PREPARING & REVIEWING PROPOSALS

John LieUniversity of California, Berkeley

July 2012

Proposal vs. Paper

• Promise vs. Achievement

• Distinct modalities of “human sciences”– Continuing national differences– Disciplinary diversity– Stylistic / methodological diversity• Statistical, historical, interview etc.

• Nonetheless, a common grammar

Commonalities

• Problematic / Topic• Review of the Literature• Thesis / Argument• Methods / Data• Budget, Schedule• Impact, Dissemination

• More abstractly:– Originality– Feasibility– Quality

Sources of Excellence

• Originality Mastery & Emulation• Feasibility Experience• Quality Exposure

• Practically speaking:– Read widely and deeply– Work diligently (10 years / 10,000 hours)– Seek expertise

• In Kazakhstan?

General Recommendations

• Preparation– Nothing like mastery of one’s field/sub-field, relevant

methods etc.• “Push the Envelope”– Theoretical, Methodological, Substantive (Empirical)– Conceptual importation (“ideas that travel”)

• Proposal and (the Final) Paper– The short distance between promise and achievement– In short: important to take it seriously

“Think Like A Fish”

• The Reviewer & The Reviewed– The Painter & The Studio

• Tacit Knowledge– The Point of Post-graduate Education– Structure of Scientific Innovation (& Hierarchy)– Opaque Culture of Review & Publication

Recommendations for the Review Process

• Additional information– Scholarly track record

• Triage– Some proposals clearly sub-standard

• Summary recommendation– “the bottom line”– The whole can be greater than its constituents

• Final selection– Common to have an executive committee

• Staff enhancement– A key to US success