Your Federal Quarterly Tax Payments are due April 15th Get Help Now >>

Proposal Writing for International Research Projects by mmw12015


									            Proposal Writing
  for International Research Projects

            - a guide for teachers -

                      prepared for

   German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD)
                    Sebastian Wulf

                 with contributions from

            M. Becker and F. Asch (Uni-Bonn)
                  B. Schütt (FU-Berlin)
                  S. Amini (Uni-Kassel)


Proposal Writing for International Research Projects
                                        A guide for seminar teachers

1.   Preface ................................................................................................................ 2
2.   Contents / Course elements ................................................................................ 4
3.   Proposal Planning and Development (Unit 1)...................................................... 5
4.   Proposal writing (Unit 2) .................................................................................... 13
5.   Proposal evaluation (Unit 3) .............................................................................. 14
6.   Project management (Unit 4)............................................................................. 16
7.   Methods Used.................................................................................................... 19
8.   Course administration........................................................................................ 20

1. Preface
Numerous DAAD alumni are engaged in research and development activities
throughout the developing world. Despite their high quality training in Germany or in
association with German partners, only very few of these alumni apply successfully
for international research projects. Although DAAD alumni have interesting research
ideas, often based on a combination of technical skills acquired in Germany and an
in-depth knowledge of local specifics and needs, there are severe deficits in
translating these ideas into research proposals eligible for support by German or
international donors. Particularly cooperative research projects that involve both the
alumni and their former supervisors or other academic contacts in Germany are seen
to enhance knowledge transfer between Germany and the DAAD alumni after their
return to their home countries. Such research cooperations cannot only contribute to
promote structural development and capacity building in the partner country, they are
also of great interest for the German side.
It is therefore necessary to further develop proposal writing and project management
skills among DAAD alumni through organization and conduct of a specialised training
seminar on proposal writing, encouraging and enabling foreign graduates from
German universities to successfully apply for research grants.
Such a training course on “Proposal Writing for International Research Projects”
needs to be embedded in the national and international context and be outcome
oriented. Research and knowledge management must be combined with technical
skills and not be considered solely as an academic exercise, but also as an income-
generating activity for academic university employees. It is essential to consider


cultural aspects in negotiation strategies for research cooperation – especially with
Germany, to balance mutual interests and maximize benefits for both partners. The
personal development of our partners by capacity building and improvement of soft
skills is an indispensable precondition for successful proposal development and
project management. Aspects of organisation, controlling, trust, leadership,
relationship, and in particular, networking and communication have to be addressed.
Aspects of research policy, creation of research teams and research performance
analysis need to be discussed before writing a proposal.
Some participants may face problems with the technical contents or the scientific,
methodological approaches. While such short-comings cannot be addressed in the
frame of the seminar, some basic aspects and some relevant tools and approaches
will be discussed and exercised in the context of proposal development and project
management. What is required to plan a project? Which skills and tools are needed
to develop a proposal? What is project management? What requirements are to be
met to conduct a research project successfully? Good projects may yield little output
if they are not well managed. This in turn might results in the rejection of later
research proposals although they might be well written and scientifically sound.
The present guide for conducting a seminar on proposal writing results from a 2-
week seminar carried out in collaboration with the DAAD in Nairobi in 2005 and 2006.
The seminar involved some 30 DAAD alumni from eastern Africa and was organized
in two parts. The first part focused on project planning and proposal development,
including exercises of all relevant skills and methods. It ended with the task to
participants to plan, develop, write and submit a proposal following the guidelines
given and the skills learned. A prerequisite to participate in part two of the seminar
was the submission of such a proposal on a topic of the candidates’ choice. In the
second part of the seminar these proposals were used as a basis for exercises on
proposal framing, project management and proposal evaluation. Additionally, issues
of research ethics, public awareness strategies and reporting and dissemination were
addressed. The content and the course elements are listed thereafter. The structure
and elements should be considered as suggestions for carrying out similar courses in
developing countries. It is obvious that seminars being held at other places and with
other groups of participants need to be adapted to the specific local requirements
and cultural backgrounds. At the end of this guide can be found a list of materials,
personnel and physical facilities required to carry out such seminar. We hope this will
contribute to allow the successful design and conduct of your own proposal-writing

Bonn, October 2006


2. Contents / Course elements
I. Project planning
a)   Brainstorming / Discussion strategies
      -   Metaplan and Mind map
      -   SWOT Analysis
      -   Conflict awareness
b)   Preconditions
      -   Indicators
      -   Quality and Relevance
      -   Skills and Resources

II. Proposal development                     PART 1
a)   Structural elements                     (unit 1, unit 2)
      -   Log Frame
      -   Milestones
      -   Resource and budget plan
      -   Project breakdown
b)   Technical skills
      -   Scientific communication
      -   Writing skills
      -   Table, graphs, diagrams
      -   References

III. Framing the proposal
a)   The consortium
      -   Identification of partners
      -   Team building
      -   Financing partners
      -   Donor requirements
b)   Persons and Institutions
      -   Disciplines and Qualifications
      -   Hierarchy
      -   Team management

IV. From proposal to Project
a)   Management aspects
      -   Personnel management
      -   Financial management
      -   Time management                        PART 2
      -   Conflict management                    (unit 3, unit 4)
b)   Communication aspects
      -   Networking
      -   Delegation
      -   Reporting and dissemination

V. Project assessment
a)   Project evaluation
      -   General criteria
      -   Written assessment
      -   Presentation
      -   Oral defense
c)   General aspects
      -   Research ethics
      -   Public awareness
      -   Reports and publications
      -   “Exit strategy”


3. Proposal Planning and Development (Unit 1)

Before writing a proposal, thorough planning is essential. In order to seize the idea
and to clarify aims and hypotheses, discussions with concerned partners and
stakeholders are necessary. The brainstorming exercise needs to be structured and
discussion strategies need to be adapted to the topic, group composition and scope
of the planned project. Depending on the field of research, the design of the project,
the number of partners and the financial volume of the project, a different donor has
to be targeted, each of them having their own special requirements on the structure,
contents, length and specific elements of a proposal.
Aim of this seminar unit is to guide the participants in defining a research topic,
develop hypotheses, define the objective, operationalize them into a time and
workplan, and to acquire the technical skills for translating these elements into a
research proposal. Additional aims involve the creation of a research team and the
identification of a topic- and research scope-specific adequate donor organization.
The participants are sensitised to different donor requirements and the necessity to
write the proposal according to the specific guidelines. In order to achieve this,
discussion strategies, the preparation of general structural elements of proposals and
scientific writing skills have to be discussed.
This unit should provide the participants with the knowledge and the technical skills
to translate an abstract research idea into a potentially successful research proposal.


Learning topics

   •   Discussion strategies: brainstorming, metaplan techniques, mind map,
       SWOT analysis, conflict awareness
One single person might develop a first research idea. The development of a
research project resulting from this initial idea generally requires a group of people
(colleagues, potential research partners) to discuss the idea, to analyze the potential,
to define resource requirements and to distil a project layout and work plan.
Teaching and practicing discussion strategies are therefore an essential part of this
seminar. Brainstorming, creation of mind maps and the SWOT-Analysis (Strength,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) are some tools for doing so.
SWOT-Analysis: STEININGER H.: Die SWOT-Analyse (in German)
Mind-mapping:      http://www.laum.uni-
          (in German)


•       Preconditions: criteria catalogue, quality, relevance, trust, confidence
In order to successfully perform these strategies in a competitive and also often
hierarchical research environment, topics like conflict awareness, trust and
confidence among partners as well as quality and relevance of research topics need
to be focused on.
A possible way of working on this topic is to convey the general principles of
discussion strategies before conduction group discussions on:
    -   possible conflicts between partners and participants in a research project
    -   prerequisites for trust and confidence in a research environment
    -   parameters determining quality and relevance of research topics

Quality and


•     Planning of structure: log frame, milestones, resource planning, budget,
      project breakdown
Developing a research idea is the most creative part of proposal writing. But even the
best ideas will not result in a research project, if they are not embedded in a well
structured, comprehensible and realistic project layout. The donor or reviewer has to
be convinced of the applicant’s ability to conduct the project successfully. Therefore
this part is most crucial for the success of a research proposal. Reasonable resource
planning and budgeting is necessary. A clear project breakdown, defining specific
tasks, setting milestones, and possibly even identifying pitfalls is essential. Resource
planning and budgeting has to be aligned with and be justified by the actions
described in the breakdown.
ODAME, H.:     Engendering the logical framework
SARTORIUS R.: The third generation logical framework approach: dynamical
              management for agricultural research projects
BECKER, M.     Framing the proposal
SCHÜTT, B.     Project breakdown and milestones


•       Proposal elements: title, introduction, working hypotheses, work plan,
Proposals, like other kinds of scientific communication (project report, poster,
research journal articles, theses), follow a logical order. Elements comprise:

    o   Topic / Title

        needs to be brief, informative and easy to understand. The title is the label of
        your proposal and requires care in phrasing. It is based on a key word
        exercise and subsequent hierarchization. The general rule: As brief as
        possible and as detailed as necessary. A title development exercise is
        contained in the links below.

    o   Duration of requested support

    o   Summary or abstract

        has to be short (150-200 words) and stands on its own. Is structured like the
        proposal itself comprising introduction, objectives, work plan, and proposed
        outcome of the project.

    o   Introduction

        summarizing the state of knowledge by focused literature review, identifying
        knowledge gaps

    o   Objectives of research

        develops research objectives from the knowledge gaps and makes clear, what
        is new and special

    o   Work plan/ work schedule

        describes what steps and measures have to be taken to achieve these
        objectives. Justifies time frame. A graph visualizing the work schedule is

    o   Deliverables / Milestones

        describe the measurable output of project steps. If milestones are not
        reached, this needs to be explained in progress reports to the donor.


   o   Budget / requested funds

       needs to be broken down to costs of personnel, travel expenses, material
       costs. Needs to be justified by work plan.

   o   Preconditions (Research team)

       states previous experience and conditions, specific conditions and skills,
       explaining why the applicant is qualified for conducting this specific research

   o   References

   o   Annex

       may include CVs of involved partners, institutional linkages, log frame, break-
       down structure, etc.

BECKER M.:     Topic Title, Summary – Proposal Writing and Reporting
ASCH F.:       References
SCHÜTT B.      Budget example


   •   Writing skills: writing, do´s and don’ts, elements, text editor, literature survey
Often the writing of a proposal is hampered by the limited experience of the
applicants in more technical aspects of English writing, of the design of graphs, of
how literature surveys are conducted or citations are made in a text. Therefore
information and exercises on these topics are useful. Some examples are given in
the following documents:
   o   English writing: do’s and don’ts
   o   Supporting elements (figures, tables, conceptual diagrams)
   o   Citing and references

ASCH, F.:      Graphs and Tables
BECKER M.:     English Writing – do’s and don’ts
ASCH F.:       References


   •     Donors: types, requirements, relationships
In order to write a successful proposal the adequate donor has to be chosen carefully
depending on their policy, scope and requirements. Differences in donors comprise:
         Scope (regional or disciplinary)
         Aim (capacity building, development, private sector, political, etc.)
         Target group (continent, country, sex, age group, etc)
         Submission conditions (frequency, budget limitations)
Most donors have specific requirements concerning structure, contents and length of
the proposal. These, as well as budget limitations and maximum duration of research
projects have to be met in order to avoid rejection due to formal reasons. Also the
chances of the proposal to succeed should be evaluated carefully. Most donors
receive far more proposals than they can support. The largest donors also have the
highest input requirements and rejection rates. Less prestigious or regional donors
often have lower requirements and are faster in processing proposals.

BECKER, M.       Financing Partners
LINKS:           Examples for donors

Handouts of unit 1

   •     lecture notes containing lectures and examples for the different topics (e.g.
         example proposals, list of possible donors and donor requirements)

   •     guidelines for proposal writing including deadlines for submission of the
         proposal to be written in unit 2 and conditions for admission to second part of
         the seminar (unit 3 and 4).


4. Proposal writing (Unit 2)
Only by practically developing and writing a proposal, the participants can
consolidate their theoretical knowledge. This dry run enables the participants to find
out their gaps of knowledge or insecurities about the application of learned topics.
Also the teachers get a feedback on the problems connected with the topics of unit 1.
Specific problems will be discussed with the participants individually. More general
gaps and insecurities should be addressed in the second part of the seminar.

Learning topics
   •   Application of learned skills and know-how
Equipped with the knowledge conveyed in unit 1, the participants write a proposal on
a freely chosen topic. Guidelines for the proposal handed out by the teachers have to
be followed and deadlines for submission have to be met.

   •   Identification of problems and knowledge gaps
While writing the proposal the participants will find out about insecurities in applying
their knowledge.

   •   writing and submission of proposals

   •   pre-evaluation by teachers
The deadline for submission of the proposal should be early enough to allow a pre-
evaluation of the proposals before inviting the participants to the second part of the
seminar. The pre-evaluation should consider formal criteria derived from the topics of
the first part of the seminar. (pre-evaluation check-list)

   •   individual consulting
Based on the pre-evaluation sheet an individual consulting as feed back to the
submitted proposal is given to the participants in the course of the second part of the
seminar. Having a specific technical or scientific background, you as a teacher will
not necessarily be able to assess the scientific quality of a proposal that is outside of
your research field. Therefore the consulting should not consider the eligibility of the
research topic, but rather focus on meeting of requirements concerning proposal
structure and elements, work plan and budgeting and scientific writing elements.


5. Proposal evaluation (Unit 3)

To improve the ability of the participants to reflect on the deficiencies of their own
proposals, they are put into the position of a proposal peer reviewer. By developing a
criteria catalogue in group work, discussion strategies that had been covered in unit 1
are practiced again. Implementing this criteria catalogue on proposals submitted by
their co-participants sharpens the eye for the benefit of rules for proposal structure
given by the donors and clarifies the need to conform to these.
In the course of proposal evaluation it is required by some donors to defend the
proposal in front of a panel. Therefore presentation techniques and discussion
behaviour are practiced.

Learning topics

   •   Peer review: development of criteria catalogue
In groups, the participants develop and operationalize a criteria catalogue for
proposal evaluation. Through this the topics of unit 1 are recapitulated (i.e. structure,
form, language, quality and relevance). Using this criteria catalogue the groups
evaluate proposals of their co-participants make a ranking of proposals and choose
the one they consider being best.

   •   Presentation: group evaluation, critical evaluation, control elements,
       presentation elements
Each group presents its criteria catalogue and it’s ranking of proposals. In a
discussion with the other participants the groups defend their catalogues and their
proposal rankings. A comparison of the different criteria catalogues and a guided
discussion on the need of weighing different criteria aspects, lead to more general
aspects of proposal quality and impartial evaluation. In the course of the discussion
issues of trust, confidence and conflict awareness should be addressed again (cf.
unit 1).
The proposals ranked first during group work are presented by their authors in a
10 minute PowerPoint presentation. Selected slides or portions of the presentations
are used to discuss presentation elements and the possible pitfalls.


   • Defense: self presentation, competence, discussion, behaviour
The teachers select some proposals and the authors are asked to defend themselves
in front of a panel. The selected proposals should be well structured and authors
should be self-confident enough to speak in front of an audience. The panel is staffed
by 2 participants (i.e., male, female) and one teacher, while another teacher is
moderating the panel discussion.

   •   Repetition of proposal elements: use of tools, presentation elements,
       breakdown structure, networking, budgeting
From the proposals handed in by the participants and the peer reviewing and
presentation exercises the need to repeat or to further discuss some issues of
proposal elements will be evident. From our experience these will be questions of
proposal structure, like breakdown structure, work plan etc. but also writing a
comprehensible and reasonable project budget.


6. Project management (Unit 4)

The focus of this seminar is the writing of research proposals. This is only the first
step in order to create a sustainable research environment. Not only a research grant
is necessary, but also the project needs to be conducted successfully, project reports
need to be written and results to be published in order to be recognized and to
become part of research networks. If this can be achieved, the effort to successfully
write future proposals will be reduced noticeably, because the beneficial cooperation
with other scientists is easier to achieve and the donor knows about the submitters
ability to successfully conduct a research project. Therefore the introduction into
basic principles of project management should be part of this seminar.
SCHÜTT, B.:    Project Management

Learning topics

   •   Research ethics
The scientific community has some basic ethical rules that arise from the
responsibility of science within society and the need for unwritten rules for
cooperation and communication within the research community.
One issue of research ethics most obvious to the public is the question of what
science is allowed to do and what not. Who decides on what we want to know? Is
there a responsibility of the researcher for what is done with his results? Where does
the quest for scientific knowledge interfere with basic human rights, environmental
concern or widespread ethical or religious believes? Among these questions are
those of cloning organisms or research with human embryos.
During proposal writing and the management of research projects other ethical
questions arise. The plagiarism of ideas, authenticity of results and rights on
publishing are necessary to discuss. For scientists it is essential that fellow
researchers do not copy research ideas from them during the evaluation process.
Also publishing rights must be handled with care. The major academic participants
should be considered as co-authors in publishing, regardless of their hierarchical
position. This is particularly important for young scientists.


   •   Budgeting
In a good proposal, the budget is tightly linked to the work plan. Costs are assigned
to specific working units, subprojects, activities or objectives. The requested amounts
must logically arise from the workplan, must be linked to an objective and must be
transparent (e.g. break down analysis cost by: number of treatments x number of
replications x number of time course samplings x cost per analysis). Only very few
donors grant overhead costs for administration purposes. This is a serious problem
for most scientists from developing countries as universities, unlike in Germany,
generally charge the project budget with substantial administration costs that cannot
be accounted for in the proposal. A generally accepted way of accounting for these
costs may be to – moderately – overprize e.g. costs for sample analysis.
In some universities reputation and success are also measured in terms of funds
raised. But in cooperation projects the money is often assigned to one partner only.
Sub-contracting the other partners might be a possible way of formally sharing
During the project progress care should be taken to spend the money according to
the guidelines of the donors. In order to maintain continuous scientific work it will be
necessary to make some preliminary research for writing other research proposals.
Often there are no funds e.g. for lab equipment, chemicals or personnel for these
purposes. Never let your donor know officially, but if the progress of the research
project is not affected, it will be accepted, if some money is spent for these purposes.

   •   Conflict management
Especially for conducting joint research projects, communication strategies and the
ability for conflict management are important. E.g.:
   o   What can be done, if cooperation partners don’t do the work or hand in the
       results of their sub-projects - especially if these results are needed for the
       successful conduction of other sub-projects? (Example: experimental research
       or field surveys by one partner, modelling with these data be another partner).
Open discussion of possible conflicts and how they might be managed will sensitise
the participants to the problems of project management and the abilities needed to
handle conflicts.


   •   Networking
Successful cooperation in joint research projects might result in a research network.
These networks can be very useful for knowledge exchange, the generation of
research ideas and successful writing of future proposals. Personal contact of the
participants is necessary sharing a common mission and vision. Trust is an important
factor in efficient networks. Each part of the network needs to feel responsibility for
the success of the network as a whole. Low-trust environments tend to follow
hierarchical patterns with only the leaders taking responsibility. This makes networks
inefficient. As trust is always a matter of personal contact, efficient networks are only
possible between persons and not between institutions. Therefore the dropping out of
one person can be difficult for the network as a whole.

   •   Reporting and public awareness
Donors continue the support of an approved research projects generally on the
condition of a project report submitted after the end of the funding period. Most
donors ask additionally for progress reports on a yearly basis. Usually deadlines for
reporting are given together with the approval of the grant.
Meeting the deadlines on reporting is essential for researchers to satisfy the donor’s
requirement. The report details the key findings, the milestones achieved and the
resource use. Proper and timely reporting is generally required to be allowed to
submit future proposals to the same donor. Where donors give guidelines to the
writing of project reports these should be followed strictly. In general, reports follow
the general structure and rules of scientific publications.
Apart from project reports, bigger cooperation projects might also require websites to
present the project in the Internet. They should provide information to the broad
public, but also to scientists interested in the specific fields of research. Thus they
can be a mean to get in touch with other scientist and support the exchange of
information and the creation of networks. Some websites may have internal pages
that can only be accessed by cooperation partners. Through theses sites
communication and the exchange of data between partners can take place.
The most common and most important ways of creating awareness within the
scientific community are posters shown or presentations given on (international)
conferences and, above all, the publication of results in (peer reviewed) journals.
Only data presented in journals accessible to international scientists are
acknowledged, and make you known to other scientists. “Publish or perish” is the rule
and most donors will eventually ask for the list of publications having resulted from
the projects.

AMINI S.:      Networking
BECKER M.:     English Writing - Reporting


7. Methods Used

            o Lectures

            o Guided reading

            o Metaplan techniques (brainstorming, mind map, SWOT, etc),

            o Seminars

            o Plenary discussions (moderated)

            o Group discussions

            o Panel discussions (proposal defense)

            o Individual and group exercises

            o Role plays

            o Individual project development

            o Individual tutoring (project evaluation)


8. Course administration
In order to reduce your efforts for organising a seminar on proposal writing, some
examples and lessons learned from the Nairobi seminar are given here.

   o   Personnel:
       As much as possible, teachers should have a disciplinary background similar
       to that of the group of participants. At the same time it is necessary to have a
       disciplinary mix, even in case the participant group is largely homogenous, as
       it is useful or even required to present different views on a same topic. In the
       case of the Nairobi seminar the teachers’ scientific backgrounds included
       agricultural sciences, physical geography and sociology. For approaching
       gender aspects appropriately, at least one teacher should be female.
       Apart from the teachers, support personnel are needed for technical and
       administrative issues. It needs somebody to assist in organizing local transport
       and accommodation, registration of the participants, reconfirmation of flights,
       solving the inevitable technical and administrative problems and planning a
       sightseeing tour. This is best done by a contact person at the venue. In the
       case of the Nairobi seminar, assistance was provided by two DAAD Alumni
       from Nairobi and one staff member from the DAAD regional office at Nairobi.
       In addition, there is a need for some technical assistance during the
       preparation phase to the course coordinator in Germany.

       3-4      teachers (different disciplines, gender mix)
       1-2       local technical/administrative assistance in the country of the course
                (communication, transport, accommodation, registration etc.)
       1        administrative support person for 1-2 month in Germany

   o   Material and equipment:

       -     3-4 flip charts and -pads (for group work and presentation of group work)
       -     “Moderatoren Koffer” or alternatively: flipchart markers in different colours,
             index cards, pin board, pins, scissors
       -     Beamer and laptop for presentations. Our experience is, that much of the
             group work results were presented via beamer, as some participants
             brought their own laptop.


 o   Rooms and facilities:

     One conference hall for at least 30 persons. Sufficient space is helpful to work
     around or discuss around posters or flip charts. A flexible table arrangement is
     desirable, i.e. to move table to small group units or push them to the wall for
     role plays and group exercises

     Four extra rooms are needed for group work. These do not necessarily have
     to be closed areas, but can also be a quiet table in the public area of the
     conference hotel.

 o   Course structure:

     As an example for the realisation of the seminar and the schedule and
     organization of the different seminar topics, the timetables of the Nairobi
     seminar are given below.

     It appears generally recommendable to break the seminar into two parts of 4-5
     days each, with a 6-month break in between to allow the participants to
     develop and the teachers to evaluate the proposals.

 o   Recommendations:
     Strive for homogenous group structure (i.e., PhD holders and post docs or MS
     holders and PhD candidates) the level of self assurance and previous
     experiences with proposals and projects largely differ between these groups.

     Get a good disciplinary and gender mix, both among participants and
     teachers. All will benefit from this.

     Reserve half a day for a sightseeing tour. Such a tour was requested by the
     participants from outside Kenya, and the break is welcome for all.

     The requirements for the proposals to be written, the deadlines, and the
     conditions for participating in the second part of the seminar have to be very
     precise and clearly spelled out. The proposal should not exceed 3-5 pages.
     You have to assess 30 of them and the participants have to do comparatively
     evaluate some 5-8.

     Apart from travel and accommodation for your participants, and depending on
     the venue, you need to budget between 12,000 and 25,000 Euro per seminar

                                                                                                                                                                                                          1. Part: (December 2005)
                            Mo 12.12.     Tu 13.12.                        We 14.12.                    Th 15.12.                   Fr 16.12.                     Sa 17.12.

            8:00 – 10:00                  •   Welcome                      • Group work (6 groups)     • Topic identification      Supporting elements            • Evaluation
                                          •   Keynote                      • Plenum discussion         • Title formation            (tables, graphics,             DAAD (Written)
                                          •   Introduction                 Wrap up indicators for:     • Summary writing            conceptual diagrams,          • Assessment (oral)
                                          •   Workshop program              Quality, Relevance, Skills, (Keywords)                  bar/time plans)               • Course conclusion
                                                                            Resources                  including exercises          including exercises           • Closing Ceremony
                                                                                                                                                                   delivery of certificates
            10:30 – 12:30

                                          • Introduction of participants   • Proposal development in    Planning                   English writing                only for Lectures:
                                          • Log frame of the course          the process of research    (personal, financial,        including exercises          Future activities
                                          • Expectations                   • Proposal writing:            resources, time frame)                                  Planning coordination
                                                                              do’s + don’ts
                                                                              identify the consortium   Managerial skills
                                                                           specific requirements of the   (delegation, networking,
                                                                             financing partners           communication reporting,

            14:00 – 16:00

                            Arrival       • SWOT-Analysis                  Example + Exercises         Exercises in groups         Layout & design                Departure
                                              (strength, weakness,         •Read text                                              • Use of format styles
                                              opportunities, threats)      •Work in groups                                         • Structure elements
                                          •   Objectives / Goals           •Discussion                                             • Track changes
                                          •   Milestones                   •Wrap up                                                • Formal layout
                                          •   Deliverables                                                                         • End note
                                          •   Indicators
            16:30 – 18:00

                            Come together Take home messages:              Person & Institution        Examples for planning       • Design your working titles
                                          • Quality                        • Groups by countries                                     & topics (indiv.)
                                          • Relevance                      • Plenum discussion                                     • Guidelines for proposal
                                          • Skills                                                     Take home message           •
                                          • Resources                      Take home message                                       Preparation for next meeting

                                          Introduction in group work

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   2. Part: June 2006:

            8:00 – 10:00    Mo 26.06                             Tu 27.06.                            We 28.06.                           Th 29.06.                      Fr 30.06.

                            • Arrival                            • Presentation of group work         • Introduction to defense           • Proposals                    • Reporting
                                                                   - criteria catalogue               • Defense of proposals with a        - refreshment (preparation,
                                                                   - project evaluation                 panel (proposals selected by       application etc.)
                                                                   - ranking of proposals               lecturers)                         - implementation and          • Exercises
                                                                                                        (2 teachers,                       networking
                                                                 • Discussion of criteria               2 participants m/f)                theory, examples
            10:30 – 12:30

                            • Opening and welcome                • Refreshment of SWOT-               • Evaluation and discussion of      • Project management           • Discussion
                                                                   Analysis                             defense

                                                                 • Re-assessment of the proposals
                                                                   in group work
                                                                   (1 to be selected by each group)
            13:30 – 15:30

                            • Do’s and don’t’s,                  • Presentation of selected           • Research ethics                                                  • Public awareness
                             refreshment of december seminar       proposals                                                                                              - logo / acronym selection
                             (giving 2 proposals as example)       (10 minutes Power Point each)                                                                          - website (examples of
                                                                 • Discussion of presentations                                                                            project websites)
                                                                                                                                                                          - corporate identity

                            • Introduction into group work and                                                                                                            - workshop (contents,
                             group formation                                                                                                                              organisation, budget
            16:00 – 18:00

                            • Proposal evaluattion               • Presentation elements              • Consulting for proposals not                                     • Evaluation
                                                                                                        discussed in the seminar so far                                  • Course Conclusion
                             (each group evaluates 5 proposals
                             handed in by the paticipants.
                             Condition: only 1 project can be

                             selected by each group)


To top