1. Office for Research Rejoinder Workshop Responding to Assessor Feedback Nicky Church: Manager, Research Grants Rebecca Marshallsay: Research Grants Officer Office for Research

2. Rejoinder Workshops Responding to assessor comments is the next important part of the application process for both ARC and NHMRC. These workshops will provide insights which could help your grant ‘across the line’.  Wednesday 29 May 10.00am -12.30pm Logan campus –Professor Elizabeth Kendall & Associate Professor Jago Dodson This workshop is hosted by Griffith Social & Behavioural Research College  Monday 3 June 10.00 - 11.30am Gold Coast campus – G06_3.18 Professor Suzanne Chambers & Dr Thomas Haselhorst  Tuesday 4 June 10.00 – 11.30am Nathan campus – N54_2.02 Professor Zhihong Xu & Professor Jason Sharman

3. Office for Research Key Dates: ARC Discovery Projects Future Fellowships Rejoinders to OR by Thursday 30 May Submitted externally on Tuesday 4 June Discovery Projectsexpect early June DECRAexpect mid June  You will have approx 10 days to respond  Check ARC Important Dates for updates

4. Office for Research Key Dates: NHMRC Project Grants Applicant Response Tuesday 11 June – Friday 21 June Periods (allocated)Tuesday 2 July – Friday 12 July 5 days from date of End of day deadline for submission to rebuttal letterOR (submit in MS Word to researchgrants@griffith.edu.au) researchgrants@griffith.edu.au 10 days* from date of5.00 pm deadline for submission to rebuttal letter NHMRC by applicant via RGMS * including weekends, not 7 business days

5. Office for Research  The Office for Research will read all responses  We will make sure all language used is appropriate Even if your assessment is highly critical it is important to respond calmly. Keep in mind that you are not replying to the assessor but you are demonstrating to the panel that you can address the concerns raised  Where time permits we will check for typos and to ensure that the important points have been addressed  We submit the rejoinders to the ARC (NHMRC are submitted by the applicant in RGMS) Our role

6. Office for Research The importance of your response  The assessor comments that you receive do not come from panel members, but from external reviewers  Only the members of the assessment panel receive your responses (NHMRC: one reviewer is on the panel)  The opinion of the panel members carries far more weight than the opinion of the external assessors  Your response could make the difference between being in the top 10% of unsuccessful applicants and being awarded the grant

7. Office for Research  Assume that you are close to the cut-off score and that this response might get you over the line Critical assessments don’t always correlate with unsuccessful applications  Respond positively to all the major points raised, particularly concerns about your approach/methods Consider the assessment criteria  Never criticise the assessors – even if you think they deserve it! Tips for Writing - General

8. Office for Research  Have someone else read over or edit your response OR does not have the capacity to conduct extensive structural or grammatical editing.  Use simple, active tense over wordy passive sentences. ‘This method will’ over ‘The intention of this method is to…’  Familiarise yourself with the formatting requirements of your scheme. Tips for Writing - General

9. Tips for Writing – Structure and Format  You need to manage the space available to you. Efficient use of space is key!  Organise your rejoinder so that it is clear which questions/comments you are addressing. Some people choose to have a section for each assessor or a section for each feedback criteria (ie. Scientific quality, Budget etc). This will largely depend on your personal preference or the content of the feedback.  Reference the question you are addressing clearly BUT do not waste space quoting large sections of assessor comment. Abbreviate, title, or paraphrase succinctly.  Make it easy to read. The Panel will have done a lot of reading by the time they get to your response. Office for Research

10. Tips for Writing – Critical Feedback The assessor has noted a mistake or omission in the application…  Acknowledge the oversight and provide the correct reference, missing information or reassure the panel of your actual intention It’s all bad!! I don’t have space to address all of the feedback…  Often it’s not as bad as it seems – we see a lot of assessor responses and hear from researchers who are concerned that they have ‘been slammed’ in the review. Very often these are relatively moderate responses.  You need to prioritise and address the queries that are ‘deal breakers.’ Address critical issues such as feasibility or scientific quality before smaller issues such minor budget concerns. Office for Research

11. Tips for Writing – Critical feedback They have asked for information that is already in the application….  Address the query/comment briefly and reference the section of the application in which it is covered Two of my assessors have given great feedback and the other one is very critical…  Generally you should assume that if 1 in 3 assessors has raised a concern then potentially 1 in 3 panel members may have the same concern – so you should address or rebut it  Do not just rely on the good feedback of other assessors but you can certainly utilise it. For example; Feasibility Assessor 3 has questioned A element of the project’s feasibility due to the risk of B. We will be employing X, Y, Z strategies to ensure that Y is minimised. Assessor 1 has noted that our experience and success in X and Y are world class. Office for Research

12. Tips for Writing – Good feedback Should I thank the reviewers?  This is personal preference. Many people lead with a line thanking the reviewers for their feedback as a courtesy (regardless of whether the feedback is good or bad) … BUT… make sure it is brief. Should I reiterate good feedback to make sure the Panel sees it?  Avoid quoting large paragraphs of assessor comments back. Your space could be better used to address concerns.  Find smart ways to incorporate positive comments back into your rejoinder. All the feedback is positive…  Congratulations  Utilise the opportunity to address any small issues or concerns Office for Research

13. Tips for Writing It is never appropriate or advisable to;  Be sarcastic, caustic or aggressive towards the assessors  To suggest that the assessors are incompetent, ignorant or worse  To express your hope that the panel has ‘better sense’ than the external reviewer/s or similar  To suggest that the reviewers have ‘clearly not read’ your application properly We have seen all of the above and worse. Office for Research

14. Based on feedback from successful grant recipients and panel reviewers.  Submit a rejoinder – non submission is poorly regarded  Rejoinders really can make a difference  Keep it clear, simple and respectful The final word

15. Office for Research Office for Research Contacts RMS Info 373 57784ore-grants@griffith.edu.au RGMS Info 1800 500 983help@nhmrc.gov.au NHMRC – Rebecca Marshallsay 555 29106r.marshallsay@griffith.edu.au ARC Future Fellowships – Kath Murrie-Jones ARC Discovery - Rhiannon Campbell ARC DECRA Nicky Church 555 29107 373 54100 373 58029 k.murrie-jones@griffith.edu.au r.campbell@griffith.edu.au n.church@griffith.edu.au