arc-tracker.bsky.social
Part human, part bot, 100% UNOFFICIAL. I track Australian Research Council grant outcomes. Bot checks outcomes announcements each min. DMs open. FAQ: https://tinyurl.com/ARC-Tracker-FAQ
851 posts
3,727 followers
0 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
More and more I suspect this delay is out of the ARC’s control and that the Minister is intervening somehow. (Or the Board, but I doubt that more.) Why would be intervening?? I don’t really have anything more than guesses.
comment in response to
post
I'm not so sure. We will see.
comment in response to
post
I'm indeed wondering whether there's something beyond the ARC's control going on here. Not sure about cancelling schemes though – that would be catastrophic for trust in the ARC, amongst industry as well. But something is afoot.
comment in response to
post
will 25R2 be extended? if one 24R2 is unsuccessful but near miss (ranked 65th among 200 apps) then a resubmission will be 26R1, the industry will walk away
comment in response to
post
Absolutely one of the things they should be telling people right now. But, like all the other things, sadly not.
comment in response to
post
It severely undercuts industry trust in these schemes. I am not sure I would try to persuade my industry partners to have a crack at LP anymore.
comment in response to
post
I really don't know what's going on. Neither do the people who I normally turn to for sage advice. The ARC may not realise that they're actively ruining some research projects here … it seems to just pass them by.
comment in response to
post
So many things left unsaid
comment in response to
post
Yeah, I just posted that (same on twitter and, apparently, Facebook a DMer tells me). Why do they do this?
Everyone: ARC grants are, like, really late now.
ARC: Grants are delayed. Thanks for understanding.
Everyone: But why?
ARC: THANKS FOR UNDERSTANDING!
comment in response to
post
They are very good at getting others to do something for them. Consistent and persistent comms. But when it comes to them doing something for researchers … not so much.
comment in response to
post
Full article (paywalled) at www.researchprofessionalnews.com/rr-news-aust...
comment in response to
post
I really cannot see any reason why the Board would not have signed off after the caretaker period finished (13th May) and the ARC immediately proceed to notify applicants ASAP. It's ridiculous.
comment in response to
post
The kicker here is that ministerial sign-off is not required for these grants. But the ARC Board may not have wanted to sign-off during caretaker so as not to (appear to) “bind a future government”. This is just a guess and I don’t really know their reasoning.
comment in response to
post
Data ▶️ docs.google.com/spreadsheets...
comment in response to
post
Apparently the official end of caretaker was 13 May. They may not have approved before that to avoid (being perceived to be) “binding the future government”. But, whatever, why haven’t they got on with it and done it since then regardless!
comment in response to
post
It’s *always* better to do a rejoinder! I have got a grant once in exactly the situation you describe. Get help with it!
comment in response to
post
I just don’t understand why they can’t communicate with researchers about this stuff. Why?!?
comment in response to
post
The new shadow is Senator Jonathon Duniam representing Tasmania.
His "first speech" in the Senate was the usual stuff but, poignantly, recalls how his wife's family sought asylum in Australia after fleeing the dictatorship in Albania.
comment in response to
post
I don't know. Sorry. I haven't even heard the first=highest rank thing before. That is certainly possible! But so would be, for example, first=first referee to post their assessment.
comment in response to
post
Is this related to why announcements for Linkage Projects & Laureate Fellowships are delayed?
Maybe RMS couldn’t handle new grants being awarded when the other changes were being made?
Why doesn’t the ARC tell anyone what’s going on?
Simple transparency & expectations management would be nice.
comment in response to
post
Having said the above I often pass on info that I'm sent by researchers regarding when rejoinders have become available. But you'll get an email from the ARC, I think, when it happens.
comment in response to
post
No, there's no way for me to track that. Normally they're released around this time, so expect it soon. Having said that, there was a massive RMS outage over most of last night, so who knows what is going on over there. I'm preparing some posts that might – or might not – explain part of it.
comment in response to
post
Hard agree
comment in response to
post
With the LP25 R2 closing in June, and LP26 not till next March, this is a bit of a disaster!
comment in response to
post
Never attribute to malice …
comment in response to
post
That is a worrying thought, but I don't think it's likely. But I will see what I can find out.
comment in response to
post
Important correction:
"… but I've NOT had reports of this so far" !!
comment in response to
post
I’ve not had any reports that anyone knows their outcome under embargo. Sometimes Laureates get told a few days before the announcement (phone call from the ARC CEO) but I’ve had reports of this so far.
comment in response to
post
I doubt that the Board would allow Ministerial interference of that sort, since they now approve grants. (I also doubt the current Minister would do that, but of course I don’t know). I don’t know whether this is some weird operational hold-up/stuff-up or something to do with the Board.
comment in response to
post
And why bother testing it when (a) they didn't test the previous way of doing it and, (b) it's generated by the fundamental problem of lack of funds anyway? [rhetorical!]
comment in response to
post
Yep, that's the problem. ARC would argue – not a *counter*, mind, just a defence/deflection – that College of Experts are well placed to rank them on this basis, at least well enough to find the "best" ~25% to pass to 2nd stage.
Safe in the knowledge that they will never actually test this idea…
comment in response to
post
Part of the price paid for not funding research (& ARC) properly. Low success rates —> More people putting more effort into more proposals —> More demand on everyone's time. The EOI process is an attempt to address these flow-on effects. A Band-Aid. Something has to give, & feedback on EOIs is it.
comment in response to
post
They can, and they should. But will they? Not sure. They have already adjusted LP submission deadlines due to other delays, but not for LP25r2 like you're asking about. Ask your Research Office to ask them to adjust it – that's the best way!
comment in response to
post
They’d find a way to lose that info…
comment in response to
post
Ha! I will do that!
There is also the Australian Resuscitation Council … if only they could resuscitate research careers!