Why does it take so long from submission to the funding decision?
To ensure that the review process is as fair and transparent as possible, there is a multi-stage review process. At least two scientific reviews and one educational review are obtained for each project. If there are major discrepancies between the two scientific reports, a third, also independent report is obtained from an international expert.
On the basis of the reviews, the OeAD produces an initial ranking. However, experience has shown that the quality of project applications is very high and it is often nuances that determine whether or not funding is granted. For this reason, selected projects that are right on the border between funding and non-funding are reviewed once again by the members of the Scientific Advisory Board. All these processes take time.
What do the reviewers look for when assessing a project application?
The scientific review is based on the indicators in the special guidelines, p. 31, point 15.1. The structure of the detailed project description should follow the recommendation in the ‘Guidelines for Submission’ (available online at the start of the call), as the applications are scientifically reviewed based on these questions.
The educational assessors pay attention to the following components:
- The methodological concept for the collaboration between scientists, pupils, teachers and, if applicable, other citizen scientists (e.g. the ability to integrate the programme into everyday school life)
- The added value for the participating pupils, teachers and, if applicable, other citizen scientists
- The planned long-term cooperation (e.g. the activities with the partner school after completion of the research project)
Who will review the project application in the event of a resubmission?
resubmitted applications will not be sent to reviewers who have already evaluated the project in the previous call, i.e. new reviewers will be consulted.
Are there requirements for the positive and negative lists of reviewers?
Yes, applicants can nominate up to 3 academic reviewers for their application(s). A maximum of 1 review will be obtained from the reviewers on the positive list, provided the following requirements are met:
- The recommended scientific reviewers must be experts in the field of research covered by the application or in the method used, if this is relevant for the assessment of the application.
- The reviewers must be German-speaking, but must NOT have their research focus in Austria.
- If possible, the recommended reviewers should be professors or have corresponding publication lists and thus be eligible as experts for the evaluation of the application due to their specific expertise.
- Possible conflicts of interest and biases, e.g. joint publications or co-authorships, supervisory relationships (e.g. doctoral supervisor), kinship, planned close scientific collaborations, etc., must be ruled out.
Applicants also have the option of excluding up to 3 reviewers from the review (negative list). When excluding reviewers, reasons must be given as to why this person is being excluded. A typical reason for exclusion would be a school dispute, for example.
When will the projects find out whether they are funded or not?
The funding decision is expected to be announced at the end of May 2024 so that the schools involved can be informed in good time before the summer holidays.
Will the evaluators' evaluation be sent to the applicants?
Yes, all applicants will receive the anonymised evaluations after the funding decision has been made.