Beyond the Program Guide: Empowering Researchers to Succeed in the new SSHRC Architecture

1. Beyond the Program Guide: Empowering Researchers to Succeed in the new SSHRC Architecture

2. Session Overview • Background and Objectives • Anatomy of a Successful Application • Supporting Researchers on Their Journey • Perspectives on Strengthening SSHRC Applications • Discussion

3. Background • Independent researcher mentor, advisor, facilitator, midwife, doula, sherpa • Helped researchers in arts, social sciences and humanities researchers secure over $50M from SSHRC, Canada Research Chairs, Canada Foundation for Innovation, Banting Postdoctoral Fellowships, Canada Council

4. Objectives • Present ideas, tools, approaches and perspectives regarding SSHRC application development • Present ideas, tools, approaches and perspectives regarding SSHRC researcher support • Enhance CAURA member SSHRC researcher support and facilitation processes

5. Anatomy of a Successful Application Dr. Tom Strong, Associate Dean Research,Faculty of EducationUniversity of CalgaryDiscipline: Psychology 2011 Insight Grant Application

6. Midwifery • Dr. Patrick Finn, 2012 Insight Grant application • Discipline:

7. Anatomy of a Successful Process Dr. Patrick Finn, Faculty of ArtsUniversity of CalgaryDiscipline: Drama 2012 Insight Grant Application

8. Perspective: Researchers do not need to change research fundamentals Researchers do not have to change any aspect of their approach apart from:i) placing their research in a broader context beyond academiaii) communicating to a broader audience

9. Perspective: Application as a complex communications exercise • Applications to all programs are more complex communications pieces than before • Focus on application development as a communications exercise, not a “figuring out the research “ • Encourage the development of a research plan well in advance and separate form the writing exercise

10. Perspective: Strategic Planning • Assess Context • Identify Current Status • Strategize Next Phase • Apply to Application Development

11. Perspective: Underlying Models Include explicit summaries of: • Underlying research, training, collaboration, community engagement, knowledge mobilization models • Each model is clearly phased and staged with outcomes feeding into subsequent phases • How outcomes of research phases integrate to meet objectives

12. Perspective: Character • Lead characters: new knowledge, research push, community pull • Bring researcher to foreground: authoritative voice, authentic voice (narrator), third (objective) and first (subjective) person • Plot: the stages of the research journey from knowledge from generation to impact. Program framework for activities • Summary is overture to main proposal

13. Perspective: Narrative Elements • Narrative continuity and clarity of integrating detailed and birds eye view • Bring research program to foreground: third (objective) and first (subjective) person • Bring researcher to foreground: authoritative voice. program framework for activities • Bring new knowledge to foreground: research push, community pull; momentum • Summary is overture to main proposal

14. Approach Warp and Weft Sections and Narrative Structure

15. Perspective: The Art and the Science • The science of a SSHRC application relates to assessing the strength of how each section addresses the instructions • The art relates to the birds eye view, assessing how the narrative threading throughout the proposal addresses the evaluation criteria • Strategic review focuses on assessing narrative structure, flow of knowledge form generation to impact

16. Perspective: Application as Art • Craft text with a focus on the application as a communications exercise conveying complex ideas to a broad audience • Analogies:Application as art: emotional response Application as educational tool Application as music score Application as a tapestry

17. SSHRC Evaluation Criteria: Challenge 40% Challenge—The aim and importance of the endeavour: • originality, significance and expected contribution to knowledge; • appropriateness of the literature review; • appropriateness of the theoretical approach or framework; • appropriateness of the methods/approach; • quality of training and mentoring to be provided to students, emerging scholars and other highly qualified personnel, and opportunities for them to contribute; and • potential influence and impact within and/or beyond the social sciences and humanities research community.

18. SSHRC Evaluation Criteria: Feasibility 20% Feasibility—The plan to achieve excellence: • probability of effective and timely attainment of the research objectives; • appropriateness of the requested budget, and justification of proposed costs; • indications of financial and in-kind contributions from other sources, where appropriate; • quality of knowledge mobilization plans, including for effective knowledge dissemination, knowledge exchange and engagement within and/or beyond the research community; and • strategies and timelines for the design and conduct of the activity/activities proposed.

19. SSHRC Evaluation Criteria: Capability 40% Capability—The expertise to succeed: • quality, quantity and significance of past experience and published outputs of the applicant and any team members relative to their roles in the project and their respective stages of career; • evidence of contributions such as commissioned reports, professional practice, public discourse, public policies, products and services, development of talent, experience in collaboration, etc.; and • potential to make future contributions.

20. Discussion Thank You