1 / 19

ERC Advanced Investigators Grant: Evaluation Procedure and Suggestions to the Proposers

ERC Advanced Investigators Grant: Evaluation Procedure and Suggestions to the Proposers. Sami Gülgöz Koç University EU 7th FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME ERC INFODAY 1 March 2010, Bogazici University, Istanbul. SH4 The Human Mind and I ts C omplexity :

vernon
Download Presentation

ERC Advanced Investigators Grant: Evaluation Procedure and Suggestions to the Proposers

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. ERC Advanced Investigators Grant:Evaluation Procedure and Suggestions to the Proposers Sami Gülgöz Koç University EU 7th FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME ERC INFODAY 1 March 2010, Bogazici University, Istanbul

  2. SH4 The Human Mind and ItsComplexity: cognition,psychology, linguistics, philosophy and education SH4_1 Evolution of mind and cognitive functions, animal communication SH4_2 Human life-span development SH4_3 Neuropsychology and cognitive psychology SH4_4 Clinical and experimental psychology SH4_5 Formal, cognitive, functional and computational linguistics SH4_6 Typological, historical and comparative linguistics SH4_7 Acquisition and knowledge of language: psycholinguistics, neurolinguistics SH4_8 Use of language: pragmatics, sociolinguistics, discourse analysis SH4_9 Second language teaching and learning, language pathologies, lexicography, terminology SH4_10 Philosophy, history of philosophy SH4_11 Epistemology, logic, philosophy of science SH4_12 Ethics and morality, bioethics SH4_13 Education: principles, techniques, typologies

  3. SH4 The Human Mind and its complexity: cognition,psychology, linguistics, philosophy and education Panel Members: 10-15 members and a panel chair Education Linguistics Neuroscience Philosophy Psychology

  4. ERC Advanced Investigators Grant From the invitation letter to become a member of the panel: This programme will provide an opportunity for established scientists and scholars to pursue frontier research with scientific merit as the sole criteria of a world‑wide competition.

  5. Purpose Novelty Advanced Grants are intended to promote substantial advances in the frontiers of knowledge,and to encourage new productive lines of enquiry and new methods and techniques, includingunconventional approaches andinvestigations at the interface between established disciplines.

  6. Risk-taking pursue ground-breaking, high-riskresearch that opens new directions in their respective research fields or other domains

  7. Evaluation Panels Two alternate evaluation panels for the Advanced Grant Together, both panels form a pool of expertise with members being available to step in, if needed, in the alternate year.

  8. Evaluations • Two headings: • Heading 1: Principal Investigator • Heading 2: Research project • Scale: • 4: Outstanding • 3: Excellent • 2: Very Good • 1: Non-competitive

  9. Principal Investigator active researchers a track-record of significant research achievements in the last 10 years exceptional leaders in terms oforiginality and significance of their research contributions.

  10. Benchmarks: 10 publications as senior author in major international peer-reviewed scientific journals 3 major research monographs, of which at least one is translated into anotherlanguage (e.g. humanities and social sciences). 5 granted patents. 10 invited presentations in well-established internationally organised conferences and advanced schools. 3 research expeditions led by the applicant.

  11. Proposal content and investigator qualifications are primary Budget is secondary

  12. Step 1 Evaluation within panel Minimum 3 panel members Individual reports Panel discussion Must pass quality threshold (≥2) Remain within the budget limit in ranking

  13. Report of Step 1 Proposal Potential of the Principal Investigator Quality of the Proposed Research Project Indicative Status Total mark Conflict of Interest Suggested evaluator for second stage

  14. Step 2 Evaluation by remote referees (2-3) as well as panel members (3) Individual independent reviews Panel discussion led by lead reviewer Ranking Report to applicant by lead reviewer

  15. Most important parts(for Step 1) Scientific Leadership Profile • content and impact of the major contributions • İndependent productivity • the international recognition • efforts and ability to inspire younger researchers • ability to productively change research fields and/or to establish new interdisciplinary approaches

  16. Most important parts(for Step 1) The Extended Synopsis • concise presentation of the scientific proposal • its ground-breaking nature • in the context of the state of the art • methodology • references to relevant literature • potential impact (high gain/high risk)

  17. Most important parts(for Step 2) • The Scientific Proposal • its ground-breaking nature • in the context of the state of the art • methodology • references to relevant literature

  18. Most important parts(for Step 2) • The Research Environment • its ground-breaking nature • in the context of the state of the art • methodology • references to relevant literature

More Related