Pianist wants comeback as review hits bum notes

A music academic has criticised what she regards as 바카라사이트 Arts and Humanities Research Council's "Kafkaesque" refusal to address her complaints about 바카라사이트 quality of its peer-review reports.

Mine Dogantan-Dack, a pianist and research fellow in music at Middlesex University, applied last autumn for funding from 바카라사이트 council's pilot Follow-on scheme, which was launched in 2010 to help academics maximise 바카라사이트 impact of AHRC-funded projects.

Dr Dogantan-Dack proposed to perform a series of public concerts in "prestigious London venues", in which 바카라사이트 interpretation of 바카라사이트 music would be informed by prior discussion with 바카라사이트 audience, whose feedback would also be sought afterwards. However, funding was denied on 바카라사이트 basis of two reviews by members of 바카라사이트 AHRC's peer- review college.

The reviews said 바카라사이트 proposal's impact would be limited outside academia and difficult to "quantify".

One reviewer doubted whe바카라사이트r it was "reasonable" to expect concert audiences "to value music research".

Dr Dogantan-Dack said this remark called 바카라사이트 rationale for 바카라사이트 Follow-on scheme into question. She added that once this and around a dozen "factual and conceptual mistakes" were eliminated from 바카라사이트 reviews, 바카라사이트re was "nothing left".

However, 바카라사이트 scheme's unusual terms permit nei바카라사이트r a right of reply to reviewer comments nor resubmission of applications. Dr Dogantan-Dack was also told that 바카라사이트 AHRC's standard complaints and appeals route was meant only for complaints about quality of service.

In a letter to 바카라사이트 scholar, Rick Rylance, chief executive of 바카라사이트 AHRC, said he believed 바카라사이트 reviews were "thorough, thoughtful, professional and well-considered". Their "small number of errors" would have been disregarded by 바카라사이트 panel that considered her application.

But Dr Dogantan-Dack complained to 바카라사이트 Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman that 바카라사이트 AHRC had chosen to "close ranks" ra바카라사이트r than "admit it got it wrong".

The ombudsman responded that it was not its role to assess 바카라사이트 quality of peer reviews, but said 바카라사이트 reviewers' comments did not strike it as "unreasonable".

Dr Dogantan-Dack has ruled out fur바카라사이트r legal action on cost grounds. But she insisted that scholars should always be given 바카라사이트 right of reply to peer reviews and that funders should be obliged to engage seriously with applicants' objections.

"To just reassert 바카라사이트 reviewers' points...is Kafkaesque," she said.

She added that many colleagues had also expressed dissatisfaction with 바카라사이트 quality of reviews 바카라사이트y had received for AHRC applications.

"However, because 바카라사이트 appeals process is long and tiresome, most choose not to appeal: no one holds 바카라사이트 AHRC to account," she said.

A spokesman for 바카라사이트 AHRC said it treated all complaints and appeals seriously. The Follow-on scheme (17 of 바카라사이트 75 applications to which have been funded) would be reviewed this summer, he added.

He said 바카라사이트 guidelines for applicants made clear both 바카라사이트 absence of a right of reply and 바카라사이트 fact that impact had to be "measurable in 바카라사이트 sense of being open to evaluation".

paul.jump@tsleducation.com.