1 / 7

Qualitative Research Proposal Lessons: Key Insights for NSF Review Panels

Learn valuable insights for crafting qualitative social science proposals. Understand the unique strengths and limitations of qualitative methods, the importance of transparent data analysis, pitfalls of multi-method research, balancing tight proposals with room for new findings, transformative potential, and leveraging rejected proposals for resubmission.

kalani
Download Presentation

Qualitative Research Proposal Lessons: Key Insights for NSF Review Panels

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Six things I didn’t know about NSF review before I joined a panel Lessons for qualitative social science proposals

  2. 1. Qualitative research is respected on its own terms. • Understand what you are and are not able to do with the methods that you employ. • Not a representative sample, but… • Not able to test hypotheses (use research questions). • Define your terms (semi-structured interview, Q-Sort, NVivo, etc.) • Justify your choices.

  3. 2. Data analysis cannot be a black box. • Data analysis: Step between collecting information and final product. • Qualitative methods: content analysis, discourse analysis, narrative analysis… • Software doesn’t analyze your data, you do! • Give examples of how you will interpret information to answer research questions.

  4. 3. Multi-method research has strengths, but can backfire. • Kitchen sink problem. • Lack of expertise in all methods. • Make sure all research methods proposed are both appropriate and necessary.

  5. 4. There is a fine line between a tight proposal and one without room for new findings. • How will you know if you are wrong? • What might surprise you? • Include discussion of possible counter-intuitive findings.

  6. 5. Transformative potential can trump concerns about success. • Not necessary to be transformative. • Not necessary to call your research transformative (might backfire). • Will your research upend conventional wisdom, policy practices, or theory?

  7. 6. Reviewers often WANT to see rejected or unfunded proposals again (revised). • Revise and resubmit: “A better proposal would…” • Research already underway has better chance of funding.

More Related