Guidelines for reviewing the tri-agency CV
Context
The tri-agency CV prioritizes narrative descriptions of an applicant’s[1] research contributions, enabling them to highlight a wide range of research outputs and describe their career trajectories. It includes three sections: personal statement, most significant contributions and experiences, and supervisory and mentorship activities.
Reviewers are encouraged to consult the instructions and responses to frequently asked questions to become familiar with this CV. The tri-agency CV is consistent with the three federal research funding agencies’ commitment to a more inclusive, diverse and holistic approach to excellence in research evaluation as signatories to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). The narrative-style tri-agency CV can be used as a tool to emphasize the quality and impact of research, thereby helping to reduce an over-reliance on quantitative indicators in the review process. It is designed to be more inclusive of all applicant types, respond to usability needs, and reduce administrative burden for applicants and reviewers.
Highlights:
- 5-page limit for English and a 6-page limit for French and there is no restriction on the length of each section (pages over the limit are removed before sending to reviewers).
- Overlap between sections of the tri-agency CV and with other parts of the application is permitted.
- Content entered can include the applicant’s entire career or focus on recent accomplishments.
Evaluation
Reviewers are asked to refer to the specific funding opportunity/program evaluation criteria in assessing the tri-agency CV.
1. Preparation
Recommendations:
- For those less familiar with the narrative format, allow more time for the review process.
- Read the objectives and evaluation criteria of the funding opportunity/program.
- Consult the tri-agency CV instructions and responses to frequently asked questions.
2. Quality and impact
In alignment with DORA, peer reviewers must look broadly, beyond quantitative indicators of productivity, when assessing a researcher’s contributions and impacts. The scientific content of a paper is always more important than publication metrics or the identity of the journal in which it was published and thus peer reviewers should avoid using journal-based metrics (e.g., Journal Impact Factor) in their assessments. It is important to consider quality and impact directly, where possible, and to recognize and value a broad range of research contributions and impacts, based on the nature of the research.
Examples of indicators of quality include, but are not limited to, consideration of equity, diversity, and inclusion in all aspects of the research process; novel, creative, innovative, and/or suitable and rigorous methodology; building capacity of research trainees through mentorship; responsible and ethical research conduct; transparency and accessibility of results; and appropriate data stewardship.
Examples of indicators of impact include, but are not limited to, use of research results by stakeholders; advances to reconciliation and the decolonization of research; advances to state-of-the-art research or technology readiness level; economic, environmental, or societal contributions; increases to equitable and inclusive participation in the research ecosystem; increased public understanding of natural sciences and engineering, social sciences and humanities, or health aspects; influence on policy and standards, etc.; and influence on direction of thought. Surrogate measures of quality and impact, such as the prestige of a publication venue or citation-based metrics (e.g., Journal Impact Factor or h-index) should not be used as they introduce bias in the merit review process.
For additional examples, see the NSERC Guidelines on the Assessment of Contributions to Research, Training and Mentoring.
Recommendations:
- Avoid assessing quantitative metrics in isolation (e.g., number of publications and citations, size/number of research grants). In some research fields, metrics may provide useful context or help identify trends (e.g., citation patterns, interdisciplinary collaborations), but they should not be used as surrogates to assess the past productivity or capability of the researcher. Such metrics should only be considered in combination with a range of indicators of quality and impact.
- If discipline-appropriate metrics are included, consider them alongside more holistic measures of quality (e.g., distinctions-based, meaningful, and culturally safe research) and impact (e.g., health and societal contributions, scientific innovations, influence on policy and practice).
- Identify and consult relevant agency-specific policy tools – such as guidelines for the review of Indigenous research or discipline-specific guidelines, which can support reviewers in assessing the contents of the CV.
- Review the entire CV, as relevant information may be included throughout the various sections.
- Consider diverse forms of excellence –research can have a range of forms, outputs and impacts that result in academic, non-academic, professional, and community contributions.
- Consider the quality and the impact of all contributions, and their benefits to society as a whole.
3. Lived and living experience and non-linear career paths
Lived and living experience refer to personal knowledge gained through direct, first-hand involvement in events. This information can be found in the personal statement section of the tri-agency CV. Applicants may also have non-linear career paths (e.g., they worked outside academia, started their academic career later in life, switched academic fields). These types of career paths should not be penalized.
Recommendations:
- Consider lived and living experience that have affected applicants.
- Review career paths holistically (i.e., consider all aspects of the career and interconnections) rather than focusing on individual parts in isolation.
4. Limited opportunities for student and postdoctoral researcher training
Applicants may have had limited opportunities to train graduate students and postdoctoral researchers because their institution does not have a graduate degree program (e.g., applicants working at a small institution). Applicants have been instructed to specify this information in their tri-agency CV and to describe proactive strategies and other informal training or mentorship activities that they have undertaken to contribute to student and postdoctoral training.
Recommendation:
- Consider formal and informal trainingand mentorship activities.
5. Self-contained information
The tri-agency CV should include all necessary and relevant information so that reviewers can understand, evaluate and make decisions based on the CV without needing to refer to other documents outside of the application (e.g., information on the web). The CV (along with the application) must stand alone and provide all relevant details to support clear and informed decision making. The sole exception for which other sources may be permitted is for hyperlinks, but only if they are used to demonstrate audio/visual creative outputs. Note that when applicants submit their application, they attest that they have provided complete and accurate information in the funding application and related documents.
Recommendation:
- Review the tri-agency CV without referring to other sources of information outside of the application.
Adapting to the tri-agency CV
The agencies recognize that the transition from a primarily structured CV to a narrative CV requires a period of adaptation for both applicants and reviewers. It constitutes a paradigm shift, where the focus is not only on the traditional indicators of productivity but also on a more holistic view of research quality and impact.
The agencies are here to support you in your work. We are developing guidance materials for reviewers and applicants, and these materials will evolve over time as we receive your feedback. We therefore encourage you to familiarize yourself with these guidance materials and contact program officers if you have any questions or suggestions for improvement.
1 Applicant is defined as a participant on an application required to complete and submit a tri-agency CV.