Research ::: SSHRC Standard Research Grant Application Tools
SSHRC Standard Research Grant Application Tools
By Hugh Shewell, Associate Dean, Students
- Focus: is the research question or topic focused, clear and well-stated?
- Does it build on, clarify, fill a gap or challenge existing research/knowledge/literature and/or does it create a new dimension to that existing knowledge or break new ground? – be clear how it accomplishes any one of these;
- Is the research manageable? Just like your dissertation – you’re not going to solve the world – but it’s amazing what a focused piece can do in contributing to that goal! Related to this: manageability means not just focus but whether or not the time frame is realistic with respect to the research question/topic, data to be collected, expected outcomes, etc.
- Budget: the budget should bear a reasonable relationship to the tasks involved in the proposed research (most of them emanating from your methodology but others related to equipment, stationery, research assistants, etc. – although all in a sense emanates from your methodology).
- Literature review: This is the heart of your proposal and is reviewed very carefully by the reviewers. Make sure that the literature reviewed really does bear on the research question, topic. Occasionally the link between some of the literature and the proposed research needs to be clearly shown since it will not be readily apparent to the reader. Make sure the literature is current to the topic or state – if as in the case of some historical pieces or examination of intellectual thought, etc. – why older literature is still relevant. Obviously major thinkers over time are to be/can be considered but be sure to address immediate literature relevant to your proposal.
- Again, be sure the literature is relevant to the proposal – amazingly, some proposals conduct lit reviews which seem only marginally or at times not evidently relevant! Be sure to show clearly how the literature and the argument you build in your literature review lead you to your research question, thesis.
- Is the proposal consistent with your previous work, areas of interest or, are you charting new waters for yourself? Can you show that it’s not such a huge leap, that there are transferable ideas, methods, and so on that contribute to the new topic area?
- If this is a second application – meaning a re-submission of the same proposal – be sure that you have addressed the previous reviewers’ comments/concerns. It’s a good strategy to thank them and then indicate where you have addressed the comments/concerns. If you are re-submitting and it was approved but not funded it doesn’t hurt to mention that together with addressing any concerns.
- Clarity, good grammar, organisation and coherence – what we expect of students we expect of ourselves – poorly written and poorly organised proposals – despite whatever flashes of brilliance they show – won’t be funded. If it’s a struggle to read it, it will leave a bad taste and doubts about your ability to write up and publish results.
- Be clear about the potential contribution of your research to both academic knowledge and to general public purpose or public good. For more esoteric topic areas this can be a bit of a spin – but all knowledge ultimately serves the public good – or we certainly like to believe it does!
