Lessons Learned From Early Career Motivation Grant Writing: The Importance of Relationships, Terminology, and Graphics

• In Event: 51.064 - Grant Writing for Motivation Research: A Guide for Early Career Researchers

Abstract

My entry into grant writing was abrupt and eye opening. Within the first three months of a short-lived postdoc, I submitted three grants as co-PI. Currently, I serve as the principal investigator on two grants and co-PI on three grants. Because my collaborators and I have submitted motivation grants to national funding agencies, private foundations, and statewide education systems, I have adopted a broad view on what constitutes a grant proposal. Aside from submitting proposals, I have also learned about writing grants through working with program officers and attending collaborative funder meetings as an expert in motivation and measurement.
Through my experiences submitting grant proposals as an early career motivation researcher, three lessons stand out as most valuable, which I will discuss during the presentation. First, relationships are key. Finding a talented team of scholars to co-create a vision with is critical for writing a high-quality proposal and carrying out funded work. Rather than immediately accepting every opportunity to write a grant proposal, think carefully about who you will be working with and set clear expectations for your role on the proposal. Similarly, relationships with funders are critical to success. For certain funding agencies, particularly private foundations, establishing a connection with your program officer is more important than the proposal itself. For my first grant, my mentor and I spent months in conversations with our program officer before being invited to submit a proposal. Once our grant was submitted, the program officer informed us that the proposal itself was a formality and he would be advocating for our project to the board. For many foundations, researchers cannot even submit a proposal unless they are invited. As such, taking the time to form strong relationships is crucial for your grant proposal’s success.
Second, your word choice can make or break you. This is particularly true for motivation researchers; one early lesson I learned is that the terms researchers use are often far removed from the terms funders or practitioners use. What one group calls motivational attitudes and beliefs another will refer to as 21st century skills, and yet another will call non-cognitive skills. For much of our work with schools and funders, my team uses the term learning mindsets. While I was originally averse to adopting new terminology, I eventually learned that it was best to meet my audience where they were and use their preferred language. As with any communication, though, it is critical to define your terms to ensure a shared understanding.
Third, start your grant writing with a graphical representation whenever possible. Whether a table or flow chart, graphics force you to synthesize your ideas and clearly present them to others. Graphics can be equally useful for your co-authors as for reviewers. Your co-authors will be able to quickly respond to your ideas, and any misconceptions or lack of clarity in the vision become evident right away. Your reviewers will appreciate a break from text-heavy proposals and have an easily-digestible representation of your research to reference.

Author

• Stephanie V. Wormington, University of Virginia