Brockhouse Canada Prize for Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Engineering

Instructions to Referees – Form 140

Before Proceeding

Please read  Instructions to Referees on the Privacy Act, Confidentiality and the Use and Disclosure of Information.

Note: Your signature on the paper version of the review form, or transmission of your final evaluation to NSERC either by mail or by using the electronic evaluation process, means that you have read these instructions and that you consent to these uses and disclosures.

In addition, you may refer to:

• Program objectives for the Brockhouse Canada Prize for Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Engineering;
• Guidelines for the Preparation and Review of Applications in Engineering and Applied Sciences; and
• Guidelines for the Preparation and Review of Applications in Interdisciplinary Research.

Information on the following topics is provided below:

• Conflict of Interest;
• Allegations of Misconduct;
• How to Evaluate the Nomination.

About Adobe Reader

To read the PDF version you need Adobe Reader 5.0 (or later) on your system. Acrobat Reader is available from the Adobe Reader download page.

Conflict of Interest

If you are in a conflict of interest or for any other reason unable to act as a referee, please contact us directly or send us an e-mail at referee.brockhouse@nserc-crsng.gc.ca as soon as possible. In order to identify yourself and the application(s) you are unable to review to NSERC, please indicate your Personal Identification Number and the application number in the SUBJECT line of the electronic message followed by your message.

Suggested referees should not be in a conflict of interest. Refer to the Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Policy of the Federal Research Funding Organizations for more information. In addition, referees (external reviewers) must sign the Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Agreement for Review Committee Members, External Reviewers, and Observers before they access the application material.

Allegations of Misconduct

Allegations of misconduct must be treated separately from the peer review process. Should your review reveal concerns of possible misconduct, please report any allegation separately to the Research Ethics Coordinator. Your report should only address the application and selection criteria and make no mention of the misconduct concerns.

How to Evaluate the Nomination

The selection committee for this prestigious award is a multidisciplinary group of distinguished scientists and engineers and relies heavily on the opinions of external referees in reaching a final decision on each nominated team. Therefore, when preparing your appraisal, please bear in mind that you are writing to non-specialists. The selection committee would greatly benefit from specific as well as general comments about the recent achievement(s) for which the team is nominated.

The Brockhouse Canada Prize for Interdisciplinary Research in Science and Engineering recognizes outstanding Canadian teams of researchers from different disciplines who have combined their expertise to produce achievements of outstanding international significance in the natural sciences and engineering in the last six years.

Nominations will include a description of the team's achievements in one or more of the following areas:

• contributions to knowledge;
• the use of existing knowledge to develop novel solutions to practical problems;
• leadership in the transfer of knowledge; and
• other appropriate contributions.

Nominations must clearly:

• highlight the interdisciplinary and collaborative nature of the team and its achievements;
• provide an explanation of the significance, novelty and impact of the achievements for which the team is being nominated; and
• outline the extent and importance of the team's contribution to the training of highly qualified personnel in an interdisciplinary setting.

In reviewing the nomination documents, please clearly address the Brockhouse Canada Prize criteria mentioned above and those items listed below:

1. Assess the quality and impact of the major achievements:
   1. the team’s achievements in one or, if applicable, more of the following categories:
      • contributions to knowledge;
      • the use of existing knowledge to develop novel solutions to practical problems;
      • leadership in the transfer of knowledge; and / or
      • other relevant contributions;
   2. the significance, novelty and impact of the achievements for which the team is being nominated;
   3. the interdisciplinary and collaborative nature of the team’s achievements, including the complementarities of expertise among members of the team. What makes this team interdisciplinary?; and
   4. the quality, extent and importance of the team’s contribution to the training of highly qualified personnel in a collaborative, interdisciplinary setting.
2. Compare the nominated team with international peers and recognized stars in the field; and
3. In cases where the nominated team has made contributions in areas other than the Natural Sciences and Engineering (NSE), such as the medical or social sciences, comment on the importance of the contributions in the NSE relative to the impact of contributions in other disciplines.