Well as expected and promised, last week was a little sparse in the posting arena. I may have to forgo these easy to do recap posts in the next coming weeks because there won’t be enough to recap!

In any event, here is a recap of last week’s posts:

DG2010 – T minus 3 weeks is basically a time marker post reminding everyone about the nearness of the NSERC Discovery grant deadline. It also speaks a little bit about the average “total input time” invested per grant submission. Then it leads into the next post on CVs by talking about the amount of time invested in a research project and how that might be annotated (and perceived) in the CV module.

DG2010 – CV Tips & Tricks is a mashup of all the tips that I can think of relating to the NSERC CV module, also known as Form 100. The notes in this post are non-specific to the Discovery grant competition, since this form is used for all NSERC applications.

And that was all I wrote! Hope this week is a little less crazy!

The next few weeks are going to be dicey, so I am not going to commit to posting regularly. Boy, this sounds just like the intro to last week’s recap . . .

If you would like to subscribe to this blog feed, just click on the orange RSS logo on the upper right hand portion of the screen – or you can use the subscribe function in your web browser.

And, for anyone that is visiting the blog for the first time and would like to see post summaries, use the drop down box on the left sidebar to search for the category “recap” or click this link and you will find posts that summarize the blog topics over the past few weeks.

Here is a recap of last week’s posts:

DG2010 – Programs versus projects talks a little bit about how important it is to ensure that your NSERC discovery proposal describes a program of research. An excerpt from the peer review manual was added to the post on Friday.

Views on proposal writing is a mashup of blog posts from academic bloggers espousing their views on grant proposals.

DG2010 – References covers a few tips and tricks to think about when you are writing and proofing your reference list for your NSERC discovery grant application. These tips are also relevant for other documents that include reference lists . . .(read: journal submissions)! I belong to the Council of Science Editors and you wouldn’t believe the amount of editorial research that is done on reference error analysis. A scintillating topic, I know, but an interesting factoid nonetheless.

TOOLS: TERMIUM Plus® is now free and available online. Best of all, you can access a searchable version of The Canadian Style through Termium.

DG2010 – Relative cost of research is my long-promised post on the cost of research evaluation indicator. There are also links to the Peer Review Manual and other FAQ files on the revised review process.

I was a bit of a featherweight in my posting schedule last week. Sorry about that. As we move into October my posts might get increasingly erratic – I think I have a deadline every week for the next few months.

As I mentioned last week, I am trying to get clarification on the binning process and have been sent reams of information by NSERC that I need to wade through. I think that I am starting to understand things a bit better, but unfortunately it also raises more questions and concerns about the process. Hopefully, I can collect my thoughts on this topic so that I can post them later this week.

For anyone that is visiting the blog for the first time and would like to see post summaries, use the drop down box on the left sidebar to search for the category “recap” or click this link and you will find posts that summarize the blog topics over the past few weeks.

Here is a recap of last week’s posts:

Grantsmanship = positioning for success covered some basic grantsmanship principles such as following the rules, taking ownership and avoiding ego creep.

DG2010 – Hurdling writing reluctance focuses on another element of grantsmanship, which is getting something on paper. Procrastination can kill a grant application before it starts, as inadequate preparation generally shines through.

While not directly related to the NSERC Discovery competition, the post SSHRC tips and tricks includes some handy links similar to my much earlier post Discovery 2010 – Important Links (which someone told me they made their homepage).

Speaking of feeling loved, thanks to Rob Annan of Researcher Forum for the kind word on the DG2010 post series and linking to my blog. If you ever have the time or interest to learn more about Canadian research policy and relevant news, this blog is definitely worth a read. Rob always has well thought out insights into the news of the day and also hosts and writes CanadaResearchFunding.org that contains many resources for Canadian health researchers.

Last week, I started to dip into the NSERC Discovery grant budget development process.

I have been getting quite a few comments, but my spam filters have been catching almost all of them. If you have posted comments and they have not been approved, please email me (via the website feedback page) to ensure that I process your comment appropriately. A little trick for skipping the filters: don’t include any links. Thanks!

Here is a recap of last week’s posts:

DG2010 – Evaluation Changes reviewed some of the changes to the evaluation process for the Discovery grant competition. I have had a few comments on this post via email regarding a misunderstanding of how the binning process will be applied. I am working on clarifying my understanding so that I can post a refined view of how this will work (or did work last year).

DG2008 & DG2009 Scatter Plots is a quick view of the scatter plot slide from the NSERC DG2010 information sessions. This data provides a bit more context to the Evaluation Changes post.

DG2010 – Building a (Normal!) Budget describes the importance of linking the budget request with the actual research work planned. Links to sites for calculating the budget ranges for GSCs from previous competitions and the NSERC Awards Search Engine are included.

Discovery Grants – Budget Breakdowns revists a post from The Accidental Mathematician on how research budgets are spent in math and stats.

DG2010 – Budget Rules of Thumb is an updated post from the last DG competition summarizing collected wisdom on budgetary rules of thumb. Be advised not to take these rules of thumb for face value — be sure to critically analyze whether these assumptions make sense for your research.

As mentioned in the notes for the Evaluation Changes posts, I am working on clarifying my understanding of the binning process and hope to provide updates soon. If you have any thoughts or knowledge of the process feel free to drop me a line!

I haven’t written all the posts for the rest of this week yet, so I don’t have a preview of what is coming up next. Stay tuned!

Last week, I covered a few general, but still important topics in the grant preparation process.

Discovery 2010 – Important Links included a list of links to important instructions and other sources of information.

Discovery 2010 – making your plan includes a list of the tasks involved in Discovery grant preparation to help prepare a work plan to the (now) 5 week away deadline.

DG2010 – proposal structure describes the necessary parts of the written proposal and provides a suggested structure for headings within the five page document. There is also some discussion of the different information that should be provided on HQP in the proposal and the CV attachments.

DG2010 – Selection Criteria & Indicators builds on the proposal structure post and provides additional links and discussion of how to relate the proposal to the selection criteria and evaluation indicators. The evaluation indicator matrix is a new document for this competition that provides an “at a glance” reference to how reviewers will score the applications.

DG2010 – presentation guidelines jumps back into the mundane details of what the free-form attachments need to look like and also discusses the challenge of selecting an appropriate font.

This week will include a discussion of some of the changes to the DG program as well as begin a series on developing a grant application budget.