ACEING ACADEMIA: Week 3 Review

Please note: The ACEing Academia series was originally published on LinkedIn. Each category is represented by a suite from playing cards to reflect the “ACEing” theme, with each week ending with a brief review

Am I allowed to say that January is flying by? It certainly feels like that as I look back at this week’s writing recommendations in the #ACEingAcademia series.

0️⃣9️⃣ AVOID IRRELEVANT CONTENT: It distracts and/or confuses the reviewer, and it will take space away from more important information. Make sure to ask yourself “How does what I’ve written help the reviewer understand my research?”

1️⃣0️⃣ AVOID VERBOSITY; BE CONCISE: Every word, sentence, and paragraph in a grant proposal should be justified. Avoid filler phrases

1️⃣1️⃣ AVOID SQUEEZING TOO MANY IDEAS IN A PARAGRAPH: Just one idea per paragraph, please! Structure your paragraphs with a topic sentence, and make sure what you include in the remainder of the paragraph supports the topic. Move on to a new paragraph when you have a new topic.

1️⃣2️⃣ AVOID AN INCONSISTENT WRITING STYLE: This is important when you have a team of researchers working on a proposal. A disconnected or disjointed writing style sends the message that individuals cannot work together. Make sure that you speak with one voice. To that end, one person (probably the PI) should be in charge of unifying the writing style before submission.