1. Faculty Mentor Workshop Session 2: Preparing SSHRC Applications June 29, 2009

2. Stages in the Process Get started as soon as possible; Confirm your eligibility; Register online; Review guidelines; Obtain forms and instructions; SSHRC NOI due August 17 th /09; Get feedback from peers (disciplinary/other); Respect AU internal submission deadlines.

3. SSHRC’s Expectations Evaluation written assessments from national and international experts are obtained prior to review by committee Committees are given specific evaluation criteria Scoring Regular scholar or new scholar?

4. Record of Research Achievement Tangible contributions Last six year period of activity or the five most significant research contributions from any period.

5. Evaluation Criteria Quality and significance of published work; Originality of previous research and its impact; Quantity of research activity relative to the stage of the applicant’s career; Demonstrated importance of other scholarly activities and contributions;

6. Recentness of output; Importance and relevance of dissemination or research results directed to non-academic audiences; Significance of any previous research supported by SSHRC or any other agency; Where applicable, the contribution to the training of future researchers; and Where appropriate, efforts made to develop research partnerships

7. Scoring Grid 5.0 – 6.0  Excellent 4.0 – 4.9  Very Good 3.0 – 3.9  Good Below 3.0  Modest Emphasis placed on applicant’s overall contribution to research measure against the stage of his or her career stage; Allowances made for applicants who do not have the opportunity to supervise grad students.

8. Program of Research Evaluated using the following criteria: Degree of originality and expected contribution; Scholarly, intellectual, social and cultural significance; Appropriateness of theoretical approach or framework; Appropriateness and expected effectiveness of the strategies or methodologies;

9. Feasibility of successfully competing the program of research and appropriateness of schedule of research; Suitability and expected effectiveness of plans to communicate research results both within and outside of the academic community; Where appropriate, the nature and extent of research training; and Contribution to interdisciplinary research (Committee 15 only)

10. Characteristics of the Program of Research Score Range 5.0 – 6.0  Strongly recommended for funding 4.0 – 4.9  Recommended for funding 3.0 -3.9  Fund if funds are available Below 3.0  Not recommended for funding Note: if the committee determines that the PI is not responsible for, or equipped to exercise the leadership, the score assigned to the program of research may be lowered.

11. Advice Title – ensure it is clear, accurate and free of jargon and acronyms Summary – key piece, as it may be the only part of the application that most of the reviewers read Organization of the Description Key themes in description Technical issues Attachments = Opportunity

12. Websites SSHRC’s Expectations & Scoring Scheme: Refer to: “Apply for Funding—Standard Research Grants” statement at http://www.sshrc.ca/site/apply- demande/program_descriptions- descriptions_de_programmes/standard_grant s_subventions_ordinaires-eng.aspx http://www.sshrc.ca/site/apply- demande/program_descriptions- descriptions_de_programmes/standard_grant s_subventions_ordinaires-eng.aspx

13. Questions or concerns?? Please contact the Research Office with any questions or concerns you may have as you work through the application process:  Jill Calliou @ jillc@athabascau.ca or ext 6102jillc@athabascau.ca  Rebecca Heartt @ rebeccah@athabascau.carebeccah@athabascau.ca or ext 6275