How to Write a Grant Proposal : 4 Golden Rules

Рет қаралды 1,518

Iain Explains Signals, Systems, and Digital Comms

9 ай бұрын

Presents 4 Golden Rules for writing winning grant proposals, as well as giving lots of specific writing tips. For more than a decade, I've been helping people improve their grant writing skills, and in this video I share my advice. I've written many successful grant applications myself, and have also served on a number of award panels - so I've seen the process from both sides. Hopefully these tips can help you too.
Check out my 'search for signals in everyday life', by following my social media feeds:
Facebook: profile.php?...
Instagram: / iainexplains
Website: www.iaincollings.com

Пікірлер: 12

@chisomejileugha9565 9 күн бұрын

Thank you

@roundtwo3321 9 ай бұрын

All good points. 00:17 Golden Rule #1 03:45 Golden Rule #2 07:47 Golden Rule #3 10:29 Golden Rule #4 13:37 How to Start 14:36 Assessment Criteria 15:32 Some Writing Tips 19:54 In Summary

@carolinefalatsi6391 3 ай бұрын

Thank you so much, this is very helpful. I think i need to improve my English writing abilities. I think I am seeing where I have been falling short.

@iain_explains 3 ай бұрын

Glad it was helpful!

@wuzhai2009 4 ай бұрын

In the context of ARC Discovery Projects, it's all about track record. CIs are rewarded for their cv. This means the tips are useful for people with a strong CV to compete amongst themselves. Otherwise, it's a waste of time.

@MrZerg0403 9 ай бұрын

Hi Iain，this is Tom. Thanks for sharing! I would like to add a little bit: the problem and solution should be stated in the way that they look general enough yet very focused. I believe this footage will be more than helpful.

@iain_explains 9 ай бұрын

Thanks Tom. Yes, it's a challenge to balance focus with generality - but it's important, as you say.

@2011HPS 9 ай бұрын

❤

@MatEffect 3 ай бұрын

Thanks for this helpful guide. Regarding the 'don't put too many details': One of my proposals was rejected due to 'feasibility concern' because an external reviewer said I was not specific enough on each test I aim to perform. I thought that, as you described, too much detail would disinterest the broad panel and challenge space limitations. How can one solve the trade-off between methodology detail and accessibility of the proposal? Is it just the element of luck?

@iain_explains 3 ай бұрын

There are no easy answers to your question. It all depends on which reviewers you get, and what their personal focus is. Some focus more on the technical details, some focus on the applications and practicality, others on the degree of "leap forward", etc. You should try to include something for everyone, as much as possible.