# data[].attributes.headline
Is there anything that should be more concrete?

# data[].attributes.subject
Is there anything that should be more concrete?

# data[].attributes.headline
Is it ok to not mention the key variables from this study, namely cue-utilization, cue-value perception accuracy, and cue-validity awareness in the summary? (it may get too complicated and too long to explain)

# data[].attributes.subject
Is it ok to not mention the key variables from this study, namely cue-utilization, cue-value perception accuracy, and cue-validity awareness in the summary? (it may get too complicated and too long to explain)

# data[].attributes.headline
Should I also describe why this is timely (and why is it timely???)

# data[].attributes.subject
Should I also describe why this is timely (and why is it timely???)

# data[].attributes.headline
Is the importance/urgency of this project clear? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Is the importance/urgency of this project clear? 

# data[].attributes.headline
Is the proposal understandable? I use quite some terms/jargon and I’m afraid that it is very hard to follow now. Is this the case and what could help to make it easier to understand? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Is the proposal understandable? I use quite some terms/jargon and I’m afraid that it is very hard to follow now. Is this the case and what could help to make it easier to understand? 

# data[].attributes.headline
The part where I discuss the actual studies is quite long. Is this understandable? Reviewers won’t spend a long time on reading the proposal so I’m afraid it is too long and hard to get an overview of the studies easily. Is this the case? And what could help? 

# data[].attributes.subject
The part where I discuss the actual studies is quite long. Is this understandable? Reviewers won’t spend a long time on reading the proposal so I’m afraid it is too long and hard to get an overview of the studies easily. Is this the case? And what could help? 

# data[].attributes.headline
For the vidi, one has to show that it is aimed at building a new research line; is this clear or does it look too much as if I’m just continuing what I’m doing? If it looks like I’m just continuing what I’m doing, at what points did you get this idea and what could I do to prevent this?

# data[].attributes.subject
For the vidi, one has to show that it is aimed at building a new research line; is this clear or does it look too much as if I’m just continuing what I’m doing? If it looks like I’m just continuing what I’m doing, at what points did you get this idea and what could I do to prevent this?

# data[].attributes.body
You might translate 'Towards' in the NL summary vertalen as 'Op naar..' ?

# data[].attributes.body
I'm still not sure whether to go for primary or secondary education. in primary education, students' levels differ and teachers differentiate more so this topic might be more relevant for primary education. Yet, the profiles that I use (struggling/strong students) from Seidel come from secondary education (no research on that in primary education) and Tina Seidel indicated that she would be worried that students' self-concept in primary education is less differentiated (all quite high). Also, a practical reason for me would be to go for secondary education because I have a much larger network of teachers in secondary education....

# data[].attributes.body
We wonder whether you should mention somewhere that also factors like ses and etnicity influence teachers' expectations - but that you will not focus on this for now (and why) - this might also matter when you design your vignetes: will the appearance of children or the way they talk play a role?

# data[].attributes.body
Het voorstelgoed opgebouwd en je hebt een prettige schrijfstijl

# data[].attributes.body
This is a hot topic, and we think your proposal fits right in. You might be able to write about this a bit, what will you bring to teachers to become more objective -> provide equal opportunities

# data[].attributes.body
It would be useful to have some more information about the possible subjects this judgement accuracy is most relevant for. For example presentations/essays or spelling/grammar tests. It could be helpful to include these examples

# data[].attributes.body
We think the way you consequently briefly explain jargon by using () works very well

# data[].attributes.body
We (M, E and I) were a bit confused by the term 'paradigm': this has a very fundamental connotation and made us think of more research paradigms ("interpretative"). What do you mean by this? And would there by other words that could describe this? Perspective maybe?

# data[].attributes.body
It is a bit confusing that the words in the figure are the same, it may need a bit more inormation

# data[].attributes.body
The focus on the phd work and the post doc work is clear, but you might show more what your unique role and tasks (that justifies the work time you ask for) are

# data[].attributes.body
Tijdens het lesgeven zijn er naast inschatting van de performance ook nog heel veel andere overwegingen waarop docenten hun acties baseren (motivatie van leerlingen, persoonlijke vorming van leerlingen). Jouw studie zou aan die overwegingen iets toe kunnen voegen, namelijk wat wel/niet relevant is voor het inschatten van de prestaties van leerlingen. Een "perfect" accuraat oordeel is daarin misschien niet realistisch (we zijn immers geen robots), maar het zou oordelen van docenten wellicht aanzienlijk kunnen verbeteren. Soms kregen we een beetje het idee dat docentschap en wat docenten in de praktijk kunnen realiseren wat nuance misten, dus dit is een beetje een samenvatting voor hoe je dat zou kunnen aanvliegen.

# data[].attributes.body
You mention the need for a review relatively late, maybe show this earlier in the text.