Proposal Writing Training and Idea Development for Early‐Career Researchers Based on Constructive Alignment, Co‐Creation and Active Learning Strategies

TL;DR

This paper introduces a new training approach for early-career researchers to improve proposal writing and idea development through active learning and collaboration.

Contribution

The novel concept involves co-creation of course content and iterative development of proposals by students.

Findings

The training concept has been successfully used in workshops and classes for climate science researchers over 10 years.

Proposals from participants had a 15%-30% success rate, higher than average for the funding schemes targeted.

Participants reported high learning outcomes and motivation to revise and resubmit proposals even after rejection.

Abstract

In today's research landscape, which is ever more dependent on external funding, early career researchers (ECRs) urgently need competence in idea development and proposal writing. However, generalized lectures provided by many higher education and research institutions lack practical elements such as hands‐on skill training and support measures to coach the ECRs through the process of developing their own proposal. This limited support often leads to proposals of low quality, low success rates, and low motivation to engage further in proposal writing. To move away from this “learning‐by‐failure,” we developed a novel concept for training in proposal writing, constructively aligning learning outcomes with students' needs, co‐creating course content with teachers and students, and using active learning strategies. The main novelty of this concept lies in students iteratively and interactively developing their own research ideas into project proposals while learning how to write proposals. Over the past 10 years, we have successfully run this concept as a 2‐day workshop and as a 5‐month class for ECRs in climate sciences.

Most of the proposals developed during our courses were submitted, and the application success rate of 15%–30% is well above the average for the targeted funding schemes. Participants whose proposals were rejected nevertheless appreciate the high learning outcome and the peer support and are motivated to revise and re‐submit their proposals. We see that increasing numbers of our ECRs are eager to develop and submit their own research ideas, which, considering the high success rates, brings both scientific and economic benefits to our institutions. We hope other research and higher education institutions will adopt our course concept, allowing more ECRs to benefit from co‐created proposal writing training which directly aligns learning outcomes with students' immediate needs.

We developed a novel concept for training in proposal writing, constructively aligning learning outcomes with students' needs, co‐creating course content with teachers and students, and using active learning strategies. The main novelty of this concept lies in students iteratively and interactively developing their own research ideas into project proposals while learning how to write proposals.

Figures