage with the policy. Applicants can choose to integrate Vision Mātauranga into the conceptual framework and/or research design of the proposed programme, for example, demonstration of consultation, linkages, outcomes or other relevant information. Alternatively, applicants may to choose to gather all relevant Vision Mātauranga information under a separate heading (Section 11) under the Research Programme template.

For a Glossary of common te reo Māori terms, please see Appendix I.

For additional information on Vision Mātauranga, please refer to the application guidelines.

Criteria for refereeing | Ngā paearu mō te tautoko

Referees should address their comments primarily to each of the following criteria and base their judgment on them.

1          Calibre of the applicant as a researcher:

Is the applicant's career exceptional for a candidate in this discipline, at their career stage?

Exceptional may be determined by consideration of the merit of the applicant’s career to date and how the research compares with other New Zealand or international research in the same field. If the applicant is at the start of his or her career the calibre must be assessed in relation to the years of research experience. Information on the applicant’s achievements is included in the curriculum vitae in Section 5.

2          Calibre of the applicant as a research leader:

Describe the leadership qualities of the applicant.

Describe the leadership qualities you believe the applicant possesses, or the potential they have, and provide any evidence for your assertions. Additional information on the applicant’s leadership is included in section 5.

3          Calibre of the research programme:

Please consider the merit of the proposal and the potential of the research.

Merit may be determined by the applicant incorporating originality, insight and rigour, and please consider the ability of the researchers to carry out the research.

Potential of the research may be assessed from the work outlined in Sections 9-12 of the proposal. The research should significantly contribute to advances in theoretical understanding, develop new methodologies, contribute to new knowledge, or lead to advancement in a field by cross-fertilisation with ideas and results from another field. Often the design and planning of a programme of research determines its success. Good design and planning are determined by whether the overall proposal and its specific objectives have a clear focus, and the methods and experimental or sampling design are likely to produce high quality results.

Note: Referees are not required to comment on budgets.

4          If the candidate is known to you; please state how long and in what capacity:

For instance, if the applicant is a former colleague or student this should be noted here. Knowing the applicant in a professional sense need not be an impediment for being a referee, provided you are satisfied with your suitability as a referee, as described earlier.

5          Any other comments that you feel are relevant:

For instance, areas where the proposal could have been improved.

6          Overall Grade:

Please ensure that the grade matches the comments above.

Grade 1: Outstanding (compares to the top 5% of international applicants)

Grade 2: Excellent (Top 10%)

Grade 3: Well above average (Top 20%)

Grade 4: Above average

Grade 5: Average or below average

If you have received any proposals for review from international funding agencies, please benchmark the applicant’s proposal against these. For example, Grade 1 should be given if you consider that the proposal is in the top 5% of international proposals in the field, Grade 2 if it is in the top 10%, and so on.

Disposal of applicant proposal matter | Ngā whakawātea i ngā kōrero o te tono

Please destroy all proposal material once your report is completed.

Additional information | Ētahi atu kōrero

Additional information on the Rutherford Discovery Fellowships is available on our website.

If you require further assistance, please email the Rutherford Discovery Fellowship Secretariat at rutherford.discovery@royalsociety.org.nz or phone + 64 4 470 5764.

Checklist before returning your report | Rārangi aeowhai i mua i te tuku i tō pūrongo

Before completing your Referee Report Form, please ensure that:

• the intended grade and all comments have been entered
• you have not exceeded the two page limit
• your name and the date are entered at the end of the referee report (the last page of the form).

NO SIGNATURE IS REQUIRED IF THE REPORT IS COMPLETED ON-LINE.

Reports are due no later than 5 pm Thu 25 May 2023 (New Zealand Standard Time). Please note that applicants will be excluded from further consideration in the funding round if Royal Society Te Apārangi has not received the required three referee reports by the deadline as described in the proposal guidelines. We therefore ask that you compare New Zealand Standard Time to you own time zone in order to assure that the report is posted on time.

The preferred mode of reply is by completing the on-line web-portal. Referee reports by email can be arranged on request. Please contact Royal Society Te Apārangi at: Rutherford.Discovery@royalsociety.org.nz

[1]       This includes research in science, technologies, and humanities.

Appendix I: Glossary of te reo Māori terms |  Āpitihanga I: Papakupu o ngā kupu reo Māori

Definitions taken from maoridictionary.co.nz

Ka mihi ki a Ahorangi Angus Macfarlane, Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha, mō tēnei. With thanks to Professor Angus Macfarlane, University of Canterbury, for his input.