Sie sind auf Seite 1von 1

Guidelines and Criteria for Judging of FAOBMB 2012 YSP-Travel Fellowship Applications

Components of YSP assessment

1. Education (CV): Rate the educational achievements, as well as research and other experience
of the applicant. Allow for justifiable training and career interruptions.

2. Publications: Rate the list of publications in international peer-reviewed journals, and book
chapters. Place less weight on local and non-peer reviewed publications.

3. Abstract: Rate the quality of the research to be presented at the FAOBMB Congress as
described in the abstract (irrespective of whether the work has been published or not). [Note that as not all applicants have specified the authors of their abstract, it is important to assess here the content of the abstract, rather than the contribution of the applicant].

4. Reference/Personal Statement: As a composite score, rate the support given by the referee
as well as the content of the personal statement that reflects the motivation of the applicant. Please use whole numbers (integers) for scoring. Please do not use half marks. Enter your scores on the Excel spreadsheet provided, in the range 0-10 for each component. Four components, each maximally of 10 points, thus could generate a maximum possible score of 40. Please use the guide to YSP scoring bands, set out below in determining your numerical score rating for each component. YSF scoring bands Recognising the subjective character of numerical scores, the following advice is provided on the degree of merit associated with specified scoring bands, as a guide. Note that the standards to be applied here are those relevant to early career researchers (ECR) in the late stages of their PhD training or their postdoctoral period (as per eligibility rules for YSP-Travel Fellowships at FAOBMB Congress, which state: Applicants must be no more than 35 years of age at the closing date for application). Scoring band 9-10 7-8 5-6 3-4 0-2 Criteria Outstanding: Of the highest merit, at the forefront of quality for international research by ECR individuals in the field. Excellent: Strongly competitive at international levels. Very good: An interesting, sound, application. Good: A sound application, but lacks a compelling element. Fair - Flawed: The application has potential, but requires development to be supportable.