REJOINDERS Where you are at Refereeing 2 x CoE readers 2 x Oz readers 4 x International readers

1. REJOINDERS Where you are at Refereeing 2 x CoE readers 2 x Oz readers 4 x International readers You may have 0 – 6 reports. On average, applications receive 4 reports If you have 6 reports you will find the rejoinder writing very challenging!

2. REJOINDERS • Where you are at • You only have the Oz reader and Int. readers reports - CoE 100-150 applications - Oz (paid) 10 – 25 - International 1 – 15 Their influence depends on the numbers read, but Ints. will have some influence beyond this number

3. REJOINDERS • Oz reader rankings count more. • Useful to distinguish them from International and spend more effort replying to Oz reader • More critical, less enthusiastic assessors may be Oz readers and • Highly complementary assessors may be International readers

4. REJOINDERS What happens to them? The CoE read the referees reports and the rejoinders, and may modify rankings of Oz/International, or their own, in the light of the rejoinder This will be taken most seriously if you are near the cut-off or if there is a major disagreement Remember the CoE are scanning ~400 reports & 100 rejoinders

5. Things to Remember Significance/Innovation 30 Approach 20 National Benefit 10 Track Record 40 • Relative to opportunities • Capacity to do research

6. Things to Remember Assessors Handbook 90-100 Outstanding <2% Top of field 85 - 90 Excellent <20% Strongly competitive 80 - 85 Very good 30% Sound, compelling 75 - 80 Good 30% Not compelling 70 - 75 Fair 20% 0 - 70 Flawed ?

7. REJOINDERS Problems: • Not all assessors read the guide to assessors, or mark, or use language that corresponds with ARC-speak • Wimpy referees who are complementary to all • Sour and jaundiced referees who are highly critical of all • Remember it is rankings, not marks that matter Do not jump to conclusions too hastily. It has resemblance to judging the future from tea-leaves

8. ASSESSORS (ie you) Unhelpful assessments • Very positive comments and low rankings • Database reviewed to remove “”unhelpful”, tardy assessors If you are asked to be an assessor • Incorporate comments that will provide the applicant with overall feedback on relative ranking • Provide enough information to give applicant a chance to respond in rejoinder • If you have a grant, you are expected to be an Oz/International reader if requested Oz readers/panel members • Aware of budget issues and research funding in Australia • Ambit/inflated claims and padded budgets readily identified (conference travel, teaching relief, support costs)

9. REJOINDER Finished kicking trees, complaining to colleagues, drowning your sorrows; recovered from hangover, dash off a draft…. …Pause!... Re-examine it, show it to colleagues/RO and get comments, or leave it for a few days, reread and start again. Several iterations needed.

10. REJOINDERS • Follow RO Advice • Be succinct • Highlight and respond directly to any criticisms • What not to do • Be hostile • Use statements like “the referee did not understand/read the proposal” – instead, refute an erroneous assessment with fact • Try and hide any negatives by repeating positive statements from other reports • Remember… • For your application to be pushed up in ranking, someone else must come down • Panel has >600 reports plus assessments to read – need focused, well-argued rejoinders

11. REJOINDERS No one way • Do it by sections: S/I, App, NB, TR and comment on each in relation thereto • Do it by referee • Combine them Do not hide from criticism

12. MY APPROACH • Some positive in case the CoE haven’t noticed • Address main criticisms with facts, rather than playing off one referee against another • New positives – publications, other grants, prizes etc.