The Peer Review process, a hallmark of the Fulbright U.S. Scholar program, ensures that applications are evaluated on academic, scholarly, and professional criteria. IIE coordinates this process for Fulbright U.S. Scholar applications, including assigning applications to Peer Review committees. Applications recommended in the Peer Review process are then considered by the host country, the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board, and the U.S. Department of State (Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs).
Peer Review is when applications are evaluated according to the applicant’s background and proposed project by a committee of several U.S.-based reviewers with relevant knowledge and expertise.
Applications are reviewed in an online review platform. IIE plans for Peer Review committees to review approximately 20-30 applications. Every eligible and complete application is assigned to one Peer Review committee; all Peer Reviewers read and evaluate all applications assigned to their committee. Fulbright Program policy does not authorize implementing partners (including IIE) to provide applicants with reasons for an application to be not recommended or not selected.
Each Peer Review committee meets once to discuss the applications and come to agreement on whether each application is recommended for further consideration. IIE staff facilitate Peer Review meetings.
Test
For U.S. Scholar awards, committees are broadly organized by discipline. Reviewers are academics and professionals with relevant expertise. They assess applications according to the review criteria. U.S. Scholar awards also include Distinguished Scholar awards and Postdoctoral awards.
September 15: U.S. Scholar Program application deadline.
Early October: Peer Reviewers access applications and begin reviewing.
Mid-October through mid-November: Peer Review committee meetings are held virtually. (Meetings conclude prior to Thanksgiving.)
(More about the review timeline.)
For International Education Administrator (IEA) awards, applications are reviewed by country-specific Peer Review committees. Reviewers are higher education administrators and professionals with relevant expertise and IEA experience. They assess applications according to the review criteria.
The application deadline and review timeline vary by award.
All Peer Review committees are designed intentionally, where individual reviewers’ areas of expertise and experience combine so the group collectively reflects the breadth of the field.
Peer Reviewers come from all types of institutions from across the U.S., and include Fulbright U.S. Scholar alumni. Reviewers are selected for their professional and scholarly expertise, their academic discipline and specialization, as well as their familiarity with the challenges and needs of lecturers and researchers abroad. Other factors, including regional expertise, may be taken into consideration in determining the final composition of the review committees.
IIE provides an orientation and instructions to new and returning reviewers, including guidance on conflicts of interest and the confidentiality of Peer Review.
See Peer Review Application Steps for more on eligibility.
Peer Review is vital to the success of the Fulbright U.S. Scholar Program. Evaluating applications:
To recognize the time and commitment from each Peer Reviewer, IIE provides a letter of acknowledgement to the reviewer and their administrators (or employer) following the review cycle.
If you are interested in serving on a Fulbright U.S. Scholar Peer Review Committee, please see Peer Review Application for more information.
Dr. Abigail Firey
"It was a real honor to serve. I felt I was repaying part of the enormous debt I owe to Fulbright for so many riches: friendships, professional contacts, and intellectual development. I also loved seeing the exciting scholarship that is going on in so many fields. The applications are all genuinely interesting, and I learned a lot. Thanks for the privilege and opportunity."
Professor Arlene Kanter
"My participation on the Peer Review Committee has been a highlight of my post-Fulbright Experience. First, I learn a great deal from reading the applications and am humbled by the creativity, intellect, and different competencies and experiences of the applicants. Second, I very much enjoy our review committee discussions. I enjoy hearing my fellow reviewers' comments and feel fortunate that we complement each other in our respective expertise and focused reading of the applications. Finally, I enjoy working with the wonderfully competent, energetic and professional Fulbright Staff."
Dr. Mahyar Arefi
“Overall, I find this experience very insightful in my own career development. You get to see what the best scholars and researchers in the country are working on, become familiar with their research agendas, and their scholarly priorities.”
Professor Cid Pearlman
“It was interesting to see the breadth of my colleagues' interests and to consider how receiving a Fulbright Award could impact their teaching, scholarship, and career. Equally interesting was considering the needs of the institutions and their students. I look forward to participating again next year.”
Dr. Andrew Giarelli
“Once I got into it I found it truly rewarding in several ways. It helped me see where and how I fit, especially as an independent scholar, within my discipline of American Studies. It gave me tips and ideas on how to apply for other American studies fellowships. Most importantly, it energized my commitment to the Fulbright experience: I would like to continue and deepen my involvement with the program.”
Dr. Maxine Sample
“Serving as a peer reviewer is a tremendous faculty development opportunity because I have a chance to see what other universities are doing or have done to internationalize their institutions. I learn much from the discussions when the reviewers come together as well. The peer review experience is informative in providing insight into the program standard as well as the program's latitude for flexibility and creativity in meeting that standard. The experience also gives a different perspective of the review process. For example, as an applicant, the perception is that the reviewers are looking for a way to say NO, which is not the case. Finally, the experience takes me out of my institutional and discipline silo, which is a good thing. Being a proponent of interdisciplinarity, I enjoy having a glimpse into how other disciplines see their role in globalizing student learning.”
Professor Abdul-Majeed Azad
“Stimulating. Having availed the opportunity of being a Fulbrighter, it was an honor to serve as a Discipline Reviewer in the case of deserving future Fulbrighters. In addition to the applicants in my area of expertise and overlap, there were interesting themes from others as well, which was quite interesting.”