BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//talks.cam.ac.uk//v3//EN
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/London
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0000
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:BST
DTSTART:19700329T010000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=3;BYDAY=-1SU
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0000
TZNAME:GMT
DTSTART:19701025T020000
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;BYMONTH=10;BYDAY=-1SU
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
CATEGORIES:Cambridge Philosophical Society
SUMMARY:Peer review\, past\, present… and future - Profess
 or Aileen Fyfe FRSE\, FRHistS\, FHEA\, University 
 of St Andrews
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/London:20260316T180000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/London:20260316T190000
UID:TALK235465AThttp://talks.cam.ac.uk
URL:http://talks.cam.ac.uk/talk/index/235465
DESCRIPTION:Research evaluation is a familiar element of moder
 n science\, and peer review is one of the favoured
  ways of doing it. But peer review has not always 
 been so central to academic reputations\; nor has 
 it always functioned as it now does. This lecture 
 will draw upon my team’s research in the archives 
 of the Royal Society of London to explore how eval
 uation has changed over the last 250 years\, to ex
 plain the present crisis and to discuss options fo
 r the future.\n\nThe Royal Society has published s
 cientific journals since 1665. It was one of the f
 irst institutions to develop written refereeing pr
 ocesses\, which began to be used at the Philosophi
 cal Transactions in the 1830s and later at the Pro
 ceedings and other journals. The Society’s unrival
 led archives shed light onhow decisions were made 
 – and by whom\, and why – before and after the int
 roduction of written refereeing.\n\nDuring the twe
 ntieth century\, ‘peer-reviewed publications’ acqu
 ired a privileged status. The increasing importanc
 e assigned to refereeing accompanied professionali
 sation and increased competition. The growth of sc
 ience\, demographic changes and internationalizati
 on have also posed challenges for our ongoing use 
 of an evaluation practice that originally develope
 d in the context of a closed\, gentlemanly communi
 ty. What should the future of peer review look lik
 e?
LOCATION:Bristol-Myers Squibb Lecture Theatre\, Department 
 of Chemistry
CONTACT:Beverley Larner
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR