Oh right! I thought HI and NCP were the same thing. Who the hell is my NCP?doggoss wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:42 pmThe host institutions have not been notified. The NCP (National Contact Point) has been notified. They are at the country, not university level. There is sometimes only one (or a few) per country. It seems they always get the results beforehand.
It appears that Dreamer and others have got their results (and perhaps that of others?) from this NCP. My university research office has stated they do not receive the results until we do.
2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
-
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2021 8:16 pm
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Why the reviewers are anonymous? At least, we should have a list of all the names for our panel, in order to have a better understanding of the review. We know that sometimes some comments are way too far from our topic. It would help understanding if the comments are made by someone who actually knows about of field... maaaan, this waiting is too much
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2021 10:27 pm
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Totally agree !Mary_dramaqueen wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:55 pmWhy the reviewers are anonymous? At least, we should have a list of all the names for our panel, in order to have a better understanding of the review. We know that sometimes some comments are way too far from our topic. It would help understanding if the comments are made by someone who actually knows about of field... maaaan, this waiting is too much
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Thank you Andy. That post was disgusting.AndyC wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:48 pmI did it, I reported the post
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Oh, gosh... Just thought I'd check what new here after a while, and I find all this...
I'm so sorry for you Dreamer, Pete, whomever else got a negative result. I was rooting for you.
No matter how much we prepare ourselves and try not to build expectation, it is disappointing and can be discouraging, after all the hard work put into it.
Please don't let it discourage you from pursuing your research, and look for other ways/places to do it (although it's not easy at all, we all know).
As already said here by several people, it says nothing about you, and a lot about the weaknesses and inconsistencies of the evaluation process.
These cases of a major drop in resubmission appear to be too common, and reveal how subjective the reviewers are.
My prospected supervisor told me before submission that she honestly doesn't know anymore what works because:
1. One of her candidates in previous calls had exactly the same thing - a drop from 88 to 68 with the same proposal, and the only changes were to adress the weaknesses pointed in the first time.
2. She was asked once, as a reviewer, to evaluate a msca proposal on something from our field but completely not in her area of expertise. She told them she is not the right person for it, but makes one wonder how many people do it anyway...
As she thinks my proposal is excellent, she actually said that if this one isn't funded, she will not apply again to msca with other people. So even this highly experienced scholar and supervisor is disillusioned regarding this system and process.
Sending good vibes and virtual covid-free hugs to you all.
And fingers crossed for those of us still waiting and hoping...
(and apologies for this very long manifesto . Didn't mean too...)
I'm so sorry for you Dreamer, Pete, whomever else got a negative result. I was rooting for you.
No matter how much we prepare ourselves and try not to build expectation, it is disappointing and can be discouraging, after all the hard work put into it.
Please don't let it discourage you from pursuing your research, and look for other ways/places to do it (although it's not easy at all, we all know).
As already said here by several people, it says nothing about you, and a lot about the weaknesses and inconsistencies of the evaluation process.
These cases of a major drop in resubmission appear to be too common, and reveal how subjective the reviewers are.
My prospected supervisor told me before submission that she honestly doesn't know anymore what works because:
1. One of her candidates in previous calls had exactly the same thing - a drop from 88 to 68 with the same proposal, and the only changes were to adress the weaknesses pointed in the first time.
2. She was asked once, as a reviewer, to evaluate a msca proposal on something from our field but completely not in her area of expertise. She told them she is not the right person for it, but makes one wonder how many people do it anyway...
As she thinks my proposal is excellent, she actually said that if this one isn't funded, she will not apply again to msca with other people. So even this highly experienced scholar and supervisor is disillusioned regarding this system and process.
Sending good vibes and virtual covid-free hugs to you all.
And fingers crossed for those of us still waiting and hoping...
(and apologies for this very long manifesto . Didn't mean too...)
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
If you look back a few pages people have posted the link to find your NCP. It this point it is pointless as they are not going to answer any email over the weekend and likely would not tell you anyway. I think some people, like Dreamer, have a close relationship with their NCP, so they get some good insider info. If they have info on all the results they might share it with us. I get the impression that may have happened in previous years.Roken2020 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:55 pmOh right! I thought HI and NCP were the same thing. Who the hell is my NCP?doggoss wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:42 pmThe host institutions have not been notified. The NCP (National Contact Point) has been notified. They are at the country, not university level. There is sometimes only one (or a few) per country. It seems they always get the results beforehand.
It appears that Dreamer and others have got their results (and perhaps that of others?) from this NCP. My university research office has stated they do not receive the results until we do.
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
A friend of mine did not get the MSCA he applied for three years ago. The reviews were ridiculous, but could not be challenged of course. The next year he applied for an ERC starting grant with the same project, and got it. Now, three years after being rejected from MSCA, he is a full professor with his own research group.Amancay wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:59 pmOh, gosh... Just thought I'd check what new here after a while, and I find all this...
I'm so sorry for you Dreamer, Pete, whomever else got a negative result. I was rooting for you.
No matter how much we prepare ourselves and try not to build expectation, it is disappointing and can be discouraging, after all the hard work put into it.
Please don't let it discourage you from pursuing your research, and look for other ways/places to do it (although it's not easy at all, we all know).
As already said here by several people, it says nothing about you, and a lot about the weaknesses and inconsistencies of the evaluation process.
These cases of a major drop in resubmission appear to be too common, and reveal how subjective the reviewers are.
My prospected supervisor told me before submission that she honestly doesn't know anymore what works because:
1. One of her candidates in previous calls had exactly the same thing - a drop from 88 to 68 with the same proposal, and the only changes were to adress the weaknesses pointed in the first time.
2. She was asked once, as a reviewer, to evaluate a msca proposal on something from our field but completely not in her area of expertise. She told them she is not the right person for it, but makes one wonder how many people do it anyway...
As she thinks my proposal is excellent, she actually said that if this one isn't funded, she will not apply again to msca with other people. So even this highly experienced scholar and supervisor is disillusioned regarding this system and process.
Sending good vibes and virtual covid-free hugs to you all.
And fingers crossed for those of us still waiting and hoping...
(and apologies for this very long manifesto . Didn't mean too...)
-
- Posts: 110
- Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2021 1:31 pm
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Well I guess it's to avoid any conflict of interests between applicants and reviewers...Mary_dramaqueen wrote: ↑Sat Feb 06, 2021 4:55 pmWhy the reviewers are anonymous? At least, we should have a list of all the names for our panel, in order to have a better understanding of the review. We know that sometimes some comments are way too far from our topic. It would help understanding if the comments are made by someone who actually knows about of field... maaaan, this waiting is too much