The NAKFI Written Products Protocol was adapted from the NCI-TREC Written Products Protocol which was adapted from an earlier version of the instrument first developed to gauge the interdisciplinary qualities of doctoral dissertations and undergraduate research fellowship term papers. The NCI-TREC Written Products Protocol is also available in the Team Science Toolkit.
Tag to Construct:
- transdisciplinary integration
Relevant Toolkit Keywords:
research evaluation, evaluation, peer review, team science, interdisciplinary research
Brief description of procedure/scoring method:
The NAKFI WPP was developed to be used by peer reviewers to derive convergent (reliable) expert appraisals of the scientific originality, generativity, interdisciplinary scope, integrative quality, conceptual links to the NAKFI conference topics, and the likely scientific impacts of products produced by NAKFI seed grantees (such as final reports and journal articles). Includes quantitative and qualitative items.
For more information on the development and use of the NAKFI Written Products Protocol for evaluating NAKFI's seed grant program, contact Anne Heberger Marino at email@example.com. Consultants on the project include Dan Stokols (University of California, Irvine) and Shalini Misra (Virginia Tech).
For more information on the National Academies Keck Futures Initiative, visit www.keckfutures.org.
For a description of the NCI Written Products Protocol, see also:
Hall K, Stokols D, Moser R, Taylor B, Thornquist M, Nebeling L, et al. The collaboration readiness of transdisciplinary research teams and centers: Findings from the National Cancer Institute TREC baseline evaluation study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2008;35(2S):161-172.
For an early version of the WPP applied to the evaluation of doctoral dissertations for their ID/TD qualities, see:
Mitrany M, Stokols D. (2005). Gauging the transdisciplinary qualities and outcomes of doctoral training programs. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 24:437-449.
The protocol has been used to assess 25 seed grant projects. Work is underway to gather more data on the reliability and validity of the instrument.