Responding to feedback
The reviewers will list issues for amendment. On resubmission you should make explicit how you have responded to each point under each item in full on a separate sheet and highlight where such amendments have been made into the resubmitted application.
Note: Listing amendments in this way will speed up the process of review. Unless you have completely redesigned your research and therefore are submitting a new application, the reviewer should not be expected to review the entire document to search out your amendments.
Please note, FREGC reviewers do this work in addition to their normal workloads. They invest considerable time and effort in scrutinising documentation to assure quality in proposals being submitted for external review and to ensure that the research is of a suitable standard to comply with the university's ethics and governance framework.
It is the researcher’s responsibility to make the documentation clear, complete and concise. If a reviewer has misunderstood your proposal, this is probably because it has not been explained with clarity and supported with a sound rationale. Responding to reviewers’ comments and making amendments should be considered part of the learning process and/or valuable feedback on work in progress. Ungracious response to feedback will be referred to the Chair and may result in the application being rejected.
