Rejoinders for ARC DP
Assessment Reports:
Your last chance for influencing
the CoE members
Zhihong Xu
Griffith University
The objectives of Discovery Projects
for 2014 funding
• support excellent basic and applied
research by individuals and teams;
• enhance the scale and focus of research
in the National Research Priorities;
• expand Australia’s knowledge base
and research capability;
The objectives of Discovery Projects
for 2014 funding (Continued)
• encourage research and research
training in high-quality research
environments;
• enhance international collaboration
in research; and
• foster the international competitiveness
of Australian research.
ARC DP Selection Criteria for 2014
Funding
• a. Investigator(s) (40%)
• Research opportunity and performance
evidence (ROPE); and
• Time and capacity to undertake the
proposed research;
ARC DP Selection Criteria for 2014
Funding (Continued)
• b. Project Quality (25%)
• Does the research address a significant
problem?
• Is the conceptual / theoretical framework
innovative and original?
• Will the aims, concepts, methods and
results advance knowledge?
ARC DP Selection Criteria for
2014 Funding (Continued)
• c. Feasibility and Benefit (20%)
• Do the Project’s design, participants and requested budget
create confidence in the timely and successful completion
of the Project?
• Will the completed Project produce innovative economic,
environmental, social and/or cultural benefit to the
Australian and international community?
• Will the proposed research be value for money?
ARC DP Selection Criteria for 2012
Funding (Continued)
• d. Research Environment (15%)
• Is there an existing, or developing, supportive and
high quality research environment for this Project?
• Are the necessary facilities to complete the Project
available?
• Are there adequate strategies to encourage
dissemination, commercialisation, if appropriate;
and promotion of research outcomes?
It’s all about ranking…
• With five times as many applications as
funding, ranking is used to apportion funds
• The ARC process is designed to rank all
applications and fund as many of the top
ranked applications as monies allow
• So each applicant is competing with
hundreds of others to be in the top ca. 20%
for DP proposals
The ranking process
• Select the most relevant research fields, courses and
disciplines (RFCD) and use important key words for
the most appropriate ARC Panel to assess
• Applications are ranked by two sets of appraisers,
with increasing levels of specialism:
– EACs (CoE members) read and rank 100-200
applications
– Specialist Assessors
– Rejoinders (in response to the Assessor Reports)
The basis of rankings
• EACs are likely to be approach (or general) but
not necessarily area specialists
• They read hundreds of applications proposing
important research on under-studied areas by
talented academics
• They look for a research idea that is compelling
and original even to a non-specialist (e.g. project
title and 100 word summaries)
• And a research plan that is detailed and wellsuited to the project for an approach specialist
Rejoinders
• The rejoinder is an important part of the ranking
process, and it is your last chance to influence the
CoE members (EACs1 and 2)
• The rejoinder should be calm, considered and
diplomatic, and it should be self-explanatory
• Use positive language and make it concise and
easy to follow
• It is often useful to reference any new work or
highlight any significant relevant publications
• It is the CoE members who would read the
rejoinders and modify the rankings if justified.
Thanks and Best Wishes
• Any comments and questions?