CASE Studentship Open Competition
Assessment criteria
The CASE Studentships Open Competition promotes partnership between eligible research organisations (research organisation partner) and public or private organisations (CASE partner). The CASE partner should have provided the initial impetus and requirements for the studentship and will provide additional funds to the student. CASE projects should offer sound training in the methods of research. The involvement of the CASE partner should provide real added value to the studentship; those proposals where the CASE partner is only providing access to data, samples and equipment will not be funded.
The four criteria for assessment of CASE Studentship Open Competition proposals, and their percentage weightings are listed below. All applications, whether to one of the four priority areas or not, will be assessed using the same criteria.
- Does the collaboration with the CASE partner lead to clear benefits for the student and the project?
(eg benefits to the student from this involvement, support to be provided to the student and opportunities made available to them, the level of buy-in to the project from the CASE partner, access to facilities and equipment necessary for the studentship) (30% weighting)
- Is the topic relevant and likely to produce high quality science? Is the research area likely to provide a stimulating and tractable topic for the student?
(eg are the hypotheses and questions well formulated, can the PhD be completed in four years including writing up and submission, is there a feasible plan of action, does the work offer genuine scope for doctoral research, is the fieldwork appropriate) (30% weighting)
- Will the student receive adequate generic and specialist training?
(eg quality of training provided by the research organisation and CASE partner, are there areas of training that have been omitted) (20% weighting)
- Are the supervisors sufficiently experienced and expert in the field, and are they research active?
(eg are the research areas of the supervisors relevant to the proposed work, are the assessment and monitoring procedures and supervisory contact adequate) (20% weighting)
For all proposals that are ranked and recommended for funding, the fieldwork costs and exceptional consumables costs will be discussed to ensure that they are appropriate for the work to be carried out.
