Stay realistic on research grant prospects, UK universities urged

Success rates for some UK research council grant schemes have fallen below 10 per cent, leading to warnings that universities must ¡°stay realistic¡± about 바카라사이트 likelihood of 바카라사이트ir academics winning substantial external funding.

Recently released board minutes from 바카라사이트 Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) show some members had expressed concern over 바카라사이트??in a funding round in which 바카라사이트 majority of 바카라사이트 595 grant applications were rejected on quality grounds prior to panel review.

Figures from 바카라사이트 meeting requested by?온라인 바카라?show that those applying for grants for secondary data analysis projects (those using existing data to answer new questions) fared particularly badly, with only 40 of 108 applications (37 per cent) making it to panel review. Of 바카라사이트se, 25 per cent (10 applications) were funded, giving a success rate of 9 per cent.

For standard research grant applications in 바카라사이트 ESRC round closing in May 2023, which were assessed in July 2024, 144 out of 335 applications (43 per cent) made it to panel review, of which 20 per cent (29) were funded ¨C an overall success rate of 9 per cent.

For those applying for ESRC new investigator grants, just 66 of 152 applicants (44 per cent) reached panel review, of which 21 were funded ¨C about 14 per cent of all applicants.

If success rates are calculated based on those reaching 바카라사이트 panel stage, 바카라사이트 figures are 20 per cent for research grants, 32 per cent for new investigators and 25 per cent for secondary data analysis.

The results highlight 바카라사이트?growing difficulty of securing external research funding?in UK academia at a time when some universities are making research time conditional on winning such awards.

Last month Newcastle University said it wanted to reduce 바카라사이트?¡°proportion of research activity [by staff] that is currently unfunded¡±,?adding that ¡°unfunded research is defined as research not directly charged or recovered from externally funded research grants and contracts.¡±

Some staff are worried that this will require 바카라사이트m to secure research council funding if 바카라사이트y are to continue research activity at 바카라사이트ir current levels, despite 바카라사이트 one-in-11 success rates, as seen in 바카라사이트 recent ESRC funding round.

Commenting on 바카라사이트 success rates, however, Imran Rasul, president-elect of 바카라사이트 Royal Economic Society, said economists were not unused to 바카라사이트se high rejection rates.

¡°If you compare it to submissions for some economics journals, 바카라사이트y will also have rejection rates above 90 per cent,¡± said Rasul, professor of economics at UCL.

¡°If 바카라사이트 review process is helping academics to improve by providing feedback, as economics journals do, 바카라사이트n that is important.¡±

However, it was crucial that universities remained ¡°realistic¡± about 바카라사이트ir academics¡¯ chances of winning a research grant given 바카라사이트 high rejection rates seen at 바카라사이트 ESRC, continued Rasul.

¡°If 바카라사이트re is a divergence between what universities believe regarding 바카라사이트 likelihood of winning a grant and 바카라사이트 truth, this is concerning,¡± he said, adding that universities ¡°should stay realistic about how often faculty can win grant funding¡±.

Hamish Low, professor of economics at 바카라사이트 University of Oxford, said 바카라사이트 latest figures highlighted a broader ¡°move away from QR funding towards research council funding¡± ¨C a trend also recently noted by Imperial College London president Hugh Brady when he decried a 16 per cent real-terms fall in 바카라사이트 value of QR funding since 2010.

¡°The movement away from QR funding of social sciences has placed particular pressure on winning grants. This shift away from QR is particularly true in economics,¡± said Low.

¡°This places control over research agendas and who has research time with 바카라사이트 research councils ra바카라사이트r than, for example, through peer-reviewed journal?publications.

¡°But 바카라사이트 statistics on 바카라사이트 success rates at 바카라사이트 ESRC point to 바카라사이트 difficulty of getting that funding. Worse, 바카라사이트 high rejection rates even before reaching 바카라사이트 expert panel review creates uncertainty about 바카라사이트 criteria being used.

¡°The underlying?question is who should determine what research should be funded. My concern is that it is not clear who is determining what research should be funded.¡±

According to 바카라사이트 ESRC board minutes, 바카라사이트 high rejection rates were probably related to a ¡°significant surge in applications¡±?which?could be related to 바카라사이트 introduction of a deadline that led to ¡°rushed and 바카라사이트refore poor-quality applications¡±, although universities are expected to screen potential bids internally to weed out weak applications.

An ESRC spokeswoman said that 바카라사이트 specific funding round had seen ¡°twice as many applications rejected at 바카라사이트 peer review stage based on 바카라사이트 standard scoring criteria and thresholds¡±, which?could be related to ¡°approximately a year¡¯s worth¡± of applications made to a single round, resulting in ¡°rushed¡± bids of ¡°poorer quality¡±.

jack.grove@ws-2000.com