This page describes the role and responsibilities of Discussion Panelists in the JWST Peer Review process. 

See also: Guide for Discussion Panelists, Review Policies and Instructions, Discussion Panel Meetings, Tips for a Smooth Review, Orientation Materials

Discussion panelists should be familiar with the Review Policies and Instructions.

During Preliminary Grading

During Preliminary Grading, Discussion reviewers are responsible for:  

• Checking for and reporting Conflicts of Interest with their assigned proposals as soon as possible, so that the proposal with the conflict can be reassigned to a different reviewer.  
• Reading their assigned proposals.
• Entering numerical scores as grades for each proposal they are assigned in SPIRIT, using the guidelines described in Selection Criteria and Scoring System. 
• Using “Remarks” section in SPIRIT to write down their comments on the proposal. This information will be used by the Primary and Secondary Reviewers at the time of writing the feedback comments, and is particularly useful in the case the proposal is triaged and not discussed during the meeting. 
• Taking notes summarizing the strengths and weaknesses for their primary/secondary designations during this phase, as they will be 1) leading the discussion of these proposals during the meeting, if they survive triage; 2) writing feedback comments on these proposals, regardless of triage status.

Before the Panel Meeting

Before the Panel Meeting, Discussion reviewers are responsible for:  

• Reviewing all proposals listed for discussion, especially those they did not read for preliminary grading (see Triage Process and Discussion List)
• Letting their Chair know no later than week before the panel meets if they want to raise one proposal from triage (see Resurrecting Proposals)
• Reading the subset of Executive Committee  proposals, as directed by their Chair and Vice Chair (these proposals will be discussed, but not graded during the Panel Meeting (see Discussion Panel Feedback of EC Proposals). 

During the Panel Meeting

During the Panel Meeting, Discussion reviewers are responsible for:  

• Discussing proposals in turn and entering numerical scores in SPIRIT as grades after each discussion, using the guidelines described in Selection Criteria and Scoring System. 
• Using “Remarks” section in SPIRIT to write down their comments on the proposal, while the discussion is still fresh in their mind. This information will be used by the Primary and Secondary Reviewers at the time of writing the Proposal Feedback Comments.
• Creating a ranked list of the proposals discussed, assessing the science balance, as described in Final Ranking.
• Reviewing team expertise for top ranked proposals once the ranking is finalized.
• Discussing (but not grading) a subset of Large GO, Treasury GO, Legacy AR, and Pure Parallel programs to provide feedback to their Executive Committee (see Discussion of EC Proposals by the Discussion Panels). 

After the Panel Meeting 

After the proposal and ranking discussions have ended, Discussion reviewers are responsible for:  

• Writing a brief proposal feedback comments (strengths and weaknesses) for each proposal they are assigned, including triaged proposals, using the guidelines described in Proposal Feedback Comments.
• Assisting the primary reviewer with proposal feedback comments for every secondary assignment.

• The goal is for the panelists to finish writing the Proposal Feedback comments before the TAC disbands.  Some panels chose to schedule a session for comment writing, others work asynchronously. 

  Please remember to remove review materials from your computer after the review.

  
  

Next: Panel Chairs and Vice Chairs