IF ST LIF wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:10 pmSame happened to me, last year I was on the reserve list (92.6%). I addressed the weaknesses and resubmitted. This year I got 77%. I'm strikingly shocked. I know that the score might change, but I wasn't expecting such a huge drop!Giu83 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:05 pmCongratulations to those who succeeded!
I have not been founded and I'm quite disappointed since mine was the resubmission of last year's project scored 90% ( I got the seal of excellence too). I resubmitted exactly the same project with only minor changes according to the weakenesses raised. The result is REJECTED and scored 71 %. I cant believe it, it sounds quite weird.
2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
-
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:24 pm
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
I really cannot get how experts can read so differently the same project. It means that the evaluation criteria is not good enough.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
It’s in rejected 79.4. Very disappointing because I had at least hoped 80, but it was done quickly...so not much of a surprise. Congrats everyone that got it!
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
yes, It's a quite huge drop! now I'm really disillusioned , It's better if I quit researchIF ST LIF wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:10 pmSame happened to me, last year I was on the reserve list (92.6%). I addressed the weaknesses and resubmitted. This year I got 77%. I'm strikingly shocked. I know that the score might change, but I wasn't expecting such a huge drop!Giu83 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:05 pmCongratulations to those who succeeded!
I have not been founded and I'm quite disappointed since mine was the resubmission of last year's project scored 90% ( I got the seal of excellence too). I resubmitted exactly the same project with only minor changes according to the weakenesses raised. The result is REJECTED and scored 71 %. I cant believe it, it sounds quite weird.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
In resubmission cases it's easy to detect the flaws of the evaluation system. It clearly reflects that the process is highly subjective rather than objective and fair; in other words, a total lottery.AdinaBabesh wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:12 pmI really cannot get how experts can read so differently the same project. It means that the evaluation criteria is not good enough.
IF ST LIF wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:10 pmSame happened to me, last year I was on the reserve list (92.6%). I addressed the weaknesses and resubmitted. This year I got 77%. I'm strikingly shocked. I know that the score might change, but I wasn't expecting such a huge drop!Giu83 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:05 pmCongratulations to those who succeeded!
I have not been founded and I'm quite disappointed since mine was the resubmission of last year's project scored 90% ( I got the seal of excellence too). I resubmitted exactly the same project with only minor changes according to the weakenesses raised. The result is REJECTED and scored 71 %. I cant believe it, it sounds quite weird.
This was my last chance for MSCA. However, I have secured another funding source so it's not the end of academia for me.
Last edited by IF ST LIF on Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
I just checked carefully my report, and only one impression, evaluators just do not want to give it high scores as it is risky for them.
all W - is just bla bla bla, and for eva maybe better do not take responsibility
craziness
but I will go again next year funny action
all W - is just bla bla bla, and for eva maybe better do not take responsibility
craziness
but I will go again next year funny action
Last edited by keep_chr on Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
Funny enough the comments weren’t actually bad. So that was confusing for such a low score. But 4.1 for the first part hasn’t too bad I would say...so the project definitely has legs!
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
This sounds extremely unprofessional.
I know there is no appeal process but I at least would like to provide some feedback on unprofessional reviews back to the grant administrators. Please, let me know if you think we could put together a collective complaint of sorts (presumably, a more efficient way than individual feedback).
I know there is no appeal process but I at least would like to provide some feedback on unprofessional reviews back to the grant administrators. Please, let me know if you think we could put together a collective complaint of sorts (presumably, a more efficient way than individual feedback).
CountZ wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:16 pmDidn't get it - 82% - down from 93% preciously.
If that's not crazy in itself - the report contradicts itself, AND one of the sections only scored 4.5 but has no weaknesses listed to explain the missing 0.5 points. Another great job done by the European Commission.
Last edited by Dajm on Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 165
- Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:24 pm
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
I also have this issue of contradiction. Posted earlier messages with examples. I really don't get how is it possible. Nobody reads the evaluation reports, and the consensus report?
CountZ wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:16 pmDidn't get it - 82% - down from 93% preciously.
If that's not crazy in itself - the report contradicts itself, AND one of the sections only scored 4.5 but has no weaknesses listed to explain the missing 0.5 points. Another great job done by the European Commission.
-
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:11 am
Re: 2018 Marie Curie Individual Fellowship (H2020-MSCA-IF-2018)
I can't say I have a ton of information. This was the most in-depth I could find: https://mariecurieactions.blogspot.com/ ... -what.htmlMC_F wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 12:40 pmHi, just let me know if you have more info about this reserve list...I don't know whether to take it as a complete rejection or not..I think chances are very low...but mainly, do you know when people in reserve list get to know something? I mean, do we have to wait for a certain day to know or it is completely random?janas wrote: ↑Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:07 amHi SBM thanks for the information.
Generally in chemistry they put 15-20 candidates in the reserved list. but in an average first 2-3 candidates get offer. I dont have any idea in LIF. It should be more, but you are almost near the cut off till now as we knew (93.6).
I.e., it might take them almost a full year to report back to you that you didn't get it, and usually only about ~5 people in each panel's reserve list actually get awarded a grant. So it's looking like pretty slim odds, unless a lot of people going the UK decide to drop out due to Brexit fears, or maybe an actual no-deal Brexit comes to pass.
Last edited by Frydendahl on Tue Feb 12, 2019 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.