Proposal Writing-An Important Skill in Academic Chemistry Programs

Katherine E. Weissmann Mott Community College, 1401 E. Court Street, Fllnt. MI 48503

Writing grant proposals has become an increasingly im- portant aspect in the chemistry program of many schools. Althoueh most lareer institutions have staff personnel in develoiment offices who provide assistance in preparing or0~0sal reauests for mants and other sponsored programs, . . many ~ W O - ~ & I colleges and highschools do not have propos- al-writina support immediately available. In any case, the chemistry fa&lty member may be asked to play a vital and frequently time-consuming role in the development of exter- nal funding requests for the chemistry program. The input of the chemistry faculty member may be only to provide scientific or technical exoertise to support a broad institu- ..-.--.--- ~ ~

tional program proposal developed b i someone else or may require that the chemistry faculty member do everything from formulating and researching an idea to writing the entire nrooosal andadding the postage to get it into the mail. This &icle is intended t o provide some helpful ideas in proposal writing. The ideas are compiled from thecomments of two-year college chemistry reviewers in the 1988-1989 National Science Foundation Instrumentation and Labora- tory lmprovement Programs and from suggestions provided in a proposal writing workshop conducted in 1988 at Mott Communitv Colleee bv the Council for the Advancement . and suppo;t of ~ d k a i i o n (CASE).

Gettlng a Start Each fund request must begin with a new idea for the

institution followed by consideration as to whether carrying out this idea ispossible. Creative ideas frequently come from discussions with colleagues, reading professional publica- tions, attending professional conferences, visiting schools with successful programs, and reviewing funded proposals. A consideration of societal, demographic, and economic trends may begin to focus your thinking. Concentrate on the nroeram need and on the students, not on the money.

dncean idea has been formulated, it is necessary to search for asource. In anticipation of seeking agrant, ir is helpful to build a resource lihiary that includesinformation about potential donors and the types of support they provide. Resource donors tend to support their purposes. You should learn about previous support given by the donor and about the donor guidelines to he sure the idea matches the intent of the sponsor purpose (I). I t may he helpful to obtain, read, and evaluate copies of arant proposals that have been fund- ed in the past s; they can serve & models. Program officers of s~onsorina agencies may also provide additional informa- - - tion and assistance.

Sponsors will want to have clear statements of needs, goals, and objectives of the proposal. They will want to know that the person making the request is capable of doing the job and that adequate & ~ ~ ~ o r t will be available LO carry out and continue the program. Remember that your proposal is the primary communication link to the sponsoring agency. I t must be concise, clear, and complete. In writing the propos- al. trv to anticipate reviewer questions and to present your , - ideas in a well-organized manner.

110 Journal of Chemical Education

Components ot Proposals Proposal formats often contain several components (2).

Thinking through the components will help you to develop your proposal in a logical and systematic way.

The Project Summary The summary should be a clear, concise, specific state-

ment. You should describe the scope of the project, identify the project clientele and the investigator, and indicate the projected cost. This statement may create the first impres- sion the reviewer perceives about your proposal. I t must be carefully composed.

introduction and Background This is the opportunity for you to speak about your school

and who it serves. I t is a chance for you to build credibility with the reviewer. How do you help students? Have you had previous support by someone for successful projects in chemistry? What is your reputation? What are your organi- zational accomplishments and goals in science? I t is not a good idea, however, to provide extensive institutional back- ground a t the expense of justifying the current project.

Assessment of Need In this section you can make a connection between the

organization's background and the problem you will solve. This will launch your proposal. Specifically indicate what you want to do and why you want to do it. Make the plan first, then consider finances. If you bad additional funding for your chemistry program, what need would you fill? Know the direction of your curriculum. Start planning early. A long-range plan in which a grant is sought in the second or third year of a five-year plan shows good foresight. Plan for matching funds in future budgets. Quotes from chemistry consultant reports or accreditation/approval reviews may add credibility to your statement of need. Do not use poverty overkill in this section by stating all the difficulties your institution faces. Rather, show how you and your institution are making positive progress with the resources you have available and how you could make further progress with additional resources. Two-year colleges can be very respon- sive to job markets and local needs. Documentation with statistics is valuable to support your purpose. Enrollment in specific chemistry courses, success ratios of graduates and transfer students, and data showing employment of students completing chemistry programs is also useful.

Be certain to select and clearly define a problem you can solve. Evaluate your human and physical resources. Re- quests that require unrealistically large amounts of work or money are likely to be rejected. Do not try to solve all prob- lems with one proposal. Focus your request.

Purpose and Objectives The purpose of the project should be made in a one- or

two-sentence goal statement that explicitly narrows the fo- cusof what you want to do. The objectives outline thespecif- ic measurable outcomes of the project. They are the re-

sponse required to help to solve the stated problem. Do not hide obiectives in the narrative. Hiehlieht them with num- bering or bullets, and show how they correlate to the pur- poses of the sponsoring agency. The objectives will deter- mine the procedures and methodology that follows. They will also he the key to determining measurements needed in evaluative procedures. If the statement is not measurable, i t is not an objective.

Scientific-Based Methodolo~v -. The methodology or procedures will actually sell your

project. This is an extremely important oart of the ~roeosal . . . . hecause you cannot receive grants on '.need" or wish alone. The methodology is the scientific framework of your prooos- . . . al. Most reviewers of chemistry instrumentation proposals are researchers. They want to hear about and understand the specific exoeriments and usaee of eauinment that vou . . ~ ~~

plan to incorporate into your program. They are looking for scientific principles and evidence that vou know the usaee of the equipment ihat you plan to acquiri. How will the e&ip- ment change or enhance the current oroeram? What real activitiesand experiments will this fundingenab~e~ou todo that you could not do before? What observations will stu- dentsmake? What measurements willstudentirecord in the experiments? How will the curriculum be improvedQ Are you going to improve scientific techniques, create new knowledge, offer a new program, disseminate an existing program, design a model for others, etc.?

Lack of knowledge and information in methodology can result in rejection. You must demonstrate that the project can be managed with knowledge and expertise. I t is helpful to show that the orincioal investieator has had recent work- shop training or ; shori course inihe usage of the requested eauioment. A soecial challenee to two-vear colleees is stat- . . ing a technologically creative case for usage of equipment due to the fact that instrurtion is riven onlv for the first two - years of a college program. At two-year colleges equipment cannot be justified in terms of third- and fourth-year stu- dents. However, special projects, curriculum innovation, teaching strategies, and enhancement of learning can he emphasized. Return on investment for students involved can also be a very favorable point. Responsiveness to local community needs and the job market can also be shown.

Evaluation The evaluation criteria should be discernible from the

objectives stated earlier in the proposal. Plans for the collec- tion of data necessary for final kva~uation of a program should be made a t the beginning of the program.

Budget The budget must provide a clear and realistic statement of

costs. It is an explanation of the project in terms of dollars rather than words. You must show a well-manaeed nroiect. - . " Equipment and activities must be costed out. Allowance should he made for price increases hut padding should be avoided. Show that you have done your shopping carefully. Costbenefit analvsis should be favorable. The s u o ~ o r t re- quested must be-appropriate for the project. ~he'experi- ments listed in the proposal methodology should justify the equipment model chosen. Do not ask for sophisticated equipment that your students could not use. In extensive propoials, one should consult with program officers or those familiar with budget praposals to gain a clearer understand- ine of reouired records and budeet forms. Derails of hudeet ~- ~ ~

an2 required records are often specific to individual propos- al guidelines.

Other Components Many agencies want to know what kind of financial sup-

port for a program is currently provided hy the institution.

Inventory lists of major pieces of equipment holdings are often requested. A reverse chronological listing of acquisi- tions is helnful to the reviewers to show what recent sunoort has been given to the chemistry program. I t is favorabie to show that the school has su~oorted the oromam. A current . . . - inventory can justify the "next logical" purchase.

Reviewers are also concerned about follow-up support of the program to keep the program going or to maintain equip- ment upon completion of the erant. A statement from your administration ;o show that they have considered thebro- posal and that they have the willingness to provide follow-up support may be of \,slue. It may he that colleagues in related disciplines can be of assistanre in maintaining and using . eauioment.

& ~ 6 e biographical information about the principal investi- eator must eive indication of current expertise and cavabili- iy. ~ l t h o u g lists of recent scientific research publications impress some reviewers, thevreallvare not true indicators of teaching effectiveness or siccess- in classroom instruction (3). The academic chemistrv community needs to be chal- lenged to more clearly define the criteriafor teaching exper- tise. In a February 1989 survey of college and university faculty, 68% of those responding indicated that at their insti- tutions better ways, besides publications, are needed to eval- uate scholarly performance of faculty (4). Since the teaching loads of most two-year college and high school chemistry faculty do not permit time for additional scientific research, criteria other than scientific publications must he used to evaluate their expertise. This author suepests that work- shops and short courses attended, receGgraduate study, active participation in professional scientificlteachine asso- ciations, sabbaticals in industry, teaching awards, reader- ship roles, involvement in student enrichment activities, etcl, are indicators of educational inquisitiveness and com- mitment that maintain and upgrade teaching skills. They have far more notential for sueeestine teachine exoertise . ~~

than do scientific research pap& or <ostgradu&e creden- tials. Careers in science education need to he viewed with the same seriousness as those in scientific research (5 ,6 ) . Fund- ing agencies need to give thoughtful consideration to peer review processes and to the preparation, perceptions, and performance of reviewers (7,8). Flnal Conslderatlons

Upon the completion of your proposal ask a friend in whom you have confidence a i d a chief competitor to read it to provide a critical review of what you have written. Some- times you are too close to your proposal to be able to see the flaws. An outside view is needed. After making final revi- sions, be certain that all requested components, especially equipment lists and proposed budget, are present in the final packet before mailing. The last reauirement is oa- tience; Reviewing proposals-and making dkisions is a dfffi- cult job, too. The processing time may be lone. When the verdirt arrives, prepare sour&lf for a l i t of work. Either you will he busily implementing your program or you should be making plans for revision of your proposal and resubmission of your request. In either event, read reviewers' comments very carefully. They provide good information about your project proposal and are key sources of advice for future direction. Even when not funded, the experience of writing a proposal is a good exercise. Occasionally, once you have stated your needs in the form of s promsal. even if erant funding is not received, the institution may suppoX the proposal from other funds that may become available. Be confident. Do not he disheartened, and do not give up! Write, write, and continue to write until you get the exper- tise and experience you need to get the grant.

- The author wishes to acknowledge the helpful suggestions

made in a proposal writing workshop sponsored by Mott

Volume 67 Number 2 February 1990 111

Community College and presented by the Council for the Llteralure Cited Advancement and Support of Education (CASE), 11 DU- 1. M.,~.s , T. R. J. c d sci. reach. 1987.16.267.269.

pant circle, washington, DC 20036, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ t i ~ ~ is also 2. ~ i ' i t ~ , N. J. ,'Program planning and Propasal Writing", The Cmntrmonrhip Center News, 1031 S. Grand Aue.. Lw Angeles. CA. 1971,1978: pp 1-8.

extended to the two-year college chemistry reviewers in the 3. plant,n. 1913, (D~C.).X

198g1989 National Science Foundation Instrumentation 4. Fact File. Chronirl~ Higher E ~ U C 1989.36110). A21. 5. Policy Forum. Project 2061: A Congressional View, Science 1969,245,340. and Laboiatory Improvement Programs for their thoughtful ,, ,,,,,,,, , , ,,,,,,,, ,,,,, ,,

comments. 7. eovernrnent concentrates. c h p m E " ~ . N<US 1989.671301. 19. 8. Psldy. L. G. J. Coll. Sci. Teoeh. 1989,18,295.

Subscriptions for JCE:Software for 1990 During 1990, the Journol o/ Chemtcal Eduralion. S o / r u o r e w i l l publish two issuer each in Series A (for the Apple

famrly ofcomputers) and Serirs X (for .\lS/DOSil'C compatihb cumputers~ and one irrue m Serier C tior the Macintosh,. The issues may he preordered at the special subscriptim rates shown brlow through April 1, 1990. Afrer the issues are oublisbed the" willbe available only at the higher, single issue price. In addition, back issues from 1988 and 1989 are still available at the prices Listed below.

To order subscriptions or back issues, fill out the form below and send with payment to JCE:Softwore, Department of Chemistry, University of Wisconsin, 1101 University Avenue, Madison, W I 53106, USA. Al l orders must be prepaid. Make checks payable to JCE:Software; allpayments must be in US. funds drawn on a U.S. bank or by international money order or magnetically encoded check.

Please send me the following:

For the Apple II family of computers

Subscription for 1990 (2 issues). Single User Subscription for 1990 (2 issues), Multiple Users IA. 1 The One-Comouter Classroom IA. 2 The Computer-Based Laboratory IIA, 1 Evolution of Bonding: Werner-J$rgen~tn Controversy IIA, 2 Organic Spectroscopy: Videosdisc Display Program

For MSIDOSIPC compatible computers

Subscription for 1990 (2 issues). Single User Subscription for 1990 (2 issues). Multiple Users iB. 1 KC? Discoverer: Exolorina the Periodic Table - . -

I 2 HPLC: An Instrument Simulator (mouse required) - IIB. 1 Soreadsheets in Physical Chemistry . . - llB. 2 The Acid-Base Package

For the Macintosh

S u b s c r i p t i o n to 1990 issue. Single User S u b s c r i p t i o n to 1990 issue. Multiple Users - IC, 1 The Periodic Table Stack

Foreign Domestic and Canada

Ship to:

Name

Address

City State z i p

112 Journal of Chemical Education