The bottom line is that while is it helpful for future grant writers to gain knowledge of models, to get a grasp of "scaffolding, coaching, and collaboration" in the classroom environment, there is no substitute for being out in the society, in formal settings, to collaborate with "experts, colleagues, and peers" in learning the ropes of grant proposal writing and getting projects funded.
Attending workshops, conferences, and signing up for training sessions are all necessary when going for large dollar grants from institutions like the National Institutes of Health and other government granting agencies. "Learning and doing are inseparable," Ding writes; without the classroom knowledge, the social collaboration and "real world experiences" of meeting key people and attending high-powered training sessions, the grant writer seeking funds from big government sources is going to fail most of the time. And quite apart from the actual research and writing of the proposal, Ding continues, "collaboration" and "peer review" practices with colleagues and seasoned professionals is vital in order to achieve success.
Stephen L. Wasby is professor of political science emeritus at the University of Albany, State University of New York (SUNY); when Wasby worked with the National Science Foundation a few years ago, one of his tasks was reviewing proposals. In a PS: Political Science and Politics article (Wasby 2001) the professor writes "...in a high proportion of cases the exciting ideas were embedded in horrendously constructed proposals." Wasby understood from this experience that more training was needed for graduate students who were required to submit a proposal, then a dissertation (we're talking here...
He established a seminar, which focuses on the proposal itself, and students had a full semester to do the work. Why only one semester for all that work? Wasby suggests that students first write a "one-to-two page 'pre-proposal' letter" to a potential funding source setting in writing a description of their project, "along with an inquiry as to whether the project falls within the funding source's jurisdiction." This allows the student doing the proposal to get a feel for how to communicate a proposal. Next, segments of the full proposal are drafted in rough form: a preliminary literature review; a list of hypotheses to explain the flow of the work to be done; a description of the "research methods" and the tools to be used; modes of "data analysis"; and lastly, a statement of the human element of this proposal. When that rough draft is done, a budget must be prepared; and following that, conversations with peers, with professionals, and with professors should be done, prior to formal review processes and creation of the final project.
Works Cited
Ding, Huiling. (2008). The Use of Cognitive and Social Apprenticeship to Teach a Disciplinary
Genre: Initiation of Graduate Students into NIH Grant Writing. Written Communication,
Lemmon, Kathryn. (2007). How to begin grant writing. Writer, (120(11), 13-13.
Wasby, Stephen L. (2001). Proposal Writing: A Remedy for a Missing Part of Graduate
Training. PS: Political Science and Politics, 34(2), 309-312.
