Application Process

Due in InfoReady Friday, March 1, 2024.

WID grants are received and managed through the University's InfoReady Review system. Below are the instructions for the Letter of Intent that appear in InfoReady:

In this letter of no more than two pages, please include the following:

• Background on the project (what inspired your interest in this line of inquiry?)
• A statement of need (given the current published conversation in disciplinary journals, pedagogical literature, or education research, what educational need or research gap will your project address?)
• A brief overview of your research project as you are currently conceiving it (what do you plan to investigate?)
• A summary of the methodology you intend to employ (how will you address your research question[s]?)
• A brief justification for funding (what would grant funding enable you to do?)

You will receive a response to your letter no later than Monday, March 11; in that response, you may be invited to submit a full application to the review committee. The goal of the feedback in this response is to help applicants craft a successful full application, due Friday, April 5. The full application may be an expanded version of the letter of intent, or it may represent revisions, minor or substantial. Final decisions will be made by Friday, April 26.

Deadline and requirements

Invited applications are due in InfoReady (link provided in your emailed invitation to apply) on Friday, April 5, 2024. Final decisions will be made by Friday, April 26.

Full applications require (1) a Project Description, (2) a budget request, and (3) (if applicable) IRB documentation. See below for details.

1: Project Description

In a Word document or PDF, please provide a 1500-to-2000-word Project Description. Head each section with the numbered heading as written here.

Part 1: Overview

In ~250 words, introduce the problem or research question that you intend to address, and briefly describe how your project will address it. The issue or problem should be comprehensible to non-specialist readers. In most cases, the overview will examine existing scholarly literature on your topic and identify a gap in existing research on writing in your field. 

Part 2: Project details

Describe your project. Please include responses to the following questions:

• What is your proposed research methodology? (We welcome methods from a wide variety of disciplines and epistemologies. Successful applicants will explain both how the particular method they’ve chosen enables them to address the research question/problem they’ve identified and why this method is the appropriate choice for their research question.)
• If some or all of the funding is designated to support the work of an undergraduate or graduate research assistant, how does the work advance that student’s professional development?
• Timeline: Please construct a timeline for your project appropriate to the scope of your initial research questions. If this grant offers seed funding to a larger project, you may include additional milestones or expected outcomes beyond the funded portion of the work.

Part 3: Relevance and plans for sharing research

WID grants are designed to support the improvement of teaching and learning while contributing to a larger understanding of big questions about writing pedagogy and practice. In this section, please address the following two questions:

• What difference will this project make? For example, what concrete things can happen in the teaching of or learning through writing as a result of this research? How might this research contribute to a more equitable and accessible University of Minnesota?
• How do you plan to share what you learn with a wider audience? Proposals with a clear plan for presentation or publication are preferred.

2: Budget request

Please complete this Excel sheet in collaboration with your department accountant. When you upload the completed copy in InfoReady, please use the following naming convention to save it: Lastname_2024_budget

3: IRB documentation (if applicable)

If your proposed research involves human subjects as defined by the University of Minnesota Institutional Review Board, you will need to include proof that you have filed for or have already received IRB approval or notification of exemption through ETHOS. For detailed information about this process and classroom research, please consult the website for the Institutional Review Board.

Criteria for selection

Engagement with relevant literature

How well is the research project grounded in a larger published conversation in disciplinary journals, pedagogical literature, or education research?

Clarity of stated educational need or research gap

What is the clear need or gap that the research project will address? What research question emerges from this gap? This issue or problem should be comprehensible to non-specialist readers.

Appropriateness of method(s) to address the research question

Successful applicants will explain both how the particular method they’ve chosen enables them to address the research question/problem they’ve identified and why this method is the appropriate choice for their research question.

Feasibility

Does the specific timeline for completion make clear how funds will be spent and what will be accomplished during the grant period? Is the project (or portion of the project) “doable” given the available time and resources?

Meaningful participation by undergraduate or graduate Research Assistant(s) (if applicable)

If some or all of the funding is designated to support the work of an undergraduate or graduate research assistant, how have the proposers made the case that the work advances that student’s professional development?

Significance

How thoroughly do the proposers make the case for this project’s contribution to what is known about writing in the disciplines? Do they suggest what concrete changes in practices related to teaching of or learning with writing might result from this research? Do they address how this research contributes to a more equitable, accessible and just University of Minnesota?  

Plans for sharing results

How do the proposers plan to share what they learn with a wider audience? How will this plan for sharing results contribute to the professional development of research assistants? Where applicable, how will project outcomes be shared with research participants?