As we stumble towards the end of 2017, our heads spinning with fake news and fake news about fake news, it's time to look back and think: well, we've got Trump and May, but at least Fundermentals is still doing lookalikes.
Yes, readers, the world may be a bizarre place at the moment but there are certain things you can rely on. And so, as 2017 shudders to a halt, we take a look back at what's tickled your fancy in the year of covfefe.
Showing posts with label summary. Show all posts
Showing posts with label summary. Show all posts
Sunday, 31 December 2017
Fundermentals Top Ten of 2017
Labels:
BBC,
Brexit,
comment,
ECRs,
Impact,
internal peer review,
Julie Bayley,
Kay Guccione,
Mark Reed,
Paul Woodgate,
Pay,
Roger Blake,
Schrodinger's Cat,
summary,
Top 10,
top ten,
Wellcome
Monday, 22 March 2010
EPSRC JeS Summary: 'Suppose Sarkozy has a Wedding...'
In a recent update from the Maths Programme of the EPSRC, the Council gave some useful tips on completing the Summary section of the JeS form. This is often overlooked, but is crucial to the application: it's often the first place that reviewers and panel members look. It's a good way to get your foot in the door, to persuade them to read the rest of the proposal.They highlight the need to keep it simple, and understandable to a general audience.
They quote Dr Shaun Stevens, an EPSRC Leadership Fellow, who suggested that applicants should 'make it accessible -- so minimal technical language: certainly none at the beginning and, where there is some, it should be explained. I would say there are (at least) two approaches: either treat it like a summary of a popular lecture, so it is in teaching mode, explaining basic concepts at the beginning and then trying to give a vague idea of the mathematics involved; or do it by analogy (a la Sarkozy) without really explaining any of the mathematics at all.'
They quote Dr Shaun Stevens, an EPSRC Leadership Fellow, who suggested that applicants should 'make it accessible -- so minimal technical language: certainly none at the beginning and, where there is some, it should be explained. I would say there are (at least) two approaches: either treat it like a summary of a popular lecture, so it is in teaching mode, explaining basic concepts at the beginning and then trying to give a vague idea of the mathematics involved; or do it by analogy (a la Sarkozy) without really explaining any of the mathematics at all.'
If you are curious about the Sarkozy reference take a look at Shaun's grant proposal from 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
