[IGFmaglist] suggested workshop grading scale descriptions - merging of proposals
Flavio Rech Wagner
flavio at inf.ufrgs.br
Tue Apr 14 08:57:15 EDT 2015
Regarding the merging of proposals, I don't think we should consider the
option "should be merged with another" in the same grading scale from 1
If, as an example, a proposal receives scores 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, and 4 from
six different MAG members, its final average score is 2.5. This does not
mean, however, that people agree that this proposal has a good potential
to be merged with some other proposal, since potential for merging can
be evaluated acoording to different criteria.
I would prefer to have a "tick box" in addition to the score, whereby
evaluators could indicate that the proposal, independently from the
score it receives, has a good potential to be merged.
> Dear MAG colleagues,
> Based upon input from the last virtual meeting, how do the following
> grading scale descriptions sit with everyone?
> 1 = proposal has serious problems
> 2 = should not be accepted
> (2.5 = should be merged with another)
> 3 = borderline
> 4 = could be accepted
> 5 = must be accepted
> Please don't hesitate to share your thoughts.
> Susan Chalmers
> susan at chalmers.associates
> *CHALMERS* & ASSOCIATES
> Igfmaglist mailing list
> Igfmaglist at intgovforum.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Igfmaglist