3 ms·
What's your hourly rate? How many hours did you spend reviewing? Divide that $100 by the hours and see if it was worth it.
by laichzeit0 8y ago
What's your hourly rate? How many hours did you spend reviewing? Divide that $100 by the hours and see if it was worth it.
- bubblethink 8y agoReviewing isn't a full-time job (or any sort of job really). So the hourly rate doesn't make sense. If anything, you'd have to put reviewing in the consulting category since the hour that you spend reviewing something isn't a literal hour of labor. It's the years of experience that you enabled you to do a review in an hour.
- impendia 8y ago> What's your hourly rate? This is not how I think about my job. Rather, the university pays me a salary, and expects me to engage in "scholarship" and "professional service" -- and I get to decide where I think I can make the biggest contributions. This luxury is not available to everyone. Universities are hiring more and more non-tenure-track instructors, at lower rates of pay, with less job security, with higher teaching loads, and (usually) without any research expectations. In the future, we might be obliged to think about our jobs in more transactional terms. But for now, I have the luxury of not having to think very much about questions like yours.
- kaitai 8y agoThe sibling commenters here have it right -- and I'll add that reviewing and similarly reading grant submissions are tasks that benefit the researcher as well. Sure, it's work, but you stay on top of the new stuff in your field, develop some sense of what's important and what's minutia, are able to identify new people coming into the field and how they or their work might interact with your own. If you don't review at all, you are actually missing a fair bit of professional development and power. It works fine for some not to review but for others it's an important part of the intellectual process.