Page 476 of 486
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:31 pm
by rkrkochi
I recommend we should raise our voice against the unjustified deduction in the points specifically for re-submissions where the candidate got significantly lower score compared to the earlier submission. I have seen in the forum people are claiming differences of 5-20 in the resubmitted proposal after addressing all the negative comments. How can it be justified? If we don't raise our voice, they will repeat the same injustice to deserved candidates.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:34 pm
by Dr Who
So, Are they going to publish the reserve list anytime?
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:46 pm
by hopefulacademic
In my case, most of the weaknesses relate to the host rather than the research. Obviously I can improve my own input but it seems like reviewers did not see how the host would benefit me. So I am a bit thinking about whether I should go for a resubmission or look for a different host.
I concur with previous posters here that comments are contrasting and there is a huge luck factor involved. Congratulations to the others. I had a bottle of prosecco to celebrate, now I am going to drink my sorrow
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:47 pm
by MCSF_new
I do not think it is available for the public, however at your national contact point they can tell you your ranking.
Dr Who wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:34 pm
So, Are they going to publish the reserve list anytime?
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:52 pm
by Dajm
rkrkochi wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:31 pm
I recommend we should raise our voice against the unjustified deduction in the points specifically for re-submissions where the candidate got significantly lower score compared to the earlier submission. I have seen in the forum people are claiming differences of 5-20 in the resubmitted proposal after addressing all the negative comments. How can it be justified? If we don't raise our voice, they will repeat the same injustice to deserved candidates.
I strongly agree. A score difference of 10-20 for the same (albeit revised) research proposal is nothing else but a reviewer mistake that needs to be flagged and corrected. Please, check out the new Co-author discussion forum just created here and consider joining some of us in drafting a letter to the EC highlighting the flaws of the MC evaluation process.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:20 pm
by rkrkochi
Dajm wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:52 pm
rkrkochi wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:31 pm
I recommend we should raise our voice against the unjustified deduction in the points specifically for re-submissions where the candidate got significantly lower score compared to the earlier submission. I have seen in the forum people are claiming differences of 5-20 in the resubmitted proposal after addressing all the negative comments. How can it be justified? If we don't raise our voice, they will repeat the same injustice to deserved candidates.
I strongly agree. A score difference of 10-20 for the same (albeit revised) research proposal is nothing else but a reviewer mistake that needs to be flagged and corrected. Please, check out the new Co-author discussion forum just created here and consider joining some of us in drafting a letter to the EC highlighting the flaws of the MC evaluation process.
Caqn you please paste the link for the Co-author discussion forum. I could not find it
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:28 pm
by Dajm
rkrkochi wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:20 pm
Dajm wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:52 pm
rkrkochi wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:31 pm
I recommend we should raise our voice against the unjustified deduction in the points specifically for re-submissions where the candidate got significantly lower score compared to the earlier submission. I have seen in the forum people are claiming differences of 5-20 in the resubmitted proposal after addressing all the negative comments. How can it be justified? If we don't raise our voice, they will repeat the same injustice to deserved candidates.
I strongly agree. A score difference of 10-20 for the same (albeit revised) research proposal is nothing else but a reviewer mistake that needs to be flagged and corrected. Please, check out the new Co-author discussion forum just created here and consider joining some of us in drafting a letter to the EC highlighting the flaws of the MC evaluation process.
Caqn you please paste the link for the Co-author discussion forum. I could not find it
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1068&p=7580#p7580
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:29 pm
by rkrkochi
Dajm wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:28 pm
rkrkochi wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:20 pm
Dajm wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 5:52 pm
I strongly agree. A score difference of 10-20 for the same (albeit revised) research proposal is nothing else but a reviewer mistake that needs to be flagged and corrected. Please, check out the new Co-author discussion forum just created here and consider joining some of us in drafting a letter to the EC highlighting the flaws of the MC evaluation process.
Caqn you please paste the link for the Co-author discussion forum. I could not find it
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1068&p=7580#p7580
I am not authorised to read this forum..This is the message I got when I clicked
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:34 pm
by Dajm
rkrkochi wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:29 pm
I am not authorised to read this forum..This is the message I got when I clicked
Try this one and if not, can CountZ help?
viewforum.php?f=3
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2019 6:40 pm
by hopefulacademic
Can I join that forum as well? I accept the decision but I want to help in transforming future MSCA reviews.