Most of the tips I’ve been sharing as part of the ACEing Academia series can be used beyond grant proposals: throwing them into any type of academic writing will result in greater clarity for everyone involved.
However, this next piece of advice is perhaps the most proposal-specific recommendation so far.
Make sure your claims are supported by appropriate evidence.
Although I know it feels like we’ve entered a post-factual era where people can say whatever they want without backing up their assertions, this hasn’t completely extended to the funding process. Yet.
Instead, grand declarations without evidence will sabotage an otherwise great idea because your reviewers *will* call you out on it. They have to trust what your project intends to deliver is feasible and has a chance of success. Evidence provided by previous work is how you demonstrate that credibility.
1️⃣ WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE: Hyperbole is a form of exaggeration. In grant proposals, it’s often used to make something sound better than it is … but there is never any evidence provided to indicate that this is accurate. Examples include “This project will revolutionise the ABC research area.” or “This research addresses the most pressing problem facing humanity today.” If this is true, show the reader why. Don’t simply tell them without providing a firm foundation.
2️⃣ USE UP-TO-DATE RESEARCH: You cannot show that you are pushing forward the boundaries of research if your evidence base is outdated. For example, it’s not uncommon to see proposals where the applicant has written “Recently, [something very exciting and relevant to the research] has been discovered.” But the citation is from 2015. That’s not exactly recent, and I would immediately wonder what’s happened in the intervening decade. You must show that you understand the current state-of-the-art so you can demonstrate your research is genuinely new.
3️⃣ CRITICALLY ASSESS THE SOURCE: A grant proposal is always about quality over quantity. It’s not about overwhelming your reviewer with the sheer number of citations you can provide. Researchers must be able to assess the validity of their sources. Something published by IEEE? Probably worthwhile. A random blog post without any form of peer review? Less likely to be seen as credible. What evidence will best make your case for you?
See the other posts in the ACEing Academia series: