Revision as of 01:04, 9 February 2014

What is the potential for the proposed activity to

advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and

benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?

This is the weakest part of the proposal. The authors describe impacts which a narrowly focused on their specific subfield within nuclear physics. Either they do not take this requirement seriously or they are unable to find impacts that go beyond their sub-discipline.

To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?

Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?

How well qualified is the individual, team, or institution to conduct the proposed activities?

Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home institution or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 ==benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?==
-This is the weakest part of the proposal.  The authors do not appear to take this requirement seriously or are unable to fullfill this requirement.
+This is the weakest part of the proposal.  The authors describe impacts which a narrowly focused on their specific subfield within nuclear physics.  Either they  do not take this requirement seriously or they are unable to find impacts that go beyond their sub-discipline.
 =To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?=

Difference between revisions of "NSF Reviewer 2014"