Funding is essential for those who wants to continue doing research. This course will provide insight to the process of writing a proposal, and how proposals are evaluated. Two major sources of funding is covered specifically, EU and the Norwegian Research Council.
HNA’s philosophy is learning by doing, and to obtain the ECTS you need to work on a ‘real’ proposal. Use what you learn during lectures, and find a relevant call for your project. If no calls are currently available, you may find an old call and structure your proposal according to this. You may follow parts of the course without taking the exam, this applies typically to Post Docs who want feedback and help with own proposals.
The instructions below applies to the participants who wants to take the exam and receive ECTS.
A draft of your research idea (one page max) must be submitted by the end of 17 Oct. Based on this draft, a mentor from a relevant department is appointed.
Five course days (30 Oct–1 Nov and 16–17 Nov 2017):
Three days of theory and small exercises, followed by two weeks of individual work. Two days are spent on presentations (see below). The detailed schedule for 2017 is yet to be finalised, see preliminary schedule here: FSK-8005_schedule2017.
Use what you have learned the first days of the course to make the backbone of your proposal. Take a look at the proposals that were distributed via Fronter, and see how they are structured (e.g. EU vs. RCN). When you have a reasonable draft, you may send it to your mentor and ask for input and suggestions. If you need a personal meeting, ask your mentor if she or he has time for that. Make sure your mentor is given enough time to give feedback to your proposal before the presentation!
Explain the contents of your proposal to your fellow students and the lecturers and get instant feedback. Each presentation will be 10 minutes + ten minutes discussion. Try to keep the number of slides to less than six. ‘Objectives’ and ‘Impact’ are among the most important parts, ‘Methods’ less important.
In addition, you are given a special responsibility for one of the other’s proposal. As a reviewer, you should suggest improvements to the proposal, point out weaknesses and ask questions after the presentation. Because of this, you have to send the proposal directly to your reviewer a few days in advance. We all need time to prepare.
Participants without proposals:
Attending the presentations is useful for you as well. Grab the opportunity to see different solutions and ideas, and give the presenters constructive feedback. You will be asked to be opponent for one proposal.
To be eligible for the exam, you need to complete the prework, have at least 80% attendance at lectures, present your proposal and review one of the other proposals. Submit your ´final´ proposal before the deadline 5 Dec at 12.00 . The grading is pass or not passed. A full, ready-to-submit proposal is not expected due to restricted time, but it should be a solid starting point for a future proposal.
Read more and sign up (deadline passed 1 Sept 2017) via the course catalogue: https://uit.no/utdanning/emner/emne/509858/fsk-8005?ar=2017&semester=H
Mentor: an experienced researcher with a similar scientific background giving input to the proposals. One round of feedback/physical meeting is expected, as well as mentor being present during ‘their’ presentation.
Participant: PhD candidate or Post doc participating with their own proposal during the course
Reviewer: participant with a special responsibility to another participant’s proposal
Proposal: not an actual proposal, but close. Ideas will mature, and a modified proposal may be submitted at a later stage or when a relevant call appear.
Professor Michaela Aschan explains how research proposals are evaluated.
Photo: A. Lynghammar