> >Is it reasonable for an Electronic Libraries project to refuse to
> >accept proposals electronically?
> >
> One of the things I do once or twice a year is to evaluate research
> proposals (for the EC, not for JISC); and I can't imagine anything much
> worse than having to do so using on-screen copies rather than paper! IMHO,
> the evaluation process, with its heavy requirements for cross-referencing,
> flicking from page to page, annotating, is surely one for which today's
> on-screen technologies are inferior to paper, isn't it?
I agree. When this year's 3/97 call closed, we had one working day to skim
32 proposals, assign them to referees, bundle them up and send them out
with the evaluation forms. Having 10 copies on paper made that possible.
On the other hand, Tom Franklin who coordinates the JTAP programme ran a
call with electronic submission. He reports there were considerable
problems with things like word processing software incompatibilities. I
think he is keen to do it again, but will have to be very much more
specific about just what he will accept (and as a corollary, may have to
reject otherwise good proposals which do not follow the guidelines).
Referees may have an even worse problem, as they may have quite a
different local software structure to Tom. They may receive from Tom for
evaluation something which causes them difficulty. Anything which adds to
a referees workload is a bad thing, especially when most are doing this
for nothing, as an addition to their normal workload.
Despite the irony, I think I'll stick to requiring paper submissions for a
while. It has the virtue of leaving the bidder in complete control over
what we receive.
--
Chris Rusbridge
Programme Director, Electronic Libraries Programme
The Library, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK
Phone 01203 524979 Fax 01203 524981
Email [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|