Read on Twitter
after getting twitter-rejected yesterday, i finally got the results of my application. i've been sharing my 'successes' on twitter so it's time to do some reflection on this rejection openly. #AcademicTwitter #AcademicChatter https://twitter.com/MSCActions/status/1358743197288173570
on the contrary to common belief, it's very common to get rejections in academia. manuscripts, job & funding applications.. my understanding is not the ones who never fail become successful but those who learn the lessons and do not become discouraged to try again ( #resilience)
i know this but it still hurts. this time- i didn't score high, but i also am not disappointed. i did pretty well last year during the pandemic. wrote&defended my thesis, found an exciting path to follow for my postdoc, finalized an MS, attended&organized many scientific events.
in the middle of everything, somewhat unexpected, i decided to apply for this funding with a subject that i tbh do not have much experience but i am very enthusiastic about. i've read a lot & wrote a project that didn't get criticism - which i see as a positive aspect.
still, much to improve next time. i didn't get very detailed feedback but at least the major issues were pointed. tbh now thinking about it i agree with those but didn't even think about some when writing.
1) the biggest issue was that i didn't have the chance to spend time to go through the text multiple times, get feedback, and see the problems myself before the reviewers did. so lesson 1: start early & get feedback from as much as possible.
lesson 2: next time, i need to find *multiple* successful applications and read in detail to see what they've done differently. and a public promise, if i ever manage to get funding, just let me know - happy to share my application.
3)i had a chat with people whose job is to know MSCA guidelines. they said my project doesn't involve human subjects&even though sex-dimorphism is relevant, gender aspects do not apply because gender≠sex. so no need to write about it unless my project specifically addresses this
either they are wrong or the reviewer didn't know it. lesson 3: follow the secure path. nobody would deduce points if i had discussed sex-dimorphism. but i have just chosen the lazy path.
4) my timeline was seen problematic unless collaborations are involved. lesson 4: the project should be ambitious but do not assume you have superpowers 
5) dissemination of results is a big part of MSCA and regarding the public engagement part - i said *how* i will communicate my results but didn't say *what* exactly i can communicate about my proposed research. well-detected by the reviewer 
lesson 5: do not limit the feedback just to science - ask what others think about other sections, they make half of the application.
I applied for smaller funding schemes before - some get funded some got rejected. never got a score or feedback though. this was helpful to see what to focus on next time. looking forward to the next round! 
