Just curious if anyone is prepping for a submission this cycle and what their experiences/thoughts are on the application changes.
My general impression is that the new instructions "Strongly convey a need for action but are vague enough to not be actionable." Things like developing the scientific premise and discussing the strengths and weaknesses of previous research seem like things that are already done in every application (at least fundable ones), but they now imply this needs to be done...differently...without giving much guidance on how. I have no idea if I even need an authentication section, let alone how to write one. Nor does my program official.
Anyways, don't expect anyone to have answers and I realize this will all likely remain a question mark until a few cycles down the road when reviewers start settling in and we know what to expect. Just wondering if anyone else is dealing with the same issue.
My general impression is that the new instructions "Strongly convey a need for action but are vague enough to not be actionable." Things like developing the scientific premise and discussing the strengths and weaknesses of previous research seem like things that are already done in every application (at least fundable ones), but they now imply this needs to be done...differently...without giving much guidance on how. I have no idea if I even need an authentication section, let alone how to write one. Nor does my program official.
Anyways, don't expect anyone to have answers and I realize this will all likely remain a question mark until a few cycles down the road when reviewers start settling in and we know what to expect. Just wondering if anyone else is dealing with the same issue.
