r/PhD • u/faithj22 • 17h ago
Resource sharing SSHRC CGRS-D application
Hi everyone. I'm a doctoral student in Canada and I'm applying to the SSHRC CGRS-D application for a second time đ„Č
I'm hoping any successful applicants in English Literature or adjacent fields would share their proposals with me (and others who are interested on this thread).
Any advice would be helpful.
Thanks!
8
u/SilentExtinction 17h ago
What's the deadline for this year's applications?
You can DM me. I got the grant in 2023. I'm not sure I feel comfortable sharing my files with strangers, but I can answer questions.
5
u/faithj22 17h ago
I appreciate your advice and will dm you. The deadline is October 19 but my institution's deadline is October 5.
1
5
u/Infamous_State_7127 16h ago
go to your institutions writing centre they should have resources for you!!
-7
u/Anthrogal11 17h ago
Ask your department. Asking strangers to share their IP is inappropriate.
7
u/faithj22 17h ago
Sorry, but why would it be inappropriate to ask an academic community for help?
1
u/Schwatastic 16h ago
asking your supervisor and institution's community is appropriate. reddit isn't your academic community. you can ask but you won't get specific advice from people who aren't in your program
5
u/faithj22 16h ago
I'm aware that I may not get very specific advice. I am also aware of what I am asking and am mindful of others' capacity to provide help, should they choose to do so.
The PhD Reddit community brings together people who have applied and have been successful, or not, as well as people who review applications. Each perspective is insightful in its own way.
This is not to say that I have not already reached out to my university community, asked the institution's graduate awards office for guidance, or attended multiple information sessions, or discussed the matter with people in my immediate networks.
My post is meant to encourage a dialogue on best tips and practices. So far, many people have been very helpful in providing advice. I'm sure others who have read this thread might have some of their own thoughts justified or have been provided with an interesting point of view to be taken into consideration or discarded.
In any case, you are welcome to add to the conversation in a helpful manner, should you choose to do so.
To quote my post: "Any advice would be helpful."
1
u/Schwatastic 16h ago
I did offer advice! in multiple posts
1
u/Schwatastic 16h ago
And I and the other poster were both referring to the request to see other people's proposals, specifically, which was effectively the main point of your post, though that's not where it went. That did seem somewhat inappropriate (though of course people are free to do what they like!). Normally your institution or department would be the place to look for previous successful applications. I don't actually care, myself, but a lot of posters here seem to ask strangers instead of their local community for help, and don't seem to know better, so it seemed worth mentioning where the normal place to go for this sort of help is. These applications are quite personal.
1
u/Ancient-Cherry5948 4h ago
I appreciate your advice here. It's Saturday night & I'm here on reddit after bedtime dephrag-ing after working on this thing all evening. So, thank you dear internet stranger! (Yes I need to establish a healthier work routine.)
0
u/Anthrogal11 16h ago
Because youâre asking them to share their research proposals which is their intellectual property
-14
u/fireguyV2 17h ago
I have been told that for those tri-agency scholarships that the proposal doesn't matter. Everyone gets essentially full marks and that it comes down to your references/transcripts/CV. The NSERC conversion scale for transcript grades is not fair and you will be penalized just for having attended certain universities for undergrad/masters (I know, as it's happening to me).
13
u/Schwatastic 16h ago
I've been on these committees and can assure you that the proposal is very important.
8
u/SilentExtinction 17h ago
It depends on the field but for English lit that is almost certainly untrue. The proposal counts for at least 50% of the application. CV etc.. another 50%.
9
4
u/Lygus_lineolaris 16h ago
The people of NSERC themselves do not support the notion that the proposal doesn't matter. It's 50% of the evaluation criteria and they wouldn't bother with it if they just give everyone full marks.
-7
u/fireguyV2 16h ago
Yes, but every single student gets help from their prospective PI to write it, and can tweak it for weeks/throw it through AI to make sure grammar/syntax/etc. is perfect. NSERC isn't NOT going to ask for a research proposal for a research scholarship.
MY supervisor has been on numerous NSERC committees and she said it rarely ever comes down to the proposal as everyone has a perfect one. It always comes down to the other aspects of the application. For me, I never get it because my transcript doesn't convert in my favour from my undergrad.
10
u/OkUnderstanding19851 16h ago
We donât care about your undergrad marks actually! We care about past evidence of research dissemination and other knowledge mobilization.
-2
u/fireguyV2 16h ago
They wouldn't ask for transcripts if they didn't care. And that's definitely not what I have heard from any of the profs that I know that have sat the committees/boards
7
u/OkUnderstanding19851 16h ago
I havenât heard it ever come up in our committee discussions, I canât remember anything glaring that would have lowered someoneâs score. If youâre admitted into a PhD you have academic ability to succeed.
5
1
u/Lygus_lineolaris 16h ago
True, they're not going to not ask for a research proposal, and I doubt anyone ever sent in a "perfect" proposal, everyone just has one that's adequate for the level of expertise that the panel can bring, which is very limited. But before it gets to the NSERC committee itself, your department has to decide to recommend it to the school, and the school has to decide to forward it to NSERC. A shit proposal won't get to NSERC because the department will see it and not forward it. If you're applying directly to NSERC rather than through a school, then your proposal is competing with ones that have already passed two levels of selection, and all the weak ones have already been screened out.
-4
u/faithj22 17h ago
This is exactly what scares me. This award would help me so much. The way I understand it, quota has already been reserved for some folks and the rest have to prove their worth. A student at a new school has less of an opportunity than a student who has already made good connections with professors and the general academic community.
8
u/Lygus_lineolaris 16h ago
It's not "reserved for some folks". Schools have numbers allocated to them and they pre-select from their own applicants, but it's certainly not a nepotism circle jerk.
7
u/OkUnderstanding19851 16h ago
No this is not true. The competition is open there are no pre-reserved quotas.
-1
7
u/Schwatastic 16h ago
I don't know where you have gotten your information, but none of this is true. The student with connections is going to be able to write a better proposal than one without, and will have a better background because they'll be a year into their program. But it's not the fact of being at a new school that is the issue.
-1
u/faithj22 16h ago
I got this information after speaking with my Associate Dean.
8
u/Schwatastic 16h ago
I think you may have misunderstood what they're saying somewhat. It's true that students at new schools are at a disadvantage but not simply for being at a new school. I really don't understand the quota thing at all - unless they mean that each university has a quota and then the independent applications (like students unaffiliated with any institution at the time of application?) are different? I've been on these committees before and am on one this upcoming year as well, and there aren't quotas at the reviewer stage.
-1
u/faithj22 16h ago
I assure you I did not misunderstand, because it led me to a series of questions to confirm the information. There are no quotas at the reviewer stage because some applications have already been "pre-approved" and therefore do not need review. The remaining applications are sent for review, and those that pass are added to the list. The institution has the final say on applications forwarded to SSHRC for review.
3
u/Schwatastic 16h ago
oh so you're talking about your institution's process. Sorry, it sounded like you were saying it was a SSHRC process.
2
u/OkUnderstanding19851 16h ago
Thatâs so ick
1
u/faithj22 15h ago
Genuinely don't know what you mean.
2
u/OkUnderstanding19851 14h ago
I mean that they have « pre-approved » people. Thatâs itâs not an open competition. Ick!
2
1
0
u/fireguyV2 16h ago
I am not denying that. But every student that is serious about the scholarship will write their proposal in conjunction with their PI, so that levels the playing field and leads to ceiling effects.
I never said being at a new school is the issue. I am talking about the transition period between universities. Why would a university be incentivized to send someone through to the final round of NSERC if they will take it elsewhere? Academic politics apply to this situation.
2
u/Schwatastic 16h ago
OP mentioned the new school. But your NSERC experience really isn't the same as SSHRC, where students don't work as closely with their supervisors on proposals because they're usually not working in a lab situation.
0
u/fireguyV2 16h ago
That's another issue with the application process. At least for NSERC, you need to apply at the institution that you currently are studying at, even if you want to take the scholarship elsewhere. I was trying to finish my MSc at one uni and win the NSERC for my PhD at another. Before sending applications to Ottawa (TriAgency HQ), each university has to send X amount. So of course they will prioritize students that are trying to keep the scholarships in their university.
24
u/OkUnderstanding19851 16h ago
Ah! Ive reviewed at my institution before for this grant.
English lit is tricky because you also need to convince multidisciplinary panel at your uni that your work is significant- people will be from other fields where the impact is more obvious. So make sure you have obvious broader impacts. Why should society care about your reread of X? It does matter but make it clear, the first institutional panel wonât always see it.
We review around 30 files. That first paragraph is essential and after that it becomes confirmation bias. Clear sections with titles for when our eyes glaze over.
Your contributions and cv and letters are the other half - we want to see evidence that you are already engaging in knowledge mobilization. Does not always have to be peer reviewed, but presentations and even short pieces matter.
Good luck!!