I have bothering questions and I would appreciate it if someone could provide me with some clarity or any way I can reach Tech Nation themselves for Clarity.
I applied for Exceptional Promise last year and only got a yes for OC2 Criteria (Outside of Work). Now I applied again with the same OC2 evidence I submitted last year and It was not even reviewed. I submitted 3 evidence for OC2, I was told only one of the evidence passed out of the two whereas I submitted three!
The same goes with my Recommendation Letters, Just one of the three letters was flagged last year with the reason that the person recommending me was the one that placed me in a role. Now I switched that for my mentor who is a developer advocate and now they are flagging all 3 letters! Can we have some consistency at least? I understand it might be different assessors but at least this is the reason for guidelines. If Assessor A deemed it fit, Assessor B should not be flagging it in another application. It is so unfair.
I would appreciate it if someone could point me in the right direction cause now I don’t even know where to start.
Hi @Francisca_Chiedu in such cases where someone has cleared a couple of criteria in first attempt and reapply with new evidence only for the rejected criteria (same evidence for previously cleared criteria): would you recommend they mention a line in their PS or perhaps in previously cleared criteria documents that since this criteria was previously approved in the previous application, adding limited new evidence here?
I appealed my case but unfortunately, I was still denied. It is quite disheartening that there is no way to check and balance these things. After my appeal, they raised another issue of speaking in just one event (This is a major event with more than 300 attendees). It makes me wonder how many events I ought to have spoken at as a GLOBAL PROMISE. Mind you, I have friends who got endorsed with one event. Furthermore, in their response, they said I only had a publication in the year 2024 which is not true. I had publications in December 2023 and two more in 2024. They also mentioned the publications being generic?!. What are the yardsticks for a publication to be generic (What was mentioned was publications being about my work). My concerns still remain about the inconsistencies with the reviews. Why can’t they follow their guidelines diligently
Sorry your application was rejected. Generally speaking, I think adding evidence close to the time of your application weakens your evidence. Fir all your evidence you need to demonstrate a track record of contribution. Assesment of application is quite subjective, no too assessors look at applications the same way. Also consider that your friends may have applied before the guide was updated. Take the feedback and rework your application.
