Writing the SSHRC and OGS Proposal: A Writing Centre Workshop for Graduate Students By Y-Dang Troeung, Laurier Writing Centre Y-Dang Troeung, Laurier Writing Centre, www.wlu.ca/writing
Grant applications: why graduate students find them so intimidating Grant applications compel you to look into an otherwise unclear or unformed intellectual future, and to construct yourself on paper as a thinker you may not yet quite be or believe you could ever be someone who has an uncannily clear view of the work to come, someone who is confident, disciplined, and focussed. -- David L. Clark, Some Notes on Grantspersonship, 1
The Discourse Community SSHRC and OGS = discourse communities A discourse community establishes shared goals, values, and conventions for the grant proposal genre (Beaufort, College Writing and Beyond) The process of writing a proposal is largely a process of presenting or creating in a text one s role in the [academic] community (Myers, Writing Biology 43) The grant giver's goal is to fund work that furthers their mission (Rasey, The Art of Grant Writing 387).
In order to be successful at winning academic grants You should continually strive to build your knowledge of: The Discourse Community The Subject Matter The Grant Proposal Genre and Rhetorical Writing Strategies Focus of today s workshop
The grant proposal genre The SSHRC proposal consists of: 1) Program of Study 2 pages (+ works cited) The OGS proposal consists of 1) Plan of Study 1 page (including works cited) The rhetorical purpose of the grant proposal is to: convince the audience of the relevance of your proposed research inspire the audience s belief in your potential as a graduate student and as a future researcher The ability to market your ideas is the most critical feature of the art of grant writing (Rasey 387)
Know your audience Who will be reading and assessing your proposal? 1) Graduate studies committee in your department 2) Multidisciplinary selection committee in your university 3) Multidisciplinary selection committee appointed by the granting body Thus, your audience = members of your academic community, who are not necessarily in your exact field or discipline What is the implication of this on how you write your proposal?
Who should you ask for help? Rasey recommends that you get experienced grant writers to review your drafts: An expert in your field A good scientific editor An intelligent non-specialist From The Art of Grant Writing, 387
The secret to writing a strong proposal? Learning the moves that matter in grant proposals Successful proposals do not follow a rigid, formulaic structure, but they do tend to make the same kinds of rhetorical moves BUT, not all formulas are bad Graff and Birkenstein: They Say / I Say model of academic writing as conversation
The moves that matter in grant Macro-level moves proposals I. Moves to create a research space (CARS) II.Moves to establish ethos and pathos (emotion and credibility) Micro-level moves I. Linguistic choices made at the sentence level Schreyer et. al talks about these rhetorical moves as strategies I. organizational strategies II. persona management strategies III. writing strategies
Macro-Level Moves I Moves to create a research space for your project This section of the proposal is similar to the introduction of an academic research article. John Swales CARS (Create a Research Space) Model of Introductions Analyzed hundreds of sample introductions from published scientific articles and developed a model to account for the most common rhetorical moves made in these introductions
CARS Model for Introductions Move 1 Establishing a territory Move 2 Establishing a niche Move 3 Occupying the niche -- John M. Swales, Genre Analysis, pg. 140-141
Move 1 Establishing a territory Step 1 Making centrality claims Recently, there has been wide interest in. The study of. has become an important aspect of. Step 2 Making topic generalizations There is now much evidence to support the hypothesis that. There are many situations where. Step 3 Reviewing items of previous research Malcolm has pointed out that. Brie s theory (1988) claims that. -- John M. Swales, Genre Analysis, 144-154
How Professors Think Michele Lamont s new book How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgement (Harvard UP, 2009): The reason why academics are asked to evaluate is because we spend our lives developing a fairly detailed classification system that allows us to know what s been done already and to determine what is original and what is significant. These are the two main criteria [for funding]. Can you think of other kinds of grant applications where it might be important to establish what has already been done?
Advice on establishing a territory Do your research and consult with your advisors about the present state of the field Ask yourself the following questions: Has there been much published on this topic? If so, what are the seminal pieces of research/criticism? If not, why is your topic still worthy of academic inquiry? Keep this section as concise and specific as possible Keep in mind that the purpose of establishing territory in your proposal is to indicate how and why your project is original and relevant
Move 2 Establishing a niche Step 1 Counter-claiming This existing research, however, is misguided because Step 2 Indicating a gap However, there has been little research that. The research has tended to focus on.., rather than. Step 3 Question-raising A question remains whether. Step 4 Continuing a tradition The differences need to be analyzed. This must represent. --John M. Swales, Genre Analysis, 155-156
Advice on establishing a niche Argue positively (rather than negatively) about how your project relates to existing positions Don t say: The existing treatment of Topic A by Writer X is superficial and inadequate, and so my project. Do say: The existing treatment of Topic A by Writer X has provided a starting point for me to focus more specifically on.
Move 3 Occupying the niche Step 1 Outlining purposes The main purpose of this research is to. My study will explore the relationship between Step 2 Announcing methodology, claims, or contributions to knowledge My methodology will involve. I will argue that. My hypothesis is that Step 3 Indicating research project structure In chapter one of my thesis, I will examine. -- adapted from John M. Swales, Genre Analysis,
Advice on occupying the niche Ask yourself the following questions: Have you provided as much specific detail as possible about your object(s) of study? Have you articulated a specific and substantive methodological or theoretical framework? Have you conveyed a sense of the structure of your thesis? Do the goals of your project sound feasible within the period of your award tenure? Have you emphasized how your research project will contribute knowledge that will be useful and relevant? Is your project interdisciplinary in nature? If so, have you specified how your research will contribute to a variety of fields and disciplines? Have focused your project by providing a catchy, informative title? Tip: Look up the titles of winning research
How detailed should I be when I occupy the niche? 1 st -year Master s program 2 nd -year Master s program 1 st -year doctoral program 2 nd -year doctoral program 3 rd -year doctoral program 4 th -year doctoral program 5 th -year doctoral program Increasingly detailed about your objects of analysis, arguments, methodology, thesis structure, contribution to knowledge
Recap of CARS Model Move 1 Establishing a territory Move 2 Establishing a niche Move 3 Occupying the niche -- John M. Swales, Genre Analysis, pg. 140-141 Another way of thinking of the CARS model: Articulating a narrative (past, present, and future) about the status of knowledge on a given topic in a given field
A note on opening and closing moves - Don t: begin and end your proposal with background information - Do: begin and end your proposal with motivating information
How Professors Think about Emotion Lamont argues that emotion plays an important role in evaluating grant applications Selection committees will often discuss what s exciting in the proposals: A lot of the previous literature on peer review treated emotion as either irrelevant or corrupting. And my argument is to say, No, actually it s not irrelevant or corrupting. It s essential to evaluation.
Macro-Level Moves II Moves to establish ethos and pathos This section of the proposal is similar to a personal narrative Somewhere in the proposal, tell a narrative (a story with a past, present, and future) to persuade the reader that you are the best person to take on the proposed research project Use moves to establish ethos and pathos (i.e. to establish the voice of your proposal) Ethos = appeals to credibility Pathos = appeals to emotion
Moves to establish ethos/pathos This narrative usually addresses questions such as: What evidence do you have of your past achievements as a student/researcher (i.e., previous awards, scholarships, research assistantships)? How have you begun to circulate the results of your research? (i.e., conference presentations, publications) What kind of knowledge or research training have you acquired in the past (i.e., through your university courses, thesis work, non-academic experience)?
Moves to establish your ethos/pathos Questions cont d: How will this background assist you in completing your future research? And how will your future research be different from your previous work? Which university will you attend, and why (i.e., course offerings, potential supervisor(s), special resources)? Why do you want to pursue graduate studies? What are your long-term vocational goals?
Putting together the two essential components of the grant proposal Moves to create a research space Moves to establish ethos and pathos
Moving from SSHRC to OGS From the OGS website: You must provide a one-page statement of interest or plan of study. The statement of interest should include your reasons for pursuing a graduate program in your chosen field. This description is very vague, but don't be fooled by it Selection committees expect a very detailed proposal Best to think of the OGS proposal as: a highly condensed version of the SSHRC proposal a one page-document that combines moves to establish create a research space AND moves to create ethos and pathos Which moves you choose to emphasize will depend on your particular strengths
Micro-level moves In your proposal, you MUST demonstrate a strong command of language and form Use language and sentence structure to reinforce the overall presentation of yourself as a motivated, energetic, intellectually curious and academically rigorous student your research as original, relevant, contextualized, focused Successful proposals are all written in a mature, compact writing style: concise, coherent, varied and vigorous According to Janet Rasey, a grant reviewer for 8 years: unfocused writing is the single most common correctable fault of grant proposals that fail to get funded (387).
The Science of Scientific Writing Gopen and Swan's article The Science of Scientific Writing emphasizes: Writing with the reader in mind: readers make many of their most important interpretive decisions about the substance of prose based on clues they receive from its structure. Personal Style: Our best stylists turn out to be our most skillful violators; but in order to carry this off, they must fulfill expectations most of the time, causing the violations to be perceived as exceptional moments, worthy of note. Clarity and coherence in your writing by using a known/new strategy
Moves to Create a Research Space Moves to establish ethos and pathos
Final Advice Start early Look over your most successful course papers Discuss potential projects with your professors Study winning proposals Check if there is a file of these in your department Ask a colleague in your department who has won Get feedback on your proposal Give your draft to a professor or a peer Bring your proposal to the Writing Centre Ensure that the presentation of your proposal is perfect Follow all the guidelines and proofread carefully; make every word count Revise, revise, revise Re-work your proposal year after year, and don t give up!
Sign-up for a Writing Consultation A writing professional at the Writing Centre will be happy to give you one-on-one feedback on your grant proposal Please schedule an appointment in advance For Laurier Students only
The Writing Centre Visit our website for information about our location, hours, staff, and upcoming workshops: www.wlu.ca/writing Get in contact with us: Emmy Misser, MA, Manager Lauren Stephen, PhD, Writing Consultant Y-Dang Troeung, PhD Candidate, Graduate Writing Advisor
Selected Bibliography Beaufort, Anne. College Writing and Beyond: A New Framework for University Writing Instruction. Logan: Utah State U P, 2007 Clark, David L. Some Notes on Grantspersonship. David L. Clark. Personal Homepage. June 20, 2007. <http://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~dclark/clarklinks.htm> Ding, Huling. Genre Analysis of Personal Statements: Analysis of Moves in Application Essays to Medical and Dental Schools. English for Specific Purposes 26. 3 (2007): 368-392. Doran, Jo. Writing the Personal Statement. The Owl at Purdue. Purdue University. July 2, 2008. http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/642/01/ Graff, Gerald, and Cathy Birkenstein. They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2006. Kolln, Martha. Rhetorical Grammar : Grammatical Choices, Rhetorical Effects. 5th ed ed. New York: Pearson Education, 2007. Lamont, Michele. How Professors Think: Inside the Curious World of Academic Judgement. Boston: Harvard UP, 2009. Locke, Lawrence F., Waneen Wyrick Spirduso, and Stephen J. Silverman. Proposals that Work : A Guide for Planning Dissertations and Grant Proposals. 4th ed ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 2000. Misser, Emmy. All You Need to Know about Verbs and Verb Look-Alikes. Writing Centre Handouts. Laurier Writing Centre. June 20, 2007. http://www.wlu.ca/forms/935/verbs_and_verb_look-alikes.pdf ---. Sentence Revision for a Mature Compact Style. Writing Centre Handouts. Laurier Writing Centre. June 20, 2007. http://www.wlu.ca/forms/918/sentence_revision.pdf
Selected Bibliography Myers, Greg. Chapter 2: Social Construction in Two Biologists Proposal. Writing Biology. Texts in the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1990: 41-62. Proctor, Margaret. Academic Proposals. Writing at the University of Toronto. The University of Toronto. June 20, 2007. http://www. utoronto.ca/writing/proposals.html Rasey, Janet. The Art of Grant Writing. September 20, 2009. http://sitemaker.umich.edu/pharmacology.502/files/rasey.pdf Schryer, Catherine et al. Strategies in Use in Successful SSHRC Applications. September 13, 2007. http://www.research.uwaterloo.ca/grants/documents/studyonsucces sfulsshrcapplications_000.pdf Stelzer, Richard J. How to Write a Winning Personal Statement for Graduate and Professional School. 3rd ed ed. Princeton, N.J.: Peterson's, 1997. Swales, John M. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 1990. Gopen, G.D., and Swan, J.A. "The Science of Scientific Writing" American Scientist 78 ((Nov-Dec 1990): 550-558. Tardy, Christine M. A Genre System View of the Funding of Academic Research. Written Communication 20.1 (2003): 7-36.