Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Faculty Mentor Workshop Session 2: Preparing SSHRC Applications June 29, 2009.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Faculty Mentor Workshop Session 2: Preparing SSHRC Applications June 29, 2009."— Presentation transcript:

1 Faculty Mentor Workshop Session 2: Preparing SSHRC Applications June 29, 2009

2 Stages in the Process Get started as soon as possible; Confirm your eligibility; Register online; Review guidelines; Obtain forms and instructions; SSHRC NOI due August 17 th /09; Get feedback from peers (disciplinary/other); Respect AU internal submission deadlines.

3 SSHRC’s Expectations Evaluation written assessments from national and international experts are obtained prior to review by committee Committees are given specific evaluation criteria Scoring Regular scholar or new scholar?

4 Record of Research Achievement Tangible contributions Last six year period of activity or the five most significant research contributions from any period.

5 Evaluation Criteria Quality and significance of published work; Originality of previous research and its impact; Quantity of research activity relative to the stage of the applicant’s career; Demonstrated importance of other scholarly activities and contributions;

6 Recentness of output; Importance and relevance of dissemination or research results directed to non-academic audiences; Significance of any previous research supported by SSHRC or any other agency; Where applicable, the contribution to the training of future researchers; and Where appropriate, efforts made to develop research partnerships

7 Scoring Grid 5.0 – 6.0  Excellent 4.0 – 4.9  Very Good 3.0 – 3.9  Good Below 3.0  Modest Emphasis placed on applicant’s overall contribution to research measure against the stage of his or her career stage; Allowances made for applicants who do not have the opportunity to supervise grad students.

8 Program of Research Evaluated using the following criteria: Degree of originality and expected contribution; Scholarly, intellectual, social and cultural significance; Appropriateness of theoretical approach or framework; Appropriateness and expected effectiveness of the strategies or methodologies;

9 Feasibility of successfully competing the program of research and appropriateness of schedule of research; Suitability and expected effectiveness of plans to communicate research results both within and outside of the academic community; Where appropriate, the nature and extent of research training; and Contribution to interdisciplinary research (Committee 15 only)

10 Characteristics of the Program of Research Score Range 5.0 – 6.0  Strongly recommended for funding 4.0 – 4.9  Recommended for funding 3.0 -3.9  Fund if funds are available Below 3.0  Not recommended for funding Note: if the committee determines that the PI is not responsible for, or equipped to exercise the leadership, the score assigned to the program of research may be lowered.

11 Advice Title – ensure it is clear, accurate and free of jargon and acronyms Summary – key piece, as it may be the only part of the application that most of the reviewers read Organization of the Description Key themes in description Technical issues Attachments = Opportunity

12 Websites SSHRC’s Expectations & Scoring Scheme: Refer to: “Apply for Funding—Standard Research Grants” statement at demande/program_descriptions- descriptions_de_programmes/standard_grant s_subventions_ordinaires-eng.aspx demande/program_descriptions- descriptions_de_programmes/standard_grant s_subventions_ordinaires-eng.aspx

13 Questions or concerns?? Please contact the Research Office with any questions or concerns you may have as you work through the application process:  Jill Calliou @ or ext  Rebecca Heartt @ or ext 6275

Download ppt "Faculty Mentor Workshop Session 2: Preparing SSHRC Applications June 29, 2009."

Similar presentations

Ads by Google