SSHRC Grant Workshop Notes, Exercises of Humanities

Download SSHRC Grant Workshop Notes and more Exercises Humanities in PDF only on Docsity!

SSHRC Insight Grant Workshop

September 2, 2020

1:00 – 2:30 pm via Zoom

Presenters: Rachel Heydon Anton Puvirajah Perry Klein

SSHRC Grant Notes

Rachel Heydon

Know who will read your application & how

• Pick your assessors wisely (go for fair, someone who will “get it”, not necessarily the big wig, & ensure no conflict of interest)
• Pick your committee wisely (go for your scholarly “home”)
• Pick your composing wisely (write like a reader: jargon free; clear & concise; use topic sentences, stems, & match language to evaluation criteria; use bold/italics/headings; take responsibility for helping a diversity of readers get it )
• (Challenge): Pick your project wisely: why this project, why now, who for?
• (Feasibility): Pick each piece of the puzzle wisely: plot out the rhythm, demands, and resources
• (Capability): Pick your team wisely: Why these scholars for this project and this audience?

Sample Resources

• Thomson, P., & Kamler, B. (2016). Detox your writing: Strategies for doctoral researchers. Routledge.
• Walker, B. L., E. & Unruh, H. E. (2017). Funding your research in the humanities and social sciences: A practical guide to grant and fellowship proposals. Routledge.
• Kamler, B. (2001). Relocating the personal: A critical writing pedagogy. State University of New York Press.

General Notes

• Plan and prepare early
  • Maintain a notebook
  • Outline and visualize all grant components that need to come together
    • Project goals, context, theory, methodology/methods
    • Roles and Responsibilities of PI, Co-PI, Collaborators, post-docs, grad students
    • Knowledge Mobilization plan
    • Expected Outcomes  Scholarly Benefits, Societal Benefits, Benefit to Target Audience
    • Timeline
  • Complete/update CCV
  • Get everything done about a week earlier than deadline
  • Identify and approach Co-PI, Collaborator
  • Read proposal guideline
  • Attend webinar by SSHRC
  • Review grants
  • Apply for internal funding

Proposal Narrative

• Future global challenges
• Sensible timeline – Gantt Chart
• Clear goals that are realized in methods
• Communicate your capability
  • How have you prepared to take on this project
  • What is your background that makes to capable of doing this project
  • How it ties to your current research
  • How it will move it forward (personally and for the discipline)

Final Thoughts

• Don’t forget that there are other parts to the application beyond the narrative; don’t leave them to the very end
• Have someone else read your proposal and give feedback, including Sonia Faremo

This session

Sources

Reviewerfeedback

Serving as reviewer un/successful^ Reading applications

• Applicable to grants beyond SIG, e.g., SSHRC Insight Development Grant, Partnership Grant, Canada Fund for Innovation JELF grant

Detailed Description

Context: Lit review, theory

• Include both widely cited and very recent studies
• Reference to meta-analyses valuable
• Create a narrative about the discipline’s progress on your topic, in which your study will bridge from the past to the future
• Theory should clearly lead to your specific hypotheses/questions

Methods

• Be as explicit and concrete about methods as possible in space available
• multiple studies? An option is to describe a typical study in detail, then briefly describe variations
• Consider a timeline or flowchart
• Include a statistical power statement, e.g., “With N = 120, assuming a small to medium effect size (d = .40), statistical power will be over 90% for main effects and over 75% for interaction effects.”

Other Sections

Research Team / Previous Output --

Contributions

• Point is to show “ capability ”
• Create a narrative of your research program, connect past and future
  • Think of a one sentence summary to orient the reader, e.g., “For 20 years Dr. Klein’s research has focused on exploring cognitive processes in writing, and using this knowledge to make writing education more effective.”
• Include concrete evidence of success of each team member, e.g., “…has published over 30 peer-reviewed articles in this area…”
• Show that team members have diverse but complementary expertise