tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post185634123814978210..comments2013-05-21T02:31:51.377-07:00Comments on David Sands: Evaluation of Grant Applications within VR's Computer Science Panel: A Report from the Panel ChairDavid Sandshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17874473645832835239noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post-51836522213018144972013-05-21T02:31:51.377-07:002013-05-21T02:31:51.377-07:00In principle the NT board could decide to reorder ...In principle the NT board could decide to reorder the list of applications, but in practice I suspect that this does not happen often, so in effect the panel makes the final decision, with the exception of one or two applications at the tail of the list which are chosen in a second round after comparison with applications from 4 or 5 other panels. <br /><br />The "better applications" are not a formal concept. I was referring to those applications for which the preliminary reviews suggest that there may be a chance of awarding funding. <br /><br />There is no point in ranking applications which have no chance of getting funding. David Sandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17874473645832835239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post-19395077876201769112013-05-15T07:57:40.061-07:002013-05-15T07:57:40.061-07:00Thanks for the interesting blog.
I have one quest...Thanks for the interesting blog.<br /><br />I have one question regarding the funding decision. You wrote that "Applications in each specialist area are handled by a so-called evaluation panel who have the job of suggesting which applications should be funded and by how much." and "The purpose of the meeting is to form a linear ranking of the better applications in each grant category." <br /><br />I noticed the choice of word "suggesting". My main question is: Does the panel also make the final decision? Or, is it the NT board (a group of 9 people) that makes the decisions over all subject areas (of course, hopefully, based on the panels' input)? In the latter case, do the decisions coincide with the recommodations, in your experience? <br /><br />Also, could you please clarify the meaning of "better applications" above?<br /><br />Thank you.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post-25500190424689542652013-02-22T01:13:14.431-08:002013-02-22T01:13:14.431-08:00On Fredrico's final question "This sugges...On Fredrico's final question "This suggests that the review process produces material on the proposals that is not shown to the applicants. Is this material available?"<br /><br />The evaluators make notes which are not intended for the reviewers, and so they contain a mixture of useful material (for the applicant) that makes its way into the final report, and possibly other notes that may not be suitable for that purpose. Since this material is internal working matter, it cannot be obtained from VR. <br /><br />This is not unlike programme committees and journal reviewers make notes for the committee only. These are never made available to the authors. <br /><br />Having said that, I think I would prefer a process more like the one we are used to from conference evaluation, where each reviewer writes a full report intended for consumtion by the author. But this is not how VR choose to work.David Sandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17874473645832835239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post-40810136265914184092013-02-22T01:04:14.992-08:002013-02-22T01:04:14.992-08:00Links to VR's evaluation handbook in Swedish a...Links to VR's evaluation handbook in Swedish and English now added to the Links section. <br />David Sandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17874473645832835239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post-31553561772271129302013-02-21T01:04:10.267-08:002013-02-21T01:04:10.267-08:00Regarding gender issues, VR's policy is descri...Regarding gender issues, VR's policy is described in depth (in Swedish) below. <br /><br />https://www.vr.se/omvetenskapsradet/strategierochriktlinjer/jamstalldhetsstrategi20102012.4.1f599ea412a30327ccf800042.html<br /><br />There is no reserved budget for women, but VR have stated the goal that the number of grants awarded to each gender should be in proportion the the number of applications. Gender issues are monitored in the sense that we are reminded (by the VR appointed observer for example) of the number of female applicants that are likely to be funded as the discussion progresses. In some panels there is even a "gender observer" who attends the meeting and makes notes on the way that applications from female researchers are handled (for example how much discussion time is devoted to discussing applications from applicants of one gender vs the other). In the end I believe that positive discrimination may be applied in the "usual way", namely when it is hard to order two applications based on purely scientific merits; in that case gender may be used as a tie-breaker. <br /><br />If you want to know more about how things are supposed to operate, then I can also recommend the evaluation handbook. <br /><br />http://www.vr.se/download/18.a1218571375c85932a70/1337586115700/Beredningshandbok+NT+2012.pdf<br />David Sandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17874473645832835239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post-91704096334432211142013-02-20T23:34:50.399-08:002013-02-20T23:34:50.399-08:00Federico, thanks for the interesting question. I&...Federico, thanks for the interesting question. I'll start with the first one for now and get to the others later. <br /><br />Since the committee are non-Swedish it is rather easy for them to ignore the distinctions between old and new universities. The research group in which the applicant works may have some influence (in particular co-applicants) but whether it is an old University or a new one really doesn't matter. From the viewpoint of most international reviewers it's all just Swedish. (As I once remarked to the previous Chalmers president: Chalmers is world-famous ... in Gothenburg).<br /><br />The previous track-record of a researcher will certainly be highly relevant. But in the case of a junior applicant who has a good application, the lack of a strong group behind him or her might equally be used as a positive argument. But again, this issue is discussed independently of the University from which the applicant applies.David Sandshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17874473645832835239noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post-91485834991623503932013-02-20T14:11:36.887-08:002013-02-20T14:11:36.887-08:00Thank you very much for the interesting insight - ...Thank you very much for the interesting insight - it is very useful for VR applicants like myself to gain access to specific information regarding the CS area. I have a few comments and questions regarding your post:<br /><br />You say that "During the discussions no attention is paid the geographic distribution of grants across Sweden, or to the distribution of grants by subject area." Does the particular institution of the applicant weigh in any way in the evaluation? Is preference accorded to applications from "older" institutions (e.g., Uppsala, Lund, KTH), perhaps because they have a more established record in the particular field of the proposal?<br /><br />You mention that "as instructed by VR, the distribution of grants by gender is monitored carefully during the meeting." What does this mean exactly? Is there an amount of the budget that is "reserved" for women? If so, is this amount set aside before the application process or is it the same pot of funding? Are there explicit policies you follow in determining the amount of positive discrimination that occurs? I think it is very important to be totally transparent on this issue - if, for instance, VR decides that female applicants should be more likely to get funded, it should be stated explicitly to what extent this is done, and the guidelines that are followed in according preference based on gender should be made public.<br /><br />When you speak about final reports, you say that "material from the internal preliminary reviews" is combined to achieve a final report. This suggests that the review process produces material on the proposals that is not shown to the applicants. Is this material available? I say this also because reports are usually very brief and not very informative (i.e., it is often not clear what one should do to improve the application), therefore any further insight on the reasons for a rejection would be greatly appreciated.<br /><br />Thank you in advance for any further information you can give us.<br /><br />Federico Pecora - Örebro.Federico Pecorahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03309685820259808941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2029501287167379682.post-32386030358663263872013-02-19T09:14:26.432-08:002013-02-19T09:14:26.432-08:00I strongly applaud and second the suggestion of a ...I strongly applaud and second the suggestion of a completely non-Swedish panel and to have as wide a coverage as possible of all major areas of Computer Science and Engg (which has conspicuously not been the case in the past).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com