1 / 10

1001 - Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Projelerini Destekleme Programı

Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu. 1001 - Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Projelerini Destekleme Programı. Doç. Dr. Amitav Sanyal Kimya Bölümü. TÜBİTAK Encounters. PI in 3 TÜBİTAK PROJECTS Co-PI in 5 TÜBİTAK PROJECTS (Naci Inci, Senol Mutlu, Zeynep Atay, Rana Sanyal)

sibyl
Download Presentation

1001 - Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Projelerini Destekleme Programı

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Kurumu 1001 - Bilimsel ve Teknolojik Araştırma Projelerini Destekleme Programı Doç. Dr. Amitav Sanyal Kimya Bölümü

  2. TÜBİTAK Encounters • PI in 3 TÜBİTAK PROJECTS • Co-PI in 5 TÜBİTAK PROJECTS (Naci Inci, Senol Mutlu, Zeynep Atay, Rana Sanyal) • Project Evaluations: 2 Panel, 2 Online

  3. Proposal Outline • Abstract and Keywords: Turkish and English • Literature Survey in the Context of Proposed Research • Relevance of the Project (özgün değeri) • Importance of the Output (yaygın etkisi) • Methodology (yöntemler) • Attachments (CV, proformas, ‘Belgeler’ etc)

  4. Proposal Evaluations • Proposalsareevaluatedfortheir: • Relevance of ProposedResearch (özgün değer) (Novelty, Comparison with Present State of the Art) • Importance/Impact of Outcomes (yaygın etki) (Scientific, Social and Economic) • Feasibility (yapılabilirlik)

  5. Please Do… • Remember that the Panelists may not be ‘Experts’ in the specific area of your proposed research

  6. Please Do… • Outline all ‘relevant’ prior research in the area (…if you don’t they will do it using WebofScience and probably not try to find out the ‘fine’ difference between the published work and proposed work) • Theliteraturesurveyactuallyhelpsbringthepanelistsuptospeedwiththetopic at hand

  7. Please Do… • Outline Method Section in moderate detail. ! what may be trivial protocol for you may not be for the panelist • Highlight without being modest why the outcome of the project is important so that it really justifies being funded!

  8. Please Don’t… • Have high degree of similarity in the title of the proposal with previously funded proposals! • Make the proposal look like ‘I’m on a shopping spree’: ends up your project being misunderstood for a infrastructure (altıyapı) project. Jusity equipment needs clearly! • Forgetto: !Checkforallnecessarysupportingdocuments: no mercytowards ‘missing ( orwhat I/youthink ‘but no soimportant’ documents) !Checkthefinishedproposalfor ‘no missing’ sections /subsections

  9. Please Do… • As a panelist please fight for good proposals! This will overtime set up a tone in these evaluation processes and other panelists will not be intimidated to voice their opinions ... Next time it will be your proposal on the table!

  10. MyTake: No Foolproof Formula….. THANK YOU….

More Related