Docstoc

IMEC Presentation

Document Sample
IMEC Presentation Powered By Docstoc
					                 Proposal Writing &
                   The Refereeing
                      Process

                        Class 4
                       27.11.2006




Project Thesis                        Class 4, 27/11/2006
                 The Refereeing
                   Process



Project Thesis                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                                   Contents

                 Introduction
                 Peer review process
                       Journals
                       Conferences
                       Research programmes
                       The tasks of a referee
                       Reviewing a research paper
                       Preparing the referee report & recommendations
                       Evaluating a research proposal
                 Acting as an editor or program chairperson
                 How to become a referee?
                 Final words




Project Thesis                                                           Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                          Disclaimer


                 There is no fixed mechanism for refereeing
                 There are simple rules that help transforming a review
                 in a constructive document
                 In time you will develop your own style of refereeing




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                                    Introduction
                 A scientific paper is expected to provide a sufficient contribution to
                 the knowledge base of its field
                     • Number of scientific papers and articles (2000): > 600 000
                       (ISI)
                     • About 50% in the fields of science and technology


                 The number of papers and articles submitted for publication is
                 much larger
                     • refereeing process selects the ones to be published


                 Examples of acceptance rates after refereeing:
                    • Journals: ~10-20% (large variance)
                    • Conferences: ~10-50%
                    • Workshops: ~30%-90%


                 Refereeing is also used in selecting research projects to be funded

Project Thesis                                                                 Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                                Introduction

                 What is a sufficient contribution?
                    • new result, theoretical or experimental
                    • new insight
                    • novel synthesis of ideas
                    • useful survey
                    • useful tutorial


                 What is not a sufficient contribution
                    • badly written
                    • erroneous data


                 MPI = Minimum Publishable Increment depends on the forum



Project Thesis                                                        Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                 Peer review process

                 Peer reviews are carried out by anonymous referees
                 who evaluate the sufficiency of contribution
                    •   novelty, significance, correctness, readability


                 Refereeing is public service to the scientific community
                    •   professional obligation,
                    •   carried out on volunteer basis
                    •   requires high expertise
                    •   helps in improving one’s own expertise
                    •   ensures the integrity of science



Project Thesis                                                            Class 4, 27/11/2006
                           Peer review process of a journal


                                                      submission
                 publish
                                       editor                       author
                                                      accept
                                                      reject
                   selection of                       revise
                   associate editor
                                                  reviews
                                                  recommendations

                                      associate
                                                                    referees
                                       editors

                                  selection of referees
                                  checking of revised papers



Project Thesis                                                                 Class 4, 27/11/2006
                        Peer review process of a conference


                                                                  submission
                       program
                                               program chair                       author
                      committee
                                                                  accept/
                 • selection of the referees                      reject/
                 • checking of revisions                          accept with revisions


                                                           accept/reject/minor revision recommendations


                                                referees                    extra referees




Project Thesis                                                                               Class 4, 27/11/2006
                  Peer review process of a workshop


                                                        submit
                   program
                                        program chair              author
                  committee
                                                         accept/
                                                         reject
                                  refereeing
                                  checking of
                                  revisions



                 extra referees




Project Thesis                                                         Class 4, 27/11/2006
                               Peer review process of a research
                                                    programme


                                                         submission
                                          steering
                                                                         proposer
                                         committee

                                                           accept with partial funding/
                                                           reject




                                          referees




                 Notice: not representative of all research programmes
Project Thesis                                                                            Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                           The tasks of a referee

                    The reviewer grades a paper based on its novelty,
                     significance,correctness, and readability
                    In case of substantial conflicts of interest or if the
                     paper is out of the field of the reviewer, the editor
                     must be informed promptly
                    Both positive and negative findings are summarized
                     in a referee report
                    Confidential part only for the editor/program
                     committee: Information that could reveal the identity
                     of the reviewer or in minor conflicts of interest
                    non-confidential part for the author/program
                     committee
                    Learn from the other reviews, if they are sent to you
                     after the process
Project Thesis                                                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                                 Why do it?

                 Several reasons
                     Enhance reputation (with editor/prog. committee)
                     Expedites processing of your own papers
                     Get on editorial board or program committee
                     Good practice
                         Increase your own critical appraisal ability
                         Your papers become better
                     Sometimes it gets preferential treatment for your papers
                 … but refereeing means more work!




Project Thesis                                                           Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                   Consideration

                 Most reviews have strict deadlines
                 By agreeing to review you take the responsibility of
                 doing a thorough job
                 If you cannot commit to this, notify the editor asap
                 Editors understand you may not have the time, but are
                 unforgiving if you commit and do a poor job
                 Good editors keep a list …




Project Thesis                                                 Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                      The right attitude: I can learn
                                                        something!
                        Humbleness and an open mind needed; 100% self-
                         confidence can be harmful
                        Early assumptions on the correctness of the paper or
                         the sufficiency of its references should be avoided
                     •      an elegantly written paper may have zero actual
                            contribution
                     •      a paper with broken English may contain a major new
                            idea
                        The papers recommended for acceptance should
                         have novelty and be correct
                     •      If the reviewer can’t check a fact or is unsure, this
                            should be stated in the review report
                        But don’t waste your time on analysing in detail a
                         paper that is never publishable
                     •      a single crucial error is enough

Project Thesis                                                                  Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                      Reviewing a research paper
                 The paper to be reviewed is typically accompanied with a
                      review form
                    •     fill the five point scale questions last
                    •     it is most important to write an itemized review report

                     Relevance
                         [ ] poor [ ] marginal [ ] fair [ x ] good [ ] excellent
                     Originality
                         [ ] poor [ ] marginal [ ] fair [ x ] good [ ] excellent
                     Background knowledge of the subject and references
                        [ ] poor [ ] marginal [ ] fair [ x ] good [ ] excellent
                     Technical content
                         [ ] poor [ ] marginal [ ] fair [ x ] good [ ] excellent
                     Presentation
                          [ ] poor [ ] marginal [ ] fair [ x ] good [ ] excellent
Project Thesis                                                                 Class 4, 27/11/2006
                      Reviewing a research paper: analysis
                 The analysis of a paper can be done by generating explanations to
                      the following eight points (Smith 1990)

                 1.    What is the purpose of the paper?
                 2.    Is the problem clearly stated and have the key issues been
                       pointed out?
                 3.    Is it clear what has been accomplished?
                 4.    Is the paper appropriate for the intended forum?
                 5.    If it is not, what could be a better choice?
                 6.    Is the goal significant = has the work been worth doing?
                 7.    Are the results just trivial variations or extensions of previous
                       results?
                 8.    Are there any new ideas, or novelties in research
                       methodology?

                      Citation analysis using electronic libraries are a big help!
Project Thesis                                                                 Class 4, 27/11/2006
                     Reviewing a research paper: analysis
                                                 (cont’d)
                    Is the method of approach clear and valid?
                         •   Is there something fundamentally flawed in the
                             approach?
                         •   Are the assumptions realistic and does that matter?
                         •   Is the method new? Can it be generalized to other
                             problems?


                    Is the actual execution of the research correct?
                         •   Are the mathematics and statistics correct? Check!
                         •   Have the simulations been described in sufficient
                             detail for replication?
                         •   What about the boundary conditions?
                         •   Do the results make sense?


                        This part may require considerable effort from the
Project Thesis           reviewer...                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                     Reviewing a research paper: analysis
                                                 (cont’d)
                     Are the conclusions correct?
                        What are the applications or implications of the
                          results and are the results analysed to an
                          adequate depth?


                     Is the presentation satisfactory?
                        Is the paper readable? Is it structured according to
                             the conventions of scientific publications?


                     What did you as the reviewer learn?
                        If you didn’t learn anything, then the paper is not
                             publishable (provided that you understood the
                             paper)

Project Thesis                                                        Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                  Reviewing a research paper:
                                     analyzing the references
                 It is researcher’s professional obligation to cite prior
                        work
                    •   the manuscript being reviewed includes claims of
                        novelties; regularly citing prior research
                    •   the reviewer needs to check the validity of the claims
                    •   most efficient to carry out the analysis using electronic
                        libraries

                 At minimum:
                    •   Check what is found using the key words of the article
                    •   Study the references you don’t know beforehand
                    •   Check which recent papers cite the same references
                    •   Check the references of those recent papers


Project Thesis                                                            Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                   Review structure

                 The actual refereeing form
                 General comments on the paper
                 Specific comments on the paper
                 Confidential note to editor

                 General idea: be professional and non-hostile: write the
                    review in a style that you would like to receive for
                    your paper




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                             The refereeing form


                 Forms might look quite different but basically ask the
                 same things
                 Poorly designed ones just have yes/no answers, good
                 ones prompt the referee to elaborate
                 Make sure you read and understand it well




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                          Writing the referee report
                 No fixed rules exist, the following ones are according to (Smith
                 1990)

                 Most important: make your opinions clear; avoid ”perhaps” and
                 ”maybe”; evaluate the paper, not the author; itemize the
                 contributions

                  State the recommendation and its justification; the five point scale
                 part of the evaluation form is not enough
                  Show with a few summarizing sentences that you have
                 understood the paper. The editor may use this part and compare
                 your summary to those of the other reviewers
                  Evaluate the significance and validity of the research goal
                  Evaluate the quality of methodology, techniques, accuracy and
                 presentation; recommendations for revisions can be written here
                  Make a clear recommendation for or against publication with
                 justifications

Project Thesis                                                               Class 4, 27/11/2006
                            Compiling the recommendations

                 Classification of papers (Smith 1990)

                 1.   Very significant; includes major results (<1% of all
                      papers)
                 2.   Interesting work, a good contribution (<10%)
                 3.   Minor positive contribution (10-30%)
                 4.   Elegant and technically correct, but useless
                 5.   Neither elegant nor useful, but not wrong
                 6.   Wrong and misleading
                 7.   Unreadable, impossible to evaluate

                 The acceptance level of the journals and conferences vary;
                     1,2, and perhaps 3(-4)
Project Thesis                                                         Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                                    Outcome

                 Usually:
                       Accept the paper as it is
                       Paper requires minor changes
                       Paper requires major changes (with or without a new refereeing
                        process)
                       Reject publication of the paper
                 You can only suggest, the choice is not yours
                       Decision is based on at least 3 reviews




Project Thesis                                                            Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                               Research proposals

                 A research proposal is a request for funding submitted to,
                     •  MCyT, MECD, GENCAT
                     •  European Commission
                     •  NIH, NASA, NSF, ESF
                     •  other funding organization such as a foundation

                 The key difference to reviewing research papers is that
                 the reviewers also evaluate the proposers

                 Not all organizations use peer review as a means for
                      selecting proposals for funding


Project Thesis                                                        Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                 Evaluating research proposals

                 The evaluation criteria vary between funding
                     organizations

                 Key criteria:

                 1.   Is the research topic significant?
                 2.   Are the goals realistic?
                 3.   Has the proposer sufficient expertice and facilities
                      to reach the goals?
                 4.   Is the requested funding reasonable?


Project Thesis                                                     Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                          Ethics of refereeing


                 Objectivity
                     Judge paper on its own merits
                     Remove prejudice
                     If you are not able to review it, return it

                 Fairness
                     Author may have different point of view / methodology / arguments
                     Judge from their school of thought not yours

                 Speed
                       Be fast, but do not rush. Author deserves a fair hearing




Project Thesis                                                                     Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                   Ethics of refereeing


                 Professional treatment
                     Act in the best interest of the author and conference/journal
                     Specific rather than vague criticism



                 Confidentiality
                     Cannot circulate paper
                     Cannot use without permission



                 Conflict of interest
                       Discuss with editor




Project Thesis                                                                Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                    Ethics of refereeing


                 Honesty
                       About your expertise and confidence in appraisal
                 Courtesy
                     Constructive criticism
                     Non-inflammatory language
                     Suggest improvements




Project Thesis                                                             Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                  Acting as an editor or program
                                                     chairperson

                 The editor
                    •     maintains correspondence with authors and referees
                    •     finds new referees if the ones assigned fail to act in given time
                    •     decides on acceptance, rejection or a revision round based on
                          2-4 review statements.
                    •     should distribute all review statements to the referees
                    •     receives occasional negative feedback

                 Review is not a vote! The editor is likely to line himself according to
                 the best justified recommendations

                 Conference program committees often rely on the numerical
                 evaluations, occasionally resorting to vote

Project Thesis                                                                 Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                        How to become a referee


                 • Writing a publication that is cited is the most certain
                 way to become a referee

                 • Coordination or technical coordination of an EU RTD
                 project is a direct road to proposal evaluations

                 • Refereeing is very rewarding, helps to keep up-to-
                 date and aware of developments in fields adjacent to
                 ones own specialty



Project Thesis                                                       Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                           Final words




                 Good   referee reports are valuable and free of charge
                    •     help in improving the paper
                    •     help in improving as a researcher
                    •     help in improving as a referee

                 Refereeing is a learning experience

                 Scientific progress rests heavily on peer reviews

Project Thesis                                                       Class 4, 27/11/2006
                             PROJECT THESIS EDITOR OFFICE




                 Using the articles prepared, we will set up an editorial office

                 Each student will act as an associate editor of one article and
                 will review three articles

                 Each student will peer review his/her three allocated articles
                 and will return the referee report to the assigned associate
                 editor
                 The associate editor will compile the final report and will
                 return the final report with the individual referee reports to the
                 Editorial Office




Project Thesis                                                            Class 4, 27/11/2006
                 Proposal Writing




Project Thesis                      Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                      Proposal Writing

                 In order to carry out research, in general financing is
                 required.

                 There are several national and international sources of
                 funding and the process for obtaining funding is realised
                 through proposal submission and review.

                 The aim of this section is to INFORM you of the proposal
                 process, proposal formats and existing funding bodies.

                 The homework of this class will be to draft a proposal of your
                 PhD to assist you in your resaerch planning, but NOT with a
                 view to preparing a formal proposal in the style of those
                 submitted for financing!


Project Thesis                                                             Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                           Content

                 Why research ?
                 Why should this be in a competitive context ?
                 Why a research proposal ?
                 Getting started
                 What makes a good proposal ?
                 Writing your proposal
                 How to structure your proposal ?
                 The review process
                 Allocation of funding
                 What next ?
                 Getting help with your proposal ?
                 Quick TIPS for writing a good proposal

Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                   Why research ?

                 Why is the development of research within universities
                 a must ?
                     To maintain the quality of teaching programs.
                     Provide the basis for undergraduate and graduate
                      thesis research projects.
                     Universities should be more than degree delivering
                      institutions.
                     Universities should be the basket for new
                      knowledge and developments.




Project Thesis                                                  Class 4, 27/11/2006
                       Why should this be in a competitive
                                                 context ?



                 Do universities have the financial capacity to develop
                 and support research activities ?
                 Where can the money be found to develop and support
                 research ?
                 How can society get the highest return on investment ?




Project Thesis                                                 Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                   Why a research proposal ?



                 Convince others the project you have designed is
                 important, worth the effort.
                 Convince others that you have the ability to carry out
                 the research design and report the findings.
                 Generate funds to sustain the research units operation.




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                    Getting started



                 Know your subject. The reviewers will look for an up-to-
                 date knowledge of the research area.
                 Know your funder. Be aware of the priorities and
                 interests of the funder you approach, and know that
                 funders are unlikely to support the same idea twice.




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                     Getting started




                 Consult colleagues.
                 Don’t be afraid to discuss your proposal with
                 colleagues, or even with the grants officer at the funding
                 body.
                 Early discussions can ensure that your proposal is
                 targeted appropriately.




Project Thesis                                                     Class 4, 27/11/2006
                             What makes a good proposal ?



                 A well-prepared application should require minimal
                 effort on the part of the reviewer.
                 Proposals must demonstrate high scientific quality.
                 The requested funds must be in proportion to the
                 proposed project (cost-effectiveness).




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                           Writing your proposal



                 Allow plenty of time to prepare your proposal. A good
                 starting point is to write a one-page summary of the
                 whole project. This may take a while to get right, but
                 once completed it will serve as an invaluable tool for
                 writing your full proposal.
                 Use your proposal to show the need and then fill the
                 gap.




Project Thesis                                                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                          Writing your proposal



                 Present your proposal in terms of the aims and
                 objectives of the funder and not just your own – make it
                 clear how you will be helping them to fund their
                 priorities.
                 Consider the questions the funder will be asking: Why
                 fund you ? Why fund this ? Why now ? ... and make
                 sure that the proposal answers them!




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                          Writing your proposal



                 Be aware that you will have limited to none
                 opportunities to answer queries arising from a reading
                 of your proposal.
                 Consult the funders website and read clearly the call for
                 research proposals as well as the criteria against which
                 your proposal will be judged.




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                          Writing your proposal



                 Although it is the content that matters, good
                 presentation is often crucial to making your proposal
                 accessible to reviewers and keeping their interest.
                      Use diagrams and tables to add clarity;
                      Bullet points and sections can break up text;
                      Keep to page, word and font size restrictions; and
                      Activate the spell checker while writing.




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                          How to structure your proposal ?


                 Check guidelines carefully – failing to meet the funder’s
                 format and specifications is one of the most common
                 reasons for applications being returned.
                 A common proposal structure normally consists of: title,
                 abstract, background, aims and objectives,
                 methodology, work program, resources, outcomes
                 (outputs & dissemination), project management,
                 reviewers.




Project Thesis                                                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                          How to structure your proposal ?



                 Title: This is the first impression the reader gets.
                 The title should be short and clear, and the reviewer
                 should be able to understand from the title the intentions
                 of the research.
                 A catchy title posing a question or including an apparant
                 contradiction or acronym may be more easily
                 remembered by a reviewer.




Project Thesis                                                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                           How to structure your proposal ?



                 Abstract: Should be a concise summary of the WHOLE
                 project.
                 Use the abstract to identify the need for this research,
                 state what you intend to do, and how you intend to do it.
                 Do not include unnecessary detail; make each phrase
                 count.
                 And remember it is the first impression a reviewer gets
                 of an applicant’s worth!




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                         How to structure your proposal ?



                 Background: This section should be used to put the
                 work into context: what has been done before, and how
                 will the proposed work add to it ?
                 What is the innovative aspect in the research project ?
                 Build your case by demonstrating your capability and
                 familiarity in the area.




Project Thesis                                                  Class 4, 27/11/2006
                         How to structure your proposal ?



                 Aims and objectives: The aims should describe what
                 you intend to achieve by doing this piece of work.
                 Your objectives are the small steps you need to reach in
                 order to achieve your aim.
                 Aims and objectives should be realistic, consistent, and
                 link them to methods, timetable, and outcomes.




Project Thesis                                                  Class 4, 27/11/2006
                         How to structure your proposal ?



                 Methodology: Methods should be detailed and well
                 thought through.
                 Explain why you have chosen a particular method.
                 Base your explanation on literature references.
                 If your own experience of a methodology is limited,
                 consider working with collaborators.




Project Thesis                                                  Class 4, 27/11/2006
                          How to structure your proposal ?


                 Work program: Make use of a Pert chart to illustrate the
                 building blocks – work packages – of the research
                 project. Be detailed in the description of the content of
                 each work package (why, objectives, method(s),
                 duration, when are you going to carry out each WP,
                 partners involved in the realization, sequence of WP,
                 etc.).




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                                              Example of a Pert chart
                           WATERSHED LEVEL                                                                     IRRIGATION SCHEME LEVEL




      WP 1         Determination of                                                  Management                                Water rights                 WP 4
                  rainfall and runoff                                              system (CERES)




                  Determination of           Determination topography
                   sediment load                   of reservoir
                                                                                  Water demand estimation
                                                                                                                                                            WP 5

                                                           Topography
      WP 2


                                                            Land use               Irrigation infrastructure
                                                                                                                                                            WP 6
                 Modeling process

                                                               Soil                                                                      Calibration and validation
                                                                                                                                         of the methodology for the
                                                                                   Conveyance efficiency                                 actual water management
                                                                                                                                                  situation
                                                             Climate


                                                                                                                                          Predicting the values of
                                                                                                                                              the irrigation and
                                                                                    Irrigation indicators                                 economic indicators for
                                                                                                                                          alternative scenarios of
                  Determination of                 Gross water availability
      WP 3                                                                                                                                  water management
                   sediment load




                                                                                    Economic indicators
                   Life expectancy                                                                                                                          WP 7
                       reservoir




                 INPUT for decision
                                                                                   Simplified management
                     making                                                                                                                                 WP 8
                                                                                            system



Project Thesis                                                                                                                            Class 4, 27/11/2006
                         How to structure your proposal ?


                 Work program: This section contains also a
                 diagrammatic work plan, called a Gannt chart.
                 The Gannt chart or diagrammatic work plan should
                 also be accompanied by a written description.




Project Thesis                                               Class 4, 27/11/2006
                 Example of a Gannt chart (= diagrammatic
                                                work plan)
                                            deliverables




Project Thesis                                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                           How to structure your proposal ?


                 Resources: The proposal should contain a detailed
                 budget.
                 The budget asked should be in proportion to the
                 volume and complexity of the work activities.
                 Be aware that funders vary as to what they are
                 prepared to pay in terms of direct project costs, such as
                 staff and equipment, and indirect costs, such as
                 overheads.
                 The funder might request to approve beforehand own
                 inputs or inputs from other institutions participating in
                 the project.


Project Thesis                                                     Class 4, 27/11/2006
                          How to structure your proposal ?


                 Outcomes, outputs (+ deliverables) and dissemination:
                 In this section one should describe the contribution to
                 knowledge and importance for future research, the
                 benefits to users, and the broader relevance to
                 beneficiaries.
                 Highlight how results will be disseminated (publications,
                 conferences, commercial exploitation, websites, ....).




Project Thesis                                                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                          How to structure your proposal ?

                 Project management: This might not be required for
                 small projects.
                 However for projects in which several partners are
                 involved sufficient information has to be provided on
                 how the project will be managed (timescales,
                 milestones, communication, criteria to measure
                 progress, how crisis situations and conflicts will be
                 handled, etc.).




Project Thesis                                                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                 Example of Project Organization chart




Project Thesis                               Class 4, 27/11/2006
                          How to structure your proposal ?

                 Reviewers: Often requested to suggest name of
                 referees.
                      Choose people who know you and your work;
                      Don’t use reviewers within your own institution;
                      Use international reviewers; and
                      Be aware that applicant’s own referees can write
                       unfavourable reports.




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                              The review process

                 Expert assessment: Traditionally applications will be
                 assessed by 2 to 3 reviewers selected from the pool of
                 experts.
                 Reviewers will make an independent assessment of the
                 scientific quality of the proposal.
                 To be selected for funding at least 2 of the 3 reviewers
                 should provide a positive assessment.




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                               The review process

                 What are reviewers looking for ?
                    High scientific quality;
                    Proposals that meet the funder’s priorities or fill a
                     knowledge gap;
                    Novelty and timeliness;
                    Value for money;
                    A clear and well thought out approach; and
                    An interesting idea – catch their attention!




Project Thesis                                                      Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                              The review process

                 Awards committee: Ranks the submitted proposals on
                 the basis of the reviewer’s reports. Their operation and
                 procedures can be very variable from funder to funder.
                 They might for policy reasons of the funder deviate from
                 the reviewer’s assessment.




Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                            Allocation of funding

                 Position in the ranking is important – it could mean the
                 difference between success and failure. Proposals are
                 often ranked into the following categories:
                      Fund;
                      Fundable;
                      Invite resubmission (used by some funders); or
                      Reject.




Project Thesis                                                    Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                           What next ?

                 If the project is retained for funding  OK.
                 If the project is found fundable  ???
                 If invited for resubmission  revise proposal 
                 feedback from the reviewers panel.
                 If rejected, can be very frustrating  do not give up, try
                 to get feedback  remember it is a learning process !




Project Thesis                                                      Class 4, 27/11/2006
                 Quick          for writing a good proposal

                  Allow  plenty of time;
                  Start by writing a summary of your proposed project;
                  Demonstrate an up-to-date knowledge of your field;
                  Present your proposal in terms of the aims and
                   objectives of the funder;
                  Avoid jargon – say what you mean in clear, simple
                   language;
                  Don’t be afraid to state the obvious;
                  Use graphics and diagrams to summarise what you are
                   trying to communicate



Project Thesis                                               Class 4, 27/11/2006
                 Quick          for writing a good proposal


                   Allow a maximum of 4 charts (PERT, GANNT,
                    PROJECT ORGANIZATION and BUDGET) - but
                    include as many schematic representations of the
                    concepts as possible;
                   Anticipate questions that may arise, before they arise;
                   Ask a colleague to review your proposal; and
                   Be enthusiastic about your idea – if you don’t sound
                    interested, why should anyone else be ?




Project Thesis                                                  Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                     Funding Sources
                 EUROPE
                  European Comission (www.cordis.lu) - 4 year programmes
                 with identified priorities and objectives. Currently Framework
                 6 - Framework 7 soon begins this year
                    European Science Foundation (www.esf.org)
                    National Funding (www.medc.es, www.mcyt.es)


                 US
                 National Institute of Health (www.nih.gov)
                 DARPA (www.darpa.mil)
                 NASA
                 Department Of Energy
                 Department Of Agriculture
Project Thesis                                                         Class 4, 27/11/2006
                                                           Homework
                 Draft a proposal of your PhD project

                 The proposal should include:
                       Title Page
                       Table of Contents
                       Overall and sub-objectives
                       State-of-the-art and novelty of project
                       Workplan - divide into ‘workpackages’, for each
                        WP describe the tasks and sub-tasks (a couple of
                        paragraphs for each), the resources required, risk
                        analysis and contingency plan, as well as
                        deliverables and milestones
                       Pert Chart
                       Gantt Chart
                       Bibliography
                       (? Budget)
Project Thesis                                                   Class 4, 27/11/2006

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:10
posted:11/15/2011
language:English
pages:71