The monthly column that I write for University Affairs is called Ask Dr. Editor. Please feel free to send me a question! Or, if you’re an academic editor who would like to be interviewed for a future column, please just let me know, and we can talk about it.
The funding agencies that I mentioned as part of the funding landscape in Canada are:
- Research Nova Scotia, Michael Smith Health Research BC, Ontario Research Fund (ORF) and Fonds de recherche du Quebec – Santé
- NSERC, CIHR, and SSHRC (also referred to as “Tri-Council” or “Tri-Agency”)
- CFI
- NFRF
- NIH
- Horizon Europe
- Max Bell Foundation
- MS Society of Canada
The written rules include:
- a description (e.g. SSHRC IDG Description)
- an application guide (e.g. SSHRC IG Application Guide)
- Tri-Agency Guide on Financial Administration
- Other guides and docs as relevant (e.g. Merit Review of Indigenous Research; Effective Research Training; Glossary of Terms)
The resources I cited in my section on unwritten rules include:
- Boudreau, K. J., Guinan, E. C., Lakhani, K. R., & Riedl, C. (2016). Looking across and looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance, novelty, and resource allocation in science. Management science, 62(10), 2765-2783. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2015.2285
- SSHRC Selection Committees
- CIHR Peer Reivew Committees
- NIH Integrated Review Groups
- Bromham, L., Dinnage, R., & Hua, X. (2016). Interdisciplinary research has consistently lower funding success. Nature, 534(7609), 684-687. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18315
- Bozhkova, E. (2016). Interdisciplinary proposals struggle to get funded. Nature News.
- Nelson, N. (1980). Issues in funding and evaluating interdisciplinary research. Journal of Canadian Studies, 15(3), 25-29. https://doi.org/10.3138/jcs.15.3.25
- Blainey, P. C. (2016). Funding: Interdisciplinary challenges. Nature Microbiology, 1(8), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.1038/nmicrobiol.2016.118
- the good blog post I mentioned: “Why are interdisciplinary research proposals less likely to be funded? Lack of adequate peer review may be a factor” (LSE, 2016)
I wrote a blog post for Editors Weekly called “Top Three Fixes for Academic Research Grant Applications.”
The resources that I cited in my list of next steps include:
- Michèle Lamont, “How Professors Think”
- Note: in February 2022, Lamont was one of the signatories on a letter of support for John Comaroff. Harvard allegedly obtained the private medical records of one of Comaroff’s accusers without her consent, one of many alleged ways in which the folks involved in the support and defence of Comaroff (allegedly) acted shamefully. Read more about why Lamont’s blind trust of Comaroff is a problem, despite her later retraction of her support.
- Marjorie Garber, “Academic Instincts”
- Previous pieces in “Ask Dr. Editor” including “Jargon can Make for Good Academic Writing” and “Three Ways to Use Colour Effectively in Grant Applications”
- Open Grants
- Columbia University’s NIH Grant Writing Boot Camp
- Udemy’s “A Guided Approach to Research Grant Proposal Writing”
- My newsletter, The Shortlist, through which I’ll be announcing my course “Editing Academic Research Grants in Canada” in April or May 2022
- The volunteer platform AuthorAid
- … and the resource hub that I run for people looking to align their business practices with their personal and political values, antihustle.ca
Was I unable to answer your question during today’s session? Please get in touch. I’d be happy to chat.