How to Write an ARC Proposal P for Discovery and Linkage Schemes for Social, Behavioural and Economic Sciences [SBE] Professor Phyllis Tharenou Executive Dean Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences 28 th May 2010 1
Agenda Setting Yourself Up to Succeed Aims of Discovery and Linkage schemes Your strategy to get the best score you can Writing a Discovery or Linkage proposal Selection criteria Critical parts of First Half of proposal: Summary of Proposal, Research Opportunity and Performance Evidence (ROPE) Critical Parts of Second Half: Aims & Background (not scored), Significance and Innovation, Approach and Methodology, National Benefit Linkage Scheme: Other aspects Partner Commitment (Linkage scheme only) Conclusion 2
Background 3
ARC Discipline Groups (Panels) 1. Biological Sciences and Biotechnology (BSB) 2. Engineering, Mathematics and Informatics (EMI) 3. Physics, Chemistry and Earth Sciences (PCE) 4. Humanities and Creative Arts (HCA) 5. Social, Behavioural and Economic Sciences (SBE) Which panel will consider your proposal? Determined by Field of Research Codes you enter Panel members (College of Experts) have the greatest influence on your score and whether you succeed Who is on your panel? ARC Executive Director has an influence (& Chair)
Aims of 2 Major ARC Grant Schemes ARC Discovery scheme is: Whereas For funding excellent fundamental research by individuals and teams 22% success rate on average ARC Linkage scheme is: For collaborative research between universities and industry, government, and community organizations to solve important problems and provide benefit 44% success rate on average 5
Aims of Discovery Scheme To support excellent research To enhance scale & focus of research in national priorities To expand Australia s knowledge base and research capability To encourage research and research training (fellowships, PhDs) in high quality environments To enhance international collaboration in research To foster the international competitiveness of Australian research Research into Indigenous Australian Societies now a priority 6
Discovery Scheme Fellowships 1. Aust Postdoctoral Fellowships ( 3 years since PhD) 2. Aust Research Fellows ARF/QEII 8 years since PhD, also 13 years if had an ARF/QEII 3. Aust Professorial Fellows APF ( 8 years since PhD) 2. and 3. can request 50% of funding Certain number available in each category in each panel Can move to new institution or apply to stay in own 7
ARC Aims of Linkage Grants 1. Long-term strategic research alliances to apply advanced knowledge to problems and/or provide opportunities to obtain national economic or social benefits 2. Scale and focus of research in priority areas 3. Collaborative research on issues of benefit to regional and rural communities and in field of IT and communications 4. Outcome-oriented postgraduate research training to prepare high-calibre research students: APAI scholarships (industry) 5. Opportunities for postdocs to pursue internationally competitive research with other organisations: APDI 6. Build a national pool of world class researchers 8
Overview Discovery (DP) 1 round/year, closes early March Can apply for research project costs alone, or project costs and PhD costs and Fellowships, or apply for Fellowships alone Linkage (LP) 2 rounds/year, close May and November Can apply for project costs alone, or PhD costs alone, or project + PhD or a postdoc Quota for ECRs ( 5 years since PhD) is 15% of 1 st year budget Can hold 2 DPs at a time: 1 sole, 1 with others Can hold 4 LPs concurrently 9
YOUR STRATEGY: HELPING YOU TO GET THE HIGHEST SCORE YOU CAN 10
Considerations Is the idea HOT/ grabs /advances knowledge/significant academically Is it a big, interesting, impactful, research problem Does the grant advance generalizable academic knowledge? Is a Discovery proposal value for money? Important for whether it can be lifted over the budget cutoff$ by the College of Experts to raise the Discovery success rate Is it a failed previous application? Needs to be different 11
Field of Research Codes Critical (FoRs) 6-digit FoR codes used to select your assessors (Oz & Int Readers) & match is strongly related to success 2-digit: 17 Psychology 4-digit: 1701 Psychology 6-digit: 170107 Industrial and Organisational Psychology Keywords and 100 word summary can also be influential Implications Select correct 6-digit codes to gain knowledgeable assessors and raise your score Your topic, or Conflicts of Interest, may rule out all knowledgeable assessors: So write proposal assuming that 12
2009 Funded Discovery Projects Characteristic All ARC Panels SBE HCA Average Duration 3.27 years 3.22 3.30 Average 1 st year funds as % of request $116k = 67% of request $89k = 66% $99k = 70% Average funds gained for total project $341k $262k $293k ECR-only applications ( 5 years since PhD awarded) Applications that include ECRs Success Rate 15.5% % of income = 10% 20% 13% 12% 13% Success Rate = 20% 24% 18% Average no. of CIs 1.96 2.31 1.97 13
Discovery Success Rates of Proposals with ECRs only: 1 or More Self-Nominated Discipline 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 BSB 28.5% 23.3% 18.4% 17.2% 16.1% EE 30.2% 20.9% 23.0% 20.0% 21.9% HCA 22.6% 18.5% 15.3% 15.2% 18.4% MIC 29.5% 22.5 % 20.9% 19.5% 20.1% PCG 29.8% 21.3% 19.0% 22.8% 18.7% SBE 25.0% 20.3% 12.7% 20.6% 23.6% All 27.4% 21.0% 17.8% 19.3% 19.9% 14 14
ECRs: Success Rates Funding Allocations for Projects Involving All ECRs 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 % of total funds allocated to projects involving ECRs 33.2% 32.1% 35.9% 35.0% 37.4% Implications: If you are an ECR, you can apply on your own if you have a good record or you can apply with a team where team is advantaged 15 15
2009 Discovery Project Fellowships Need good to excellent scores on both the (1) Project - total score on 4 selection criteria, and (2) Fellow, especially on Research Opp ity & Perform ce Evidence 1. Australian Postdoc Fellowships: Can be 3 years or 4 year duration (75% of each year) Success Rate: 17% (4 year 21% vs 3 yr 16%) 2. Australian Research Fellows/Queen Eliz. II Fellows: Success Rate: 15.1% Can ask for 50% of funds: better success rate (22% vs 13%) 3. Australian Professorial Fellows Success Rate: 14.3% Can ask for 50% of funds: better success rate (20% vs 8%) 16
2009 Funded Linkage Projects (Rd 1 & 2) Feature All ARC Panels SBE HCA Average duration 3.05 years 3.10 2.95 Av. ARC 1 st year funds as % of request Av. ARC Funds gained for project & % request $110k or $101k= 71% $329k or $300k =68% $95k or $95k= 71% or 64% $290k or $291k =66% or =61% $97k or $87k= 74% or 67% $295k or $245 =72% or 67% Average no. CIs 2.9, 3.1 3.63, 3.65 3.06, 2.75 Av. no. of collab. organisations 2.2 2.6 2.9 Success Rates APAI 34%, 39% 33%, 40% 26%, 40% APAI _IT (quota of 50) 91%, 65% 0%, 29% 30%, 13% Aust. Postdoc Fellows 52%, 40% 88%, 47% 100%, 67% Rural & Regional 46%, 43% 39%, 47% 45%, 45% 17
Your Strategy Based on the Evidence 1. Choose right 6-digit Field of Research codes to gain a match with knowledgeable assessors (r =.87 with success) 2. Write proposal knowing the features of a funded one 3. Select right Chief Investigator team and size (e.g. 2 or 3) but Can include ECRs as CIs in Discovery Projects or as ECRs alone 4. Have an international partner (DP: 24.2% vs 16.9%: 2006-2008) 5. Avoid submitting an across-panel proposal (2004-2008 data): Cross-vs single panel 19.7% vs 23.4% (overall success rate 23.2%) Transfer vs not transfer proposal to another panel: 16.8% vs 23.7% 6. Do not resubmit same topic if rejected twice 7. Consider success rates of schemes: Linkage 22% Discovery 44% 18
How Will You Write the Grant to Get the Best Score?: Critical to Meet the Selection Criteria: Write the sections of the grant as the best and biggest on whether they are scored and their weight on the selection criteria 19
Calculating Your Score: The Weights Criteria for Scoring Discovery Linkage Investigators 1. Research Opportunity and 40% 20% Performance Evidence Project Content 2. Significance & Innovation 30% 25% 3. Approach and Training 20% 20% 4. National Benefit 10% 10% Partner Organization 5. Partner Alliance, Commitment - 25% 100% 100% Average Success Rate 22% 44% An automatic, weighted (by %) formula calculates your score. 20
First Part of the Proposal Grant Is Read from the Front to the Back ****Writing of First Pages is Critical (e.g. Summary, ROPE) 21
100 word Project Summary (No score) 1. First impression to assessors 2. Helps Executive Director match Proposal to CoE member and Oz Readers (qualitatatively) 3. Contributes to score for Significance and Innovation (30% of DP score & 25% of LP score) Presents the academic idea that advances knowledge of the field Write in simple, plain, clear person in the street English; no technical terms, no acronyms/abbreviations Grab the assessor: research problem needs to be worthy, interesting, meaningful, competitive 22
Writing the100 Word Project Summary: For example 1. 1 st sentence says why this research is practically important and why it is so now ( urgency ) 2. Leads to your providing the research problem and the project s research aims, indicating how it will it be significant (i.e., how it advances knowledge) 3. Leads to your providing how the research will be done, and 4. Ends logically with what the project s expected outcomes and benefits will be (which leads into the 2-sentence Summary of Proposal for Public Release/media release coming up next) 23
ROPE (% of Total Score: 40% DP, 20% LP) The Chief Investigator team- Increase overall ROPE of team (e.g. 2 or 3?) Carefully select the team Established researchers, ECRs, top international CIs, Partners - worked together before? Expertise/Capacity to deliver this project Can also just have a sole CI 24
ROPE Questions 1. Details on career and opportunities for research over last 5 years e.g. career interruptions and their effects 2. Recent significant publications in last 5 years 3. Ten career-best publications (no time limit) 4. Further evidence in relation to research impact and contributions to the field over the last 10 years 5. Most significant contributions to the research field of the Proposal Link your past research and achievements to this specific project 25
Writing ROPE For 3. Ten career-best publications, and 2. numbered Recent significant publications in last 5 years: Give any publicly obtainable/acknowledged measure of quality; e.g. Reputation of the Book Publisher The complete reference for a Published Book Review ERA journal ranks; Web of Science/ISI Impact Factors, Ranks of IFs (e.g. 4/69), other publication ranking No. of citations (from Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar) Awards Provide any ARC grants from last 10 years and put the numbered recent publications in last 5 years that arose from each 26
Provide both: ***Justification of Best 10 1. Objective evidence for a publication e.g. book review, quality of press, award, ERA rank, citations, impact factor rank; and 2. A substantive argument for how the publication is recognized as having advanced knowledge Avoid selecting for Best 10 if you can: Textbooks, working papers, Reports, government publications, Conference presentations or papers, Books in lowly regarded presses, chapters in own edited book, Lowly ranked journals, Australian journals (unless cited), Publications in press or forthcoming 27
Further evidence for research impact and contributions to the field over last 10 years (b) Evidence for quality of research outputs within discipline expectations: e.g.: Citations (e.g. numbers, H factors) Evaluation of quality of publications, conference papers Honours and awards/prizes, other esteem measures e.g. Keynote addresses especially at international conferences Quality of conferences presented at Editorial roles & reviewing, especially international Fellowships in learned societies or prestigious bodies External competitive grants International research collaborations Number of PhD completions & where now Any other ERA esteem factors 28
What Harms Team s ROPE Score? Omitted information or mistakes in reference list; e.g. Missing page nos. or volume nos. for any publication including conference proceedings (or CD Rom, URL). Authors names not given in order appear on publication Choosing weak publications for best 10 Having many conference presentations & few journal articles or have no books Many journals or books of low rank or reputation Too few publications or too many low ranked ones Weak member of team on ROPE subject to opportunity 29
Second Part of Writing the Application: The Project Scored Parts Critical: Significance and Innovation, Approach and Training, National Benefit, Partner Commitment (only Linkage) Not scored: Aims & Background, Communication of Results, Role of Personnel, References 30
Writing the Application Like writing the first half of a top, international, journal article up to the end of the Method section. Has: 1. Title 2. A 100 word Summary 3. Aims and background = Introduction to a paper - 1 page 4. S&I = Critical literature review of a paper arguing for research propositions - 4 pages (Discovery) or 3 pages (Linkage) 5. Approach = Method (includes method of analysis) - 2 pages Especially for Discovery, not written like a proposal justifying practical importance as Significance & Innovation Usually a program of research, not just one study Follow funding rules & instructions to applicants 31
A Successful Discovery Project Application Give specific research objectives, consistent throughout the proposal To prove significance, provide an academic argument for how addressing the research problem advances knowledge in this field Do a critical literature review to arrive at Research Questions/ Propositions/Hyps etc. whose testing will advance knowledge Approach then tests these Research Quests/Props/Hyps Write proposal based on weightings for selection criteria: ROPE, S&I, Approach & National Benefit, plus Partner Commitment for the Linkage scheme 32
Aims & Background (No score) Introduces research problem & justifies its importance Make it short, sharp, clear, important Write 1 page only (gains no score), 1. Start with arguing for why this is an important problem to be examined now justified by CITED evidence (e.g. stats), which then leads to your giving the specific research aims (1 st paragraph) 2. Then provide the broad contemporary literature trends to contextualise and justify the overall research problem that you pose (2 nd maybe 3 rd paragraph) 3. Finish with paragraph leading to clear, specific research objectives (e.g. 3 dot points) (3 rd or 4 th paragraph) 33
Definition of Significance and Innovation Discovery Scheme Does the research address a significant academic problem? Do the Proposal s aims and concepts advance the knowledge base of the discipline? How will the anticipated outcomes do so? Does the research have a conceptual framework? Will new methods or technologies be developed? Will the project contribute to the advancement of knowledge in one or more areas of national priority or of Indigenous Australian societies? Linkage Scheme Does the research address an important problem? How will the anticipated outcomes advance the knowledge base? Are the project aims and concepts novel and innovative? Will new methods or technologies be developed?
Significance & Innovation (Scored 30% or 25%) Write 3-4 pages as a critical literature review of the top literature to argue for Research Propositions whose testing will advance knowledge of the field Shows that you are advancing theory and the results of the top literature to prove significance 1. Might start with an overall conceptual framework e.g. a figure or model to give structure to what will come up or to show the conceptual framework to be tested 2. Then subdivide the research objectives and work through each of their components in a logical order, critiquing the literature and arguing from theory to arrive at the research quests/props 3. End with a summary S&I paragraph, drawing together in a convincing order what makes this research program significant and innovative 35
Approach - 20% of score Write 2 pages describing the studies/stages which test the Research Props derived in Signific ce & Innovation Divide your program of research into studies/stages. Give each study a substantive title, for example, that matches your research questions. For each study or stage, write a specific Method section Make critical features clear (e.g., what is the Dep Variable) Point out the specific limitations & problems Budget table and its justification page match what you say you will do in the Approach 36
1. Start with an overview paragraph describing the total research program and linking each of its studies/stages to the Research Ques/Props/Hyps developed in S&I. Justify the overall research design 2. Then describe each study/stage and show how each tests its research Props/Hyps or answers each research question Sectionalise each in a consistent way: e.g. i. The sample, how you will gain it (sanction), the problems, ii. iii. iv. Writing the Approach How you will collect the data How you will measure the concepts/variables How you will analyse the data to answer the Res Props. No need for a timetable or tables or a lot of white space 37
Writing National Benefit: Two Ways or Both Write 2/3s of a page & use dot points 1. Say how the results will make a difference to Australian society economically or socially or environmentally: i. How your forecasted results will translate into outputs, productivity, change, etc. or affect the social fabric ii. If possible, by how much iii. Who will be affected by them iv. Who will use the results and how AND/OR 2. Show how you will develop research capacity (postdocs, PhDs, ECRs etc) in this important area for Australia and how the results will help build Australia s research excellence and reputation in this area Do not exaggerate, or be vague or too general Do not repeat what was said earlier in the Proposal 38
Other (No Score) References: Very important (1 page can use smaller font) Need a very strong, selective reference list of the top international literature to show are advancing knowledge; Can include CI team s work but not too much self-citing Roles of Personnel: Watch what you say, e.g., do not have CIs only as managers of others (or have too many CIs with little to do) Communication of Results: Do not be vague or unrealistic. Name the journals you will submit to, and give the titles of papers or book that will arise from the Proposal. 39
What will lower your score in an Application? If the Linkage Proposal is a consulting job or contract research (kiss of death) Unclear &/or inconsistent research objectives across the sections of the proposal Nontheoretical/practical only, especially in Discovery Team does not look real or have the skills needed, or has poor ROPE overall National Benefit section is weak (repetitive, exaggerates, vague) Constan repeating of why this project is practically important in S&I (it is said in National benefit, Aims & Background, and Summary for Public Release) Poor reference list, wrong length 40
LINKAGE GRANTS: ADDITIONAL ISSUES Partner Organisation Commitment: Contribution of money, in-kind support, participation, leadership, conduct of tasks 41
Writing Partner Commitment 25% of score Write 1-2 pages Show commitment; for example, Industry personnel part of the project team, High % cash contribution by Partner 1. Start showing real partner relevance Fit of proposal with their strategic plan, current goals, etc. and a strong rationale for the partnership 2. Next show clearly the Partner s contributions and role in project Show Partner involved in project direction and planning e.g. member of steering group Show clear involvement in conduct of the project Show use of partner s facilities, equipment, services 3. Then show good strategies in place to maintain the partnership e.g. Regular meetings in both places, Present work in industryrelated forums and newsletters etc. 42
Who are Linkage Partner Organizations? Rd1 09 Rd2 09 05-08 Commonwealth Government 5% 3% 6% State & Local Government 29% 36% 27% International government 1% 2% 2% Nonprofit Australian 12% 15% 11% Nonprofit International 4% 1% 2% Private company Australian 33% 31% 37% International company Australian 18% 12% 17% 43
Most Frequent Industry Partner (2009 Rd 2) Government Administration & Defence (206); Health & Community Services (198); Education (82) Manufacturing (121); Electricity, Gas & Water (50), Mining (44), Construction (36) Cultural & Recreational Services (99); Property & Business Services (82); Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing (77) 44
How Did Researchers Find Linkage Partners From Students & Clients Past students e.g. PhD, C wk Masters Past clients of Flinders: Clients from contract research & consulting you did or sought your advice Small Projects To start relationship, including student or honours projects From Practitioner Organizations By joining committees of professional associations/practitioner bodies Advisory board members & their contacts, school industry liaison Accepting when Asked When organizations ask researcher to do research or consulting or approach Flinders with an idea Matched with Orgnz n Strategic Plans Find organizations whose strategic plans match your research study Work from government policy From Colleague Contacts Join with others in Flinders who already have the partner contacts and write the grant as a team By Getting One s Work Known Publish article in a practitioner magazine getting the idea out; practitioners may then contact you Disseminating a report in the area and gaining interest Giving seminars or public lectures on topic to practitioners 45 Gain introductions by third parties
Building the Partnership Start negotiations early may take over 12 months to arrange Identify partner(s) first and fit with their needs Build on existing links Start small- when asked for advice, through a consulting job, a small research contract, an honours project Work with partner(s) to develop project together to meet both goals Discuss intellectual property issues up front Allow time to obtain support letters from the Partner Make sure that they match application in terms of focus of the project, industry partner contributions, etc. Be explicit about partner s role and contribution and agreement about the $$ Need internal contact or champion for the project 46
Conclusion 47
Conclusion: Writing an ARC Grant Check out the idea first Is it a meaningful, significant, big enough research problem? Make sure first half of grant is written very well e.g. 100 word summary, ROPE give evidence of quality Write grant in same format as first half of a top journal article (i.e. up to end of Method) Write significance and innovation showing how you will advance knowledge by providing a critical literature review Ensure grant has theory and an explicit conceptual framework, especially for Discovery 48
Conclusion: Your Writing Strategy Make sure grant is clear, no jargon, argued/analytical, specific, no repetition, well cited. Understand what each selection criterion means and write to that meaning. Write the length of sections according to the weight of each selection criterion Gain a match between the knowledge of the assessors and your proposal by the 6-digit codes you select Help make ROPE as good as it can be by design of team and by writing ROPE well 49
Conclusion: Opportunities Give yourself the best chance of success: Consider the success rates of the different schemes Linkage Projects have highest success rates (44%) Partners are State & Local Governments, Australian & International Private companies Try to obtain a Linkage postdoc (success rate 46%) Include international collaborators Work with top overseas partner investigators Know ARC priorities (gain an advantage) For example, Indigenous research and ECRs are a priority Consider the team carefully. For Discovery Projects If your track record is not strong enough to go on your own, go with a team with good track records If you are an ECR with journal articles or books, try for a sole ECR grant to capitalise on that ARC priority 50
The End 51