Improving Research Proposals: Writing Proposals and the Proposal Review Process

1. Improving Research Proposals: Writing Proposals and the Proposal Review Process Heather Macdonald (based on material from Richelle Allen-King, Cathy Manduca, and Barbara Ransom)

2. Why do you want funding? • Buy time • Buy equipment • Buy help • Get support for students • Recognition/peer review of work • Tenure/promotion criteria

3. Words of Wisdom • Much can be done for free. • Writing proposals is less productive than writing papers because the success rates are lower. • Choose your project(s) carefully • NEVER write a proposal for something you don’t REALLY want to do.

4. Proposal Review • Who are the reviewers? • What are the criteria? • Criterion 1: Intellectual Merit (NSF) • Criterion 2: Broader Impacts (NSF) • Program Guidelines • Imagine the reviewers • 10-30 proposals at once on top of their regular work • Don’t know you, your strengths, your institution • Different agencies – similarities and differences

5. What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity? (NSF) • How important is the proposed activity to advancing knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields? • How well qualified is the proposer (individual or team) to conduct the project? (If appropriate, the reviewer will comment on the quality of prior work.) • To what extent does the proposed activity suggest and explore creative and original concepts? • How well conceived and organized is the proposed activity? • Is there sufficient access to resources?

6. What are the broader impacts of the proposed activity (NSF) • How well does the activity advance discovery and understanding while promoting teaching, training, and learning? • How well does the proposed activity broaden the participation of underrepresented groups (e.g., gender, ethnicity, disability, geographic, etc.)? • To what extent will it enhance the infrastructure for research and education, such as facilities, instrumentation, networks, and partnerships? • Will the results be disseminated broadly to enhance scientific and technological understanding? • What may be the benefits of the proposed activity to society?

7. Careful consideration given to: • Integration of Research and Education • abundant opportunities where individuals may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators, and students, and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through the diversity of learning perspectives. • Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities • Broadening opportunities and enabling the participation of all citizens, women and men, underrepresented minorities, and persons with disabilities, are essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

8. Project Summaries of Successful Proposals • What are the attributes of a successful proposal?

9. The Critical Pieces • A clearly articulated, doable project • State hypothesis or research questions clearly • A well-formulated argument for why this is important, how this this fits into previous work, and why you are the one to do it • A vivid plan for implementation • A track record • Prelim data/previous publications • Pilot projects (local funding) • Partnerships with recognized experts • Benefits and potential drawbacks

10. Writing a Strong Proposal • Grant writing as a persuasive essay • What do you want to do? • Why is it important? • How will you do it? • Why are you the best person to do this? • What do you need to succeed? • Clear, concise, compelling Follow the rules

11. A Tale of Two Proposals Reviews of Proposal 1 • The proposal overall is thorough, specific, well-motivated, clearly laid out, and has a broad yet attainable vision. This is the best project of its kind that I've seen. • Although this project is quite expensive, I believe the payoff makes it worthwhile, and it should absolutely be funded. • The past work is seen as exceptionally successful - it has impacted a large segment of the academic geoscience community, far beyond only those who have attended the supported workshops, and it has initiated a cultural shift in the field toward ascribing high value to educational activities and scholarship. Reviews of Proposal 2 • There was a wide range of opinions on the panel regarding this proposal. …. One panelist suggested that it would be very worthwhile to work with national societies to implement the workshop at annual meetings.

12. Other Comments • Be careful in writing the proposal to avoid upsetting reviewers - take care to cite relevant sources, give credit where due, and view it as a 'hypothesis testing' proposal rather than as a 'prove something' proposal. • There is relevant literature related to education. • Contact relevant program officer – questions about ideas, mechanics – before submission • Email, phone, arrange to meet at AGU, GSA, AMS

13. Keys to Success • Figure out what you want to do and why • Evaluate your assets and needs • Start small • Always be ready to explain what you are doing and where it is going • Stay the course

14. Options • Mock panel review – read and review other project summary examples • Pre-proposal review of an idea you have (goal is to improve the proposal idea) • Goal/hypothesis/question • Significance/importance • Plan (1-2 sentences about what you will do) • Read successful proposals on your own