Criteria of Assessment

Loading...

En provenance du cours de Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology

Grant Proposal

28 notes

Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology

Grant Proposal

28 notes

Cours 3 sur 5 dans Specialization English for Research Publication Purposes

The course provides guidance on developing a strong application that will allow reviewers to better evaluate the science and merit of your proposal. You will learn how to put your ideas into proper words, arrange a clear and concise paper and search grant market for potential funder. You will also learn how to react to negative feedback from reviewers and resubmit your proposal. The course focuses on useful project management tools and possible budget pitfalls.

À partir de la leçon

MODULE III: READY TO WRITE

In this module you will learn how to develop and arrange sections of your proposal, write the best headings for them, and prepare the abstract. You will also learn how to make your narrative persuasive and appealing. Besides, you will solve the problem of compressing text to the right size and keeping it readable. Another important skill you will acquire is preparing a brief oral presentation of your project in case funders want to meet you.

Letter of Intent4:35

Structure of Narrative4:03

Criteria of Assessment5:30

Rencontrer les enseignants

Elena Bazanova
Director of the Language Training and Testing Center
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology
Varvara Sosedova
PhD in Philology
Moscow State University of International Relations

[MUSIC]

As we said 100 times before you must always follow the guidelines or

directions provided by the funder.

So we can assume that technically your proposal will be impeccable in

terms of page limit, fonts, intervals, names of sections and so on.

But these are requirements for a so called pre-assessment.

The real one starts after your proposal is forwarded to reviewers.

A grant proposal is usually assessed by three peer reviewers

who are in the field of study, but not necessarily.

To make their assessment more objective,

there is a number of points assigned to each section of the narrative.

In most instances the scoring of your entire grant application is based

on a total of 100 points and typically your grant application

needs to score in the high 90s in order to be recommended for the grant award.

The number of points for each section varies significantly.

So it is wise to learn how much this or that section weighs and

devote a respective number of pages to it.

The most comprehensive writing sections of any grant application narrative is usually

the introduction or program design section and background.

Because these are where you write your goals, measurable objectives,

implementation strategies and qualifications of the staff.

Mind that the evaluation methods are really important for reviewers as well

as they want to know if the evaluation design and methodologies are adequate

to measure the extent to which program indicators and outcomes are being met.

So, the section where they will be stated, methods,

where a separate section are scored high as well.

Let's see how it works.

For example, page limit for the whole narrative is 20 pages.

The distribution of points is the following.

The Statement of Need or Introduction, 20 points.

Background section, 40 points, Methods 20 points, and budget section 20 points.

When you know the maximum number of pages that you are allowed to write for

the entire grant application narrative, in our case it's 20.

You can take the total points, 100,

and divide them by the points for each section.

Translate this number into a percentage and you know how many pages you need to

write in each narrative section to fulfill the peer reviewer's expectations.

So 20 points is 20%, consequently such a section should

comprise 20% of the total page limit, or four pages in our case.

For the background section it will be eight pages.

Mind that some government agencies assign more than 100 points to grant application.

Read every word in the guidelines so you know what to shoot for.

For example, you can get an edge on the competition by meeting

the funding agency's priority for a specific grant competition.

Funders often identify one or more priority target populations,

geographic areas or performance criteria.

And award a funding to applications that document that they meet that preference.

For example, when NASA issues a programme for classroom-based space exploration

education and summer camps, it may include an opportunity for

grant applicants to earn an extra five or ten bonus points

if their program will be located in the Alaska or Pacific Rim regions.

These points can give you a huge advantage over other applicants.

The review criteria are usually stated directly in the grant program,

if not you can approach the programme officer with this question, and

the information will be sent to you.

There is nothing wrong about it.

The more data you have the better your proposal will be.

You may wonder what happens when two peer reviewers rate you highly,

95 points, and the third reviewer rates you below the cutoff scores for an award.

After each reviewer independently scores your application, all three get together

over phone or in person and discuss and defend their scores.

And the general rule is that all three reviewers must come with ten points

of each other in order for an application to go one way or the other.

Often after a discussion, application scores change and

sometimes in your favor and sometimes not.

Explorer notre catalogue

Rejoignez-nous gratuitement et obtenez des recommendations, des mises à jour et des offres personnalisées.

Coursera propose un accès universel à la meilleure formation au monde, en partenariat avec des universités et des organisations du plus haut niveau, pour proposer des cours en ligne.

© 2018 Coursera Inc. Tous droits réservés.

Télécharger dans l'App Store

Disponible sur Google Play