From: Subject: SSHRC Mentoring Workshop Date: Fri, 3 Sep 2010 09:12:55 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/related; type="multipart/alternative"; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001C_01CB4B48.31DFA520" X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5931 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01CB4B48.31DFA520 Content-Type: image/gif Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-Location: file:///C:/2289C636/Grantswriting2006_files/buttons.gif R0lGODlhWAESAPf4AAAAAIAAAACAAICAAAAAgIAAgACAgICAgAQEBISEBASEBISEhAQEhMTExAQE /KTM9Pz8/ERERPz8BAT8/KSkpGRkhMTcxCRkxAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMDAwP8AAAD/AP//AAAA//8A/wD//////yH5BAEAAPgALAAAAABYARIA QAj/APEJHEiwoMGDCBMqXMiwocOHECNKnEixosWLGCEiQKCRo8YDIEHig2DxAD4LKD1avDDhgUuV GUOGbHBR5QGYFBG4fHAB58EKECJEwCfUYAWPFGAygLCRKQIIUKM6WAohKUGgCikcFWh1INWoYKVS 7SrQ41GbIhGYLAuVQVOoC+IyXUuUAkG1HE3KFDhAwkgJc5/qDZmxsOHDiBMrXsy4sePDGyP7lChT 5MULmDPnlDw5YmW6FTNrfgi0aNGEZPEtbfo2bNTUpYeeRph69dPWrqvCNFuBIGG1A59CYPAVQtwF cw0OxWdTIOiBCQAjaAB17fOFII8voGmRc+eOkilm/z9OvTtnjN4hYk1YoT3H2rnBOphPAB9skgq3 2lcaX/5YnJVt9BloAar12UEIRGCZdQghMABI1Tn32IQUVthYexhmqGGGMBHAgIfEhSiiiATAtOGJ GnYI4ogsEldicAYOGNJGZaml3Y0L3NTZUBz1xlB0PUoUI0jlVWRSVN89xBKSGB1YU1TMoRfVBEle hR9HQs1GEHxQ3RZZbveZthxt/LEmXHyp5XWABSCpaRJwbM13gAACPHVccgJFgF+NEhqUAEkQSCfc ddhVhh5dVTaEAEsTUNlkZUWKN9BNGDE6QU8OrSdbllzpxyVTTrU21Uj3scfhp7nNpyoDaTIEJ3P9 If8J2kbLNYegg9JRBwGhFvbq66+ZUiDssMQWK2yHxiZLrInKNotss8l+B5yBrr5p2UIJvortANoC 6+234IbLla/elRtZjeamh5CC3Sb0YLvixivvYkDFGlZqBNh7r4n6goVvv6/ZlCicN+kL71ALTnpQ dCIZp7CihkLA3UQmoWRBogyxtBPGCTnZncVR1rSTo5nuydC/Eo8kUH+lOoTyyvjoCuZu+PjYIKLD rZybtrM1d10C0QXKEVz48GrQkEeWdFJKlbb0UmEeV0SzyC6RvNB646LWIVjUNeC1zAFb+RDKXksM 9r531bwmpQW9+hQDDsx5pqwDRWBXcFES2hc+gEn/wJGdEEWdE6LoWcoxQweaTNmkhydkKaYMYY2Q p1unbLl/pPKbn3v7EZRvrKvqlja2ONvrtoIw9tn2g32/tQBlhtYkU+MNikZ7QYlPDPuMldpOmuJX nVo5VF3HjI+q89mteX5IDd/fVFClma5kiE4f2XUJhlz09gj2NbTDRifkmu7zXjR++RVJ/lPznuvr QH2iD6S+UewP9Dnon6d2NLwN8n90BB6hC68cFMCHoe+ACASP9c4DowUyEF0OPFcDI0ij/VXPaAKC UfhS95AKGoQ7IBRICI1HwhGaUIQoLGEKT6jCFrLwhSuMoQtlCMMZ2rCGOKShDm+4wxzy8Ic+DGIP B4cIRCKGMCAAOw== ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01CB4B48.31DFA520 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_001_001F_01CB4B48.31E46010" ------=_NextPart_001_001F_01CB4B48.31E46010 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: mhtml:file://R:\Website\Archive Aug 23 2010 Old Research Web site\grants\documents\Grantswriting2006.mht!Grantswriting2006_files/frame.htm SSHRC Mentoring Workshop ------=_NextPart_001_001F_01CB4B48.31E46010 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: mhtml:file://R:\Website\Archive Aug 23 2010 Old Research Web site\grants\documents\Grantswriting2006.mht!file:///C:/2289C636/Grantswriting2006_files/outline.htm
=20  Notes
Slide Show
Outline
1


  • Presented by=20
  • Marc Fonda, Ph.D.=20
  • Assistant Director,=20
  • Strategic Programs and Joint Initiatives, SSHRC=20
2
  • Applications for a SSHRC Committee are adjudicated by a=20 disciplinary, multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary committees = depending on program.=20
  • The purpose of these committees is to consider the merits of = and=20 rank order all applications.=20
  • In general, the success rates across all the committees in = Standard=20 Grants are very similar. (range between 38% and 42%), in SPJI = programs=20 the success rate varies.
3

  • Committee membership is determined by the following = criteria:=20 Adequate representation of the various subfields and specialties = within=20 the discipline(s), and regional, linguistic, gender, and = generational=20 representation, as well as members from small, mid and large = size=20 universities. If an SPJI committee, members will have the = appropriate=20 expertise in face of the research being supported=20
  • But given the wide variety of disciplines applying to SSHRC, = it is=20 necessary to acknowledge the differences between = committee/disciplinary=20 culture.
4
  • Normally serve a maximum of three years=20
  • Normally have held a SSHRC Grant in the past=20
  • Possess written and oral comprehension of both official = languages=20
  • Agree to be governed by strict conflict of interest = guidelines=20
  • Take their tasks very seriously=20
  • Are often happy to share their insights with their = colleagues=20

5
  • Look for a  = natural fit=20 between your proposed research and an existing committee.=20
  • If appropriate consider the Interdisciplinary Committee in = SRGs=20
  • Merely having a program that might interest scholars in a = range of=20 fields is not sufficient.=20
  • Nor is simply attaching another perspective to your work = – they must=20 be integrated.=20
  • Remember that a committee with scholars in the same or = similar=20 discipline to yourself will likely be better placed to evaluate = your=20 record of research achievement, e.g. they will know the leading=20 journals/presses in your field. =
6
  •  Each = Committee member=20 receives copies of all the applications in binders (can reach = 150),=20
  •  Members are = expected to=20 be familiar with all the files in addition to having a detailed=20 knowledge of the files to which she or he was assigned.=20
  •  Very few = committee=20 members receive any course release for this service, and it is = not=20 unusual for them to spend twenty hours or more a week for seven = weeks in=20 preparation.=20
  •  Please bear = this in=20 mind. Committee members describe the work as fascinating and the = experience as rewarding, but it comes at considerable sacrifice = to their=20 own work and a shoddily-prepared application will not very well=20 received.
7
  • The purpose of the face to face meeting in Ottawa is to rank = order=20 all the applications submitted.=20
  • IN SRGs, Applications are assessed on the basis of two = criteria: the=20 applicant’s record of research achievement and the program = of research.=20
  • In SPJIs and elsewhere, the criteria vary depending on the = program.=20 Review the RFP for clues.=20
  • An initial ranking is produced by having the two readers = submit=20 their scores, but the final score is the result of the = committee’s=20 deliberations and reflects the consensus of the committee.=20

8
  • Of  those = recommended=20 for funding who will receive funding is determined after the = funding=20 envelope is applied to the rank-ordered list.=20
  • Fund  = envelopes are more=20 or less consistent with in the SRG committees;=20
  • Funding envelopes in Strategic Programs varies by the nature = of the=20 program, the number of funding partners (if relevant) and how = much=20 resources the partners can contribute=20

9
  •  In SRGs this = is an=20 important concern and is an official evaluation criteria.=20
  •  In SPJIs and = other=20 strategic Programs, this is rarely an official criteria but is = in almost=20 all cases applied by the committee members regardless.=20
10
  • For team applications, the score is that for the group as a = whole,=20 determined according to the contribution each of the = participants makes=20 to the total.=20
  • Applicants are advised not to put forward as principal = investigator=20 a new scholar simply on the basis that they might gain from the=20 different weighting used for new scholars.=20
  • The principal investigator should be the person with the = largest=20 role to play, and they will accordingly count the most in = calculating=20 the team’s track record.=20
  • Committees look favorably at teams in which responsibilities = are=20 clearly delineated, articulated and complementary, and where the = respective contributions are weighted. =
11
  • Adjudication committees pay close attention to previous = research=20 awards, especially earlier SSHRC grants, and their outcomes.=20
  • Carefully and clearly indicate the status of previously = funded=20 programs of research.=20
  • Be sure to specify whether the program is now complete=20
  • If you have not finished writing up that research, and the = committee=20 concludes that it could take a year or more to do so, they very = likely=20 might conclude that your application is premature.=20
  • While committees are often impressed by one’s success = in securing=20 grants, they can also become alarmed at the thought of an = applicant=20 taking on too many projects. You need to convince the Committee = that you=20 have in the past and will continue to produce from research = grants.=20
12
  • Read the instructions carefully=20
  • Do not include publications that lie outside the six year = window on=20 the form=20
  • If you have not had the opportunity to supervise graduate = students,=20 indicate so, and provide an explanation as to why this has been = the=20 case.=20
  • List your publications according to the format commonly used = in your=20 discipline AND MAKE SURE YOU GIVE PAGE NUMBERS.=20
  • Specify the status of forthcoming publications: e.g. in = press, under=20 review, etc.
13

  • Separate peer-reviewed publications from non peer-reviewed=20 publications, and DO NOT claim the latter as the former.=20
  • Check your citations for errors=20
  • Come across as quietly confident, not brashly arrogant.=20
  • If you are moving into a new area of research – or in = some cases a=20 new discipline – you will need to convince the committee = that you have=20 mastered the necessary background and/or methodology. Some = indication of=20 publications or conference presentations in the new area helps = to=20 inspire confidence.

14
  • Originality=20
  • Clarity of Objectives and Methodology=20
  • Feasibility=20
  • Necessity or at least desirability of your work=20
  • Impact within and perhaps outside the Field=20
  • Potential for graduate student training=20
  • Innovation in methodology=20
  • Significance (though not in a narrow sense)=20
  • These are all captured in the descriptors used to guide = committee=20 scoring as indicated on the following chart.=20



15
  • A successful application will clearly state the purpose of = the=20 research program, the methodology (s) to be used and the reasons = for=20 them, the theoretical perspective employed, a thorough = literature=20 review, the importance of the research in terms of the = discipline and=20 perhaps outside the discipline, the role and/or potential for = graduate=20 student training, and an appropriate strategy for disseminating = the=20 results.=20
  • It must be both exciting and feasible – the committee = has to be able=20 to see how you will go about accomplishing what you set out to = do.=20
  • In some cases, it may consist of a number of interconnected = projects=20 which perhaps began before and will continue after the intended = grant=20 period.

16
  • Proposal is deemed to be premature.=20
  • Proposal appears to be a fishing expedition.=20
  • Proposal is thought to be too ambitious for the resources = and or=20 time allotted.=20
  • Conceptualization is lacking in originality.=20
  • The methodology and/or theoretical perspective is = under-developed or=20 insufficiently explained.=20
  • Literature review is inadequate.=20
  • Proposal  is = seen as too=20 derivative of previous work, sometimes known as a rolling = thunder=20 application.=20
  • The program of research is so narrowly conceived that major = advances=20 are unlikely.=20
  • The proposal is a ‘trust me’ application – = one in which the=20 committee is expected to accept the program of research simply = on the=20 basis of the applicant’s previous record. This is more = common in=20 applications from senior scholars. =

17
  • Write your application as clearly as possible, with an eye = to=20 persuading specialists and generalists alike.=20
  • Try to engage with some of the wider questions in your=20 field/discipline so as to show the wider relevance of your = proposal.=20
  • Make sure the 1 page summary captures the excitement, = originality=20 and feasibility of your program. Specialists and generalists = alike must=20 be able to understand it.
18
  • Demonstrate familiarity with the most recent work pertaining = to your=20 topic.=20
  • Make sure your title accurately captures your program of = research.=20
  • Cut back on jargon=20
  • Avoid excessive or inflated claims to originality and/or=20 significance=20
  • Never announce that you are filling in a gap or a niche = – if you=20 have a gap, get a backhoe.=20
  • Check out the programs that have been funded by your = committee in=20 the past so as to get a better idea of the range of activities.=20
19
  • Avoid using a combative or overly aggressive tone when = locating your=20 work within the wider scholarly community=20
  • Ambition should be tempered by realism, especially for first = time=20 applicants.=20
  • Avoid choosing a topic, or framing it in terms of what you = think is=20 trendy or sexy=20
  • Presentation is important, but content is even more = important.=20
20
  • If there is a scholarly debate surrounding your topic, = acknowledge=20 all sides respectfully and carefully locate yourself within it.=20
  • Make explicit any links between this proposed program of = research=20 and what you have done before.=20
  • Your methodology or research plan should be laid out clearly = such=20 that each stage is visible to the reader.=20
  • Even if the intended result is a book, don’t talk = about the book per=20 se – committees fund research, not book production.=20
  • Outlining chapters in a proposed book is not a replacement = for a=20 clear discussion of your methodology.=20
  • Avoid any appearance that the application is intended to = tidy up=20 some earlier work.
21
  • Never start your research plan with a literature review=20
  • Make certain that the works cited in your bibliography are = addressed=20 in the detailed proposal=20
  • If you have already conducted a pilot project, tell the = committee=20 about it and the results.=20
  • If space is tight and you need to show your grasp of key=20 methodological or conceptual issues, you can always cite = previous work=20 in which you have already demonstrated such familiarity.=20
  • Ask your colleagues to look at your application in order to = get some=20 specialist feedback. =


22
  • The first paragraph should make it clear to the reader why = this=20 study is so important and why you are the person to do it.=20
  • Make certain that you provide definitions for any unfamiliar = terms/acronyms.=20
  • Use headings/subheadings if you find them useful to organize = your=20 thoughts.=20
  • There are no good grant writers – only good grant = rewriters. Be=20 prepared to go through many iterations.=20
  • Make certain that there are no errors in syntax, spelling, = or fact –=20 if there are, committee members are inclined to mark such = applications=20 more harshly on the basis that they were too hastily put = together.=20

23
  • Insist on flying business class.=20
  • Tell the Committee that last year’s committee members = were complete=20 idiots who failed to realize your true brilliance.=20
  • Claim that nobody has ever done anything vaguely related to = your=20 topic before.=20
  • Invent your own format for providing bibliographical = information.=20
  • Ask for an $8000 notebook when all you need is a simple word = processor.=20
  • Tell the committee how overworked you are in the section for = extenuating circumstances.=20
  • Talk about how badly under-funded you have been.=20
  • Tell the committee all kinds of things about yourself which = were not=20 requested and which are not relevant to the application.=20
24
  • Misspell the names of your referees=20
  • Ignore the rules on page length, margins and spacing.=20
  • Rely exclusively on your spellchecker – there is = considerable=20 difference between public affairs and pubic affairs.=20
  • Show up before the same committee on three different = applications=20 (as principal investigator on one and co-investigator on two = others)=20
  • Double-count publications in your c.v.=20
  • List publications more than six year’s old in the c.v. = section of=20 the application.=20
  • Include a big name on your team but do not define her/his = role.=20
  • Avoid paragraphs.=20
  • Fail to explain the reasons for your trips to various places = or what=20 you are looking for.

25
  • Use the application to carry on a polemical fight with your=20 colleagues in other institutions.=20
  • Ask for funding in excess of the total amount one can = request.=20
  • Insist that there is a conspiracy (feminist, Marxist, = right-wing,=20 vegetarian, or all four) out there trying to get to you – = and then=20 arrange for your external referees to back you up=20
  • Keep submitting the same application without taking any = notice of=20 previous committee’s comments.=20
  • Employ a graduate student to help cart books back and forth = from the=20 library.=20
  • Insist that you have nothing to learn from recent = scholarship.=20

------=_NextPart_001_001F_01CB4B48.31E46010-- ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01CB4B48.31DFA520 Content-Type: text/css; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: file:///C:/2289C636/Grantswriting2006_files/master24_stylesheet.css BODY { WIDTH: 534px; HEIGHT: 400px } .TB { mso-special-format: nobullet=95 } .T { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 209%; COLOR: #e5e5ff; FONT-FAMILY: = Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: center; text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 3; = mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .BB { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .B { FONT-SIZE: 152%; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: left; = text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .B1B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .B1 { FONT-SIZE: 133%; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: left; = text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .B2B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #e5e5ff; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 3 } .B2 { FONT-SIZE: 114%; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: left; = text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .B3B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .B3 { FONT-SIZE: 95%; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: left; = text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .B4B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .B4 { FONT-SIZE: 95%; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: left; = text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .N { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .N1 { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .N2 { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .N3 { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .N4 { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .OB { mso-special-format: nobullet=95 } .O { FONT-SIZE: 85%; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: Arial; TEXT-ALIGN: left; = mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .O1 { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .O2 { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .O3 { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .O4 { mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .CBB { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .CB { FONT-SIZE: 152%; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: = center; text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .CB1B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .CB1 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .CB2B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #e5e5ff; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 3 } .CB2 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .CB3B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .CB3 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .CB4B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .CB4 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .CTB { mso-special-format: nobullet=95 } .CT { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 285%; COLOR: #e5e5ff; FONT-FAMILY: = Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: center; text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 3; = mso-char-wrap: 1; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .HBB { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .HB { FONT-SIZE: 133%; COLOR: white; FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; TEXT-ALIGN: left; = text-shadow: auto; mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .HB1B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .HB1 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .HB2B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #e5e5ff; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 3 } .HB2 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .HB3B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .HB3 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .HB4B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .HB4 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .QBB { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .QB { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .QB1B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .QB1 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .QB2B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #e5e5ff; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 3 } .QB2 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .QB3B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .QB3 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .QB4B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: bulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .QB4 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .TblB { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .Tbl { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .Tbl1B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .Tbl1 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .Tbl2B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #e5e5ff; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 3 } .Tbl2 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .Tbl3B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #a886e0; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 5 } .Tbl3 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .Tbl4B { FONT-SIZE: 70%; COLOR: #ffcc00; FONT-FAMILY: Wingdings; = mso-special-format: nobulletn; mso-color-index: 6 } .Tbl4 { FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; text-shadow: auto; mso-char-wrap: 1; = mso-kinsoku-overflow: 1 } .defaultB { mso-special-format: nobullet=95 } .default { FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 85%; COLOR: white; DIRECTION: ltr; = LAYOUT-FLOW: horizontal; FONT-STYLE: normal; FONT-FAMILY: Garamond; = TEXT-ALIGN: center; TEXT-DECORATION: none; text-shadow: none; = mso-color-index: 1; mso-char-wrap: 0; mso-kinsoku-overflow: 0; = text-effect: none; mso-fareast-hint: no; mso-text-raise: 0%; = mso-line-spacing: "100 0 0"; mso-margin-left-alt: 0; = mso-text-indent-alt: 0; mso-word-wrap: 1; mso-vertical-align-special: = baseline; mso-ansi-language: EN-US } A:link { COLOR: #ffcc00! important } A:active { COLOR: #a886e0! important } A:visited { COLOR: #ffffcc! important } ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01CB4B48.31DFA520 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: mhtml:file://R:\Website\Archive Aug 23 2010 Old Research Web site\grants\documents\Grantswriting2006.mht!file:///C:/2289C636/Grantswriting2006_files/slide0067.htm SSHRC = Mentoring Workshop
SSHRC Grant Getting =
n
n
nPresented by nMarc Fonda, Ph.D. = nAssistant Director, nStrategic Programs and Joint = Initiatives,=20 SSHRC=20 ------=_NextPart_000_001C_01CB4B48.31DFA520 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: mhtml:file://R:\Website\Archive Aug 23 2010 Old Research Web site\grants\documents\Grantswriting2006.mht!file:///C:/2289C636/Grantswriting2006_files/outline.htm
=20  Notes
Slide Show
Outline
1


  • Presented by=20
  • Marc Fonda, Ph.D.=20
  • Assistant Director,=20
  • Strategic Programs and Joint Initiatives, SSHRC=20
2
  • Applications for a SSHRC Committee are adjudicated by a=20 disciplinary, multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary committees = depending on program.=20
  • The purpose of these committees is to consider the merits of = and=20 rank order all applications.=20
  • In general, the success rates across all the committees in = Standard=20 Grants are very similar. (range between 38% and 42%), in SPJI = programs=20 the success rate varies.
3

  • Committee membership is determined by the following = criteria:=20 Adequate representation of the various subfields and specialties = within=20 the discipline(s), and regional, linguistic, gender, and = generational=20 representation, as well as members from small, mid and large = size=20 universities. If an SPJI committee, members will have the = appropriate=20 expertise in face of the research being supported=20
  • But given the wide variety of disciplines applying to SSHRC, = it is=20 necessary to acknowledge the differences between = committee/disciplinary=20 culture.
4
  • Normally serve a maximum of three years=20
  • Normally have held a SSHRC Grant in the past=20
  • Possess written and oral comprehension of both official = languages=20
  • Agree to be governed by strict conflict of interest = guidelines=20
  • Take their tasks very seriously=20
  • Are often happy to share their insights with their = colleagues=20

5
  • Look for a  = natural fit=20 between your proposed research and an existing committee.=20
  • If appropriate consider the Interdisciplinary Committee in = SRGs=20
  • Merely having a program that might interest scholars in a = range of=20 fields is not sufficient.=20
  • Nor is simply attaching another perspective to your work = – they must=20 be integrated.=20
  • Remember that a committee with scholars in the same or = similar=20 discipline to yourself will likely be better placed to evaluate = your=20 record of research achievement, e.g. they will know the leading=20 journals/presses in your field. =
6
  •  Each = Committee member=20 receives copies of all the applications in binders (can reach = 150),=20
  •  Members are = expected to=20 be familiar with all the files in addition to having a detailed=20 knowledge of the files to which she or he was assigned.=20
  •  Very few = committee=20 members receive any course release for this service, and it is = not=20 unusual for them to spend twenty hours or more a week for seven = weeks in=20 preparation.=20
  •  Please bear = this in=20 mind. Committee members describe the work as fascinating and the = experience as rewarding, but it comes at considerable sacrifice = to their=20 own work and a shoddily-prepared application will not very well=20 received.
7
  • The purpose of the face to face meeting in Ottawa is to rank = order=20 all the applications submitted.=20
  • IN SRGs, Applications are assessed on the basis of two = criteria: the=20 applicant’s record of research achievement and the program = of research.=20
  • In SPJIs and elsewhere, the criteria vary depending on the = program.=20 Review the RFP for clues.=20
  • An initial ranking is produced by having the two readers = submit=20 their scores, but the final score is the result of the = committee’s=20 deliberations and reflects the consensus of the committee.=20

8
  • Of  those = recommended=20 for funding who will receive funding is determined after the = funding=20 envelope is applied to the rank-ordered list.=20
  • Fund  = envelopes are more=20 or less consistent with in the SRG committees;=20
  • Funding envelopes in Strategic Programs varies by the nature = of the=20 program, the number of funding partners (if relevant) and how = much=20 resources the partners can contribute=20

9
  •  In SRGs this = is an=20 important concern and is an official evaluation criteria.=20
  •  In SPJIs and = other=20 strategic Programs, this is rarely an official criteria but is = in almost=20 all cases applied by the committee members regardless.=20
10
  • For team applications, the score is that for the group as a = whole,=20 determined according to the contribution each of the = participants makes=20 to the total.=20
  • Applicants are advised not to put forward as principal = investigator=20 a new scholar simply on the basis that they might gain from the=20 different weighting used for new scholars.=20
  • The principal investigator should be the person with the = largest=20 role to play, and they will accordingly count the most in = calculating=20 the team’s track record.=20
  • Committees look favorably at teams in which responsibilities = are=20 clearly delineated, articulated and complementary, and where the = respective contributions are weighted. =
11
  • Adjudication committees pay close attention to previous = research=20 awards, especially earlier SSHRC grants, and their outcomes.=20
  • Carefully and clearly indicate the status of previously = funded=20 programs of research.=20
  • Be sure to specify whether the program is now complete=20
  • If you have not finished writing up that research, and the = committee=20 concludes that it could take a year or more to do so, they very = likely=20 might conclude that your application is premature.=20
  • While committees are often impressed by one’s success = in securing=20 grants, they can also become alarmed at the thought of an = applicant=20 taking on too many projects. You need to convince the Committee = that you=20 have in the past and will continue to produce from research = grants.=20
12
  • Read the instructions carefully=20
  • Do not include publications that lie outside the six year = window on=20 the form=20
  • If you have not had the opportunity to supervise graduate = students,=20 indicate so, and provide an explanation as to why this has been = the=20 case.=20
  • List your publications according to the format commonly used = in your=20 discipline AND MAKE SURE YOU GIVE PAGE NUMBERS.=20
  • Specify the status of forthcoming publications: e.g. in = press, under=20 review, etc.
13

  • Separate peer-reviewed publications from non peer-reviewed=20 publications, and DO NOT claim the latter as the former.=20
  • Check your citations for errors=20
  • Come across as quietly confident, not brashly arrogant.=20
  • If you are moving into a new area of research – or in = some cases a=20 new discipline – you will need to convince the committee = that you have=20 mastered the necessary background and/or methodology. Some = indication of=20 publications or conference presentations in the new area helps = to=20 inspire confidence.

14
  • Originality=20
  • Clarity of Objectives and Methodology=20
  • Feasibility=20
  • Necessity or at least desirability of your work=20
  • Impact within and perhaps outside the Field=20
  • Potential for graduate student training=20
  • Innovation in methodology=20
  • Significance (though not in a narrow sense)=20
  • These are all captured in the descriptors used to guide = committee=20 scoring as indicated on the following chart.=20



15
  • A successful application will clearly state the purpose of = the=20 research program, the methodology (s) to be used and the reasons = for=20 them, the theoretical perspective employed, a thorough = literature=20 review, the importance of the research in terms of the = discipline and=20 perhaps outside the discipline, the role and/or potential for = graduate=20 student training, and an appropriate strategy for disseminating = the=20 results.=20
  • It must be both exciting and feasible – the committee = has to be able=20 to see how you will go about accomplishing what you set out to = do.=20
  • In some cases, it may consist of a number of interconnected = projects=20 which perhaps began before and will continue after the intended = grant=20 period.

16
  • Proposal is deemed to be premature.=20
  • Proposal appears to be a fishing expedition.=20
  • Proposal is thought to be too ambitious for the resources = and or=20 time allotted.=20
  • Conceptualization is lacking in originality.=20
  • The methodology and/or theoretical perspective is = under-developed or=20 insufficiently explained.=20
  • Literature review is inadequate.=20
  • Proposal  is = seen as too=20 derivative of previous work, sometimes known as a rolling = thunder=20 application.=20
  • The program of research is so narrowly conceived that major = advances=20 are unlikely.=20
  • The proposal is a ‘trust me’ application – = one in which the=20 committee is expected to accept the program of research simply = on the=20 basis of the applicant’s previous record. This is more = common in=20 applications from senior scholars. =

17
  • Write your application as clearly as possible, with an eye = to=20 persuading specialists and generalists alike.=20
  • Try to engage with some of the wider questions in your=20 field/discipline so as to show the wider relevance of your = proposal.=20
  • Make sure the 1 page summary captures the excitement, = originality=20 and feasibility of your program. Specialists and generalists = alike must=20 be able to understand it.
18
  • Demonstrate familiarity with the most recent work pertaining = to your=20 topic.=20
  • Make sure your title accurately captures your program of = research.=20
  • Cut back on jargon=20
  • Avoid excessive or inflated claims to originality and/or=20 significance=20
  • Never announce that you are filling in a gap or a niche = – if you=20 have a gap, get a backhoe.=20
  • Check out the programs that have been funded by your = committee in=20 the past so as to get a better idea of the range of activities.=20
19
  • Avoid using a combative or overly aggressive tone when = locating your=20 work within the wider scholarly community=20
  • Ambition should be tempered by realism, especially for first = time=20 applicants.=20
  • Avoid choosing a topic, or framing it in terms of what you = think is=20 trendy or sexy=20
  • Presentation is important, but content is even more = important.=20
20
  • If there is a scholarly debate surrounding your topic, = acknowledge=20 all sides respectfully and carefully locate yourself within it.=20
  • Make explicit any links between this proposed program of = research=20 and what you have done before.=20
  • Your methodology or research plan should be laid out clearly = such=20 that each stage is visible to the reader.=20
  • Even if the intended result is a book, don’t talk = about the book per=20 se – committees fund research, not book production.=20
  • Outlining chapters in a proposed book is not a replacement = for a=20 clear discussion of your methodology.=20
  • Avoid any appearance that the application is intended to = tidy up=20 some earlier work.
21
  • Never start your research plan with a literature review=20
  • Make certain that the works cited in your bibliography are = addressed=20 in the detailed proposal=20
  • If you have already conducted a pilot project, tell the = committee=20 about it and the results.=20
  • If space is tight and you need to show your grasp of key=20 methodological or conceptual issues, you can always cite = previous work=20 in which you have already demonstrated such familiarity.=20
  • Ask your colleagues to look at your application in order to = get some=20 specialist feedback. =


22
  • The first paragraph should make it clear to the reader why = this=20 study is so important and why you are the person to do it.=20
  • Make certain that you provide definitions for any unfamiliar = terms/acronyms.=20
  • Use headings/subheadings if you find them useful to organize = your=20 thoughts.=20
  • There are no good grant writers – only good grant = rewriters. Be=20 prepared to go through many iterations.=20
  • Make certain that there are no errors in syntax, spelling, = or fact –=20 if there are, committee members are inclined to mark such = applications=20 more harshly on the basis that they were too hastily put = together.=20

23
  • Insist on flying business class.=20
  • Tell the Committee that last year’s committee members = were complete=20 idiots who failed to realize your true brilliance.=20
  • Claim that nobody has ever done anything vaguely related to = your=20 topic before.=20
  • Invent your own format for providing bibliographical = information.=20
  • Ask for an $8000 notebook when all you need is a simple word = processor.=20
  • Tell the committee how overworked you are in the section for = extenuating circumstances.=20
  • Talk about how badly under-funded you have been.=20
  • Tell the committee all kinds of things about yourself which = were not=20 requested and which are not relevant to the application.=20
24
  • Misspell the names of your referees=20
  • Ignore the rules on page length, margins and spacing.=20
  • Rely exclusively on your spellchecker – there is = considerable=20 difference between public affairs and pubic affairs.=20
  • Show up before the same committee on three different = applications=20 (as principal investigator on one and co-investigator on two = others)=20
  • Double-count publications in your c.v.=20
  • List publications more than six year’s old in the c.v. = section of=20 the application.=20
  • Include a big name on your team but do not define her/his = role.=20
  • Avoid paragraphs.=20
  • Fail to explain the reasons for your trips to various places = or what=20 you are looking for.

25
  • Use the application to carry on a polemical fight with your=20 colleagues in other institutions.=20
  • Ask for funding in excess of the total amount one can = request.=20
  • Insist that there is a conspiracy (feminist, Marxist, = right-wing,=20 vegetarian, or all four) out there trying to get to you – = and then=20 arrange for your external referees to back you up=20
  • Keep submitting the same application without taking any = notice of=20 previous committee’s comments.=20
  • Employ a graduate student to help cart books back and forth = from the=20 library.=20
  • Insist that you have nothing to learn from recent = scholarship.=20

------=_NextPart_000_001C_01CB4B48.31DFA520 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Location: mhtml:file://R:\Website\Archive Aug 23 2010 Old Research Web site\grants\documents\Grantswriting2006.mht!file:///C:/2289C636/Grantswriting2006_files/outline.htm
=20  Notes
Slide Show
Outline
1


  • Presented by=20
  • Marc Fonda, Ph.D.=20
  • Assistant Director,=20
  • Strategic Programs and Joint Initiatives, SSHRC=20
2
  • Applications for a SSHRC Committee are adjudicated by a=20 disciplinary, multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary committees = depending on program.=20
  • The purpose of these committees is to consider the merits of = and=20 rank order all applications.=20
  • In general, the success rates across all the committees in = Standard=20 Grants are very similar. (range between 38% and 42%), in SPJI = programs=20 the success rate varies.
3

  • Committee membership is determined by the following = criteria:=20 Adequate representation of the various subfields and specialties = within=20 the discipline(s), and regional, linguistic, gender, and = generational=20 representation, as well as members from small, mid and large = size=20 universities. If an SPJI committee, members will have the = appropriate=20 expertise in face of the research being supported=20
  • But given the wide variety of disciplines applying to SSHRC, = it is=20 necessary to acknowledge the differences between = committee/disciplinary=20 culture.
4
  • Normally serve a maximum of three years=20
  • Normally have held a SSHRC Grant in the past=20
  • Possess written and oral comprehension of both official = languages=20
  • Agree to be governed by strict conflict of interest = guidelines=20
  • Take their tasks very seriously=20
  • Are often happy to share their insights with their = colleagues=20

5
  • Look for a  = natural fit=20 between your proposed research and an existing committee.=20
  • If appropriate consider the Interdisciplinary Committee in = SRGs=20
  • Merely having a program that might interest scholars in a = range of=20 fields is not sufficient.=20
  • Nor is simply attaching another perspective to your work = – they must=20 be integrated.=20
  • Remember that a committee with scholars in the same or = similar=20 discipline to yourself will likely be better placed to evaluate = your=20 record of research achievement, e.g. they will know the leading=20 journals/presses in your field. =
6
  •  Each = Committee member=20 receives copies of all the applications in binders (can reach = 150),=20
  •  Members are = expected to=20 be familiar with all the files in addition to having a detailed=20 knowledge of the files to which she or he was assigned.=20
  •  Very few = committee=20 members receive any course release for this service, and it is = not=20 unusual for them to spend twenty hours or more a week for seven = weeks in=20 preparation.=20
  •  Please bear = this in=20 mind. Committee members describe the work as fascinating and the = experience as rewarding, but it comes at considerable sacrifice = to their=20 own work and a shoddily-prepared application will not very well=20 received.
7
  • The purpose of the face to face meeting in Ottawa is to rank = order=20 all the applications submitted.=20
  • IN SRGs, Applications are assessed on the basis of two = criteria: the=20 applicant’s record of research achievement and the program = of research.=20
  • In SPJIs and elsewhere, the criteria vary depending on the = program.=20 Review the RFP for clues.=20
  • An initial ranking is produced by having the two readers = submit=20 their scores, but the final score is the result of the = committee’s=20 deliberations and reflects the consensus of the committee.=20

8
  • Of  those = recommended=20 for funding who will receive funding is determined after the = funding=20 envelope is applied to the rank-ordered list.=20
  • Fund  = envelopes are more=20 or less consistent with in the SRG committees;=20
  • Funding envelopes in Strategic Programs varies by the nature = of the=20 program, the number of funding partners (if relevant) and how = much=20 resources the partners can contribute=20

9
  •  In SRGs this = is an=20 important concern and is an official evaluation criteria.=20
  •  In SPJIs and = other=20 strategic Programs, this is rarely an official criteria but is = in almost=20 all cases applied by the committee members regardless.=20
10
  • For team applications, the score is that for the group as a = whole,=20 determined according to the contribution each of the = participants makes=20 to the total.=20
  • Applicants are advised not to put forward as principal = investigator=20 a new scholar simply on the basis that they might gain from the=20 different weighting used for new scholars.=20
  • The principal investigator should be the person with the = largest=20 role to play, and they will accordingly count the most in = calculating=20 the team’s track record.=20
  • Committees look favorably at teams in which responsibilities = are=20 clearly delineated, articulated and complementary, and where the = respective contributions are weighted. =
11
  • Adjudication committees pay close attention to previous = research=20 awards, especially earlier SSHRC grants, and their outcomes.=20
  • Carefully and clearly indicate the status of previously = funded=20 programs of research.=20
  • Be sure to specify whether the program is now complete=20
  • If you have not finished writing up that research, and the = committee=20 concludes that it could take a year or more to do so, they very = likely=20 might conclude that your application is premature.=20
  • While committees are often impressed by one’s success = in securing=20 grants, they can also become alarmed at the thought of an = applicant=20 taking on too many projects. You need to convince the Committee = that you=20 have in the past and will continue to produce from research = grants.=20
12
  • Read the instructions carefully=20
  • Do not include publications that lie outside the six year = window on=20 the form=20
  • If you have not had the opportunity to supervise graduate = students,=20 indicate so, and provide an explanation as to why this has been = the=20 case.=20
  • List your publications according to the format commonly used = in your=20 discipline AND MAKE SURE YOU GIVE PAGE NUMBERS.=20
  • Specify the status of forthcoming publications: e.g. in = press, under=20 review, etc.
13

  • Separate peer-reviewed publications from non peer-reviewed=20 publications, and DO NOT claim the latter as the former.=20
  • Check your citations for errors=20
  • Come across as quietly confident, not brashly arrogant.=20
  • If you are moving into a new area of research – or in = some cases a=20 new discipline – you will need to convince the committee = that you have=20 mastered the necessary background and/or methodology. Some = indication of=20 publications or conference presentations in the new area helps = to=20 inspire confidence.

14
  • Originality=20
  • Clarity of Objectives and Methodology=20
  • Feasibility=20
  • Necessity or at least desirability of your work=20
  • Impact within and perhaps outside the Field=20
  • Potential for graduate student training=20
  • Innovation in methodology=20
  • Significance (though not in a narrow sense)=20
  • These are all captured in the descriptors used to guide = committee=20 scoring as indicated on the following chart.=20



15
  • A successful application will clearly state the purpose of = the=20 research program, the methodology (s) to be used and the reasons = for=20 them, the theoretical perspective employed, a thorough = literature=20 review, the importance of the research in terms of the = discipline and=20 perhaps outside the discipline, the role and/or potential for = graduate=20 student training, and an appropriate strategy for disseminating = the=20 results.=20
  • It must be both exciting and feasible – the committee = has to be able=20 to see how you will go about accomplishing what you set out to = do.=20
  • In some cases, it may consist of a number of interconnected = projects=20 which perhaps began before and will continue after the intended = grant=20 period.

16
  • Proposal is deemed to be premature.=20
  • Proposal appears to be a fishing expedition.=20
  • Proposal is thought to be too ambitious for the resources = and or=20 time allotted.=20
  • Conceptualization is lacking in originality.=20
  • The methodology and/or theoretical perspective is = under-developed or=20 insufficiently explained.=20
  • Literature review is inadequate.=20
  • Proposal  is = seen as too=20 derivative of previous work, sometimes known as a rolling = thunder=20 application.=20
  • The program of research is so narrowly conceived that major = advances=20 are unlikely.=20
  • The proposal is a ‘trust me’ application – = one in which the=20 committee is expected to accept the program of research simply = on the=20 basis of the applicant’s previous record. This is more = common in=20 applications from senior scholars. =

17
  • Write your application as clearly as possible, with an eye = to=20 persuading specialists and generalists alike.=20
  • Try to engage with some of the wider questions in your=20 field/discipline so as to show the wider relevance of your = proposal.=20
  • Make sure the 1 page summary captures the excitement, = originality=20 and feasibility of your program. Specialists and generalists = alike must=20 be able to understand it.
18
  • Demonstrate familiarity with the most recent work pertaining = to your=20 topic.=20
  • Make sure your title accurately captures your program of = research.=20
  • Cut back on jargon=20
  • Avoid excessive or inflated claims to originality and/or=20 significance=20
  • Never announce that you are filling in a gap or a niche = – if you=20 have a gap, get a backhoe.=20
  • Check out the programs that have been funded by your = committee in=20 the past so as to get a better idea of the range of activities.=20
19
  • Avoid using a combative or overly aggressive tone when = locating your=20 work within the wider scholarly community=20
  • Ambition should be tempered by realism, especially for first = time=20 applicants.=20
  • Avoid choosing a topic, or framing it in terms of what you = think is=20 trendy or sexy=20
  • Presentation is important, but content is even more = important.=20
20
  • If there is a scholarly debate surrounding your topic, = acknowledge=20 all sides respectfully and carefully locate yourself within it.=20
  • Make explicit any links between this proposed program of = research=20 and what you have done before.=20
  • Your methodology or research plan should be laid out clearly = such=20 that each stage is visible to the reader.=20
  • Even if the intended result is a book, don’t talk = about the book per=20 se – committees fund research, not book production.=20
  • Outlining chapters in a proposed book is not a replacement = for a=20 clear discussion of your methodology.=20
  • Avoid any appearance that the application is intended to = tidy up=20 some earlier work.
21
  • Never start your research plan with a literature review=20
  • Make certain that the works cited in your bibliography are = addressed=20 in the detailed proposal=20
  • If you have already conducted a pilot project, tell the = committee=20 about it and the results.=20
  • If space is tight and you need to show your grasp of key=20 methodological or conceptual issues, you can always cite = previous work=20 in which you have already demonstrated such familiarity.=20
  • Ask your colleagues to look at your application in order to = get some=20 specialist feedback. =


22
  • The first paragraph should make it clear to the reader why = this=20 study is so important and why you are the person to do it.=20
  • Make certain that you provide definitions for any unfamiliar = terms/acronyms.=20
  • Use headings/subheadings if you find them useful to organize = your=20 thoughts.=20
  • There are no good grant writers – only good grant = rewriters. Be=20 prepared to go through many iterations.=20
  • Make certain that there are no errors in syntax, spelling, = or fact –=20 if there are, committee members are inclined to mark such = applications=20 more harshly on the basis that they were too hastily put = together.=20

23
  • Insist on flying business class.=20
  • Tell the Committee that last year’s committee members = were complete=20 idiots who failed to realize your true brilliance.=20
  • Claim that nobody has ever done anything vaguely related to = your=20 topic before.=20
  • Invent your own format for providing bibliographical = information.=20
  • Ask for an $8000 notebook when all you need is a simple word = processor.=20
  • Tell the committee how overworked you are in the section for = extenuating circumstances.=20
  • Talk about how badly under-funded you have been.=20
  • Tell the committee all kinds of things about yourself which = were not=20 requested and which are not relevant to the application.=20
24
  • Misspell the names of your referees=20
  • Ignore the rules on page length, margins and spacing.=20
  • Rely exclusively on your spellchecker – there is = considerable=20 difference between public affairs and pubic affairs.=20
  • Show up before the same committee on three different = applications=20 (as principal investigator on one and co-investigator on two = others)=20
  • Double-count publications in your c.v.=20
  • List publications more than six year’s old in the c.v. = section of=20 the application.=20
  • Include a big name on your team but do not define her/his = role.=20
  • Avoid paragraphs.=20
  • Fail to explain the reasons for your trips to various places = or what=20 you are looking for.

25
  • Use the application to carry on a polemical fight with your=20 colleagues in other institutions.=20
  • Ask for funding in excess of the total amount one can = request.=20
  • Insist that there is a conspiracy (feminist, Marxist, = right-wing,=20 vegetarian, or all four) out there trying to get to you – = and then=20 arrange for your external referees to back you up=20
  • Keep submitting the same application without taking any = notice of=20 previous committee’s comments.=20
  • Employ a graduate student to help cart books back and forth = from the=20 library.=20
  • Insist that you have nothing to learn from recent = scholarship.=20

------=_NextPart_000_001C_01CB4B48.31DFA520--