I came away with so much more than my original expectations of the course. I work in a research environment where I work with grants and proposals all day, every day. It is all too easy to get caught up in the day-to-day process of getting a proposal out the door and forgetting what the objective of a proposal actually is.
Proposals are tools for managing change. The proposal writer’s primary responsibility is to develop a rhetorical strategy to persuade the reader his or her proposal is worth funding. Rhetorical strategy is a phrase that is often preached, but how often is it explained in depth for an individual to understand what the true meaning of rhetorical strategy is?
During the development phase I found a great deal of research about proposal writing that talked all around rhetorical strategy; however, none defined it enough for the reader to come away with a clear understanding and ability to use it. I also learned I have been a preacher of rhetorical strategy in my position in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies in AAH. I can look back on situations where I assisted in editing or framing proposals where I prompted the writer to revisit his or her rhetorical strategy. Ironically, I have been preaching rhetorical strategy just as the authors of the books and articles I reviewed. I never tried to enable the writer to understand how and why their rhetorical strategy could be improved.
Rhetorical strategy is more than just the writing. Rhetoric is a tremendous tool if you use it wisely. Every word, every image, every page, and every punctuation mark of a proposal is rhetorical strategy. Writing a proposal is more than writing words to obtain funding for a project. Writing a proposal is a way of persuading the reader your proposal is the project that will be the tool for managing change he or she is looking for.
I also learned that proposal writing should not be done alone. Peer review is vital to the success of a proposal. Individuals not associated with the proposal can offer a fresh perspective and constructive criticism.
I thoroughly enjoyed this course, and it will benefit me as a MAPC student, as well as in my position at Clemson. I have a new appreciation of theory and the power of rhetoric, not only in proposal writing, but in writing and communication in general.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Chapter 12, The Final Touches
The deadline is looming and the writer is tired but there is still more to do before the proposal can be submitted. Working with faculty and students in AAH I always stress the importance of trying to have the document ready for submission three to five days prior to the deadline. That gives the writer and our office time to make last minute revisions and changes prior to submission. It also allows a fresh set of eyes to review the document and offer suggestions. A few weeks ago I worked with a faculty member and graduate student on a proposal that we actually submitted three minutes past the deadline. Frankly, the proposal presentation reflected a last minute, rushed proposal. When a reviewer sits down to read proposals they have a stack of proposals to read and is probably tired before they even start to read. My guess is that particular proposal was probably never read from start to finish. This is so important to allot time to put the finishing touches on your proposal. It is a shame to put time and effort into a proposal that is not even read.
The writer should not wait until the last minute to try to obtain letters of support, subawards, bios, and contract documentation. These are all items that tend to be forgotten about until the last minute. They are also all items that take a considerable amount of time to obtain. These contacts should be made at the beginning of the proposal process.
Revise the proposal one last time. The writer is probably tired of looking at the document and it may be a good idea to have someone not associated with the project to review it. If writing a proposal for an institution contact a grants coordinator or someone in the administrative office to acquire a checklist to make sure nothing has been left off. Review the sponsor’s guidelines again to make sure the package has everything that is required.
The writer should not wait until the last minute to try to obtain letters of support, subawards, bios, and contract documentation. These are all items that tend to be forgotten about until the last minute. They are also all items that take a considerable amount of time to obtain. These contacts should be made at the beginning of the proposal process.
Revise the proposal one last time. The writer is probably tired of looking at the document and it may be a good idea to have someone not associated with the project to review it. If writing a proposal for an institution contact a grants coordinator or someone in the administrative office to acquire a checklist to make sure nothing has been left off. Review the sponsor’s guidelines again to make sure the package has everything that is required.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Chapter 11
In Chapter 11 Johnson-Sheehan talks about the importance of graphics in proposals. Our society is becoming more and more digital literate. With this comes the reality that as a whole we are becoming more visual and want more visuals in the text we read. Graphics should be used in a proposal to augment the writing, not to simply fill space. The graphics should be informative and placed closely to the topic they are referencing. I recall a proposal where all of the tables and figures were in the appendix. It takes far too much time to have to flip back and forth to reference a table ten or more pages away. The writer should design his or her proposal with the graphics reinforcing the text it is associated with.
Graphics should be considered when writing the text, not in the final hours of the proposal. Each graph, table, or picture should be numbered consecutively and labeled properly and neatly with the reader in mind. Data taken from another source should include the name of that source. Another point Johnson-Sheehan makes is that graphics should be credible and ethical. The writers (and the company or institution he or she represents) is on the line. It would be wise to not use data if what it represents is questionable.
Visuals in the document should not clutter the document, but clarify an important point to the readers. The writer should keep in mind that visuals are powerful tools that can make or break a proposal depending on the time, effort and quality they portray. The writer should be certain the graphics in the proposal are enhancing the proposal, not taking away from it. If the writer is not skilled in graphics he or she may want to employ someone to assist with the graphics in a proposal. This will ensure a quality document.
Graphics should be considered when writing the text, not in the final hours of the proposal. Each graph, table, or picture should be numbered consecutively and labeled properly and neatly with the reader in mind. Data taken from another source should include the name of that source. Another point Johnson-Sheehan makes is that graphics should be credible and ethical. The writers (and the company or institution he or she represents) is on the line. It would be wise to not use data if what it represents is questionable.
Visuals in the document should not clutter the document, but clarify an important point to the readers. The writer should keep in mind that visuals are powerful tools that can make or break a proposal depending on the time, effort and quality they portray. The writer should be certain the graphics in the proposal are enhancing the proposal, not taking away from it. If the writer is not skilled in graphics he or she may want to employ someone to assist with the graphics in a proposal. This will ensure a quality document.
Style Sheet
Diana Thrasher Style Sheet
Line Level
Body Text: 12pt Arila
Underline: each header of each section of the proposal
Paragraph Level
Leading: 1.5 spaces
Headings: Level 1, 14 pt. Arial, bold, underlined
Justification: Left
Nonsequential lists:circles (filled)
Page Level
Columns: one
Header: none
Footer: centered page number one each page (excluding the cover)
Borders: around figure boxes only, ½ pt. lines
Graphics: Tables fit into one column.
Graphics Level
Font: 10pt.Arial, bold
Borders: ½ pt around each table or graph if necessary
Captions: None
Document Level
Binding: 3 ring binder
Cover stock: Same as body
Paper: 25lb. white standard 8.5x11
____________________________________________________________________
Project Plan
Incorporating research expectations in a predominately humanities teaching college will require careful planning and support in order to build a research culture. It will not happen overnight, and it will take more than one individual to make it happen. Therefore, my primary aim at this point is to produce two complete resource documents for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts, and Humanities (AAH) to use in developing an idea into a proposal that conforms to the overall goal of a selected funding agency. First, a resource manual containing a set of guidelines to assist in successful proposal development will be compiled. Second, a multimedia document housed on the AAH Research website will be developed that will introduce and highlight the key points of the manual.
AAH can succeed in research but in order to develop a research culture the College must be willing to put the resources into place to enable the new grant seekers to produce winning proposals. This starts at the top and will trickle down. President Barker has laid the ground work with his push for Top 20 status. In order to reach this goal, Clemson’s research dollars must excel at a rapid pace.
The first phase of the project will be to enlist the support from the department chairs. If the chairs are not behind this project, the faculty will not feel it is their best interest to pursue research dollars. The department chairs will be presented with the research history of the University and the future forecast from President Barker. A list of benefits will also be presented to the chairs. These benefits include:
o Grants allow exploration of interest.
o Grants help move a department toward its goals.
o The department/school needs the results that grants generate, such as equipment, personnel and research findings.
o Grants can get things that the institution cannot afford to purchase (e.g., equipment, post doctorial employees, and top-notch graduate students)
o Grants can lead to publishing, the deliverance of papers at professional meetings, and travel.
o Increased indirect return dollars for the department.
This encouragement to pursue research dollars will result in more individuals needing tools and guidance in grant writing in our college. Building a research philosophy will take time, effort, and support. A well laid out plan is important to the success of this project.
Line Level
Body Text: 12pt Arila
Underline: each header of each section of the proposal
Paragraph Level
Leading: 1.5 spaces
Headings: Level 1, 14 pt. Arial, bold, underlined
Justification: Left
Nonsequential lists:circles (filled)
Page Level
Columns: one
Header: none
Footer: centered page number one each page (excluding the cover)
Borders: around figure boxes only, ½ pt. lines
Graphics: Tables fit into one column.
Graphics Level
Font: 10pt.Arial, bold
Borders: ½ pt around each table or graph if necessary
Captions: None
Document Level
Binding: 3 ring binder
Cover stock: Same as body
Paper: 25lb. white standard 8.5x11
____________________________________________________________________
Project Plan
Incorporating research expectations in a predominately humanities teaching college will require careful planning and support in order to build a research culture. It will not happen overnight, and it will take more than one individual to make it happen. Therefore, my primary aim at this point is to produce two complete resource documents for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts, and Humanities (AAH) to use in developing an idea into a proposal that conforms to the overall goal of a selected funding agency. First, a resource manual containing a set of guidelines to assist in successful proposal development will be compiled. Second, a multimedia document housed on the AAH Research website will be developed that will introduce and highlight the key points of the manual.
AAH can succeed in research but in order to develop a research culture the College must be willing to put the resources into place to enable the new grant seekers to produce winning proposals. This starts at the top and will trickle down. President Barker has laid the ground work with his push for Top 20 status. In order to reach this goal, Clemson’s research dollars must excel at a rapid pace.
The first phase of the project will be to enlist the support from the department chairs. If the chairs are not behind this project, the faculty will not feel it is their best interest to pursue research dollars. The department chairs will be presented with the research history of the University and the future forecast from President Barker. A list of benefits will also be presented to the chairs. These benefits include:
o Grants allow exploration of interest.
o Grants help move a department toward its goals.
o The department/school needs the results that grants generate, such as equipment, personnel and research findings.
o Grants can get things that the institution cannot afford to purchase (e.g., equipment, post doctorial employees, and top-notch graduate students)
o Grants can lead to publishing, the deliverance of papers at professional meetings, and travel.
o Increased indirect return dollars for the department.
This encouragement to pursue research dollars will result in more individuals needing tools and guidance in grant writing in our college. Building a research philosophy will take time, effort, and support. A well laid out plan is important to the success of this project.
Thursday, June 12, 2008
Week 3 update
To: Dr. Holmevik
From: Diana Thrasher
Introduction
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of a funding agency. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Work Completed
As of today I have met with my POC regarding the project section of the proposal. It was suggested I add more research methodology in this section to show the reader(s) how and why I will gather the data to put my project together. I also revisited my current situation. Looking at it through a critical lense, I felt it necessary to add more of the MAPC readings to this section. Writing of the introduction and conclusion was still a challenge even after working through the outline in class. Referencing our class readings to date was very helpful in narrowing down my thoughts for these two sections. I put together the bibliography and put the proposal together to submit the first draft.
I also have reviewed various media for the multimedia project. I am not sure if I can acquire enough footage on the topic to use Final Cut or Movie Maker. Adobe Presenter may be the best package to use. I have downloaded various clips related to our college that I may be able to incorporated into the project.
Future Work
I will revise my first draft of my proposal based on the comments I receive. I will move forward with my multimedia project. I anticipate I will draft a few options and move forward with the one that I feel will be most suited for my project.
Conclusion
I am pleased with my progress to date. I feel the text book we are using in this class is a really good fit for proposal writing, whether the proposal is for academia, business or an external sponsor. There is still a great deal of work to do and a limited amount of time to complete it.
From: Diana Thrasher
Introduction
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of a funding agency. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Work Completed
As of today I have met with my POC regarding the project section of the proposal. It was suggested I add more research methodology in this section to show the reader(s) how and why I will gather the data to put my project together. I also revisited my current situation. Looking at it through a critical lense, I felt it necessary to add more of the MAPC readings to this section. Writing of the introduction and conclusion was still a challenge even after working through the outline in class. Referencing our class readings to date was very helpful in narrowing down my thoughts for these two sections. I put together the bibliography and put the proposal together to submit the first draft.
I also have reviewed various media for the multimedia project. I am not sure if I can acquire enough footage on the topic to use Final Cut or Movie Maker. Adobe Presenter may be the best package to use. I have downloaded various clips related to our college that I may be able to incorporated into the project.
Future Work
I will revise my first draft of my proposal based on the comments I receive. I will move forward with my multimedia project. I anticipate I will draft a few options and move forward with the one that I feel will be most suited for my project.
Conclusion
I am pleased with my progress to date. I feel the text book we are using in this class is a really good fit for proposal writing, whether the proposal is for academia, business or an external sponsor. There is still a great deal of work to do and a limited amount of time to complete it.
Chapter 10 Designing Proposals
Chapter 10 stresses that a well thought out proposal will be visually interesting as well as being well written. Considering balance, alignment, grouping, and consistency is very important to proposal development. It is not just how you say it, but how you present it.
This chapter talks about balance and grids. These grids seem to be designed for western culture where the reading path is top to bottom, left to right. What if someone not from our culture was reading the proposal? What can and cannot be seen within a frame all are directly involved with the positioning and reading of the image (how the reader download and interprets). The images and text interact to create meaning. As stated above, balance, alignment, grouping and consistency are all very important. This is just one more item to carefully consider when putting a proposal together. This ties back in to your rhetorical strategy and knowing your audience.
Consistency is also a critical part of the proposal. Problems often arise when proposal are written in teams. All too often it is evident the sections of a proposal were written by multiple individuals. It more than a good idea to have one individual delegated at the start of a proposal to oversee this area and make sure everyone is in compliance in regards to page format, font and consistency with key words throughout.
This chapter talks about balance and grids. These grids seem to be designed for western culture where the reading path is top to bottom, left to right. What if someone not from our culture was reading the proposal? What can and cannot be seen within a frame all are directly involved with the positioning and reading of the image (how the reader download and interprets). The images and text interact to create meaning. As stated above, balance, alignment, grouping and consistency are all very important. This is just one more item to carefully consider when putting a proposal together. This ties back in to your rhetorical strategy and knowing your audience.
Consistency is also a critical part of the proposal. Problems often arise when proposal are written in teams. All too often it is evident the sections of a proposal were written by multiple individuals. It more than a good idea to have one individual delegated at the start of a proposal to oversee this area and make sure everyone is in compliance in regards to page format, font and consistency with key words throughout.
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Chapter 9 Writing with Style
Style is all about credibility. Your credibility as well as the institution or company you are representing credibility is on the line. Most funders specify the quantity they expect in a proposal, but it is the quality of the proposal that will determine if the funders deems you and your company credible and committed to the proposed project.
The section on writing paragraphs seems pretty basic; however, it is surprising how many proposals are sent out that do not follow these basic guidelines. Stay on point. Do not try to "flatter" the reader(s) with your education and knowledge. Stick with the need to know instead of the want to tell you format. A proposal is intended to prompt future discussions, not rejection.
The goal of a proposal is to be rhetorically persuasive. Using metaphors may not always work to your advantage. A reviewer may be of another nationality or not familiar with the metaphor you deem as familiar. This could result in a negative review.
The section on writing paragraphs seems pretty basic; however, it is surprising how many proposals are sent out that do not follow these basic guidelines. Stay on point. Do not try to "flatter" the reader(s) with your education and knowledge. Stick with the need to know instead of the want to tell you format. A proposal is intended to prompt future discussions, not rejection.
The goal of a proposal is to be rhetorically persuasive. Using metaphors may not always work to your advantage. A reviewer may be of another nationality or not familiar with the metaphor you deem as familiar. This could result in a negative review.
Monday, June 9, 2008
Chapter 8 Developing Budgets
Directly connected to the success of most research programs is a well thought-out and properly prepared budget. Often time so much work is dedicated to the writing of the proposal the budget gets neglected. Funders review the budget just as closely as the proposal itself. Not only do they want to see the bottom line, they want a detailed explanation of how each category will be spent. If you have never prepared a budget before it is wise to contact someone with experience to assist you. Preparing a budget can be overwhelming for a new comer to the research genre.
The decision to use an itemized or nonitemized budget depends on the funder. When submitting a proposal for a grant the funder usually specifies how the budget should be laid out. Grant proposals will typically be itemized, where as business proposals and contracts may be nonitemized. Regardless of which is used, it is wise to start out with an itemized budget so you are sure you have included all of the expenses you anticipate on incurring during the project.
The funder of your proposal will typically determine if your budget will be fixed or flexible. Grants are typically fixed and agreed upon before the award is made. This is because most funders have a set “pot” of money that is distributed to numerous institutions or individuals and all money awarded has to be accounted for.
One area that surprises many people is the budget categories that make up the budget. When submitting as a representative of Clemson University the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-21 must be adhered to. Just as the names sound complicated, so too are the rules that must be followed. These are guidelines on who can be paid off of a grant, what can be purchased (for example, computers are typically an unallowable charge on a grant unless written into the budget justification). F&A is 48% for year 2009 (for research). These costs are those that are incurred for common or joint objectives of the University and, therefore, cannot be identified specifically with a particular sponsored project. F&A are expected to be charged on a project unless otherwise noted from the sponsor. What does that mean in regard to your budget? If a sponsor has allotted 100K toward the award of the proposal 48% of your total direct costs have to be charged to F&A (48K). That means you actually only has 52K to spend on your project. Unless a sponsor does not allow F&A to be charged, CU requires all sponsored research to include F&A unless not allowed by the sponsor. More information about these guidelines can be found at
http://www.comptroller.clemson.edu/pdf/F_A_agreement2007.pdf
The decision to use an itemized or nonitemized budget depends on the funder. When submitting a proposal for a grant the funder usually specifies how the budget should be laid out. Grant proposals will typically be itemized, where as business proposals and contracts may be nonitemized. Regardless of which is used, it is wise to start out with an itemized budget so you are sure you have included all of the expenses you anticipate on incurring during the project.
The funder of your proposal will typically determine if your budget will be fixed or flexible. Grants are typically fixed and agreed upon before the award is made. This is because most funders have a set “pot” of money that is distributed to numerous institutions or individuals and all money awarded has to be accounted for.
One area that surprises many people is the budget categories that make up the budget. When submitting as a representative of Clemson University the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-21 must be adhered to. Just as the names sound complicated, so too are the rules that must be followed. These are guidelines on who can be paid off of a grant, what can be purchased (for example, computers are typically an unallowable charge on a grant unless written into the budget justification). F&A is 48% for year 2009 (for research). These costs are those that are incurred for common or joint objectives of the University and, therefore, cannot be identified specifically with a particular sponsored project. F&A are expected to be charged on a project unless otherwise noted from the sponsor. What does that mean in regard to your budget? If a sponsor has allotted 100K toward the award of the proposal 48% of your total direct costs have to be charged to F&A (48K). That means you actually only has 52K to spend on your project. Unless a sponsor does not allow F&A to be charged, CU requires all sponsored research to include F&A unless not allowed by the sponsor. More information about these guidelines can be found at
http://www.comptroller.clemson.edu/pdf/F_A_agreement2007.pdf
Proposal draft
Purpose Statement
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency.
Executive Summary
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Introduction
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office. The goal is to assist faculty, staff and students in our college excel in their research efforts.
Anytime a paradigm shift occurs, new principles will gain new followers and spark debate from those not willing to relinquish the current paradigm (Kuhn, ix). Research at Clemson University has become a necessity instead of an option—a necessity that has thrown many areas of the University into a state of crisis. With state funding remaining at the same since 1995, our institution must find other ways of funding, and that funding is research. The state budget will continue to be cut and those cuts will be passed down to the departments and the departments will have no other choice but to scale back if other funding is not secured.
Completion of this project will be the first in many steps the Office of Research and Graduate Studies will take to assist the College in succeeding in acquiring research funding, and the benefits associated with this funding. This project will produce a manual on how to write a successful proposal. This manual will also be revised into a web document and a training document. Access will be convenient for all of the College with multiple media options for reference.
Current Situation
The College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities is not known as a research college; however there are research dollars out there for our college. Since research has not been a priority, tools to assist those individuals interesting in research have not been a top priority in our college. The research paradigm shift will require re-examination of prior theories and goals of our college. This is shift will be difficult and time consuming in addition to being strongly resisted by some in the established discourse community. Personnel have been added over the last few years and workshops and assistance are being developed to facilitate the research. Over the last seven years research has steadily increased in our college as indicated in Table 1.1. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college succeed in the area of research. In order to succeed our college must be willing to accept the proposed change in order to proceed with the new paradigm of research Clemson University has entered into.
Table 1.1 Figures presented at the May 2008 AAH Faculty and Staff Meeting
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Because of the diversity of the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities no one funding agency is identified for this project. The goal of this manual is to be a key reference guide on a long road to preparing a successful proposal. A great deal of effort will go into showing that a good idea is necessary but not sufficient and that a successful proposal is an exercise in rhetorical strategy. This manual will show how to gain insight from seasoned grant writers that know the system. Students will be able to understand the importance of finding a way of differentiating their grant proposal from run-of-the-mill applications.
Each year there are more and more demands for research dollars and the competition for these dollars is great. Each year the number of proposals submitted by Clemson University’s AAH increases and the need for resources to assist our college in this area is at a critical level. This project will be the first of many in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies developed to assist our researchers.
This project will benefit AAH in that a manual will be available for reference when writing proposals. Readers can employ different methods in using this manual depending on their needs and experience. This project will integrate writing, communication, rhetorical analysis, and the importance of research methodology.
Numerous books, how to listings, and guides offer insights to novice grant writers and even those with experience, however, it is believed one manual tailored for AAH research would be a useful tool that can offer assistance and insight to both the novice and experienced grant seeker. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request (Carlson, 12). This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Anytime a document is written the writer creates a rhetorical situation. According to Greg Myers, the writing is shaped by the “gatekeepers” that review their work (“Text as Knowledge” 611-622). The grant writer must realize this and understand the situation, know the audience, and build a persuasive argument in order to convince the “gatekeepers” his or her proposal is rhetorically sound. This project will focus on the importance of communicating ideas rather than how to do research.
A proposal must reflect a well-planned project with reasonable cost justified. Often, the most common flaws grantmakers find in proposals are lack of clarity about what the writer is trying to achieve, the importance of the need, and the plan for meeting that need cost effectively (Lauffer, 103). The funding agencies are sending a clear message that the grant seekers will be expected to demonstrate solidity in long-term financial success of the project to be funded and of the funding agency itself. Funding agencies fund work that furthers their mission. In addition, getting to know the grant officers, funding limits, and previous funded grants from those agencies are critical (Wason, 144).
Reviewers become frustrated at having to read and reread a research plan before understanding a project. Carter and Quick, co-authors of “How to Write a Grant Proposal”, have written four books on the subject. They spend a great deal of effort illustrating how grant seeking is primarily project development, research, and positioning. The writing of the proposal actually comes last. They stress that “one should never write the first line of a proposal until the project is fully developed and at that point the proposal writes itself” (85). In addition to getting to know the funder, one must also understand what all is involved in the proposal process. As stated above, writing the text of the research is only a fraction of the work. Assembling budgets, tables, and getting the proposal through internal reviews are critical (New, 202). These references show the more effort and time the funder has to devote to figure out the proposal application, the less energy they will have to review the proposal itself. This also brings a key point: never assume the reader knows what the writer means Janet Rasey states in “Writing the Grant,” ‘explain it as clearly as possible but without insulting his/her intelligence’ (153) One should keep abbreviations, acronyms, and discipline-specific terminology to an absolute minimum.
Consulting someone with experience is key to help understand what makes a grant successful (Whalen,116). Experienced grant writers not only can share past experiences, they can also provide key connections with funding agencies. Bauer, author of “How to Evaluate and Improve Your Grant Effort”, strongly suggest interviewing veteran grant writers to gain a better understanding of the positive outcomes of submitting proposals. Interviews with seasoned researchers in AAH faculty will be conducted and highlighted in the project. Experienced writers can advise on how not to make the same mistakes they made. In addition to interviewing seasoned grant writers, a sampling of awarded and rejected proposal will be reviewed as examples of what and what not to do when writing a proposal.
One area that is repeated in a great deal of the literature is the importance of following the rules set by the funder. The guidelines for the organization will indicate what to include in a grant proposal. Most funders want the same basic information, even if they use different words or ask questions in a different order. Checking the funder’s website often will produce all instructions, templates and guidance for assistance needed to submit a proposal to that funder. This guide will house an outline that should meet the needs of most funders, or guide the writer when approaching a funder with no written guidelines.
Patricia Bizzell writes in “Foundationalism and Anti-Foundationalism in Composition Studies” ‘change occurs when an external reality…impinges on the work of the community’. This discourse of the community changes to accept the new changes in the material world. “…what the community ‘knows’ is never some truth external to its own discourse; it knows only what it can frame, test and establish in its discourse” (50). The outcome of this project will be to produce a resource document that will guide the newcomer in grant writing to produce winning proposals in the discourse community of the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities.
Project Plan
This objective of this study is to attempt to learn what can be gained from the experience of successful grant writers to help the new comer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities succeed in this area. The study will use a mixed methods approach and collecting diverse types of data will provide a better understanding of the steps that are necessary in order to produce a successful proposal.
A sequential mixed methods approach will be used which will include a deductive approach and verification as well as an inductive approach to an emerging pattern to be reviewed. In the first phase, quantitative research will evaluate a sampling of proposals that were evaluated and approved or rejected, thus, providing a data set with results. From the findings, a qualitative exploration of successful grant writers will be conducted to probe or explore those results in more depth. Review of successful grants and interviews with actual faculty with a proven track record of funding will help to answer research questions. From these interviews more questions to research will emerge.
As stated above, this study will look at actual proposals submitted for funding.
Results from the Study
The study should focus on the following research questions:
1. How does one conform to the targeted funding agencies needs and expectations?
2. What makes a successful grant in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities?
3. What are funders looking for in a grant?
I am proposing to answer each of these questions by collecting data as follows:
Interviews with successful grant writers: Writing the text is only half of the work. The rest is assembling budgets and boilerplate, getting the proposal through internal reviews, etc. Consulting someone who is experienced will provide valuable information the new grant writer can expand upon.
A textual analysis comparing successful and failing proposals: This will give a good review of types of grants that are worth a second look. This will show that reviewers look for evidence of good ideas, focused writing and evidence of productivity and knowledge of proposed techniques.
A rhetorical analysis of what elements in successful grants are persuasive: Some reviewers may not be experts in the proposed area of research, and the writer is just as obligated to communicate with them as with the leading researchers in the field who know all the techniques and terminology. The analysis will help the writer focus more on his or her rhetorical strategy.
The above areas will provide the necessary framework to begin the project. After I have compiled the data I will begin appropriate production phase of the manual. The manual will be laid out in steps based on the project structure below.
The college of Architecture, Arts and Humanities can succeed in research but in order to develop a research culture our college must be willing to put the resources into place to enable our grant seekers succeed. This starts at the top and will trickle down. President Barker has laid the ground work with his push for Top 20 status. In order to reach this goal, Clemson’s research dollars must excel at a rapid pace.
For our college to be a part of this we must take the first step of enlisting support from the department chairs. If the chairs are not behind this project, the faculty will not feel it is their best interest to pursue research dollars. In this first step the department chairs will be presented with the research history of the University and the future forecast from President Barker. A list of benefits will also be presented to the chairs. These benefits include:
· Grants allow exploration of interest.
· Grants help move a department toward its goals.
· The department/school needs the results that grants generate, such as equipment, personnel and research findings.
· Grants can get things that the institution cannot afford to purchase (e.g., equipment, post doctorial employees, and top-notch graduate students)
· Grants can lead to publishing, the deliverance of papers at professional meetings, and travel.
This encouragement to persue research dollars will result in more individuals needing tools and guidance in grant writing in our college. Building a research culture will take time and effort. This project will produce a step by step guide in producing winning proposals, a multimedia training project housed on the AAH Research web site, and workshops given throughout the year.
A “how to” manual will provide the newcomer a road map starting with an idea and turning it into a well-defined proposal. It will stress that throughout the process the novice will need to be precise about his or her own role and analyze how well the project reflects the funding agency’s goals.
It takes time, and then more time to write a successful grant. The actual writing of the text in the research grant is only part of the work that goes into a successful proposal. In the economy of the academic research institution, success in grant writing continues to gain importance. It is imperative to thoroughly understand the expectations of knowing how to write proposals and the importance of funding to the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. The proposal writer needs to understand they should not be “casual” in the way they write. The writer should not write a proposal as if they were talking to peers who already know and understand their project, but develop an awareness of who their proposal reviewing audience will be.
I feel it is important to write the manual first because I envision it as being the backbone of the project. Currently I plan on organizing the manual into ten chapters.
Chapter 1 Developing Relationships with Funders
Chapter 2 Following the Rules (internal and external)
Chapter 3 Defining Clear Goals and Objectives
Chapter 4 Developing the Research Methodology
Chapter 5 Developing Sustainability Strategies and Collaborations
Chapter 6 Preparing the Budget
Chapter 7 Writing the Organization Background Component
Chapter 8 Writing the Proposal Summary
Chapter 9 Putting the Package Together
Chapter 10 Sustaining Relationships with Funders
In each chapter I will enlist suggestions from the AAH Faculty Research Facilitators. I will also interview successful researchers in each department for suggested content. The document will be submitted to the Associate Dean of Research for review. Revisions will be made at this point and the manual will be written.
From paper to the web will be the third step in my project. Not everyone will want to read a manual. Some individuals prefer to get their information visually. Being aware of this, I must be careful as to what is the best format for this project. Research and possible usability testing may be required to determine the best method. I will also have to learn the software that I select to produce the document. The last phase of the third step is to develop the project and put it one the AAH web site.
Step four will be to develop a workshop to incorporate into the Research Office training though out the year. First I will enlist suggestions for the best media to use from the AAH Faculty Research Facilitators. I will also need to determine if funding will be needed to develop and conduct the workshops. At this point I will be ready to develop the workshop.
This project will foster the research paradigm shift that has begun to occur at Clemson as well in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. At the completion of this project not one, but three different training media to chose from on how to writer a winning proposal. This manual will be redesigned as a web document and formatted for training classes sponsored by the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. This project will result in three different media on the subject designed to reach as many graduate students and new faculty as possible in our College.
Timeline.
July 1, 2008 Submit proposal to the Associate Dean of Research
August 2008 Form committee and submit proposal to committee
October 2008 Chapters 1 -6 completed
November 2008 Chapters 7-10 completed
December 2008 Begin work on multimedia project for web
February 2008 Complete multimedia project and being training documentationMarch 2009 Present project to committee
Conclusion
The product that results from this project will be a manual on writing winning proposal designed for the novice grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. This manual will also be housed on the AAH web site and will be incorporated into the training cycle of the Research Office. This will free up time of advisors and empower the newcomer to begin research with a positive outlook.
Faculty and graduate student have more demands on them than ever. It is difficult to find time to attend a training session or classes deemed as “extra work.” Faculty, graduate students, and staff will have access to any one of the three media developed in the project to insure it reaches as many individuals as possible.
Resulting from the push of upper administration to become a Top 20 University, research dollars have steadily increased in AAH over the last seven years. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college succeed in this area. In order to succeed our college must be willing to accept the proposed change in order to proceed with the new paradigm of research Clemson University has entered into.
This project will give the College more resources to ensure our researches produce more quality proposals. This project will lay the foundation for future workshops based on research growth and needs of our college in the research area. The AAH Office of Research Support exists to assist faculty in obtaining funding needed to carry out their work. Once a faculty member has a specific research topic or area of interest, the staff in the Office of Research Support can assist in a variety of ways from helping identifying funding sources to assisting in submitting the proposal to the sponsor. Our office is available to assist our college and this project is the first of many that will relay we have the knowledge and capability of working through the entire proposal process, and we are available for more than just “pushing” the internal paperwork through the University system.
Bibliography
American Historical Association. (1998). Grants, Fellowships, and Prizes of Interest
to Historians (1998-99 Ed.) Washington, DC.
Bauer, David G. (2001) How to Evaluate and Improve Your Grants Effort, American
Council on Education Orxy Press.
Bauer, David G (1995). The “how to” Grants Manual: Successful Grantseeking
Techniques for Obtaining Public and Private Grants (3rd Ed.). Phoenix, AZ: Oryx.
Bizzell, Patricia. “Foundationalism and Anti-Foundationalism in Composition Studies.” PRE/TEXT 7.1-2 (1986): 37-56
Browning, B (2001), Grantwriting for Dummies, New York, NY Minds.
Burns, M. (1993), The Proposl Writer’s Guide, New Haven, CT, D.A.T.A
Carlson, Tim (2002). Winning Grants, Step by Step (2nd Ed). San Francisco, CA.
Jossey-Bass.
Cresswell, John W., (2003), Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Approaches, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gilpatrick, Eleanor (1989) Grants for Nonprofit Organizations, A Guide to Funding
and Grant Writing, New York, NY, Praeger Publishing.
Hall, M (1986) Getting Funded: A Complete Guide to Proposal Writing. Portland,
OR, Continuing Education Publication.
Hill, Hames, and Whalen, T (1993) How to Create and Present Successful
Government Proposals, Techniques for Today’s Tough Economy. Piscataway, NJ,
IEEE Press.
Johnson-Sheehan (2008), Writing Proposals. 2nd ed. New York, Pearson Education.
Kiritz, N. (1980) Proposal Checklist and Evaluation Form, Los Angeles, CA: The
Grantsmanship Center.
Kuhn, Thomas. Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970. v-9.
Lauffer, Armand (1984) Grantsmanship and Fund Raising. Beverly Hills, CA. Sage
Publications.
Locke, Lawrence F., Spirdusa, Waneen W., & Silverman, Stephen J. (2000)
Proposals That Work: A Guide for Planning Dissertations and Grant Proposals,
4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Myers, Greg. “Texts as Knowledge Claims: The Social Construction of Two Biology Articles.” Social Studies in Science 15 (1985): 593-630.
New, Cheryl C., Quick, James A. (2003), How To Write A Grant Proposal.
Hoboken, NJ. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Office of Research and Graduate Studies. welcome page. 31 May, 2008.
http://www.clemson.edu/caah/research/index.html
“Proposal Writing Short Course”, The Foundation Center, (2008),
www.fdncenter.org/lear/shortcourse/prop1, (31 May, 2008)
Rasey, Janet, S. “Writing the Grant”; Research Funding Service: Fundamentals of
Grantsmantship; Research Funding Service Grants information for UW
Health Sciences (1993), ww.healthlinks.Washington.edu/rfs/gw/fundamentls
(31 May, 2008).
Vid Mohan-Ram; “Lost at Sea: How Not to Kill a Grant Application,” Part Four”
Science, Next Wave (2000), www.nextwave.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full
(31 May, 2008).
Wason, Sara D., (2004) Webster’s New World Grant Writing Handbook, Hoboken, NJ Wiley.
“Writing Winning Proposals: An Introduction”; ASME PPC - Communication:
Writing Winning Proposals: An Introduction ASME International (1996-
2004),www. Professionalpractice.asme.org, (31 May, 2008).
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency.
Executive Summary
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Introduction
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office. The goal is to assist faculty, staff and students in our college excel in their research efforts.
Anytime a paradigm shift occurs, new principles will gain new followers and spark debate from those not willing to relinquish the current paradigm (Kuhn, ix). Research at Clemson University has become a necessity instead of an option—a necessity that has thrown many areas of the University into a state of crisis. With state funding remaining at the same since 1995, our institution must find other ways of funding, and that funding is research. The state budget will continue to be cut and those cuts will be passed down to the departments and the departments will have no other choice but to scale back if other funding is not secured.
Completion of this project will be the first in many steps the Office of Research and Graduate Studies will take to assist the College in succeeding in acquiring research funding, and the benefits associated with this funding. This project will produce a manual on how to write a successful proposal. This manual will also be revised into a web document and a training document. Access will be convenient for all of the College with multiple media options for reference.
Current Situation
The College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities is not known as a research college; however there are research dollars out there for our college. Since research has not been a priority, tools to assist those individuals interesting in research have not been a top priority in our college. The research paradigm shift will require re-examination of prior theories and goals of our college. This is shift will be difficult and time consuming in addition to being strongly resisted by some in the established discourse community. Personnel have been added over the last few years and workshops and assistance are being developed to facilitate the research. Over the last seven years research has steadily increased in our college as indicated in Table 1.1. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college succeed in the area of research. In order to succeed our college must be willing to accept the proposed change in order to proceed with the new paradigm of research Clemson University has entered into.
Table 1.1 Figures presented at the May 2008 AAH Faculty and Staff Meeting
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Because of the diversity of the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities no one funding agency is identified for this project. The goal of this manual is to be a key reference guide on a long road to preparing a successful proposal. A great deal of effort will go into showing that a good idea is necessary but not sufficient and that a successful proposal is an exercise in rhetorical strategy. This manual will show how to gain insight from seasoned grant writers that know the system. Students will be able to understand the importance of finding a way of differentiating their grant proposal from run-of-the-mill applications.
Each year there are more and more demands for research dollars and the competition for these dollars is great. Each year the number of proposals submitted by Clemson University’s AAH increases and the need for resources to assist our college in this area is at a critical level. This project will be the first of many in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies developed to assist our researchers.
This project will benefit AAH in that a manual will be available for reference when writing proposals. Readers can employ different methods in using this manual depending on their needs and experience. This project will integrate writing, communication, rhetorical analysis, and the importance of research methodology.
Numerous books, how to listings, and guides offer insights to novice grant writers and even those with experience, however, it is believed one manual tailored for AAH research would be a useful tool that can offer assistance and insight to both the novice and experienced grant seeker. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request (Carlson, 12). This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Anytime a document is written the writer creates a rhetorical situation. According to Greg Myers, the writing is shaped by the “gatekeepers” that review their work (“Text as Knowledge” 611-622). The grant writer must realize this and understand the situation, know the audience, and build a persuasive argument in order to convince the “gatekeepers” his or her proposal is rhetorically sound. This project will focus on the importance of communicating ideas rather than how to do research.
A proposal must reflect a well-planned project with reasonable cost justified. Often, the most common flaws grantmakers find in proposals are lack of clarity about what the writer is trying to achieve, the importance of the need, and the plan for meeting that need cost effectively (Lauffer, 103). The funding agencies are sending a clear message that the grant seekers will be expected to demonstrate solidity in long-term financial success of the project to be funded and of the funding agency itself. Funding agencies fund work that furthers their mission. In addition, getting to know the grant officers, funding limits, and previous funded grants from those agencies are critical (Wason, 144).
Reviewers become frustrated at having to read and reread a research plan before understanding a project. Carter and Quick, co-authors of “How to Write a Grant Proposal”, have written four books on the subject. They spend a great deal of effort illustrating how grant seeking is primarily project development, research, and positioning. The writing of the proposal actually comes last. They stress that “one should never write the first line of a proposal until the project is fully developed and at that point the proposal writes itself” (85). In addition to getting to know the funder, one must also understand what all is involved in the proposal process. As stated above, writing the text of the research is only a fraction of the work. Assembling budgets, tables, and getting the proposal through internal reviews are critical (New, 202). These references show the more effort and time the funder has to devote to figure out the proposal application, the less energy they will have to review the proposal itself. This also brings a key point: never assume the reader knows what the writer means Janet Rasey states in “Writing the Grant,” ‘explain it as clearly as possible but without insulting his/her intelligence’ (153) One should keep abbreviations, acronyms, and discipline-specific terminology to an absolute minimum.
Consulting someone with experience is key to help understand what makes a grant successful (Whalen,116). Experienced grant writers not only can share past experiences, they can also provide key connections with funding agencies. Bauer, author of “How to Evaluate and Improve Your Grant Effort”, strongly suggest interviewing veteran grant writers to gain a better understanding of the positive outcomes of submitting proposals. Interviews with seasoned researchers in AAH faculty will be conducted and highlighted in the project. Experienced writers can advise on how not to make the same mistakes they made. In addition to interviewing seasoned grant writers, a sampling of awarded and rejected proposal will be reviewed as examples of what and what not to do when writing a proposal.
One area that is repeated in a great deal of the literature is the importance of following the rules set by the funder. The guidelines for the organization will indicate what to include in a grant proposal. Most funders want the same basic information, even if they use different words or ask questions in a different order. Checking the funder’s website often will produce all instructions, templates and guidance for assistance needed to submit a proposal to that funder. This guide will house an outline that should meet the needs of most funders, or guide the writer when approaching a funder with no written guidelines.
Patricia Bizzell writes in “Foundationalism and Anti-Foundationalism in Composition Studies” ‘change occurs when an external reality…impinges on the work of the community’. This discourse of the community changes to accept the new changes in the material world. “…what the community ‘knows’ is never some truth external to its own discourse; it knows only what it can frame, test and establish in its discourse” (50). The outcome of this project will be to produce a resource document that will guide the newcomer in grant writing to produce winning proposals in the discourse community of the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities.
Project Plan
This objective of this study is to attempt to learn what can be gained from the experience of successful grant writers to help the new comer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities succeed in this area. The study will use a mixed methods approach and collecting diverse types of data will provide a better understanding of the steps that are necessary in order to produce a successful proposal.
A sequential mixed methods approach will be used which will include a deductive approach and verification as well as an inductive approach to an emerging pattern to be reviewed. In the first phase, quantitative research will evaluate a sampling of proposals that were evaluated and approved or rejected, thus, providing a data set with results. From the findings, a qualitative exploration of successful grant writers will be conducted to probe or explore those results in more depth. Review of successful grants and interviews with actual faculty with a proven track record of funding will help to answer research questions. From these interviews more questions to research will emerge.
As stated above, this study will look at actual proposals submitted for funding.
Results from the Study
The study should focus on the following research questions:
1. How does one conform to the targeted funding agencies needs and expectations?
2. What makes a successful grant in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities?
3. What are funders looking for in a grant?
I am proposing to answer each of these questions by collecting data as follows:
Interviews with successful grant writers: Writing the text is only half of the work. The rest is assembling budgets and boilerplate, getting the proposal through internal reviews, etc. Consulting someone who is experienced will provide valuable information the new grant writer can expand upon.
A textual analysis comparing successful and failing proposals: This will give a good review of types of grants that are worth a second look. This will show that reviewers look for evidence of good ideas, focused writing and evidence of productivity and knowledge of proposed techniques.
A rhetorical analysis of what elements in successful grants are persuasive: Some reviewers may not be experts in the proposed area of research, and the writer is just as obligated to communicate with them as with the leading researchers in the field who know all the techniques and terminology. The analysis will help the writer focus more on his or her rhetorical strategy.
The above areas will provide the necessary framework to begin the project. After I have compiled the data I will begin appropriate production phase of the manual. The manual will be laid out in steps based on the project structure below.
The college of Architecture, Arts and Humanities can succeed in research but in order to develop a research culture our college must be willing to put the resources into place to enable our grant seekers succeed. This starts at the top and will trickle down. President Barker has laid the ground work with his push for Top 20 status. In order to reach this goal, Clemson’s research dollars must excel at a rapid pace.
For our college to be a part of this we must take the first step of enlisting support from the department chairs. If the chairs are not behind this project, the faculty will not feel it is their best interest to pursue research dollars. In this first step the department chairs will be presented with the research history of the University and the future forecast from President Barker. A list of benefits will also be presented to the chairs. These benefits include:
· Grants allow exploration of interest.
· Grants help move a department toward its goals.
· The department/school needs the results that grants generate, such as equipment, personnel and research findings.
· Grants can get things that the institution cannot afford to purchase (e.g., equipment, post doctorial employees, and top-notch graduate students)
· Grants can lead to publishing, the deliverance of papers at professional meetings, and travel.
This encouragement to persue research dollars will result in more individuals needing tools and guidance in grant writing in our college. Building a research culture will take time and effort. This project will produce a step by step guide in producing winning proposals, a multimedia training project housed on the AAH Research web site, and workshops given throughout the year.
A “how to” manual will provide the newcomer a road map starting with an idea and turning it into a well-defined proposal. It will stress that throughout the process the novice will need to be precise about his or her own role and analyze how well the project reflects the funding agency’s goals.
It takes time, and then more time to write a successful grant. The actual writing of the text in the research grant is only part of the work that goes into a successful proposal. In the economy of the academic research institution, success in grant writing continues to gain importance. It is imperative to thoroughly understand the expectations of knowing how to write proposals and the importance of funding to the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. The proposal writer needs to understand they should not be “casual” in the way they write. The writer should not write a proposal as if they were talking to peers who already know and understand their project, but develop an awareness of who their proposal reviewing audience will be.
I feel it is important to write the manual first because I envision it as being the backbone of the project. Currently I plan on organizing the manual into ten chapters.
Chapter 1 Developing Relationships with Funders
Chapter 2 Following the Rules (internal and external)
Chapter 3 Defining Clear Goals and Objectives
Chapter 4 Developing the Research Methodology
Chapter 5 Developing Sustainability Strategies and Collaborations
Chapter 6 Preparing the Budget
Chapter 7 Writing the Organization Background Component
Chapter 8 Writing the Proposal Summary
Chapter 9 Putting the Package Together
Chapter 10 Sustaining Relationships with Funders
In each chapter I will enlist suggestions from the AAH Faculty Research Facilitators. I will also interview successful researchers in each department for suggested content. The document will be submitted to the Associate Dean of Research for review. Revisions will be made at this point and the manual will be written.
From paper to the web will be the third step in my project. Not everyone will want to read a manual. Some individuals prefer to get their information visually. Being aware of this, I must be careful as to what is the best format for this project. Research and possible usability testing may be required to determine the best method. I will also have to learn the software that I select to produce the document. The last phase of the third step is to develop the project and put it one the AAH web site.
Step four will be to develop a workshop to incorporate into the Research Office training though out the year. First I will enlist suggestions for the best media to use from the AAH Faculty Research Facilitators. I will also need to determine if funding will be needed to develop and conduct the workshops. At this point I will be ready to develop the workshop.
This project will foster the research paradigm shift that has begun to occur at Clemson as well in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. At the completion of this project not one, but three different training media to chose from on how to writer a winning proposal. This manual will be redesigned as a web document and formatted for training classes sponsored by the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. This project will result in three different media on the subject designed to reach as many graduate students and new faculty as possible in our College.
Timeline.
July 1, 2008 Submit proposal to the Associate Dean of Research
August 2008 Form committee and submit proposal to committee
October 2008 Chapters 1 -6 completed
November 2008 Chapters 7-10 completed
December 2008 Begin work on multimedia project for web
February 2008 Complete multimedia project and being training documentationMarch 2009 Present project to committee
Conclusion
The product that results from this project will be a manual on writing winning proposal designed for the novice grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. This manual will also be housed on the AAH web site and will be incorporated into the training cycle of the Research Office. This will free up time of advisors and empower the newcomer to begin research with a positive outlook.
Faculty and graduate student have more demands on them than ever. It is difficult to find time to attend a training session or classes deemed as “extra work.” Faculty, graduate students, and staff will have access to any one of the three media developed in the project to insure it reaches as many individuals as possible.
Resulting from the push of upper administration to become a Top 20 University, research dollars have steadily increased in AAH over the last seven years. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college succeed in this area. In order to succeed our college must be willing to accept the proposed change in order to proceed with the new paradigm of research Clemson University has entered into.
This project will give the College more resources to ensure our researches produce more quality proposals. This project will lay the foundation for future workshops based on research growth and needs of our college in the research area. The AAH Office of Research Support exists to assist faculty in obtaining funding needed to carry out their work. Once a faculty member has a specific research topic or area of interest, the staff in the Office of Research Support can assist in a variety of ways from helping identifying funding sources to assisting in submitting the proposal to the sponsor. Our office is available to assist our college and this project is the first of many that will relay we have the knowledge and capability of working through the entire proposal process, and we are available for more than just “pushing” the internal paperwork through the University system.
Bibliography
American Historical Association. (1998). Grants, Fellowships, and Prizes of Interest
to Historians (1998-99 Ed.) Washington, DC.
Bauer, David G. (2001) How to Evaluate and Improve Your Grants Effort, American
Council on Education Orxy Press.
Bauer, David G (1995). The “how to” Grants Manual: Successful Grantseeking
Techniques for Obtaining Public and Private Grants (3rd Ed.). Phoenix, AZ: Oryx.
Bizzell, Patricia. “Foundationalism and Anti-Foundationalism in Composition Studies.” PRE/TEXT 7.1-2 (1986): 37-56
Browning, B (2001), Grantwriting for Dummies, New York, NY Minds.
Burns, M. (1993), The Proposl Writer’s Guide, New Haven, CT, D.A.T.A
Carlson, Tim (2002). Winning Grants, Step by Step (2nd Ed). San Francisco, CA.
Jossey-Bass.
Cresswell, John W., (2003), Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Approaches, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gilpatrick, Eleanor (1989) Grants for Nonprofit Organizations, A Guide to Funding
and Grant Writing, New York, NY, Praeger Publishing.
Hall, M (1986) Getting Funded: A Complete Guide to Proposal Writing. Portland,
OR, Continuing Education Publication.
Hill, Hames, and Whalen, T (1993) How to Create and Present Successful
Government Proposals, Techniques for Today’s Tough Economy. Piscataway, NJ,
IEEE Press.
Johnson-Sheehan (2008), Writing Proposals. 2nd ed. New York, Pearson Education.
Kiritz, N. (1980) Proposal Checklist and Evaluation Form, Los Angeles, CA: The
Grantsmanship Center.
Kuhn, Thomas. Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd Edition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970. v-9.
Lauffer, Armand (1984) Grantsmanship and Fund Raising. Beverly Hills, CA. Sage
Publications.
Locke, Lawrence F., Spirdusa, Waneen W., & Silverman, Stephen J. (2000)
Proposals That Work: A Guide for Planning Dissertations and Grant Proposals,
4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Myers, Greg. “Texts as Knowledge Claims: The Social Construction of Two Biology Articles.” Social Studies in Science 15 (1985): 593-630.
New, Cheryl C., Quick, James A. (2003), How To Write A Grant Proposal.
Hoboken, NJ. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Office of Research and Graduate Studies. welcome page. 31 May, 2008.
http://www.clemson.edu/caah/research/index.html
“Proposal Writing Short Course”, The Foundation Center, (2008),
www.fdncenter.org/lear/shortcourse/prop1, (31 May, 2008)
Rasey, Janet, S. “Writing the Grant”; Research Funding Service: Fundamentals of
Grantsmantship; Research Funding Service Grants information for UW
Health Sciences (1993), ww.healthlinks.Washington.edu/rfs/gw/fundamentls
(31 May, 2008).
Vid Mohan-Ram; “Lost at Sea: How Not to Kill a Grant Application,” Part Four”
Science, Next Wave (2000), www.nextwave.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full
(31 May, 2008).
Wason, Sara D., (2004) Webster’s New World Grant Writing Handbook, Hoboken, NJ Wiley.
“Writing Winning Proposals: An Introduction”; ASME PPC - Communication:
Writing Winning Proposals: An Introduction ASME International (1996-
2004),www. Professionalpractice.asme.org, (31 May, 2008).
Thursday, June 5, 2008
Chapter 7
An introduction can make or break a proposal. Many funding agencies employ colleagues in the same field to sit on a review panel and critique your work. The panel may meet in one location for a one-or-two day period, or they may be sent the documents electronically. Either way, when it is time to review the proposal the reviewers are usually tired. The way the introduction is crafted can be the difference in a proposal getting put in the reject file or possible fundable file. It is a shame to spend so much time and effort for someone to only read the introduction of a proposal.
A great deal of thought should go into the cost section of the proposal. If the team underestimates the project cost, the project may not be able to be completed. Offering a synopsis of the costs gives the funder the opportunity to understand in more detail how the applicant will use their money. This class is focusing more on academic proposals where budgets and costs are not typically necessary. Budgets for grants and contracts are a critical part of those proposals and should be addressed with a critical lense.
I like to think of the conclusion of the proposal much like I do the closing arguments of a jury trial. The conclusion is the last memory the reader will have of a project. The reader should be aware he or she is moving from the body of the proposal to the conclusion. The reader is more than likely tired and the conclusion should reenergize them and remind them of why this is definitely a fundable proposal. Bringing the main point back into the eye of the reader is critical in closing your proposal.
A great deal of thought should go into the cost section of the proposal. If the team underestimates the project cost, the project may not be able to be completed. Offering a synopsis of the costs gives the funder the opportunity to understand in more detail how the applicant will use their money. This class is focusing more on academic proposals where budgets and costs are not typically necessary. Budgets for grants and contracts are a critical part of those proposals and should be addressed with a critical lense.
I like to think of the conclusion of the proposal much like I do the closing arguments of a jury trial. The conclusion is the last memory the reader will have of a project. The reader should be aware he or she is moving from the body of the proposal to the conclusion. The reader is more than likely tired and the conclusion should reenergize them and remind them of why this is definitely a fundable proposal. Bringing the main point back into the eye of the reader is critical in closing your proposal.
Week #2 Update
To: Dr. Holmevik
From: Diana Thrasher
Introduction
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of a funding agency. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Work Completed
Since last Thursday I have addressed the elements of change behind the need for this project is the increase in research expectations placed on faculty by the University, This is a result of Clemson’s push for Top 20 Status, a decrease in funding by the state, and necessary resources are lacking in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. I came to this conclusion by looking at the project from a cause and effect point of view and accessing what caused the problem. I drafted the current situation for my proposal that I feel illustrates if we are unable to move forward on this opportunity the problem will only get worse for our college. I chose to mix the narrative and effects approach in this sections because of the diversity of the secondary readers of the document. I am relatively secure with my current situation; however, I feel I should use more theory from the MAPC reading list in my final draft. I plan on looking at Aristotle, Burke, Kuhn, Foucault, and Bitzer over the weekend to possibly add to my bibliography.
I have also drafted the project structure; however I feel I need look though a critical lense at this portion of my proposal and break my steps down more thoroughly with the why and how questions. I have sent out a few emails to seasoned grant writers in our college for feedback on my project plan. I have mapped out the project plan and drafted a time line to submit to my POC
Future Work
I want to revisit my current situation and use more theory from the MAPC reading list. In addition I will flesh out the writing in this section. I will also revise the project structure to include my research methodology. I plan on drafting a bio that on second thought I will include with the proposal. Although my POC is fully aware of my qualifications, I feel that adding a qualifications section to the proposal will ensure that he understands my commitment to the project. Next, I will complete the draft of the proposal for submission on Monday. After this is complete, I will focus on a visual product to submit with my proposal.
From: Diana Thrasher
Introduction
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of a funding agency. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Work Completed
Since last Thursday I have addressed the elements of change behind the need for this project is the increase in research expectations placed on faculty by the University, This is a result of Clemson’s push for Top 20 Status, a decrease in funding by the state, and necessary resources are lacking in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. I came to this conclusion by looking at the project from a cause and effect point of view and accessing what caused the problem. I drafted the current situation for my proposal that I feel illustrates if we are unable to move forward on this opportunity the problem will only get worse for our college. I chose to mix the narrative and effects approach in this sections because of the diversity of the secondary readers of the document. I am relatively secure with my current situation; however, I feel I should use more theory from the MAPC reading list in my final draft. I plan on looking at Aristotle, Burke, Kuhn, Foucault, and Bitzer over the weekend to possibly add to my bibliography.
I have also drafted the project structure; however I feel I need look though a critical lense at this portion of my proposal and break my steps down more thoroughly with the why and how questions. I have sent out a few emails to seasoned grant writers in our college for feedback on my project plan. I have mapped out the project plan and drafted a time line to submit to my POC
Future Work
I want to revisit my current situation and use more theory from the MAPC reading list. In addition I will flesh out the writing in this section. I will also revise the project structure to include my research methodology. I plan on drafting a bio that on second thought I will include with the proposal. Although my POC is fully aware of my qualifications, I feel that adding a qualifications section to the proposal will ensure that he understands my commitment to the project. Next, I will complete the draft of the proposal for submission on Monday. After this is complete, I will focus on a visual product to submit with my proposal.
My Bio
Diana Thrasher
Profile
· More than five experience in proposal development and budget administration.
· Over fifteen years experience in business administration, management and human resources.
Education
B.A., English, Clemson University. May, 1989
M.A., Professional Communication, Candidate, Clemson University
Relevant Experience & Accomplishments
Program Coordination
· Comprehensive editor for the J.E. Sirrine Textile Foundation Endowed Chair in Advanced Fiber-Based Materials.
· Copyeditor on $16 million, 2004, NSF proposal (MRSEC).
· Developed polices and procedures for graduate program in the School of Materials Science & Engineering.
· Observer in SEA evaluations of FY06 National Textile Center proposals.
· Certified ISO 9001 Internal Auditor.
Employment
Grants Coordinator II, Clemson University, College of Architecture, Arts & Humanities
· Formulate grant requests and contracts
· Assist in framing, writing, editing and budget preparation
· Advise faculty of sponsor procedures and policies required for proposal submissions.
· Develop and administer training programs for faculty, staff, and students
· Establish and maintain effective relationships with funding agencies, institution administration administrators and researchers.
Honors & Awards
2007-2008 Dean’s Award for Excellence in Outstanding Customer Service, CAAH
2006 Clemson University Board of Trustees Award for Staff Excellence
2005 Rising Star Research Award, CU Graduate Research Forum
Profile
· More than five experience in proposal development and budget administration.
· Over fifteen years experience in business administration, management and human resources.
Education
B.A., English, Clemson University. May, 1989
M.A., Professional Communication, Candidate, Clemson University
Relevant Experience & Accomplishments
Program Coordination
· Comprehensive editor for the J.E. Sirrine Textile Foundation Endowed Chair in Advanced Fiber-Based Materials.
· Copyeditor on $16 million, 2004, NSF proposal (MRSEC).
· Developed polices and procedures for graduate program in the School of Materials Science & Engineering.
· Observer in SEA evaluations of FY06 National Textile Center proposals.
· Certified ISO 9001 Internal Auditor.
Employment
Grants Coordinator II, Clemson University, College of Architecture, Arts & Humanities
· Formulate grant requests and contracts
· Assist in framing, writing, editing and budget preparation
· Advise faculty of sponsor procedures and policies required for proposal submissions.
· Develop and administer training programs for faculty, staff, and students
· Establish and maintain effective relationships with funding agencies, institution administration administrators and researchers.
Honors & Awards
2007-2008 Dean’s Award for Excellence in Outstanding Customer Service, CAAH
2006 Clemson University Board of Trustees Award for Staff Excellence
2005 Rising Star Research Award, CU Graduate Research Forum
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Very rough draft of project plan
Anytime a paradigm shift occurs, problems will arise and will have to be addressed. Research at Clemson University has become a necessity instead of an option. With state funding dropping from ____ in 1990 to around ___ in 2008, our institution must find other ways of funding, and that funding is research. The state budget will continue to be cut and those cuts will be passed down to the departments.
AAH is not known as a research college; however each year the number of proposal submitted by AAH faculty increases for various reasons. Since research has not been a priority, tools to assist those individuals interesting in research are available, but they are not widely know. Personnel have been added over the last few years and workshops and assistance are being developed to facilitate the research. Over the last seven years research has steadily increased in our college. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college succeed in this area.
The college of Architecture, Arts and Humanities can succeed in research but our college must be willing to provide the tools necessary to enable this paradigm shift to occur. In order to develop a research culture our college must be willing to put the resources into place to enable our grant seekers succeed. This starts at the top and will trickle down. President Barker has laid the ground work with his push for Top 20 status. In order to reach this goal, Clemson’s research dollars must excel at a rapid pace.
For our college to be a part of this we must take the first step of enlisting support from the department chairs. If the chairs are not behind this project, the faculty will not feel it is their best interest to pursue research dollars. In this first step the department chairs will be presented with the research history of the University and the future forecast from President Barker. A list of benefits will also be presented to the chairs. These benefits include additional graduate students to assist with research, lab equipment, travel money to conduct research, and course release. If the department chairs are in favor of the project, their faculty, staff and students will be more inclined to pursue external research.
This encouragement to persue research dollars will result in more individuals needing tools and guidance in grant writing in our college. Building a research culture will take time and effort. This project will produce a step by step guide in producing winning proposals, a multimedia training project housed on the AAH Research web site, and workshops given throughout the year.
A “how to” manual will provide the newcomer a road map starting with an idea and turning it into a well-defined proposal. It will stress that throughout the process the novice will need to be precise about their own role and analyze how well their project reflects the funding agency’s goals.
It takes time, and then more time to write a successful grant. The actual writing of the text in the research grant is only part of the work that goes into a successful proposal. In the economy of the academic research institution, success in grant writing continues to gain importance. It is imperative to thoroughly understand the expectations of knowing how to write proposals and the importance of funding to the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. They need to understand they should not be “casual” in the way they write. They should not write a proposal as if they were talking to peers who already know and understand their project, but develop an awareness of who their proposal reviewing audience will be.
I feel it is important to write the manual first because I envision it as being the backbone of the project. Currently I plan on organizing the manual into ten steps.
Step 1 Developing Relationships with Funders
Step 2 Following the Rules (internal and external)
Step 3 Defining Clear Goals and Objectives
Step 4 Developing the Research Methodology
Step 5 Developing Sustainability Strategies and Collaborations
Step 6 Preparing the Budget
Step 7 Writing the Organization Background Component
Step 8 Writing the Proposal Summary
Step 9 Putting the Package Together
Step 10 Sustaining Relationships with Funders
In each step (or chapter) I will enlist suggestions from the AAH Faculty Research Facilitators. I will also interview successful researchers in each department for suggested content. The document will be submitted to the Associate Dean of Research for review.
Revisions will be made at this point and the manual will be written.
From paper to the web will be the third step in my project. Not everyone will want to read a manual. Some individuals prefer to get their information visually. Being aware of this, I must be careful as to what is the best format for this project. Research and possible usability testing may be required to determine the best method. I will also have to learn the software that I select to produce the document. The last phase of the third step is to develop the project and put it one the AAH web site.
Step four will be to develop a workshop to incorporate into the Research Office training though out the year. First I will enlist suggestions for the best media to use from the AAH Faculty Research Facilitators. I will also need to determine if funding will be needed to develop and conduct the workshops. At this point I will be ready to develop the workshop.
This project will foster the research paradigm shift that has begun to occur at Clemson as well in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. Our college should be a part of this transition, and be recognized for the outstanding research we are conducting. At the completion of this project not one, but three different training media will be available to chose from on how to writer a winning proposal.
AAH is not known as a research college; however each year the number of proposal submitted by AAH faculty increases for various reasons. Since research has not been a priority, tools to assist those individuals interesting in research are available, but they are not widely know. Personnel have been added over the last few years and workshops and assistance are being developed to facilitate the research. Over the last seven years research has steadily increased in our college. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college succeed in this area.
The college of Architecture, Arts and Humanities can succeed in research but our college must be willing to provide the tools necessary to enable this paradigm shift to occur. In order to develop a research culture our college must be willing to put the resources into place to enable our grant seekers succeed. This starts at the top and will trickle down. President Barker has laid the ground work with his push for Top 20 status. In order to reach this goal, Clemson’s research dollars must excel at a rapid pace.
For our college to be a part of this we must take the first step of enlisting support from the department chairs. If the chairs are not behind this project, the faculty will not feel it is their best interest to pursue research dollars. In this first step the department chairs will be presented with the research history of the University and the future forecast from President Barker. A list of benefits will also be presented to the chairs. These benefits include additional graduate students to assist with research, lab equipment, travel money to conduct research, and course release. If the department chairs are in favor of the project, their faculty, staff and students will be more inclined to pursue external research.
This encouragement to persue research dollars will result in more individuals needing tools and guidance in grant writing in our college. Building a research culture will take time and effort. This project will produce a step by step guide in producing winning proposals, a multimedia training project housed on the AAH Research web site, and workshops given throughout the year.
A “how to” manual will provide the newcomer a road map starting with an idea and turning it into a well-defined proposal. It will stress that throughout the process the novice will need to be precise about their own role and analyze how well their project reflects the funding agency’s goals.
It takes time, and then more time to write a successful grant. The actual writing of the text in the research grant is only part of the work that goes into a successful proposal. In the economy of the academic research institution, success in grant writing continues to gain importance. It is imperative to thoroughly understand the expectations of knowing how to write proposals and the importance of funding to the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. They need to understand they should not be “casual” in the way they write. They should not write a proposal as if they were talking to peers who already know and understand their project, but develop an awareness of who their proposal reviewing audience will be.
I feel it is important to write the manual first because I envision it as being the backbone of the project. Currently I plan on organizing the manual into ten steps.
Step 1 Developing Relationships with Funders
Step 2 Following the Rules (internal and external)
Step 3 Defining Clear Goals and Objectives
Step 4 Developing the Research Methodology
Step 5 Developing Sustainability Strategies and Collaborations
Step 6 Preparing the Budget
Step 7 Writing the Organization Background Component
Step 8 Writing the Proposal Summary
Step 9 Putting the Package Together
Step 10 Sustaining Relationships with Funders
In each step (or chapter) I will enlist suggestions from the AAH Faculty Research Facilitators. I will also interview successful researchers in each department for suggested content. The document will be submitted to the Associate Dean of Research for review.
Revisions will be made at this point and the manual will be written.
From paper to the web will be the third step in my project. Not everyone will want to read a manual. Some individuals prefer to get their information visually. Being aware of this, I must be careful as to what is the best format for this project. Research and possible usability testing may be required to determine the best method. I will also have to learn the software that I select to produce the document. The last phase of the third step is to develop the project and put it one the AAH web site.
Step four will be to develop a workshop to incorporate into the Research Office training though out the year. First I will enlist suggestions for the best media to use from the AAH Faculty Research Facilitators. I will also need to determine if funding will be needed to develop and conduct the workshops. At this point I will be ready to develop the workshop.
This project will foster the research paradigm shift that has begun to occur at Clemson as well in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. Our college should be a part of this transition, and be recognized for the outstanding research we are conducting. At the completion of this project not one, but three different training media will be available to chose from on how to writer a winning proposal.
Chapter 6
At the beginning of this class we defined stasis – two sides agree to have a discussion. The qualifications sections can be the deciding factor for the funder if they want to "have a discussion" with the applicant or not. When a funder sees a proposal as promising the next step is to look at the qualifications. This can be the deciding factor to not fund a proposal if the funder does not see the team as credible or capable of carrying out the project.
Focusing on what makes your team different and attractive is more important that one may think. When developing a proposal for a federal funder, talk to the program officer, or participate in a conference call. Often times if you listen carefully and read between the lines they will give advice on what they are looking for, or what other types of proposals they anticipate receiving. This is the team’s time to step up and make themselves more attractive than the other submissions. This is not an area of the proposal let go until the last minute. This section of the proposal is as much about rhetorical strategy as the current situation and the project plan.
Just as a resume is revised depending on the positing and company that is targeted, so too should the qualifications section of a proposal. It is not wise to submit the same qualifications page to two different funders. One should always compose a qualifications document specific to the funding agency and audience targeting.
Boiler plates are common in federally funded projects. Often times this section is limited so the writer only has a compacted amount of space to put a great deal of information. Know your audience and tailor your qualifications to the audience you are targeting. When preparing this section remember to keep in mind what they funder needs to know, not what you want to tell them.
Just as a resume is revised depending on the positing and company that is targeted so to should the qualifications section of a proposal. It is not wise to submit the same qualifications to two different funders. One should always compose a qualifications document specific to the funding agency and audience targeting. Know your audience.
Focusing on what makes your team different and attractive is more important that one may think. When developing a proposal for a federal funder, talk to the program officer, or participate in a conference call. Often times if you listen carefully and read between the lines they will give advice on what they are looking for, or what other types of proposals they anticipate receiving. This is the team’s time to step up and make themselves more attractive than the other submissions. This is not an area of the proposal let go until the last minute. This section of the proposal is as much about rhetorical strategy as the current situation and the project plan.
Just as a resume is revised depending on the positing and company that is targeted, so too should the qualifications section of a proposal. It is not wise to submit the same qualifications page to two different funders. One should always compose a qualifications document specific to the funding agency and audience targeting.
Boiler plates are common in federally funded projects. Often times this section is limited so the writer only has a compacted amount of space to put a great deal of information. Know your audience and tailor your qualifications to the audience you are targeting. When preparing this section remember to keep in mind what they funder needs to know, not what you want to tell them.
Just as a resume is revised depending on the positing and company that is targeted so to should the qualifications section of a proposal. It is not wise to submit the same qualifications to two different funders. One should always compose a qualifications document specific to the funding agency and audience targeting. Know your audience.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Project Plan Outline
Step 1 – Enlist support of department chairs for project
Dean and ADR to meet with each chair to support project
Provide a better understanding of the research expectations of the University
Step 2 – Write the manual
Enlist suggestions from AAH Faculty Research Facilitators
Interview successful researchers in each department for suggested content
Submit to POC for final approval
Write the manual
Step 3 – Develop multimedia project for the AAH Research website
Determine the best format
Lean software
Develop the project
Step 4 – Develop workshop
Determine the best media for workshop
Determine if funding is needed for the workshops
Develop the workshop
Dean and ADR to meet with each chair to support project
Provide a better understanding of the research expectations of the University
Step 2 – Write the manual
Enlist suggestions from AAH Faculty Research Facilitators
Interview successful researchers in each department for suggested content
Submit to POC for final approval
Write the manual
Step 3 – Develop multimedia project for the AAH Research website
Determine the best format
Lean software
Develop the project
Step 4 – Develop workshop
Determine the best media for workshop
Determine if funding is needed for the workshops
Develop the workshop
Chapter 5 Project Plan
Now that the draft of the current situation is complete it is time to focus on the organization of the plan. I feel like my POC, Dr. James London will be heavily involved in these decisions based on his expectations and the office work load. I think after reviewing the current situation with him again, we will want to revisit the TRO. There is the possibility of revising them.
Just as we mapped the current situation, we will want to map out the project plan. We will look at the most promising solution to our problem as a starting point, in this case a guide for AAH on proposal development. We will then ask if our mapping meets our revised TRO. If in fact it does we will have answered the HOW stasis question. We can then move on to asking ourselves WHY are the steps we laid out in the project plan map necessary. Are they the proper steps we should take or should we try doing it a different way? Once we are comfortable with these answers we have a solid project plan.
The next step is to focus on a realistic timeline. In my case, the client, Dr. James London will relay expectation and goals. These goals will be weighed against other deadlines and projects our office is currently working on.
Just as we mapped the current situation, we will want to map out the project plan. We will look at the most promising solution to our problem as a starting point, in this case a guide for AAH on proposal development. We will then ask if our mapping meets our revised TRO. If in fact it does we will have answered the HOW stasis question. We can then move on to asking ourselves WHY are the steps we laid out in the project plan map necessary. Are they the proper steps we should take or should we try doing it a different way? Once we are comfortable with these answers we have a solid project plan.
The next step is to focus on a realistic timeline. In my case, the client, Dr. James London will relay expectation and goals. These goals will be weighed against other deadlines and projects our office is currently working on.
POC
My point of contact for my project is Dr. James B. London, Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities
Current situation rough draft
Anytime a paradigm shift occurs, problems will arise and will have to be addressed. Research at Clemson University has become a necessity instead of an option. With state funding dropping from ____ in 1990 to around ___ in 2008, our institution must find other ways of funding, and that funding is research. The state budget will continue to be cut and those cuts will be passed down to the departments.
AAH is not known as a research college; however there are research dollars out there for our college. Since research has not been a priority, tools to assist those individuals interesting in research are available, but they are not widely know. Personnel have been added over the last few years and workshops and assistance are being developed to facilitate the research. Over the last seven years research has steadily increased in our college as you can see by the table below. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college succeed in this area.
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office staff.
The goal of this manual is to be the only reference guide needed on a long road to preparing a successful proposal. A great deal of effort will go into showing that a good idea is necessary but not sufficient and that a successful proposal is an exercise in good communication. This guide will show how to gain insight from seasoned grant writers that know the system. Students will be able to understand the importance of finding a way of differentiating their grant proposal from run-of-the-mill applications.
Because of the diversity of the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities no one funding agency is identified for our guide. Each year there are more and more demands for research dollars and the competition for these dollars is great. Each year the number of proposals submitted by Clemson University’s CAAH increases.
This project will benefit CAAH in that a manual will be available for reference when writing proposals. Readers can employ different methods in using this manual depending on their needs and experience. This project will integrate writing, communication, rhetorical analysis, and the importance of research itself.
The purpose of this literature review is to summarize ideas about the research on writing successful proposals. Numerous books, how to listings, and guides offer insights to novice grant writers and even those with experience, however, it is believed one manual tailored for CAAH research would be a useful tool that can offer assistance and insight to both the novice and experienced grant seeker.
Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request (Carlson,12). This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. This guide will be readily available for anyone in CAAH. It is expected that this guide will save time and increase efficiency for faculty and students in that they will have one location to go to for guidance. This review will focus on the importance of compiling a manual that focuses on the importance of communication rather than research ideas.
A proposal must reflect a well-planned project. The cost must be reasonable. Often, the most common flaws grantmakers find in proposals are lack of clarity about what the writer is trying to achieve, the importance of the need, and the plan for meeting that need cost effectively (Lauffer, 103). The funding agencies are sending a clear message that the grant seekers will be expected to demonstrate solidity in long-term financial success of the project to be funded and of the funding agency itself (A Proposal Writing Short Course). Funding agencies fund work that furthers their mission. In addition, getting to know the grant officers, funding limits, and previous funded grants from those agencies are critical (Wason,144).
Reviewers become frustrated at having to read and reread a research plan before understanding a project. Carter and Quick, co-authors of How to Write A Grant Proposal, have written four books on the subject. They spend a great deal of effort illustrating how grant seeking is primarily project development, research, and positioning. The writing of the proposal actually comes last. They stress that “one should never write the first line of a proposal until the project is fully developed and at that point the proposal writes itself.” In addition to getting to know the funder, one must also understand what all is involved in the proposal process. As stated above, writing the text of the research is only a fraction of the work. Assembling budgets, tables, and getting the proposal through internal reviews are critical (New, 202). These references show the more effort and time the funder has to devote to figure out the proposal application, the less energy they will have to review the proposal itself. This also brings a key point: never assume the reader knows what the writer means (Rasey, Writing the Grant). She states, “explain it as clearly as possible but without insulting his/her intelligence.” One should keep abbreviations, acronyms, and discipline-specific terminology to an absolute minimum.
Consulting someone with experience is key to help understand what makes a grant successful (Whalen,116). Experienced grant writers not only can share past experiences, they can also provide key connections with funding agencies. Bauer, author of How to Evaluate and Improve Your Grant Effort, interviewed veteran grant writers and listed a variety of reasons for seeking grants. Among their reasons were the following:
· Grants allow exploration of interest.
· Grants help move a department toward its goals.
· The department/school needs the results that grants generate, such as equipment, personnel and research findings.
· Grants can get things that the institution cannot afford to purchase (e.g., equipment, graduate students, post doctorial employees, and course release.
· Grants can lead to publishing, the deliverance of papers at professional meetings, and travel.
Experienced writers can advise on how not to make the same mistakes they made. A study in Getting Funded: A Complete Guide to Proposal Writing, found from interviews that some proposal writers deliberately set out to dazzle readers with their mastery of technical terminology and overblown phrases. He also discovered some writers try to make a simple, routine job sound complex and difficult in hopes the funder will think they are getting more for their money. Tips included from the interviews for making a more understandable proposal are:
· Say the most important thing first.
· Summarize often.
· Present general concepts, conclusions, major points first; then present the details.
· Use simple, familiar words.
· Use short sentences.
· Keep paragraphs short.
· Write in an active voice.
· Write in the first-person plural.
· Repeat, repeat, repeat.
· Use high-connotation words and phrases.
· Fine tune the first sentence.
Exponential growth in academic grants efforts is another area to carefully consider when planning a proposal. On one hand the idea of “growth is good” (more money, more indirect costs, more research, more publications and more prestige for the university) and on the other, “there is no limit to where research funding can take the university” (Bauer,1995,11). It is important to factor in the reality of the infrastructure to support exponential growth. One must take into account if there are adequate labs to house the research and space for the potential growth and the problems associated with this type of growth (Locke, et al, 186).
One area that is repeated in a great deal of the literature is the importance of following the rules set by the funder. The guidelines for the organization will indicate what to include in a grant proposal. Most funders want the same basic information, even if they use different words or ask questions in a different order. Checking the funders website often will produce all instructions, templates and guidance for assistance needed to submit a proposal to that funder. This guide will house an outline that should meet the needs of most funders, or guide the writer when approaching a funder with no written guidelines.
My primary focus from this will be to write a manual to guide the newcomer and to help an individual understand that one cannot simply identify a funder and write a proposal. There is no substitute for a good idea, but successful proposal writing is an exercise in communication.
AAH is not known as a research college; however there are research dollars out there for our college. Since research has not been a priority, tools to assist those individuals interesting in research are available, but they are not widely know. Personnel have been added over the last few years and workshops and assistance are being developed to facilitate the research. Over the last seven years research has steadily increased in our college as you can see by the table below. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college succeed in this area.
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office staff.
The goal of this manual is to be the only reference guide needed on a long road to preparing a successful proposal. A great deal of effort will go into showing that a good idea is necessary but not sufficient and that a successful proposal is an exercise in good communication. This guide will show how to gain insight from seasoned grant writers that know the system. Students will be able to understand the importance of finding a way of differentiating their grant proposal from run-of-the-mill applications.
Because of the diversity of the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities no one funding agency is identified for our guide. Each year there are more and more demands for research dollars and the competition for these dollars is great. Each year the number of proposals submitted by Clemson University’s CAAH increases.
This project will benefit CAAH in that a manual will be available for reference when writing proposals. Readers can employ different methods in using this manual depending on their needs and experience. This project will integrate writing, communication, rhetorical analysis, and the importance of research itself.
The purpose of this literature review is to summarize ideas about the research on writing successful proposals. Numerous books, how to listings, and guides offer insights to novice grant writers and even those with experience, however, it is believed one manual tailored for CAAH research would be a useful tool that can offer assistance and insight to both the novice and experienced grant seeker.
Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request (Carlson,12). This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. This guide will be readily available for anyone in CAAH. It is expected that this guide will save time and increase efficiency for faculty and students in that they will have one location to go to for guidance. This review will focus on the importance of compiling a manual that focuses on the importance of communication rather than research ideas.
A proposal must reflect a well-planned project. The cost must be reasonable. Often, the most common flaws grantmakers find in proposals are lack of clarity about what the writer is trying to achieve, the importance of the need, and the plan for meeting that need cost effectively (Lauffer, 103). The funding agencies are sending a clear message that the grant seekers will be expected to demonstrate solidity in long-term financial success of the project to be funded and of the funding agency itself (A Proposal Writing Short Course). Funding agencies fund work that furthers their mission. In addition, getting to know the grant officers, funding limits, and previous funded grants from those agencies are critical (Wason,144).
Reviewers become frustrated at having to read and reread a research plan before understanding a project. Carter and Quick, co-authors of How to Write A Grant Proposal, have written four books on the subject. They spend a great deal of effort illustrating how grant seeking is primarily project development, research, and positioning. The writing of the proposal actually comes last. They stress that “one should never write the first line of a proposal until the project is fully developed and at that point the proposal writes itself.” In addition to getting to know the funder, one must also understand what all is involved in the proposal process. As stated above, writing the text of the research is only a fraction of the work. Assembling budgets, tables, and getting the proposal through internal reviews are critical (New, 202). These references show the more effort and time the funder has to devote to figure out the proposal application, the less energy they will have to review the proposal itself. This also brings a key point: never assume the reader knows what the writer means (Rasey, Writing the Grant). She states, “explain it as clearly as possible but without insulting his/her intelligence.” One should keep abbreviations, acronyms, and discipline-specific terminology to an absolute minimum.
Consulting someone with experience is key to help understand what makes a grant successful (Whalen,116). Experienced grant writers not only can share past experiences, they can also provide key connections with funding agencies. Bauer, author of How to Evaluate and Improve Your Grant Effort, interviewed veteran grant writers and listed a variety of reasons for seeking grants. Among their reasons were the following:
· Grants allow exploration of interest.
· Grants help move a department toward its goals.
· The department/school needs the results that grants generate, such as equipment, personnel and research findings.
· Grants can get things that the institution cannot afford to purchase (e.g., equipment, graduate students, post doctorial employees, and course release.
· Grants can lead to publishing, the deliverance of papers at professional meetings, and travel.
Experienced writers can advise on how not to make the same mistakes they made. A study in Getting Funded: A Complete Guide to Proposal Writing, found from interviews that some proposal writers deliberately set out to dazzle readers with their mastery of technical terminology and overblown phrases. He also discovered some writers try to make a simple, routine job sound complex and difficult in hopes the funder will think they are getting more for their money. Tips included from the interviews for making a more understandable proposal are:
· Say the most important thing first.
· Summarize often.
· Present general concepts, conclusions, major points first; then present the details.
· Use simple, familiar words.
· Use short sentences.
· Keep paragraphs short.
· Write in an active voice.
· Write in the first-person plural.
· Repeat, repeat, repeat.
· Use high-connotation words and phrases.
· Fine tune the first sentence.
Exponential growth in academic grants efforts is another area to carefully consider when planning a proposal. On one hand the idea of “growth is good” (more money, more indirect costs, more research, more publications and more prestige for the university) and on the other, “there is no limit to where research funding can take the university” (Bauer,1995,11). It is important to factor in the reality of the infrastructure to support exponential growth. One must take into account if there are adequate labs to house the research and space for the potential growth and the problems associated with this type of growth (Locke, et al, 186).
One area that is repeated in a great deal of the literature is the importance of following the rules set by the funder. The guidelines for the organization will indicate what to include in a grant proposal. Most funders want the same basic information, even if they use different words or ask questions in a different order. Checking the funders website often will produce all instructions, templates and guidance for assistance needed to submit a proposal to that funder. This guide will house an outline that should meet the needs of most funders, or guide the writer when approaching a funder with no written guidelines.
My primary focus from this will be to write a manual to guide the newcomer and to help an individual understand that one cannot simply identify a funder and write a proposal. There is no substitute for a good idea, but successful proposal writing is an exercise in communication.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
Revised Executive Summary and Purpose Statement
Revised Executive Summary
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Purpose Statement
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency.
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Purpose Statement
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency.
Chapter 4 Describing the Current Situation
Chapter 4 Describing the Current Situation
1. Describing the current situation is where the writer establishes his/her ethos. The writer has to establish that the problem being addressed is the effect of change. Anytime a paradigm shift occurs, problems will arise and will have to be addressed. Research at Clemson University has become a necessity instead of an option. With state funding dropping from 90% in 1990 to around 15% in 2008, our institution must find other ways of funding, and that funding is research. The state budget will continue to be cut and those cuts will be passed down to the departments.
AAH is not known as a research college; however there are research dollars out there for our college. Since research has not been a priority, tools to assist those individuals interesting in research are available, but they are not widely know. Personnel have been added over the last few years and workshops and assistance are being developed to facilitate the research. Over the last 7 years research has steadily increased in our college as you can see by the table below. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college excel in this area.
A well researched, well written current situation is a must for any proposal as it establishes the ethos of the writer. The review may choose to not read the remainder of the proposal if he/she does not feel the writer is credible. It is crucial our college have the tools necessary for our faculty and students to succeed in this area.
2. Problem-Cause Map
The guidelines are very important for the writer to carefully dissect in order to draft the current situation section.
1. Problems are the effect of causes – Less state funding has promoted the need to secure other funding opportunities. This has prompted the need for more resources needed to assist our college excel in their research efforts.
2. Ignored problems tend to grow worse - More resources are needed for our faculty, staff and students to craft quality proposals. More and more graduate students are being encouraged to seek out their own funding for projects.
3. Blame change, not people – Increased demand for research – Top 20 status, reduced state budget, reduced departmental operating budgets, push to attract top notch graduate and PhD students, tenure.
3. Researching the current situation can take a causal approach, effects approach or a narrative approach. These terms are relatively explanatory. Deciding which approach to use is based on the research being conducted and the kind of situation you are trying to describe and the readers to whom you are describing it to (65). I am considering the narrative approach versus the effects approach in my proposal. My concern is some of my secondary readers are aware of the causes of the problem, but I am worried they might not recognize the importance of doing something to remedy that problem. At the same time those same readers may not be aware of all of the economic factors that have contributed to the push for more research dollars. At this juncture I believe I need to spend more time with the problem-causes map to determine which approach to take.
1. Describing the current situation is where the writer establishes his/her ethos. The writer has to establish that the problem being addressed is the effect of change. Anytime a paradigm shift occurs, problems will arise and will have to be addressed. Research at Clemson University has become a necessity instead of an option. With state funding dropping from 90% in 1990 to around 15% in 2008, our institution must find other ways of funding, and that funding is research. The state budget will continue to be cut and those cuts will be passed down to the departments.
AAH is not known as a research college; however there are research dollars out there for our college. Since research has not been a priority, tools to assist those individuals interesting in research are available, but they are not widely know. Personnel have been added over the last few years and workshops and assistance are being developed to facilitate the research. Over the last 7 years research has steadily increased in our college as you can see by the table below. With this increase comes the reality that steps need to be taken to do everything we possibly can to help our college excel in this area.
A well researched, well written current situation is a must for any proposal as it establishes the ethos of the writer. The review may choose to not read the remainder of the proposal if he/she does not feel the writer is credible. It is crucial our college have the tools necessary for our faculty and students to succeed in this area.2. Problem-Cause Map
The guidelines are very important for the writer to carefully dissect in order to draft the current situation section.
1. Problems are the effect of causes – Less state funding has promoted the need to secure other funding opportunities. This has prompted the need for more resources needed to assist our college excel in their research efforts.
2. Ignored problems tend to grow worse - More resources are needed for our faculty, staff and students to craft quality proposals. More and more graduate students are being encouraged to seek out their own funding for projects.
3. Blame change, not people – Increased demand for research – Top 20 status, reduced state budget, reduced departmental operating budgets, push to attract top notch graduate and PhD students, tenure.
3. Researching the current situation can take a causal approach, effects approach or a narrative approach. These terms are relatively explanatory. Deciding which approach to use is based on the research being conducted and the kind of situation you are trying to describe and the readers to whom you are describing it to (65). I am considering the narrative approach versus the effects approach in my proposal. My concern is some of my secondary readers are aware of the causes of the problem, but I am worried they might not recognize the importance of doing something to remedy that problem. At the same time those same readers may not be aware of all of the economic factors that have contributed to the push for more research dollars. At this juncture I believe I need to spend more time with the problem-causes map to determine which approach to take.
Week #1 Update
To: Dr. Holmevik
From: Diana Thrasher
Introduction
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of a funding agency. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Work Completed
At this point I have spoken with various faculty, students, and staff in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities regarding the content of the proposed project. Based on those conversations I have answered the four stasis question:
1. Is there a problem with proposal submission in AAH? Yes
2. What exactly is the problem? There are not adequate resources to assist our graduate students and new faculty in proposal preparation and submission.
3. How serious is the problem? With the growing expectation of the university on research is it a rapidly growing problem
4. What kind of proposal would solve the problem? A planning proposal
I have taken those questions and answers to the Associate Dean of Research and Graduate Studies and revised my executive summary based on the expectations relayed during that meeting. I have gathered several books from the Cooper Library related to the subject. I have also contacted other Grants Coordinators on campus and requested their input.
Next Steps
I feel at this point I need to address the elements of change that are behind the need for this project. I want to look at the project again from a cause and effect point of view and access what caused the problem. I want to be able to show that if we are unable to move forward on this opportunity the problem will only get worse for our college. I also want to compare the documentation reviewed to date with my strategic plan to make sure I am still on course. I feel it is critical the reader understand how the change in the research culture has presented this opportunity and if not addressed it will only get worse. I will start reviewing the research on the topic I have collected to make sure I have an adequate footing and will compare this to the reader’s expectation.
Conclusion
Currently I feel I am where I need to be with this proposal. If I stay focused on my next steps I believe over the weekend I can acquire more documents for my research and begin to focus on drafting the literature review that will establish my ethos on the project
From: Diana Thrasher
Introduction
This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of a funding agency. This project will not contain instructions on how to do research. This guide will focus on how to seek out funding opportunities and write a winning proposal. A new grant writer needs to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document that will be housed in the Office of Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. It will also be available on the AAH Research web site, and will be incorporated into the training cycle conducted by the research office.
Work Completed
At this point I have spoken with various faculty, students, and staff in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities regarding the content of the proposed project. Based on those conversations I have answered the four stasis question:
1. Is there a problem with proposal submission in AAH? Yes
2. What exactly is the problem? There are not adequate resources to assist our graduate students and new faculty in proposal preparation and submission.
3. How serious is the problem? With the growing expectation of the university on research is it a rapidly growing problem
4. What kind of proposal would solve the problem? A planning proposal
I have taken those questions and answers to the Associate Dean of Research and Graduate Studies and revised my executive summary based on the expectations relayed during that meeting. I have gathered several books from the Cooper Library related to the subject. I have also contacted other Grants Coordinators on campus and requested their input.
Next Steps
I feel at this point I need to address the elements of change that are behind the need for this project. I want to look at the project again from a cause and effect point of view and access what caused the problem. I want to be able to show that if we are unable to move forward on this opportunity the problem will only get worse for our college. I also want to compare the documentation reviewed to date with my strategic plan to make sure I am still on course. I feel it is critical the reader understand how the change in the research culture has presented this opportunity and if not addressed it will only get worse. I will start reviewing the research on the topic I have collected to make sure I have an adequate footing and will compare this to the reader’s expectation.
Conclusion
Currently I feel I am where I need to be with this proposal. If I stay focused on my next steps I believe over the weekend I can acquire more documents for my research and begin to focus on drafting the literature review that will establish my ethos on the project
Wednesday, May 28, 2008
Proposal Opportunity Worksheet
Project Title: A Guide for Producing Winning Proposals
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Client: Dr. James B. London
Title: Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities.
Deadline for Proposal Submission: July 1, 2008
Address for Proposal Submission: 118 Lee Hall, Clemson, SC 29634
Summary of Proposal Opportunity: To develop a “manual” for graduate students and new faculty in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities on developing and writing winning proposals.
Comments and Recommendations: This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document for use in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. The document will also be housed on the AAH Research web site and will be part of the AAH Research training cycle.
Accept or Reject: Accept
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Client: Dr. James B. London
Title: Associate Dean for Research and Graduate Studies in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities.
Deadline for Proposal Submission: July 1, 2008
Address for Proposal Submission: 118 Lee Hall, Clemson, SC 29634
Summary of Proposal Opportunity: To develop a “manual” for graduate students and new faculty in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities on developing and writing winning proposals.
Comments and Recommendations: This project proposes to develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. This project will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. This manual is designed as a new reference document for use in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities. The document will also be housed on the AAH Research web site and will be part of the AAH Research training cycle.
Accept or Reject: Accept
Chapter 3 blog
The Team Approach
Writing as a team can be challenging and rewarding. Having the expertise of multiple individuals in various disciplines is an advantage. Many funders are encouraging interdisciplinary collaboration and it is becoming more and more common in proposal writing.
We all bring different expectations and goals to the table. It is important to consider those when forming a team approach. In this environment one must not only consider the funders motives, values, attitudes and emotions, but the other team members as well.
The Rhetorical Situation
As in chapter one, rhetorical situation is front and center. It is imperative the proposal writer take the time at the beginning of the process to research the funding agency and the individuals (if possible) that will be reviewing the proposal. A proposal that will be reviewed by 3 or 4 panel members will be written in a different format that one reviewed by a 50 member board. Taking time to investigate these areas is evident in a well written proposal.
"WORKING METHODICALLY THROUGHOUT THE RHETORICAL SITUATION THE WRITER CAN DISCOVER A GREAT AMOUNT ABOUT HIS/HER PURPOSE, THE READER AND THE CONTEXTUAL FACTORS THAT WILL INFLUENCE HIS/HER READERS." (page 48) This is valuable information that I feel is important to remember. Even when the writer starts writing it is important stay in check through out the process.
The time invested in defining the rhetorical situation will pay off at the end with a much more informed proposal(subject, purpose, readers and context).
The Reader
It is not uncommon to write a proposal to one reader when there are multiple individuals that will be reviewing your work. Factoring in the primary, secondary, tertiary, and gatekeepers is necessary to produce a rhetorically sound document.
As you look at each reader you should ask yourself what are their motives, values, attitudes and emotions regarding the subject. How will my proposal impact them? I like the idea of charting things out in order to get a better understanding of who my audience is.
Writing as a team can be challenging and rewarding. Having the expertise of multiple individuals in various disciplines is an advantage. Many funders are encouraging interdisciplinary collaboration and it is becoming more and more common in proposal writing.
We all bring different expectations and goals to the table. It is important to consider those when forming a team approach. In this environment one must not only consider the funders motives, values, attitudes and emotions, but the other team members as well.
The Rhetorical Situation
As in chapter one, rhetorical situation is front and center. It is imperative the proposal writer take the time at the beginning of the process to research the funding agency and the individuals (if possible) that will be reviewing the proposal. A proposal that will be reviewed by 3 or 4 panel members will be written in a different format that one reviewed by a 50 member board. Taking time to investigate these areas is evident in a well written proposal.
"WORKING METHODICALLY THROUGHOUT THE RHETORICAL SITUATION THE WRITER CAN DISCOVER A GREAT AMOUNT ABOUT HIS/HER PURPOSE, THE READER AND THE CONTEXTUAL FACTORS THAT WILL INFLUENCE HIS/HER READERS." (page 48) This is valuable information that I feel is important to remember. Even when the writer starts writing it is important stay in check through out the process.
The time invested in defining the rhetorical situation will pay off at the end with a much more informed proposal(subject, purpose, readers and context).
The Reader
It is not uncommon to write a proposal to one reader when there are multiple individuals that will be reviewing your work. Factoring in the primary, secondary, tertiary, and gatekeepers is necessary to produce a rhetorically sound document.
As you look at each reader you should ask yourself what are their motives, values, attitudes and emotions regarding the subject. How will my proposal impact them? I like the idea of charting things out in order to get a better understanding of who my audience is.
Sunday, May 25, 2008
Proposal Abstract
The objective of this project is to learn what can be gained from the experience of successful grant writers. Successful grantsmanship is critical to the economy of the academic research institution. The results of the research will help the new grant writer in the College of Architecture, Arts and Humanities to be able to identify the needs of the targeted funding agency or approach an agency with an unsolicited request. This project will develop a set of guidelines for the new grant writer to use in developing an idea that conforms to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. This proposal will look at successful versus unsuccessful proposal submissions, and attempt to understand how the project fits into the philosophy and mission of the agency or organization targeted. The importance of convincing the funding agency that a project is compelling and is a valuable project worth funding by the agency will be substantiated.
Chapter 2 topics for discussion
In chapter 2, Johnson-Sheehan talks about analyzing problems and opportunities with the researcher asking who, what, when where, why, and how. If the researcher feels they have a good grasp on these questions they should make contact with the funding agency in order to get further clarification. The contact will not give out the “magic” answer, but they will give the researcher feedback. For example, at NEH and NEA the program officer is evaluated yearly on the number of contacts and follow-ups that were made with researchers. If the researcher submits a draft proposal to NEH and NEA within 6 weeks of the deadline, these two agencies will give feedback on the proposal. The feedback will not be from the panel that will be reviewing the final proposals, but it will be from a representative of that agency.
Another critical key element of the proposal that should be addressed is the budget. If the researcher does not allot enough money do complete the project, the research efforts will be hampered. This area is often times not thought out in the proposal stage, and the research can be slowed, or terminated if the money is not in the budget to complete what has been proposed.
Other ways to search for funding opportunities are below.
http://www.grants.gov/
http://www.neh.gov/
http://www.nea.gov/
http://www.infoed.org/genius_live/login.asp InfoEd is a search engine that you design yourself. I believe Katie is going to talk to us about it more in class. Karen Pless (kpless@clemson.edu) in the Office of Sponsored Programs will assist in getting accounts set up for anyone interested.
http://www.clemson.edu/caah/research/index.html AAH has a research web site that has a tremendous amount of information for anyone interested in seeking external (or internal) funding.
Another critical key element of the proposal that should be addressed is the budget. If the researcher does not allot enough money do complete the project, the research efforts will be hampered. This area is often times not thought out in the proposal stage, and the research can be slowed, or terminated if the money is not in the budget to complete what has been proposed.
Other ways to search for funding opportunities are below.
http://www.grants.gov/
http://www.neh.gov/
http://www.nea.gov/
http://www.infoed.org/genius_live/login.asp InfoEd is a search engine that you design yourself. I believe Katie is going to talk to us about it more in class. Karen Pless (kpless@clemson.edu) in the Office of Sponsored Programs will assist in getting accounts set up for anyone interested.
http://www.clemson.edu/caah/research/index.html AAH has a research web site that has a tremendous amount of information for anyone interested in seeking external (or internal) funding.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Proposal idea for 839
This class actually comes at a good time. I have been asked by the Associate Dean of Research in Architecture, Arts and Humanities to develop manual that is a set of guidelines for the new grant writer the College that will assist in the steps of writing a proposal. This will include advice on taking an idea and conforming that idea to the larger overall goal of the funding agency. I am hopeful I will be able to secure a committee in the MAPC program that will enable me to move forward on my final project.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)