Page 489 of 495
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:39 am
by LAVIN1234@1
MSCA-IF-RI-LIF-2020 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:19 am
LAVIN1234@1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:53 am
Guys, my proposal is about transcriptomic studies. What should I mention for the materials and methods section? I received terrible comments. Please guide.
ENV panel
Agricultural, transcriptomic
What do you mean M&M? Did you format your proposal like a paper? Sorry naive Q maybe. I wouldn't suggest to do that, I mean if you are only using transcriptomics fine but each WP can be different still depending on processing samples, batch effects, analysis etc.
No no, methodology, (The description of the research methodology), I mentioned all the details, but the comment refers to the details
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:45 am
by LAVIN1234@1
LAVIN1234@1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:39 am
MSCA-IF-RI-LIF-2020 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:19 am
LAVIN1234@1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:53 am
Guys, my proposal is about transcriptomic studies. What should I mention for the materials and methods section? I received terrible comments. Please guide.
ENV panel
Agricultural, transcriptomic
What do you mean M&M? Did you format your proposal like a paper? Sorry naive Q maybe. I wouldn't suggest to do that, I mean if you are only using transcriptomics fine but each WP can be different still depending on processing samples, batch effects, analysis etc.
No no, methodology, (The description of the research methodology), I mentioned all the details, but the comment refers to the details
Transcriptomics analysis + interaction between plant and pathogen
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 7:59 am
by Shathlia
LAVIN1234@1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:45 am
LAVIN1234@1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:39 am
MSCA-IF-RI-LIF-2020 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 2:19 am
What do you mean M&M? Did you format your proposal like a paper? Sorry naive Q maybe. I wouldn't suggest to do that, I mean if you are only using transcriptomics fine but each WP can be different still depending on processing samples, batch effects, analysis etc.
No no, methodology, (The description of the research methodology), I mentioned all the details, but the comment refers to the details
Transcriptomics analysis + interaction between plant and pathogen
The only thing I can contribute is that on my first submission (failure) and from comments I received from someone who has served on an evaluation panel before, they both said basically the same thing: not enough detail. So, everything should be crystal clear. I spent a long time adding every detail I could think would be relevant to what I was describing and be as clear as possible fit as much details. I decided to approach it as better to be very thorough about everything and have less in my proposal than to have a lot proposed but no detail. This time I was successful and they did like my attention to detail.
Re: RE-EVALUATION! revisor's MISTAKE
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 9:20 am
by AdinaBabesh
I would suggest you write directly to the EC. Because if I am not wrong the appeal is only for procedural matters not for the content of the evaluation. But I might be wrong. Anyway, I wouldn't give it up because this is a really big fault from the evaluators side.
Best of luck!
quote=MSCA-IF-RI-LIF-2020 post_id=15481 time=1612990151 user_id=1197]
Ila-MSCA wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:20 pm
ST-LIF: Guys, I NEED YOUR HELP PLEASE! I got terrible comments on the project (Excellence)... I was so sorry... BUT ... BUT... reading carefully the comments, they made the medline on the wrong protein, saying that the project was not new at all ... but they spelt the molecule out in the WRONG WAY, and of course all the revision is not consistent with my project. As often happens in biology, similar acronyms are used, for extremely different stuff. My protein has never been studied in my field, the protein he/she wrote about, is extremely studied. This influenced the score, that was 2.5 out of 5... in the IMPACT section I got 5/5, in the Implementation 3/5 because of a shorter duration of the project (15 months).
I felt 15 months to be appropriate for a pioneering study. But of course, the revisor did not even get what I was going to study because search on the wrong protein.
What should I do now?
Thank you
You should for sure appeal!!
But you would need to now get very high (almost 5) in excellence and you have lost 8% in implementation, but worth a try!
[/quote]
Re: RE-EVALUATION! revisor's MISTAKE
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 9:41 am
by Little_Venice
So, the protein (the one the reviewers has in mind) has been well studied/understood but 15 month is not enough to study it, although the project impact would be excellent? [facepalm]
AdinaBabesh wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 9:20 am
I would suggest you write directly to the EC. Because if I am not wrong the appeal is only for procedural matters not for the content of the evaluation. But I might be wrong. Anyway, I wouldn't give it up because this is a really big fault from the evaluators side.
Best of luck!
quote=MSCA-IF-RI-LIF-2020 post_id=15481 time=1612990151 user_id=1197]
Ila-MSCA wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:20 pm
ST-LIF: Guys, I NEED YOUR HELP PLEASE! I got terrible comments on the project (Excellence)... I was so sorry... BUT ... BUT... reading carefully the comments, they made the medline on the wrong protein, saying that the project was not new at all ... but they spelt the molecule out in the WRONG WAY, and of course all the revision is not consistent with my project. As often happens in biology, similar acronyms are used, for extremely different stuff. My protein has never been studied in my field, the protein he/she wrote about, is extremely studied. This influenced the score, that was 2.5 out of 5... in the IMPACT section I got 5/5, in the Implementation 3/5 because of a shorter duration of the project (15 months).
I felt 15 months to be appropriate for a pioneering study. But of course, the revisor did not even get what I was going to study because search on the wrong protein.
What should I do now?
Thank you
You should for sure appeal!!
But you would need to now get very high (almost 5) in excellence and you have lost 8% in implementation, but worth a try!
[/quote]
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 11:03 am
by LAVIN1234@1
Shathlia wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 7:59 am
LAVIN1234@1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:45 am
LAVIN1234@1 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:39 am
No no, methodology, (The description of the research methodology), I mentioned all the details, but the comment refers to the details
Transcriptomics analysis + interaction between plant and pathogen
The only thing I can contribute is that on my first submission (failure) and from comments I received from someone who has served on an evaluation panel before, they both said basically the same thing: not enough detail. So, everything should be crystal clear. I spent a long time adding every detail I could think would be relevant to what I was describing and be as clear as possible fit as much details. I decided to approach it as better to be very thorough about everything and have less in my proposal than to have a lot proposed but no detail. This time I was successful and they did like my attention to detail.
Thank you very much, it was very helpful
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:46 pm
by no42
curious wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:47 pm
Hello,
Does anyone know if it is possible for a single supervisor to support more than one applicant in each call? I did not get this year
and was wondering if I can still apply for the next call.
Thank you!
My supervisor got two fellows this year: Myself, a European fellow and a colleague who will be a global fellow.
Edit: The university might get more than that, I could be wrong.
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 3:09 pm
by curious
no42 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 1:46 pm
curious wrote: ↑Wed Feb 10, 2021 9:47 pm
Hello,
Does anyone know if it is possible for a single supervisor to support more than one applicant in each call? I did not get this year
and was wondering if I can still apply for the next call.
Thank you!
My supervisor got two fellows this year: Myself, a European fellow and a colleague who will be a global fellow.
Edit: The university might get more than that, I could be wrong.
Congratulations for getting the fellowship and thanks a ton for clarifying my doubts
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:18 pm
by 10000790
Not from NCP France but through "dreamgirl" its 12 in RI my score 92.2 and cutoff 92.4. Not sure its believable or not. What are my chances?
Re: 2020 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2020)
Posted: Thu Feb 11, 2021 7:12 pm
by MSCA-IF
10000790 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 11, 2021 6:18 pm
Not from NCP France but through "dreamgirl" its 12 in RI my score 92.2 and cutoff 92.4. Not sure its believable or not. What are my chances?
Check with your NCP!