I submitted my application on April 1 and it was rejected after three weeks. I strongly believe there was an oversight. Even though I mentioned that I started a startup company in my personal statement I didn’t select options related to it because I didn’t have the required evidence. However, the response I got clearly shows a different response.
Documents I submitted: Mandatory Evidence submitted
Published material in professional or major trade publications or major media about the applicant related to the applicant’s work in the digital sector.
You command a high salary or other remuneration for your services
You have held or held a significant expert role in assessing the work of others.
Optional Criteria 1
Documentation on product designs or architecture diagrams clearly showing your contribution
Evidence of GitHub account that contains lines of code
Evidence of commanding high salary and employment
Optional Criteria 3
Evidence of at least one significant contribution via publication
Letters of support
Evidence of awards received for outstanding applied (PhD)
Evidence of awards received for outstanding applied work
Tech nation response:
The applicant has not met the criteria for exceptional Promise. Whilst the applicant is a strong AI & ML researcher at the University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, the applicant has not provided evidence proving him to have the potential to be a leader in digital technology. Whilst his research and peer-reviewed work are plentiful, he does not have a public profile, has not spoken at tech events, and has not provided evidence on mentoring. Whilst the applicant started a business and has 2 clients, evidence of its commercial success or technological contributions has not been provided.
OC1, example of proof of recognition for work beyond the applicant’s occupation has not been met. Whilst the applicant has strong Github contributions (46 repositories, 130 stars) it is not clear that this has been created beyond the applicant’s occupation as a researcher.
OC2, 1 example of exceptional ability in the field by academic contributions has been met. The applicant has provided evidence of one publication authored by him 5 years ago in 2017 (6 citations) and has provided citation links. He has also provided evidence of his peer reviewed documents and his 9 publications
I am preparing the appropriate response to the issues raised in my application and I would appreciate any input or advice on how to go about it.
@Jay Your case is very similar to mine, I also applied as an AI/ML candidate. I was told by the assessors that I met OC4 which is academic contribution to the field of Tech. I got endorsed after I asked for a review.
(1) Do you have any conference papers you presented? That might help your case on the question “You haven’t spoken at tech event” raised by the assessors.
(2) I think OC1 is innovation and OC2 is recognition of work outside your occupation going by Tech Nation’s standard.
(3) If you are using your repo to show contributions outside of your day-to-day work try to reiterate the projects you worked on with others that are not work-related, the significance and the impact of the work and how many other contributors on such a project.
Thanks for the feedback. I submitted my review form and i made it clear that i didn’t select the options the assessment was based on. Also because i couldn’t submit additional docs I pointed out the options i selected for manadatory criteria : 7,8,9 and from the response the reviwer didn’t look. i selected oc3 and 0c4 for the optional criteria. I work as a research fellow so these options were best for me. How long did your review process take?
I am trying to study the so called tech nation and seems they are bias in their decisions and most cases doesn’t check evidences in details . Their is also online racism. Most African applicants are rejected on first application until some apply for review and then endorsed while people from other regions get endorsed sometime within few days . Are saying Africans aren’t worth it or what! Do they mean that Africans can’t contribute to tech sector enough!
What’s the basis of your allegation of racism? How many applicants do you know with such cases before drawing this conclusion? I think making such accusations because your application was not endorsed is uncharitable. Would you have said this if your application was endorsed? Sometimes a rejected application is simply an opportunity for you to make clarifications in you application especially for some people who provided limited information in their application. There’s always human error but calling this racism is out of line. I do not speak for Tech Nation, this entitled mentality doesn’t help. There are other visa programs for other countries where you don’t have a review process, since there is a review process simply use it or move on and stop sounding racist with your comment.
I stand to be corrected Most Africans I know how have applied we’re rejected on first attempt. This is first hand information. If you didn’t experience this then good for you.
My application was initially refused but the feedback gave me an opportunity to clarify my evidence. I know many people who got it at first attempt. What’s your own statistics of rejection ? If you don’t present your application well don’t expect to get it endorsed at once. There are clearly gaps in your application, don’t make it a racial issue
Point out any evidence that was not considered in the initial application, this is possible when you submit up to 10 documents.
Also point any feedback that contradicts the information provided in the tech nation guide. An assessor may mix up your evidence and put them in the wrong eligibility criteria, state it if that’s the case.
If an assessor undermines your contribution because they don’t know much about the importance in your country, give statistics or explain giving examples that compares to a similar organisation in the UK. It may be possible an assessor has limited knowledge on the weight of your application let them know if your claims are verifiable online.
Importantly, don’t be rude or show so much anger such that a review panel misses the point you are trying to communicate. See your case as a possible error of judgement, misinterpretation of the guide or an oversight, that way you help a review panel get a sense of what is amiss and agree with your claims if it is truly the case.
Write very clear English, don’t make sentences with multiple interpretations. Sometimes our evidence may be misconstrued.
I do not speak for Tech Nation, this is my experience from supporting many applicants with their application.
I think the Tech Nation visa is a beautiful route that has some high standards but even at that I get a sense of them really evaluating each case individually on the merit of the evidences supplied. They know mistakes can be made and hence the appeal/review process. I don’t see any foundation for the kind of claims you are making here and on other threads.
reapplication and i used the same documents. I only asked one of referee’s to write more about projects we did compared to to the previous one which was more research based
@Legendguru let us be careful of how we throw certain words. I applied once and got endorsed once. I know at least 5 folks from West Africa that applied once and got it once. One of them got her decision in 8 days.
It is all about how well done your application is. Nothing more. I think folks are applying with a biased mindset and once they get rejected they run towards the easiest excuse, instead of being humbled enough to figure out what is missing and reapply or contest the decision.
Do not forget, your application is about telling a compelling story. You can be Elon Musk (pardon the exageration) and still be rejected if the narrative is wrong or you didn’t show the right evidence.
