We recently had a lively research forum discussion about funding in science. For me one of the most interesting ideas that came up was that of refining the grant application process to eliminate personal biases.
Dr. Kreulen prompted us to continue thinking about funding in science and I would like to continue the discussion here on the blog.
I will start by saying that if we were attempting to improve the grant review process; I think the first step is to decide, in very loose terms, by what criteria a grant should and shout not be reviewed. Can we form a list of factors that should be considered and a list of factors that we would prefer not be considered? Some items might require a bit of explanation and that’s fine. This is just brainstorming. I will start and I encourage everyone to continue the lists in their comments:
Grant should be review based on:
Quality of idea – Will the proposed experiments contribute significant, meaningful content to the scientific community regard (insert granting institutions particular agenda here).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Boost your career
Taking courses online is also a great way to be able to do the class work on your own time rather than have time obligations and requirements for each course. It is now possible to have a fully booked life and go to school with ease. Also, you will want to consider all the money in gas you would be saving by not having to commute to school on a daily basis………….
students zone
this post really very good and effective for me thanks for sharing this nice post
It is nice to find a site about my interest. My first visit to your site is been a big help. Thank you for the efforts you been putting on making your site such an interesting and informative place to browse through. I'll be visiting your site again to gather some more valuable information. You truly did a good job.
Post a Comment