On why you should seriously consider actually submitting your grant application


3 reasons why should submit Your grant your Application

Funding Ideas

I have just finished providing the first round of feedback to a number of faculty members at my institution in the wind up to the first major research funding deadline in Canada of 2014. During the first round, I feel I do the most service to prospective applicant by providing the applicants with substantive feedback pushing them to be very specific with their research question, clear with how their question emerges from or responds to the existing literature, and clear defining their methodology.

But sometimes this substantive feedback, given with the objective of allowing them to produce the most competitive application possible, leads to a sense of discouragement.

For example, today I received a phone call from one of these applicants, saying that the applicant agreed wholeheartedly with my comments but felt that because of the work that needed to be done on some of the concepts was now considering…

View original post 595 more words

The importance of the research question


tips in writting Research grant Application

Funding Ideas

As I ramp up towards the next big round of research grant applications at my university, I’m back to advising faculty on how to build their applications for success or how to revise a previously unsuccessful application into a successful one. For my first post, I thought I would tackle by number one piece of advice.

Photo  taken by Ethan Lofton http://www.flickr.com/photos/eleaf/ Photo taken by Ethan Lofton http://www.flickr.com/photos/eleaf/

A competitive research proposal must have a clear and compelling research question.

I am a strong opponent of copying and pasting from one section of the research application form to another, but the research question is the exception that proves the “no-copying” rule. Feel free to repeat the research question, in the same phrasing, ad nauseam throughout your application – in the summary, the project description, the student training section and even in the title (!).

It is your research question that provides the motivation for the project and provides…

View original post 260 more words

Who reviews scientific papers and how do reviews work?


Food for thoughts on peer-reviews publication

The Logic of Science

I spent my afternoon reviewing a paper for a scientific journal and making a recommendation about whether or not the paper should be published. As a scientist, this is not an uncommon task for me, but it is a process that is largely foreign to the general public. Indeed, the peer-review system often seems to be a mystery to those who don’t participate in it, and, as a result, it is a frequent topic for this blog. For example, I have previously written about what it takes to publish a paper. However, I have not previously written a post specifically about what it is like to be a reviewer or even who reviewers are. So, I thought I would take this opportunity to explain the process from a reviewer’s point of view and offer you a window into the system that determines which papers get published.

Who are reviewers and…

View original post 2,665 more words

thesis to journal article – five things to remember


Preparing to write for new readers !

patter

Once you have winkled the topic of your paper out of its thesis shell, you need to select the journal that you want to publish in. And once you’ve made that decision, you need to remember these five things as you start to think about the process of reshaping the material.

  1. You are writing for a new reader

The reader is no longer an examiner who was looking for evidence that you knew how to ‘do’ research and that your research made a credible contribution to your field.  The journal reader expects a paper about something that will interest them, that will connect with what they already know, that  is believable, well constructed and tightly argued. Their expectations mean that you now need to tailor make the material from your thesis into something different.

Photo: Bill Benzon, flickrcommons Photo: Bill Benzon, flickrcommons

2. You have to write a new rationale

You have to construct the particular case for this particular slice…

View original post 645 more words

from conference paper to journal article – writing in small chunks


highly applicable to rewrite your conference paper into journal article

patter

You may not always have the luxury of a block of time to revise your conference paper. Or you might choose to devote the big slab of writing time you do have, perhaps over summer, to a big new project. After all, having extended time is a rarity and you don’t necessarily want to waste it on something that can be done in smaller slices. So if you have decided to revise or rewrite your conference paper in chunks, then here’s one way to go about it.

The usual caveat applies – this is only one way, not The Way – and you may well already have, or find other approaches. But this is worth a go.

I’m assuming that you have already chosen the journal and you know its house style and  readership. You already roughly know the ways in which your revised paper is going to connect with the on-going journal conversation. That’s the foundation you’re now going…

View original post 1,887 more words

“Editor’s Introduction to The New Economic History and the Industrial Revolution,” J. Mokyr (1998)


The New Economic History and the Industrial Revolution

A Fine Theorem

I taught a fun three hours on the Industrial Revolution in my innovation PhD course this week. The absolutely incredible change in the condition of mankind that began in a tiny corner of Europe in an otherwise unremarkable 70-or-so years is totally fascinating. Indeed, the Industrial Revolution and its aftermath are so important to human history that I find it strange that we give people PhDs in social science without requiring at least some study of what happened.

My post today draws heavily on Joel Mokyr’s lovely, if lengthy, summary of what we know about the period. You really should read the whole thing, but if you know nothing about the IR, there are really five facts of great importance which you should be aware of.

1) The world was absurdly poor from the dawn of mankind until the late 1800s, everywhere.
Somewhere like Chad or Nepal today fares better…

View original post 1,712 more words

turning your thesis into a book


Great advice to turn my thesis to book, focusing on differences between thesis and book on purpose and readership

patter

Lots of people want to turn their thesis into a book. This is not always possible – not all theses make good books. But it may also not be desirable. Some disciplines revere the scholarly monograph so writing one may be very good for the career. But others hold the peer reviewed journal article as the gold standard; in such cases, it may be better to get stuck into turning the thesis into a set of papers, rather than sweating over a manuscript. However, if you do want to do the book business, then you have to think about what the common advice – this book is not your thesis – actually means.

The first and most important difference relates to purpose.

The thesis is a text which is written to be examined and evaluated. As such, it follows a particular form, and the writing has to do particular kinds…

View original post 668 more words