1. Expertise of the Proposed Fellow
   The fellow should have the potential to develop a long-term research relationship with Warwick and ability to deliver any proposed outputs from the fellowship. Research track record including publications (number & quality), patents, commissioned reports etc. conference & other presentations invited talks, evidence of previous funding awarded, other esteem indicators such as prizes and awards, other research outputs? Evidence of interdisciplinarity? Synergy with the nominating team and the wider research environment at Warwick (e.g. GRPs). Evidence of the Fellow’s existing collaborative research outside their home institution?
2. Expected outcomes of the collaboration
   The fellowship should seek to produce outcomes which support the development of future collaborations. In addition to research outputs it is also expected that the fellowship will support the career development of the fellow and, if not already the case, help in the establishment of an academic career. Are the proposed outputs feasible or can they be progressed as proposed within the period of the fellowship? Will the fellowship establish or further cement future long-term collaborations and is there a suitable plan to develop these (e.g. joint publications and applications for further research funding)? Is the potential impact on the career development of the fellow demonstrated?
3. Schedule and description of proposed activities during the fellowship
   During their stay, it is anticipated that alongside research, the Fellow will contribute to a number of activities targeting a variety of cross-disciplinary audiences. These may include activities such as, lectures, performances, exhibitions, seminars or workshops aimed at an interdisciplinary audience, cross-university and/or cross-sector meetings, one-to-one exploration of further collaborative opportunities with groups/individuals in other areas; a focussed conference or workshop to create collaboration opportunities with researchers from other UK institutions, working with the Institute of Advanced Teaching & Learning to develop collaborative teaching activities. To what extent do the activities proposed during the fellowship; (1) Deliver the short and long-term outputs proposed? (2) Engage with an interdisciplinary audience beyond the immediate host department? (3) Develop the skills and experience of the fellow?

Scores

Zero (0) - Fails to address the criterion or cannot be assessed due to missing or incomplete information

Poor (0-2) - Criterion is addressed in an inadequate manner, or there are serious inherent weaknesses

Fair (2-4) - while the proposal broadly addresses the criterion, there are significant weaknesses

Good (4-6) - Addresses the criterion well, but a number of shortcomings are present.

Very good (6-8) - Addresses the criterion very well, but a small number of shortcomings are present.

Excellent (8-10) - Successfully addresses all relevant aspects of the criterion. Any shortcomings are minor