Refining a research proposal is done in research colloquium that usually is arranged in seminars, conferences or at doctoral level events. Is there any best method of conducting such a research colloquium?
Khaliq - to me, probably the best screening, reviewing or critical appraisal of current research proposals is at the local level. For tenured academic staff, that is best in designated research streams/clusters/groups within schools, departments, faculties etc. For PhD students, best at their local Higher Degree Research (HDR) forums and support groups. The most common proposal 'screening' that I experience is the research proposal milestone for early doctoral students. This is best organised with the HDR co-ordinator a month or so before presentation. The Principle Supervisor organises for the draft proposal to be reviewed by an internal 'expert' reviewer who offers their feedback within a week. A week or two before the presentation, a flyer is posted to all relevant staff and HDR students offering attendance. Supervisors are expected to attend - as well as the internal reviewer. Venue dates and details are supplied. The student prepares a half-hour Power Point presentation - with 15 minutes for questions from the audience. Post-event, the student, reviewer and supervisors meet up to critically, constructively and objectively discuss outcomes and improvements. Applying parts, if not all of this process, to tenured staff is also a useful approach at local seminars. The process for conferences is different - but one could argue that the screening process occurs at the abstract submission review. General feedback from the audience may help - but is not as structured as the previous process I have described.
Dean Whitehead has provided a very comprehensive response - we use the same procedures, but we include an external expert reviewer in addition to the internal expert reviewer in the process he has outlined.