2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
Hi All,
Again I might try for this year call. I hope to get this time after improving the Proposal keeping the comments addressed thoroughly and taking suggestions/help from previously successful people here and from the WhatsApp grop and at same time helping others who are new to MSCA.
All the best.
Regards
Again I might try for this year call. I hope to get this time after improving the Proposal keeping the comments addressed thoroughly and taking suggestions/help from previously successful people here and from the WhatsApp grop and at same time helping others who are new to MSCA.
All the best.
Regards
Re: 2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
The call will be published in spring 2024, opening on 23 April 2024 and closing on 26 September 2024.
The 2024 Postdoctoral Fellowships call will have a budget of €417.2 million.
The 2024 Postdoctoral Fellowships call will have a budget of €417.2 million.
Re: 2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
EU F&T Portal shows as follows:
Planned opening date
10 April 2024
Deadline date
11 September 2024 17:00:00 Brussels time
Forthcoming
Planned opening date
10 April 2024
Deadline date
11 September 2024 17:00:00 Brussels time
Forthcoming
Re: 2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
this link https://marie-sklodowska-curie-actions. ... ships-2024
says as below:
Indicative timeline
23 April 2024: Launch of the call for proposals
11 September 2024: Deadline for submitting proposals
February 2025: Notification of call results to applicants (TBC)
April 2025: Grant agreement signature for successful projects (TBC)
April 2025: First EU-funded projects start (TBC)
says as below:
Indicative timeline
23 April 2024: Launch of the call for proposals
11 September 2024: Deadline for submitting proposals
February 2025: Notification of call results to applicants (TBC)
April 2025: Grant agreement signature for successful projects (TBC)
April 2025: First EU-funded projects start (TBC)
Re: 2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
I still see forthcoming.
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2024 4:22 pm
Re: 2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
Dear all,
I won the MSC Postdoc Fellowship in 2023 at my first attempt. I have initated my project in Dec 2023.
Here are my insights to strengthen you proposal:
1) Mature idea: think well and do a thorough background research. Study all potential scenarios or your proposal as if you are the evaluator. Try to find weak points, insufficient explanations and address them efficiently. The proposal should be in paralel to your skills but it should not be a repetition of something you have done before.
2) Suitable host: The most important issue of your proposal is the suitable host. I suggest find a research institute that is equipped with tools you need for your proposed study. Poor institute has very little to offer. You should make a proper advertisement of the host institute for its facilities and international/national projects in your proposal. Remember, it is better if the institute had parallel projects in the past too or some recent projects in parallel to your study field that you can involve as well.
3) Experienced supervisor: Another very important part. Your chosen supervisor must have enough experience in supervising postgraduates. Must be a resourceful person for your ongoing and future career plans. Must have research topics that are parallel to yours. I have a colleague who applied for MSC Postdoc Fellowship and did not get it because the chosen supervisor was not experienced enough. Discuss your idea with your potential supervisor in advance for its feasibility, possible risks, collaborations etc. Exchange your proposal draft several times or corrections, suggestions. In the end, this is why supervisors are for.
4) Be realistic. High risk / high gain proposal is necessary but at the end of the day it should be feasible. You'll have two years time to do research, to learn something new, to disseminate, and to publish (at least submit). Your project proposal must allow you gain something. A realistic Gantt Chart should demonstrate your research plan clearly. I know people who did not win MSC Postdoc Fellowship because their plan was not realistic (e.g. too much lab work plus learning a new software good enough to develop a model as an outcome of your project within two years is not a good plan) or their (this was an ERC grant case) Gantt Chart was not convincing/clear (e.g. a continuous workpackage throughout your project is not that easy to comprehend and not possible to defend if it will bear useful deliverables for other workpackages at the end your project).
5) You. Do you have enough experience that you can prove to perform the project you propose? Pubslished without your PhD supervisor or previous group members? If not, do not waste your time. Remember-you will have two years. Your project should align with your skills but it shouls not be the same thing that you have done in the past. It must me something new where you can apply your skills. Hence your CV should demonstrate that you are capable of using your scientific skills in different fields.
I wish everyone good luck!
I won the MSC Postdoc Fellowship in 2023 at my first attempt. I have initated my project in Dec 2023.
Here are my insights to strengthen you proposal:
1) Mature idea: think well and do a thorough background research. Study all potential scenarios or your proposal as if you are the evaluator. Try to find weak points, insufficient explanations and address them efficiently. The proposal should be in paralel to your skills but it should not be a repetition of something you have done before.
2) Suitable host: The most important issue of your proposal is the suitable host. I suggest find a research institute that is equipped with tools you need for your proposed study. Poor institute has very little to offer. You should make a proper advertisement of the host institute for its facilities and international/national projects in your proposal. Remember, it is better if the institute had parallel projects in the past too or some recent projects in parallel to your study field that you can involve as well.
3) Experienced supervisor: Another very important part. Your chosen supervisor must have enough experience in supervising postgraduates. Must be a resourceful person for your ongoing and future career plans. Must have research topics that are parallel to yours. I have a colleague who applied for MSC Postdoc Fellowship and did not get it because the chosen supervisor was not experienced enough. Discuss your idea with your potential supervisor in advance for its feasibility, possible risks, collaborations etc. Exchange your proposal draft several times or corrections, suggestions. In the end, this is why supervisors are for.
4) Be realistic. High risk / high gain proposal is necessary but at the end of the day it should be feasible. You'll have two years time to do research, to learn something new, to disseminate, and to publish (at least submit). Your project proposal must allow you gain something. A realistic Gantt Chart should demonstrate your research plan clearly. I know people who did not win MSC Postdoc Fellowship because their plan was not realistic (e.g. too much lab work plus learning a new software good enough to develop a model as an outcome of your project within two years is not a good plan) or their (this was an ERC grant case) Gantt Chart was not convincing/clear (e.g. a continuous workpackage throughout your project is not that easy to comprehend and not possible to defend if it will bear useful deliverables for other workpackages at the end your project).
5) You. Do you have enough experience that you can prove to perform the project you propose? Pubslished without your PhD supervisor or previous group members? If not, do not waste your time. Remember-you will have two years. Your project should align with your skills but it shouls not be the same thing that you have done in the past. It must me something new where you can apply your skills. Hence your CV should demonstrate that you are capable of using your scientific skills in different fields.
I wish everyone good luck!
Re: 2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
ias per point 4, above i understand that 'continuous WPs in Gantt chart is not a feasible practically. But if there are some parallel work that can be started for , say WP-2, while some part of WP-1 is still going on. In such cases this could be possible. What do you say? for example in my theoretical WPs, i can do such tasks within two WPS, and thus can show continuous WPs flow. Hope that is fine. May be if i added 1 senetence about such continuity in the description as well as in Gantt chart, then it should be fine. What is your opinion?AggressivePanda wrote: ↑Sun Apr 28, 2024 5:01 pmDear all,
I won the MSC Postdoc Fellowship in 2023 at my first attempt. I have initated my project in Dec 2023.
4) Be realistic. High risk / high gain proposal is necessary but at the end of the day it should be feasible. You'll have two years time to do research, to learn something new, to disseminate, and to publish (at least submit). Your project proposal must allow you gain something. A realistic Gantt Chart should demonstrate your research plan clearly. I know people who did not win MSC Postdoc Fellowship because their plan was not realistic (e.g. too much lab work plus learning a new software good enough to develop a model as an outcome of your project within two years is not a good plan) or their (this was an ERC grant case) Gantt Chart was not convincing/clear (e.g. a continuous workpackage throughout your project is not that easy to comprehend and not possible to defend if it will bear useful deliverables for other workpackages at the end your project).
5) You. Do you have enough experience that you can prove to perform the project you propose? Pubslished without your PhD supervisor or previous group members? If not, do not waste your time. Remember-you will have two years. Your project should align with your skills but it shouls not be the same thing that you have done in the past. It must me something new where you can apply your skills. Hence your CV should demonstrate that you are capable of using your scientific skills in different fields.
I wish everyone good luck!
for the Point 5, if one has collaboration publications, then one might not have first author or even corresponding author status. then How can we prove that at least for our part of the contribution is unique in the article, and my contribution is independent of others work? for example i support experimental researcher (that is my collaborator) with my theoretical / computational explanation, no other author in the list has that expertise (say) but i will be only as co-author not as corresponding author, for obvious reasons (because its not my main project). in such case we cannot defend our uniqueness or independent contribution. any views on this?
Re: 2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
[/quote]
ias per point 4, above i understand that 'continuous WPs in Gantt chart is not a feasible practically. But if there are some parallel work that can be started for , say WP-2, while some part of WP-1 is still going on. In such cases this could be possible. What do you say? for example in my theoretical WPs, i can do such tasks within two WPS, and thus can show continuous WPs flow. Hope that is fine. May be if i added 1 senetence about such continuity in the description as well as in Gantt chart, then it should be fine. What is your opinion?
for the Point 5, if one has collaboration publications, then one might not have first author or even corresponding author status. then How can we prove that at least for our part of the contribution is unique in the article, and my contribution is independent of others work? for example i support experimental researcher (that is my collaborator) with my theoretical / computational explanation, no other author in the list has that expertise (say) but i will be only as co-author not as corresponding author, for obvious reasons (because its not my main project). in such case we cannot defend our uniqueness or independent contribution. any views on this?
[/quote]
My personal take on this:
When addressing your the risks in part 3 you should mention that overlapping activities are carefully calculated as you mentioned above. In any case you should make explicit that you know that you have more than one activity happening at the same time and explain why this is feasible.
As for your publications, I would make an explicit point in part 1.4 of application on what was your personal contribution to the articles. In this way you both describe the uniqueness of your expertise as well as what you can do. For instance: "I have contributed with my expertise on theoretical / computational explanation in so and so's research project and publications", and here you cite it as footnote. Or something on these lines. You may also make a point in part b2 in your CV. People who figure as co-author should write a paragraph under every publication detailing what was their specific task in said article.
ias per point 4, above i understand that 'continuous WPs in Gantt chart is not a feasible practically. But if there are some parallel work that can be started for , say WP-2, while some part of WP-1 is still going on. In such cases this could be possible. What do you say? for example in my theoretical WPs, i can do such tasks within two WPS, and thus can show continuous WPs flow. Hope that is fine. May be if i added 1 senetence about such continuity in the description as well as in Gantt chart, then it should be fine. What is your opinion?
for the Point 5, if one has collaboration publications, then one might not have first author or even corresponding author status. then How can we prove that at least for our part of the contribution is unique in the article, and my contribution is independent of others work? for example i support experimental researcher (that is my collaborator) with my theoretical / computational explanation, no other author in the list has that expertise (say) but i will be only as co-author not as corresponding author, for obvious reasons (because its not my main project). in such case we cannot defend our uniqueness or independent contribution. any views on this?
[/quote]
My personal take on this:
When addressing your the risks in part 3 you should mention that overlapping activities are carefully calculated as you mentioned above. In any case you should make explicit that you know that you have more than one activity happening at the same time and explain why this is feasible.
As for your publications, I would make an explicit point in part 1.4 of application on what was your personal contribution to the articles. In this way you both describe the uniqueness of your expertise as well as what you can do. For instance: "I have contributed with my expertise on theoretical / computational explanation in so and so's research project and publications", and here you cite it as footnote. Or something on these lines. You may also make a point in part b2 in your CV. People who figure as co-author should write a paragraph under every publication detailing what was their specific task in said article.
-
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Tue May 07, 2024 10:22 am
Re: 2024 Marie Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship(HE-MSCA-PF-2024)
Hi all, I'm planning to apply for this year MSCA PF call.
I was wondering if there is a requirement to explicitly use the provided word template for part B? I would be glad to use Latex for this and I was wondering if someone uses it as well?
It appears that the word template has tags which I would not know how to replicate in Latex.
I was wondering if there is a requirement to explicitly use the provided word template for part B? I would be glad to use Latex for this and I was wondering if someone uses it as well?
It appears that the word template has tags which I would not know how to replicate in Latex.