Full Department Name
Name of Institution
Department Address
Dear Dr./Mr./Ms. Search Committee Chair’s last name and/or Search Committee Members:
Paragraph 1 [3-5 Sentences]: Identify the position you are applying for. Introduce yourself to the committee and your research interests. Connect your interests to the department and describe what makes you interested in becoming part of this departmental community.
Paragraph 2 [3-5 Sentences]: Briefly explain your research to date. Consider mentioning your research questions, methods, key findings, as well as where and when you published and/or presented this work.
Paragraph 3 [4-5 Sentences]: Elaborate on your current research project. Consider mentioning your most prestigious funding awards for this project. Explain your key findings in more detail.
Paragraph 4 [3-5 Sentences]: Introduce your future research plans and goals. Point out the intellectual merit and/or broader impacts of this future work.
Paragraph 5 [3-5 Sentences]: Briefly discuss your teaching experience and strategies. Provide examples of teaching strategies or an anecdote highlighting your teaching effectiveness. You may also want to introduce your philosophy on diversity in an academic setting.
Paragraph 6 [2-3 Sentences]: Make a connection between your work and the department to which you are applying. Include how you will participate in the intellectual life of the department both inside and outside the classroom. Provide concrete examples of how you will be a hard-working and collaborative colleague.
Paragraph 7 [1-2 Sentences]: A thank you for the search committee’s time and consideration.
Sincerely,
[Signature]
Your Name
Credentials and Position
Institution/Affiliation Name
Date: Month Day, Year Search Committee Chair’s First and Last Name, Graduate Degree Dear Dr./Mr./Ms. Search Committee Chair’s last name and/or Search Committee Members: Paragraph 1 [3-5 Sentences]: Identify the position you are applying for. Introduce yourself to the committee and your research interests. Connect your interests to the department and describe what makes you interested in becoming part of this departmental community. Paragraph 2 [3-5 Sentences]: Briefly discuss your teaching experience and pedagogical commitments. Provide examples of teaching strategies or an anecdote highlighting your teaching effectiveness. You may also want to introduce your philosophy on diversity in an academic setting. Paragraph 3 [3-4 Sentences]: Provide a discussion of how you involved yourself with students or the broader university community outside of the traditional classroom setting. Discuss how those interactions influenced your teaching. Paragraph 4 [2-3 Sentences]: Briefly explain your current research interests to date and how it relates to your teaching. State your research questions, methods, and key findings or arguments. Point out the intellectual merit and/or broader impacts of this future work. Paragraph 5 [3-5 Sentences]: Highlight when and where your research was published and/or presented this work or any forthcoming publications. Mention any prestigious funding or awards. Introduce your future research plans and goals. Paragraph 6 [2-3 Sentences]: Make a connection between your work and the department to which you are applying. Include how you will participate in the intellectual life of the department both inside and outside the classroom. Provide concrete examples of how you will be a hard-working and collaborative colleague. Paragraph 7 [1-2 Sentences]: A thank you for the search committee’s time and consideration. Sincerely, Your Name |
Remember your first draft does not have to be your last. Try to get feedback from different readers, especially if it is one of your first applications. It is not uncommon to go through several stages of revisions. Check out the Writing Center’s handout on editing and proofreading and video on proofreading to help with this last stage of writing.
Using the word dissertation. Some search committee members may see the word “dissertation” as a red flag that an applicant is too focused on their role as a graduate student rather than as a prospective faculty member. It may be advantageous, then, to describe your dissertation as current research, a current research project, current work, or some other phrase that demonstrates you are aware that your dissertation is the beginning of a larger scholarly career.
Too much jargon. While you may be writing to a specific department, people on the search committee might be unfamiliar with the details of your subfield. In fact, many committees have at least one member from outside their department. Use terminology that can easily be understood by non-experts. If you want to use a specific term that is crucial to your research, then you should define it. Aim for clarity for your reader, which may mean simplification in lieu of complete precision.
Overselling yourself. While your job letter should sell you as a great candidate, saying so (e.g., “I’m the ideal candidate”) in your letter may come off to some search committee members as presumptuous. Remember that although you have an idea about the type of colleague a department is searching for, ultimately you do not know exactly what they want. Try to avoid phrases or sentences where you state you are the ideal or the only candidate right for the position.
Paying too much attention to the job description. Job descriptions are the result of a lot of debate and compromise. If you have skills or research interests outside the job description, consider including them in your letter. It may be that your extra research interests; your outside skills; and/or your extracurricular involvements make you an attractive candidate. For example, if you are a Latin Americanist who also happens to be well-versed in the Spanish Revolution, it could be worth mentioning the expanse of your research interests because a department might find you could fill in other gaps in the curriculum or add an additional or complementary perspective to the department.
Improper sendoff. The closing of your letter is just as important as the beginning. The end of the letter should reflect the professionalism of the document. There should be a thank-you and the word sincerely or a formal equivalent. Remember, it is the very last place in your letter where you present yourself as a capable future colleague.
Small oversights. Make sure to proofread your letter not just for grammar but also for content. For example, if you use material from another letter, make sure you do not include the names of another school, department, or unassociated faculty! Or, if the school is in Chicago, make sure you do not accidentally reference it as located in the Twin Cities.
Name dropping. You rarely know the internal politics of the department or institution to which you are applying. So be cautious about the names you insert in your cover letters. You do not want to unintentionally insert yourself into a departmental squabble or add fire to an interdepartmental conflict. Instead, focus on the actions you will undertake and the initiatives you are passionate about.
We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.
Ball, Cheryl E. 2013. “Understanding Cover Letters.” Inside Higher Ed , November 3, 2013. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2013/11/04/essay-cover-letter-academic-jobs .
Borchardt, John. 2014. “Writing a Winning Cover Letter.” Science Magazine , August 6, 2014. https://www.sciencemag.org/careers/2014/08/writing-winning-cover-letter# .
Helmreich, William. 2013. “Your First Academic Job.” Inside Higher Ed , June 17, 2013. https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2013/06/17/essay-how-land-first-academic-job .
Kelsky, Karen. 2013. “How To Write a Journal Article Submission Cover Letter.” The Professor Is In (blog), April 26, 2013. https://theprofessorisin.com/2013/04/26/how-to-write-a-journal-article-submission-cover-letter/ .
Tomaska, Lubomir, and Josef Nosek. 2008. “Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Cover Letter to Accompany a Job Application for an Academic Position.” PLoS Computational Biology 14(5). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006132 .
You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Make a Gift
Managing the office, disabilities, harassment and discrimination, unemployment.
How to write a cover letter for a fellowship.
Graduate and postgraduate students often must pursue a fellowship for financial support to conduct their research or to complete training or internships necessary for school and their career. A cover letter is typically the first thing the recipient reads in your fellowship application, so it needs to be convincing and well-written.
Start a new document on your computer and choose a cover letter template if one is available. Make a header that includes your name (in larger and bolder font), followed by your address, phone number, email address and website (if applicable).
Type a formal salutation that addresses the recipient by name. This may mean you have to do extra research to find out who will be considering your letter and application. It is considered bad form to open a cover letter with a generic salutation, and your goal is to establish a personal connection with the individual who will be deciding on whether or not to grant your fellowship.
Type two to three sentences for the first paragraph to explain who you are, which university or organization you are a student or member of and what type of fellowship you are applying for.
Type five to seven sentences as your middle paragraph. This section should explain the work your or your organization is performing, its purpose and its benefits, and a short history of the work you have accomplished so far. In a polite but direct tone, provide a budget estimate of how much you will need granted in your fellowship to cover program costs as well as living expenses. Also provide information about your living situation, including housing, transportation and location. Explain that a more thorough summary of your project is contained in your fellowship proposal.
Type two to four sentences as your closing paragraph. Indicate that your resume (if required) and fellowship proposal are enclosed, and specify the method with which you would prefer to be contacted to discuss the opportunity further. Thank the recipient for his consideration and time.
The average salary of a grant writer →.
How to become a plastic surgeon →.
Kara Page has been a freelance writer and editor since 2007. She maintains several blogs on travel, music, food and more. She is also a contributing writer for Suite101 and has articles published on eHow and Answerbag. Page holds a Bachelor of Music Education degree from the University of North Texas.
princigalli/iStock/GettyImages
All disciplines.
Academic cover letter samples.
Read a summary or generate practice questions using the INOMICS AI tool
When applying for an academic position as a researcher, lecturer, or for a fellowship, a cover letter is usually required to accompany your CV or resume . Stating your particular interest in the role, and showing how your academic and work experience enables you to excel at the job, is the aim of a successful cover letter. They can be one of the most important parts of your application, giving the recipient an idea of who you are and what your relevant expertise is. Essentially, it's the first impression an institution will have of you, so it's important to get it right.
For those planning a PhD in economics, check out our Sample Motivation Letter for some specific guidance as to how to get yourself prepared. For others applying for a research role, teaching role, or for a fellowship – stick around. The following are a collection of sample cover letter templates that you can use as a basis for your own. Yep, we got you covered!
I am writing to apply for the postdoctoral position in marine biology in the Department of Life Sciences. Having recently completed my PhD in biology, I am excited for the opportunity to join the world-renowned research team at the University of Leipzig.
My primary research interests are migration behaviors in marine creatures, and in my current research I use methods including statistical modeling and field observations. My aim is for my research to form a bridge between modeling and field work approaches. I am therefore particularly attracted to the University of Leipzig as a department which values research using a wide range of methodologies, and which offers the chance for collaboration with colleagues in other life sciences fields.
Working in research in both Germany and abroad has given me a network of potential collaborators and experience in international projects. I have found bringing together researchers from different fields to be particularly beneficial, and my interdisciplinary background has provided me with effective communication skills across a diverse range of groups. I am keen to continue collaborating with researchers from other disciplines in order to better understand complex issues.
Furthermore, I have experience with the supervision of Bachelor's students, and with teaching undergraduate courses such as An Introduction to Oceanography, for which I received excellent feedback. I find the nurturing of students in order to realize their best potential to be a greatly rewarding aspect of teaching work and I am thus interested in taking on teaching work as well as research.
I have three publications pending from my doctoral project, covering a broad range of scholarly interests. These papers are currently in the submission process for high-ranked peer-reviewed journals.
I wish to acquire third-party funding to support my research in the future, and to that end I am preparing applications for the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation) fellowship and the Sir Henry Wellcome Postdoctoral Fellowship. As a member of the committees which applied for extensions of funding from the German research foundation for both my graduate school and my university institution, I have experience with large-scale funding applications, both of which were successful in securing further funding.
I am enthusiastic about the possibility of working at the University of Leipzig. I thank you for your consideration and look forward to hearing from you.
I am applying for the role of lecturer in psychology at the University of Hamburg. I completed a PhD on the topic of how stressful life events affect decision making at University College London. Since then I have been working in a postdoctoral role in the neurology department at the Charité Hospital Berlin. The primary topics I teach are neuropsychology, rehabilitation after brain injury, and the social impact of stress, and I have additional teaching experience in the field of neuroscience.
My teaching philosophy is to promote independent thought and critical reasoning skills in my students by encouraging them to discuss and debate. For example, in my Neural Decision Making course, each student is required to learn a topic and present it briefly to the other students once per lesson. This not only challenges the presenting student to convey the material accurately and concisely, but also aids the understanding of the other students in the class. Similarly, three times per semester I organize debate classes in which the class is split into groups which must defend a contested position in the field. Encouraging students to consider perspectives which are contentious and with which they may not agree challenges them to think beyond their current knowledge and to explore alternative perspectives.
This teaching style has been successful in engaging students and holding their interest. I am happy to have received strong positive feedback from students on my teaching, and one of my classes was selected by the student newspaper as a top ten course at my previous university. I also have experience co-supervising students in Bachelor's and Master’s psychology programs, from which I gained skills in project management and supporting students academically.
My current research is on the relationship between priming and decision making, examining the degree to which value assessments are influenced by non-verbal primes. I have five publications on this topic, each published in high-impact journals. I am keen to continue this research at the University of Hamburg, given its expertise in decision making and its strong neuroscience community.
I enjoy supporting students from diverse backgrounds and those who have followed non-traditional career paths. I believe that the strength of a discipline comes from hearing a wide range of viewpoints. I am excited to pass the experience I have received on to other students who are supporting themselves through work while studying, who may have family commitments, or come from a non-traditional academic background. The possibility of teaching Bachelor's and graduate students and continuing my research at the University of Hamburg is something I am enthusiastic about. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to hearing from you.
In response to your advertised opportunity for a fellowship in experimental psychology from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, I am writing to you to express my interest in this fellowship.
My PhD research included paradigms from experimental psychology alongside innovative interview techniques for assessing personality disorder traits. I believe combining knowledge from disparate disciplines can be uniquely effective in building new models for understanding complex phenomena such as mental disorders. I am therefore particularly attracted to the Alexander von Humboldt foundation as an organization which promotes interdisciplinary, unusual and innovative approaches to research.
I have a truly interdisciplinary background, having studied psychiatry and neurology as well as psychology. I currently hold a postdoctoral scholarship at the University of Munich, where I perform research into the assessment and classification of personality disorders. Having worked with a broad range of methods including interviews, reaction time measures, subliminal stimuli detection, and theoretical work. I have been in frequent contact with both clinicians and empirical scientists, and I have experience in presenting to and learning from experts from a wide variety of specialties within psychology. For example, I co-organized the Constructs of Personality Disorders conferences in 2018 which included psychologists, philosophers and psychiatrists as part of an interdisciplinary working group.
My recent research has focused on using interview methods to categorize and classify the rates of personal disorder symptoms within the general population. Having found evidence of higher-than-expected rates of symptoms within certain groups, particularly younger people, I was inspired to design further experiments to investigate this intriguing result. My background in both psychology and psychiatry makes me ideally suited to this work. I am confident in my abilities to design and run experimental projects, having worked independently throughout my PhD on a project of my own design. I also demonstrated an ability to run projects and maintain strict deadlines by completing both my PhD and three manuscripts for papers within 36 months.
Thank you for considering me. I am excited for this opportunity to undertake a fellowship with the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation and I look forward to hearing from you.
Featured announcements.
Call for papers: emanes annual conference 2024, mirdec 23rd barcelona 2024 conference, upcoming deadlines.
The INOMICS AI can generate an article summary or practice questions related to the content of this article. Try it now!
Please try again later.
For more questions on economics study topics, with practice quizzes and detailed answer explanations, check out the INOMICS Study Guides.
Email Address
Forgot your password? Click here.
You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.
The “berkeley” factor, introduction, closing/enclosures.
The reception your cover letter will receive is more varied and unpredictable than the other elements of your application packet. Some readers, especially at large research universities, will skip it entirely, and focus instead on more direct indicators of your academic achievements and potential: the CV, letters, and writing sample. Most often, however, your cover letter works in tandem with your CV, and represents your best opportunity to communicate directly with your target audience prior to an interview.
The cover letter should not simply repeat the information contained in the CV; rather it should elaborate and frame the aspects of your academic training and background that you want search committee members to have uppermost in their minds as they consider your candidacy. At a minimum, it should contain a clear statement of your research and teaching interests, and how your qualifications match the requirements of the job description. Many disciplines have their own conventions and protocols for application materials including the cover letter. Be sure to show a draft of your letter to your chair or the department’s placement advisor.
There is no perfect or even preferred style of cover letter save that tone should be that of a confident professional. Departments aren’t interested in hiring graduate students (they already have enough of those). They are looking for serious scholars/teachers who will make interesting, congenial, and productive colleagues. While it is probably not a good use of your time to tailor your letter for each opening, you will probably need at least two base versions that emphasize different elements (You would not want to use the same cover letter to apply to Oberlin as UC Irvine). You may want to customize the letters for the three to five jobs most attractive to you.
Your cover letter should not exceed a page and a half or two at the most. No one will read a four-page letter, and your apparent inability to communicate your credentials in a concise manner is not to your advantage. Every line of your letter should serve a demonstrable purpose. Some people have gotten excellent jobs with a brief, boilerplate letter containing no more than a short intro, a paragraph on their research, and a couple of sentences on their teaching. Others use letters that discuss in very specific terms how they, their research, and their teaching would “fit” within the existing department and institutional setting. The choice of style is up to you, and should reflect what makes you feel most comfortable and most positive about your credentials.
There are, however, circumstances where a longer, more annotated version is more likely to be helpful. The issues you should take into account when making this decision are:
Size matters. The larger the department, the less detailed your letter needs to be. If there are already six people working in your sub-field, they can assess and translate the significance of your work to others in the department. If, however, you will be the only history of science person or the only physical anthropologist in the department, the search committee and others will likely need more help from you to understand the import of your work. Remember, if they are searching for your specialty they are understaffed in your area, and even if there is more than one person in your sub-field she/he may be on leave or otherwise uninvolved in the search.
Similarly, smaller departments are more likely to be concerned than larger ones about the specific courses you are prepared to teach. If there are certain core courses your position needs to cover, make it unambiguously clear that you are prepared to do so even if you haven’t taught them already.
As a rule of thumb, the more your profile diverges from the specifics of the job description (or the norm, such that it exists), the more likely you will want to say more about why you are nonetheless a strong candidate. By doing so you can turn a question mark into an advantage. Highlight your strengths, and if you have time perform a little research on the department (see below) so you can explain how you would add to the department in ways that they might otherwise not have considered. Job descriptions are not always etched in stone. Share your list of college/university openings (along with the names of search committee chairs) with your faculty. If they know someone in the department, they may feel comfortable reaching out, either to give you an added plug, or learn more about where their colleague believes the department is headed and what they’re looking for in an ideal candidate. They may well be willing to sacrifice a course in an area that the ad specified in order to get the extra teaching experience or innovative research that you have to offer, but only if you give them the opportunity and explain what they’d get in return.
If you’ve taken an unusually long time to finish because you spent three years learning a new language in order to prepare for two years of original research or some other factor that enriches what you have to offer as a teacher or a scholar, let them know about it. Learning a new language, for example, is an indicator of your commitment to serious scholarship. Think of a way to put a positive valence on an aspect of your CV that you believe is likely to raise questions or doubts.
As hard as it may be for not-yet-employed-but-soon-to-be academics like yourselves to believe, there are some individuals and departments that are intimidated by you and your institutional pedigree. There are many fine schools and departments that are convinced that every Berkeley graduate student and postdoc is only interested in a position at Harvard, Princeton, or (hold your nose) Stanford. If it is a small liberal arts college, they may also assume that you view teaching and advising undergraduates strictly as a necessary evil. Ergo, why interview someone who will either look down their nose at us, and/or desert us for greener pastures as soon as their third book has been published and Yale comes calling. They often don’t seem to realize that many Berkeley graduate students and postdocs are sincerely interested in a wide range of academic settings for a variety of reasons (personal and professional), and, perhaps more to the point, Yale rarely “comes calling.” An even greater burden of proof exists if a quick scan of your CV reveals that all of your experience in higher education has occurred in a large, elite, research-oriented setting. How can you overcome this potential obstacle especially if you’re very interested in a school that you have reason to believe may be suspicious of Berkeley PhDs?
It’s probably not advisable to write in a cover letter that they shouldn’t be intimidated by lil’ old you (i.e., “I’m really not very good; in fact, my advisor says I’m her worst graduate student in twenty years.”), but there are ways to indicate a sincere interest in their department. One means is to do a little research, and briefly discuss how you might fit into the department and the institutional community-at-large. There are numerous articles written by faculty about the search process that state explicitly the positive impact it can have on their impression of a candidate to see evidence that he/she has taken the time to learn something about them. Researching a department and its associated programs/research centers has never been easier.
A second way to address fears of imminent flight is to provide evidence of ties to the area, the university, or lifestyle. If you are from the Midwest, have family nearby, or even if you just spent an enjoyable summer there, add a line about it and your desire to return to your cover letter for Purdue or Wayne State. If you did your undergraduate work at a similar type of institution, draw their attention to that link. Don’t assume that they will notice where you got your BA on your CV, and make the connection.
If you are applying to small, liberal arts colleges, don’t just list the courses you’ve taught with a line of boilerplate about how important you take your teaching responsibilities to be. These days, a good, small college has a list price of about $35,000-$75,000 a year, and close contact with people like you is one of their key selling points to parents and potential students. You are expected to be more than a lecturer, and your ability to convey your recognition of that fact and a sincere interest in working closely with students matters. Advising, participating in non-academic activities, watching your students grow and mature inside the classroom and out (and having an influence on that process) can be among the most rewarding aspects of the profession. If you value these broader elements of being a professor, let them know. In particular, if your own experience has been limited to large universities, think about describing an episode where you had a positive impact on the development of a student and the satisfaction you derived from helping him or her. At many small colleges, and large universities (including Berkeley) as well, one of the most significant pedagogical trends is fostering greater student involvement in faculty research. If you can articulate how this might occur for you and their students in a brief but thoughtful manner, it can alleviate some of the concerns occasioned by your Berkeley background.
Your letter typically will have four segments: the introduction, research, teaching, and the closing.
Be sure to identify the position you are applying for by rank and sub-field in the first sentence or two. It is not uncommon for departments to be engaged in more than one search in a given year, and large departments may have more than one in your sub-field. If it is an open rank position and you are applying as an assistant professor, in most cases you and your record of accomplishments will not be directly compared with those of more experienced candidates applying for it at the associate or full professor level. Rather, applicants are assessed based on where they are in their career path, and you have every chance of successfully competing against them.
In addition to identifying the job for which you are applying, the first paragraph serves as an introduction – your “speed dating” commercial: what are the three broad aspects of your background that you want to be clear in their mind as they make the decision whether or not to devote more time and attention to your application?
The first aspect is that you come from Berkeley, and hence one of the strongest programs in your discipline (e.g., I am in the final stages of completing my dissertation at UC Berkeley). The other two aspects that you can briefly highlight are those elements that you believe represent your strongest qualifications for the position and that, potentially, differentiate you from other candidates in the pool. For example, if the ad specifies that they are looking for someone whose research is interdisciplinary and who will strengthen a new research center focused on conservation biology, let them know in this initial paragraph that you fit the bill. Conversely, if you are applying to a small liberal arts college and you attended a similar type of institution as an undergrad, point that out here.
Ask yourself what are the three things I want a search committee member to know about me before she/he decides whether or not my file stays in the active pile, and describe them briefly in this first paragraph. Briefly; you will have space to elaborate more fully in the paragraphs below. Here, you just want to catch their attention and provide them with cause to pay closer attention to the text that follows.
If you’ve finished, mention it up front. If not, state when you expect to file – no later than the June before you would start the position. Many readers will view your optimistic prediction with a skeptical eye, and anything you can say that makes the claim appear more credible (e.g., “I have written and my chair has reviewed four of the six chapters.”) can help mitigate their concerns. You can put such a statement in the introduction or wait until you discuss the dissertation itself.
If your discipline holds its annual meeting in the summer or early fall (i.e., before application deadlines) and you had an excellent conference interview, make reference to it in the cover letter including the names of the faculty with whom you spoke. By the time people actually start to read files, months may have passed and even the strongest of impressions can fade. But they can be rehabilitated and revived, especially if you can remind them of a specific strength, ability, or issue that seemed particularly salient during the interview.
Unless you are applying to a school that cares only about your teaching (increasingly rare), a description of your research generally follows next. The challenge here is not simply to describe your research, but to frame it in terms of your sub-field and discipline. The search committee hasn’t lived, eaten and breathed Post-Edwardian Hermeneutics for the past five years the way you have. And they haven’t been there every step of the torturous process like your friends and significant others. So forgive them for not immediately recognizing your research at first blush for the path-breaking work that it is.
Departments want to know that in hiring you, they are adding someone who will make a future contribution to the discipline and enhance the reputation of the department. However, they are often ill-equipped to understand exactly how that will be true in your particular case. Many disciplines are sufficiently broad that leading or cutting-edge research in one sub-field is barely intelligible to those in others. In addition, when you become a candidate for the short list, your file will be read by department members outside your specialty, and, oftentimes later on in the process, by individuals outside your discipline as well. You need to describe the forest in which your tree resides, and explain why it matters in terms of the broader trends and issues within your discipline. Obviously, if your work is focused on one of the classic conundrums of your field, much less in the way of providing perspective is necessary than if you are addressing an emergent issue or employing an unconventional approach.
If your research is particularly novel or cutting-edge, any markers of broader acceptance by other, more established scholars or scholarly organs in your field can ameliorate possible concerns about its relevance and potential importance. In discussing your work, note the recognition it has received in the form of competitive grants, awards, publications in refereed journals, and/or presentations at major conferences.
It is also important to mention where you expect your research to go after the completion of your dissertation and the publications that will flow from it. They, especially at research-oriented institutions, want to know at least in broad terms where you expect to go from here. They want to see evidence of a scholarly agenda that extends beyond the dissertation or postdoc project. You don’t need to have pages written or titles blocked out, but you need to tell them in a paragraph, (two at the most) about what questions intrigue you, and how you expect to go about finding the answers to them. These questions for future research may have been generated by the findings of your dissertation, unusual data uncovered during your fieldwork, or interesting side issues that you were forced to put off in order to keep your dissertation taut and focused. Think twice about mentioning future projects that appear entirely unrelated to your current work. Departments will want you to be firmly established in one area before you go off into another.
The relative importance of teaching versus research is a continuous and not a discrete variable. Even schools that emphasize teaching in their job listing will generally want evidence of scholarly engagement and publishing potential. It is a very competitive market for undergrad and grad students out there, and virtually all institutions are under pressure to sell themselves via the quality of their faculty to the limited number of good students in the applicant pool. A good marker for the relative importance of teaching versus research is the teaching load. An institution with a 3-2 teaching load (a total of five courses taught per two-semester year) will expect more in the way of and value research more highly than one with a 3-3 load.
If you work in a capital-intensive area, mention your track record of gaining grants and other sources of external funding.
In a similar fashion, the more the institution you are applying to diverges from Berkeley and the more your profile differs from the job description, the more expansive you should be in talking about your teaching and what you have to offer their students. If you have won a teaching award at Berkeley, don’t make them wait until they read your CV to discover that fact.
For letters sent to large universities where you will be expected to teach large lecture courses and graduate seminars, little is needed except to convey that you have the necessary experience and/or background. Since the dominant pedagogical style is the same as that found at Berkeley, it will be assumed that you will be able to do the same for them. Still, rather than list off a series of courses you are prepared to teach (which should be included in an Areas of Teaching Interests section of your CV), devote a couple of sentences to demonstrating in qualitative terms how you are thoughtful and effective in your teaching. Instead of just stating: “I want all of my students to be able to utilize the concepts in class to better understand the world around them (not untrue, but still a cliche).” Provide a concrete illustration: for example in an intro to sociology class, I had my students observe X and Y in downtown SF and draw inferences about Z.
If you have TA’d some of the courses that (based on the job description) you would be expected to offer, let them know. If you have not had that opportunity, but your fields and research fall within the domain of the job description, you may want to add a line about how well prepared you are to teach such courses based on your training and research.
If your profile does not correspond exactly to the description found in the job announcement, but you believe that you could nonetheless teach the required courses, explain the basis for your confidence. What strength would you bring to the department that would more than make up for your “otherness”? Departments may decide that they don’t “need” another conventional European historian if you can convince them that you can handle the core courses and offer something new that they don’t currently cover as well. In this case especially, think about doing some research so you can speak in more specific terms about how you would fit into and enhance the department’s offerings. Help them visualize how you would strengthen them as a department.
Small colleges will want to know that you are able to teach on a more intimate basis and are prepared to take the time to do it well. If you give them three generic lines about how “important” you consider your teaching responsibilities, don’t expect much of a positive response. Spend a couple of paragraphs describing your teaching experience and philosophy, and how you would take advantage of the opportunity to create your own courses.
If you’ve had the opportunity to design and teach your own course, tell them, briefly, how you went about it and the choices you made. Don’t just say you’re a good teacher, show them why. Look over your teaching evaluations and pick out one or two consistent strengths to highlight. Drawing on your experience, talk about how you engage students and enhance their skills (especially writing) and intellectual development.
For good, small colleges, the quality of the teaching offered to students is their stock-in- trade. Even the most research-oriented, small colleges take teaching undergraduates very seriously. You need to demonstrate that you take it seriously as well, and can talk about it using more than vague generalities and shop-worn cliches.
Wrap it up quickly. If you are going to be traveling for any significant portion of the job search season, be sure to let them know how they can contact you (email, cell phone etc.).
Before closing, include a sentence where you list the materials you have uploaded/included (e.g., CV, dissertation abstract, transcripts, teaching statement/portfolio, writing samples, etc.) and are having sent separately (letters of recommendation). You will often be assembling multiple packets at the same time (as in midnight October 14th, midnight November 14th, etc.) for jobs that ask for different combinations of enclosures. In addition to telling them what they should have received, it serves as a handy list for you to check before metaphorically “sealing the envelope.”
Should you send a writing sample, even if they haven’t asked for one? Unless the norm in your discipline is to never send more than they ask for, and you feel the sample represents you and your work to your advantage, by all means send it. That way it’s in the file should someone become interested in you and want to read more.
Berkeley Career Engagement UC Berkeley, CA 94720
Main navigation.
We seek highly skilled and motivated individuals from diverse backgrounds and perspectives to join our full-time Predoctoral Research Fellows Program for a one- to two-year appointment.
The SIEPR Predoctoral Research Fellows program is committed to creating inclusive research spaces for all. We are a proud participant of Pathways to Research and Doctoral Careers (PREDOC) whose goal is to help foster the growth of the next generation of researchers in economics and public policy.
These pre-doctoral research fellow positions are full-time and in-person with a significant portion of time dedicated to the research project. Fellows can also take one under-graduate or graduate-level course per quarter. Fellowship offers include tuition, health insurance, and a stipend.
You will be asked to provide the following in your application:
Open Positions
SIEPR staff or faculty will contact candidates who are advanced to the next round by email, and you may be asked to complete a coding task. Given the high volume of applications we receive, we are not able to provide application feedback or individual responses to all candidates.
For priority consideration, candidates should submit all application materials for SIEPR's common application by 5pm on Friday, October 20, 2023. Positions will remain open until filled. New positions may continue to be posted, and filled positions will be indicated on the website.
Applicants rank the projects they are most interested in during the application process. The faculty will select a specific candidate to mentor for 1-2 years.
The program year begins in early July. If necessary, alternate start date may be considered and negotiated.
For further questions, please review our frequently asked questions or email [email protected] .
An online community for discussing issues related to academia, faculty life, research, and institutional structures. This is NOT the place to ask questions about your homework, your particular school or professors, or to get admission advice! Survey posts must be approved by mods in advance, must include contact/IRB info, and must be specific to academia.
Hello! Humanities/social history PhD student in the US here. I've encountered a requirement for a fellowship app I don't quite understand and, since my faculty is not super responsive, was hoping one of you might have some insight.
I'm applying for a research fellowship at a library--not a full time position or anything, just a fellowship where they provide you with $ to travel there and use the archives. They require a research statement, which makes sense, but they also say they want a cover letter. No further explanation. Have any of yall written or seen a good example of a cover letter for a research-only grant like this? If it was a full position or something, I'd get it, but I don't know what they want from the cover letter that they wouldn't get from my CV and research statement
By continuing, you agree to our User Agreement and acknowledge that you understand the Privacy Policy .
You’ve set up two-factor authentication for this account.
Create your username and password.
Reddit is anonymous, so your username is what you’ll go by here. Choose wisely—because once you get a name, you can’t change it.
Enter your email address or username and we’ll send you a link to reset your password
An email with a link to reset your password was sent to the email address associated with your account
Ria C Fyffe-Freil, Joesph R Wiencek, A Trainee’s Guide: Crafting a Personal Statement for Laboratory Medicine Fellowship Applications, The Journal of Applied Laboratory Medicine , Volume 9, Issue 5, September 2024, Pages 1091–1094, https://doi.org/10.1093/jalm/jfae067
There are many unique paths that can lead an individual to the field of laboratory medicine. For some, the profession may be a natural sequence from their current work or research, and for others, the trail might be much more challenging at first to locate. Common paths to the field usually fall into 2 categories: medical doctors (MD, DO, MBBS) and doctorate-degree holders (PhD, DCLS, etc.). For medical doctors, a pathology residency is completed; then subspecialization can be pursued. Doctoral trainees, on the other hand, may be required to use an online tool such as myIDP to explore scientific career options based on aptitude and values ( 1) or may uncover the field by word-of-mouth. Regardless of route, once a prospective trainee commits to a vocation in lab medicine, there is ultimately no reversing course. Fortunately, to help navigate prospective trainees through the process, there are countless individuals in academic, private, and industry job settings who are ready to inspire the next generation by paying it forward. In this laboratory reflection, the goal is to provide some practical advice for one of the most critical aspects of the process—the laboratory medicine fellowship application stage, specifically the personal statement (or letter of intent). And while this piece focuses on clinical chemistry fellowships (as this is what both authors completed), the personal statement “do’s and do not’s” apply more broadly to any clinical laboratory medicine fellowship. Of note, aside from clinical chemistry, there are clinical fellowship opportunities in microbiology, biochemical genetics, laboratory genetics and genomics, as well as clinical immunology/human leukocyte antigen specialties.
Personal account.
Sign in with a library card.
Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:
Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.
Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.
If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.
Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.
Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:
Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:
If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.
Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.
A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.
Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.
Click the account icon in the top right to:
Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.
For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.
To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.
Don't already have a personal account? Register
Citing articles via.
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide
Sign In or Create an Account
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
Understanding ecosystems for a sustainable future, search form.
Visitors: The SERC campus is open Monday-Saturday, 8:00am-5:30pm. We're closed Sundays and federal holidays. Please do a health self-check before arriving, and stay home if feeling sick. Read Plan Your Visit for information on where to park, updated maps and hours, safety, and more.
Our trails are closed due to downed debris from a recent storm. For your safety, please do not hike the trails until further notice. We appreciate your patience while we work to clear the debris.
In the event of a government shutdown, SERC will remain OPEN for our normal Monday - Saturday hours through at least Saturday, October 7, by using prior year funds. Visit si.edu for updates.
The Reed Education Center is back open! Parking is available in the paved lot in front of the building. Please watch your step as you walk around the building - Remnant construction debris may be present.
Read Plan Your Visit for information on where to park, updated maps, safety, and more. Find out when to visit the Woodlawn History Center .
Interns & Fellows Menu
The Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) is offering fellowship opportunities for independent research starting after June 1, 2025. Graduate, predoctoral, postdoctoral, and senior fellowships are available in a wide range of topics centered around some of the critical issues challenging our world today, such as habitat alteration, biodiversity loss, and climate change.
Research topics include: biodiversity and conservation, biological invasions, ecosystems ecology, environmental pollution, global change, parasite and disease ecology, watersheds, and land use. Projects that broaden and diversity the research conducted at SERC are encouraged. Applicants are suggested to contact research staff to help identify potential advisors and determine the feasibility of the proposed research.
Learn more about the research conducted at SERC and visit our tips for applying to fellowships resource.
Please visit the Smithsonian Institution Fellowship Program page for more details about qualifications, stipends, and application instructions.
Application deadline: October 15, 2024 11:59pm EST
Heather Richardson Internship and Fellowship Coordinator [email protected]
SERC is a research center of the Smithsonian Institution, located in Edgewater, MD on the western shore of the Chesapeake Bay, approximately 10 miles south of Annapolis, 40 miles west of Washington DC, and 40 miles south of Baltimore. SERC's 2,650-acre campus is a living laboratory for long-term ecosystem research on forests, farmland, wetlands, shorelines, and estuaries. The SERC campus contains a laboratory and office complex, as well as education and waterfront facilities, dormitories for interns, and guest housing for visitors.
The Smithsonian Institution is an equal opportunity employer, committed to a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity, national origin, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, age, religion, marital/parental/caregiver status and disability. The SERC community recognizes the value of diversity in promoting innovative science and creative solutions, and we strongly encourage candidates from all backgrounds to apply. We recognize that each applicant will bring unique skills, knowledge, experiences and background to these positions.
Make a Gift
by Elainy Mata
May 10, 2022
I hate cover letters. They add so much stress to the already uncomfortable and grueling job hunt. Every time I’m writing one, I find myself wondering: Do people even read these?
Unfortunately, the answer is “yes.” But, there are some ways to make the process a little less terrible. I asked Amy Gallo, Harvard Business Review editor and author of “ How to Write a Cover Letter ,” for her advice. From doing the research, to starting off strong, to emphasizing your value — Gallo taught me exactly what I need to do to get my cover letters noticed by hiring managers. I even wrote a new cover letter that has her blessing. (Scroll down if you’re in need of an expert-approved example.)
Subscribe to HBR Ascend on YouTube for more videos on work, life, and everything in between.
Transcript
ELAINY MATA: So you want to know how to tackle the cover letter. I do too. I actually really hate cover letters. I hate cover letters. I hate cover letters.
But the cover letter is important. It’s time to face our fears, and just figure out how in the world we are actually going to write it.
I got you, and we’re going to do this together. These tips are going to help you go through the process a lot easier. So if you are ready to tackle the cover letter, stick around and keep watching.
In front of me right now are three cover letters that I’ve written in the past, for three different jobs. And I’m just embarrassed. I’m embarrassed to read these.
To whom it may concern, to whom it may concern, to whom it may concern.
I would like to respectfully submit this cover letter. I would like to respectfully submit this cover letter.
I am a passionate, detail-oriented person. I am passionate, detail-oriented person.
This sounds like I’m — this doesn’t sound like me at all. I think you want me to talk this way. Here we go like. Hire me.
I talked to Amy Gallo, an HBR editor, and the author of one of our most popular articles, “How to Write a Cover Letter.”
AMY GALLO: First of all, you’re not alone. I write about how to write cover letters, and I also hate them.
ELAINY MATA: She’s done the research. She’s talked to the experts. And I’m going to tell you exactly what she told me.
ELAINY MATA: So how long does a cover letter actually have to be? Just one page, one.
AMY GALLO: Don’t play with the font, and make it like eight point font, and like make your margins really wide. Just really figure out what is the most essential things that need to go on one page.
ELAINY MATA: This should be a no-brainer, but let’s get specific. Let’s say you’re applying for a job here, at Harvard Business Review. Go on the company’s website, go to their “About Us” section, and read what they’re about, see their mission statement, see their tone, see what that company is actually looking for, and what they stand for.
So you’ve got the broad stuff, but let’s dig a little bit deeper. What is the company that you’re applying for talking about now? You should actually go into their LinkedIn, their Twitter, see what they’re sharing, see who are they’re talking to, see what they’re talking about, so you can get a sense of what is currently happening. Lastly, find that hiring manager. It is so much better to address your cover letter to an actual person and a name rather than, to whom it may concern. So I have to kind of creep a little bit, and be like a private investigator.
AMY GALLO: Yeah, creeping is definitely part of the process. Usually, with LinkedIn, you can see who’s posted the job, who is sharing it with their network. You may not know for sure that that’s the hiring manager, but at least it’s a little more personable. Sometimes, I’ve heard people just reach out and say, “Who’s the hiring manager for this job? I’d like to address my cover letter to that person.”
ELAINY MATA: You’ve probably written this 100 times before. “Hi, my name is this. I’m based here, and I’m applying for this job.” No, no, no, no, don’t do that. The hiring manager has a stack of cover letters. So you have to write yours to grab their attention. Amy, can you please give me an example of a strong, bold, opening line for cover letter. I promise I won’t steal it.
AMY GALLO: You’re allowed to steal it. Anyone should be able to steal it:
“I saw your listing on this website, and I was thrilled to see it, because it’s exactly the kind of job I’ve been looking for to apply my skills in X.”
Write something that’s short, to the point, but shows both enthusiasm, as well as experience that’s relevant to the job.
ELAINY MATA: Figure out what problem the company is facing. They’re hiring for a reason. Figure out what that reason is, and how you can best solve that problem. Amy also found the top two qualities that people generally look for is adaptability, and the ability to learn quickly.
How about if I just got out of college, and I’m looking at these jobs that are asking for three to five years or more of experience. How can I write a cover letter if I feel like I don’t have enough to write about?
AMY GALLO: Yeah, so that’s a good question, because the cover letter shouldn’t be focused so much on the past. That’s the resume’s job. The cover letter is really about the future. So how are you going to take what’s in that resume, your past, and apply it to where you’re going.
ELAINY MATA: This is really hard to balance. You want to show them that you’re excited to work there, and that you’re going to bring a lot of energy to the team. But don’t be too strong, because over eagerness can actually work against you.
AMY GALLO: Write the letter you want to write. Then share it with someone else, someone who knows you well, but someone who also will tell you like it is. We’re not good judges of our own writing.
ELAINY MATA: So getting a second pair of eyes will help you look for any errors, typos, and most importantly, they can tell you if you make sense.
Amy, this sounds like a lot. Is there even like a sort of a shortcut to this, or a sort of scalable way that I can do this for multiple different jobs?
AMY GALLO: I mean, you’ve probably heard the phrase looking for a job is a full-time job. It does take a lot of time. You’re tweaking some things. You’re not writing a whole new letter. So you’re going to have a template. Write your best cover letter for the first job you apply for. Share that with your friend to check the tone. Do the research on the company, right? Do that the first time. Then and adjust the cover letter accordingly. Does that seem more reasonable?
ELAINY MATA: Yes, much more reasonable.
So my task is to apply for a job here at HBR, and to write a new cover letter using the advice that Amy gave me. Let’s do it.
This is hard. I never said it was going to be easy, maybe easier than what you were doing before, but definitely not easy.
Dear Maureen and hiring team,
I saw your listing on Linkedln and am excited because this is exactly the job that I’ve been looking for to showcase my skills in video production and production management to assist the creative center in producing compelling content.
Working in news and movie production has taught me to hear an idea and a concept and be able to fully plan out the logistics needed to make the desired final visual product. I have been able to work with software like Adobe Creative Suite and TriCaster, and have worked with other team members to write scripts and compose story boards.
Being part of the Creative Center team will give me the challenges to grow as a skilled producer and assist in production, help the production planning process, create a quick tum around for video publication, and manage content.
AMY GALLO: You did well on length. It is very short. That’s good.
ELAINY MATA: My gosh.
AMY GALLO: I read this, I’m like, that first sentence is spot on. And then it gets a little bit stilted. And then it goes into what’s probably on your resume. And I want a little more personality.
ELAINY MATA: So Amy, after many back and forths — How do you think I did?
AMY GALLO: All right. So I’m looking at it right now. And I think you did a really good job.
You’ve got the main components here. There’s some personality in it. There’s some flattery in it about the company you’re applying to, but it’s not like over the top. I have to tell you, I would have you in. I think it’s a great letter.
ELAINY MATA: That’s it for me. I wrote the cover letter. You got to see the whole process. And I feel like I definitely have a better outlook on how to approach it. These are not easy to write, so good luck out there. Watch as many times as you can. Practice makes perfect. I’ll see you soon.
I was so excited to see your post on LinkedIn because it’s exactly the type of job I’m looking for: an opportunity to bring my experience with video production and enthusiasm for storytelling to an organization that sets the standard for high-quality management content.
In addition to five years of experience in broadcast journalism, research, and video production, I would bring an organized and systems-level perspective to this role. I view video production as a puzzle, and like to think about which parts need to come together in order to make a great final product. My approach is to have in-depth conversations with my team members, and the various stakeholders, before each project. This helps me nail down the logistics — from location to talent.
From there, the fun begins: fleshing out the concept and identifying what visuals will best represent it. Ideation and storyboarding are essential in this step. I know I’m not right all the time, so I enjoy working with a diverse team that can bring in new perspectives, brainstorm, and pitch ideas that will make the final product stronger. Whenever possible, I also try to seek out other sources for inspiration, like magazines, which allow me to observe different ways of expression and storytelling. This approach has served me well. It’s what has allowed me to enter the film industry and grow as a creator.
On my website, you can see examples of how I use the above process to create fun, engaging content.
Given this experience and my enthusiasm for the work you do, I believe I’d make a great addition to your team. I recently had a chance to try out your Patient Zero product at my current organization. The simulation is both challenging and engaging. I was impressed by your ability to apply different storytelling methods to an online training course (which, let’s admit, can often be a little dry). Your work exemplifies exactly what I believe: There’s an opportunity to tell a compelling story in everything — all you have to do is deliver it right.
I’d love to come in and speak with you more about what I’d be able to offer in this role. Harvard Business Publishing is my top choice and I believe I’d make valuable contributions to your team.
Thank you for your time and consideration!
How to apply.
A cover letter is required for consideration for this position and should be included as the first page of your resume. The cover letter should address your specific interest in the position and outline skills and experience that directly relate to this position.
Please note: This is a term-limited position funded for four (4) years. Renewal may be possible if continued funding is available.
The Michigan Institute for Data and AI in Society (MIDAS) seeks a Postdoctoral Program Manager for its two postdoctoral training programs: the Eric and Wendy Schmidt AI in Science Postdoctoral Fellowship Program, and the Michigan Data Science Fellows program. These campus-wide programs aim to: 1) catalyze major scientific breakthroughs carried out by the postdoctoral fellows (the Fellows) and their mentors; 2) enable a broader U-M research community to adopt data science and artificial intelligence (AI) in imagining, planning, executing, and supporting research; 3) provide outstanding training to the Fellows; and 4) collaborate with other similar postdoc program sites around the world. The Program Manager will report to the program directors, and will work with a diverse range of stakeholders, including a large and interdisciplinary faculty community, many campus units, and similar programs at other universities.
About MIDAS: MIDAS is an organization under the Office of the Vice President for Research (OVPR). Our mission is to strengthen U-M's preeminence in data science and AI, and enable their transformative use in a wide range of research disciplines to achieve lasting societal impact. We lead strategic thrusts in data science and AI research; enable research collaboration, provide research training, and build research resources. We foster a world-class data science and AI research community at U-M and promote its diversity and inclusion. We also build coalitions with academia, industry, government and the community, and support data-to-insight transfer for positive social change.
The culture of the MIDAS core team is one that strives toward shared goals through collaboration, creativity, initiative, and excellence. The ideal candidate will be a team player who takes initiative, thinks out of the box, and enjoys a fast-paced environment.
Be the first point of contact of the Fellows. Support their tenure in the program to have a fruitful training and research experience. Support strategic planning through assisting and collaborating with the program directors and the advisory committee, as well as other stakeholders. Promote the program on campus and externally. Organize the Fellows recruitment and selection process. Engage with the Fellows' mentors, and organize the Fellowship Committees and their activities. Coordinate and monitor the Fellows' community-based learning activities, including weekly research meetings, AI carpentry work sessions, hackathons, and the onboarding bootcamps. Collaborate with campus units to secure learning and professional development opportunities for the Fellows. Collaborate with partners internally and externally, and with program alumni, to enable the postdoc programs' broader impact on scientific research.
Master's degree in a discipline related to education, management or data science; or equivalent experience. Two or more years of experience in higher education administration or academic research, working with both faculty and trainees. Experience in managing multiple aspects of a training or research program that supports early-career researchers (trainees or faculty), including recruitment, enrollment, monitoring trainee progress, alumni tracking, program finance, program evaluation and reporting. Experience in community engagement and collaboration development. Professionalism, strong work ethic, demonstrated sense of responsibility, discretion and reliability. Ability to set priorities, exercise initiative, solve problems, adapt to changes quickly, make independent judgments, and work effectively both independently and collaboratively as part of a team. Excellent written and verbal communication skills; timely and consistent communication and follow-through with the leadership, the team and stakeholders. Strong interpersonal skills and the ability to drive consensus. Strong organizational skills and attention to detail. Demonstrated ability to deal with software applications, including literacy in common office software.
Experience in managing all aspects of a training program for early-career researchers, including recruitment, enrollment, monitoring academic milestones, alumni tracking, program finance, program evaluation and reporting. Working knowledge of U-M organizational policies, rules, regulations, procurement and purchasing. Experience with M-Pathways, Chrome River, and other U-M administrative systems. Experience with U-M postdoc or faculty career development programs.
This is a term-limited position funded for four (4) years. Renewal may be possible if continued funding is available.
The University of Michigan conducts background checks on all job candidates upon acceptance of a contingent offer and may use a third party administrator to conduct background checks. Background checks are performed in compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
The University of Michigan is an equal opportunity/affirmative action employer.
An official website of the United States government
Here's how you know
Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.
Nsf 24-597: u.s. national science foundation research traineeship program, program solicitation, document information, document history.
|
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization's local time):
November 14, 2024
September 08, 2025
September 8, Annually Thereafter
Proposals may be submitted under two tracks (i.e., Track 1 and Track 2). All projects should include a focus on STEM graduate students in research-based PhD and/or master's degree programs. Track 1 proposals may request a total budget up to $3 million for projects up to five years in duration; Track 2 proposals may request a total budget up to $2 million for projects up to five years in duration; NSF requires that Track 2 proposals focus on programs from institutions not classified as Doctoral Universities: Very High Research Activity (R1). For R1 and other institution of higher education (IHE) classifications, please refer to Carnegie Basic Classifications: https://carnegieclassifications.acenet.edu/carnegie-classification/classification-methodology/basic-classification/ . Other requirements for Track 1 and Track 2 are identical.
The NRT Program accepts proposals in any interdisciplinary or convergent research theme of national importance and encourages specific priority research areas that change periodically. All interdisciplinary or convergent research themes should align with NSF or other national STEM research priority areas and have high potential to develop novel, innovative practices in graduate education. Proposers should describe the importance of the NRT project's thematic focus to the Nation and the particular need to train students for a variety of careers in that thematic area.
The minimum trainee stipend amount has been increased from $34,000 to $37,000 for a 12-month appointment.
Proposals for planning grants are encouraged but not required to facilitate collaborative trans-disciplinary and training activities in anticipation of submission of Track 2 proposals. Please refer to Section II.F for additional information.
Important Information
Please note restrictions on institutional eligibility. The number of NRT proposal submissions allowed per institution for Tracks 1 and 2 combined remains limited to two (2) submissions total. All Track 1 and/or Track 2 NRT proposals will be counted toward this total limit of two proposals per institution. Planning proposals, described in Section II, Program Description, are excluded from this limitation. The number of NRT proposal submissions per PI or co-PI remains limited to one submission total across all Tracks.
Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.
General information.
Program Title:
U.S. National Science Foundation Research Traineeship (NRT) Program
The NSF Research Traineeship (NRT) program seeks proposals that explore ways for graduate students in research-based master's and doctoral degree programs to develop the skills, knowledge, and competencies needed to pursue a range of STEM careers. The program is dedicated to effective training of STEM graduate students in high priority interdisciplinary or convergent research areas, through a comprehensive traineeship model that is innovative, evidence-based, and aligned with changing workforce and research needs. Proposals are requested that address any interdisciplinary or convergent research theme of national priority, as described in section II.D below. The NRT program addresses workforce development, emphasizing broad participation, and institutional capacity building needs in graduate education. The program encourages proposals that involve strategic collaborations with the private sector, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), government agencies, national laboratories, field stations, teaching and learning centers, informal science centers, and academic partners. NRT especially welcomes proposals that reflect collaborations between NRT proposals and existing NSF Eddie Bernice Johnson Inclusion across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science (INCLUDES) Initiative , Research Experiences for Undergraduates (REU) , Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation (LSAMP) , NSF Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM) , and NSF STEM Ed Organizational Postdoctoral Fellowship program (STEM Ed OPRF) projects, provided the collaboration will strengthen both projects. Researchers at minority serving institutions and emerging research institutions are strongly encouraged to submit proposals. Collaborations between NRT proposals and existing NSF INCLUDES projects should strengthen both NRT and INCLUDES projects.
NSF recognizes the unique lived experiences of individuals from communities that are underrepresented and/or under-served in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and the barriers to inclusion and access to STEM education and careers. NSF highly encourages the leadership, partnership, and contributions in all NSF opportunities of individuals who are members of such communities supported by NSF. This includes leading and designing STEM research and education proposals for funding; serving as peer reviewers, advisory committee members, and/or committee of visitor members; and serving as NSF leadership, program, and/or administrative staff. NSF also highly encourages demographically diverse institutions of higher education (IHEs) to lead, partner, and contribute to NSF opportunities on behalf of their research and education communities. NSF expects that all individuals, including those who are members of groups that are underrepresented and/or under-served in STEM, are treated equitably and inclusively in the Foundation's proposal and award process.
NSF encourages IHEs that enroll, educate, graduate, and employ individuals who are members of groups underrepresented and/or under-served in STEM education programs and careers to lead, partner, and contribute to NSF opportunities, including leading and designing STEM research and education proposals for funding. Such IHEs include, but may not be limited to, community colleges and two-year institutions, mission-based institutions such as Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs), women's colleges, and institutions that primarily serve persons with disabilities, as well as institutions defined by enrollment such as Predominantly Undergraduate Institutions (PUIs), Minority-Serving Institutions (MSIs), and Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs).
"Broadening participation in STEM" is the comprehensive phrase used by NSF to refer to the Foundation's goal of increasing the representation and diversity of individuals, organizations, and geographic regions that contribute to STEM teaching, research, and innovation. To broaden participation in STEM, it is necessary to address issues of equity, inclusion, and access in STEM education, training, and careers. Whereas all NSF programs might support broadening participation components, some programs primarily focus on supporting broadening participation research and projects. Examples can be found on the NSF Broadening Participation in STEM website.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.
Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant
Estimated Number of Awards: 18 to 20
NRT Track 1 Awards (12-14 awards each year) are expected to be up to five years in duration with a total budget up to $3,000,000.
NRT Track 2 Awards (4-6 awards each year) are expected to be up to five years in duration with a total budget up to $2,000,000.
NRT Track 2 Planning Grants (3-4 awards per year), are expected to be up to $100,000 per year (including indirect costs) and for up to two years in duration.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $53,000,000
Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.
Who May Submit Proposals:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members. Special Instructions for International Branch Campuses of US IHEs: If the proposal includes funding to be provided to an international branch campus of a US institution of higher education (including through use of sub-awards and consultant arrangements), the proposer must explain the benefit(s) to the project of performance at the international branch campus, and justify why the project activities cannot be performed at the US campus.
Who May Serve as PI:
Track 1 and Track 2: The PI must be on the faculty of the submitting institution.
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 2
An eligible IHE may participate in only two (2) proposals per NRT competition as lead or collaborative non-lead. All Track 1 and/or Track 2 NRT proposals will be counted toward this total limit of two proposals per institution. Participation includes serving as a lead institution or a non-lead institution (i.e., as part of a separately submitted collaborative proposal or as a sub-recipient) on any proposal . Organizations participating only as evaluators on projects are excluded from this limitation. Planning proposals, described in Section II, Program Description, are also excluded from this limitation. Proposals that exceed the organizational eligibility limit will be returned without review regardless of whether the institution on such a proposal serves as lead or non-lead collaborative institution. Potential PIs are advised to contact their institutional office of research regarding processes used to select proposals for submission.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 1
An individual may serve as Principal Investigator (PI) or co-PI on only one (1) proposal submitted to the NRT program per annual competition. Proposals that exceed the PI/co-PI eligibility limit (beyond the first submission based on timestamp), will be returned without review regardless of the individual's role (PI or co-PI) in the returned proposal.
A. proposal preparation instructions.
C. due dates, proposal review information criteria.
Merit Review Criteria:
National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review criteria apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Award Conditions:
Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Reporting Requirements:
Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) graduate education is poised to undergo major transformations. There are multiple drivers for such change including: (i) recent major national reports on the state of STEM graduate education 1 ; (ii) the accelerating pace of science and engineering discoveries and technological innovations, (iii) national STEM workforce and demographic trends; (iv) the growing globalization of science and engineering; (v) the potential to align graduate education practices and models with an increasing understanding of how people learn; and (vi) calls for new models for graduate education at the national and international levels leveraging the high impact educational practices that enhance student engagement and increase student success. In addition, there is increasing recognition that addressing the grand challenges in science and engineering requires interdisciplinary and convergent approaches, as well as broader professional training that is not characteristic of most graduate programs. 2 These realities and the increasing calls for new approaches to STEM graduate education represent an extraordinary opportunity. Accordingly, this NRT solicitation encourages proposals to test, develop, and implement innovative and effective STEM graduate education models, promote interdisciplinary and broad professional training of graduate students, broaden participation in the STEM workforce, and foster fundamental research advances in support of national priorities.
1 The Path Forward: The Future of Graduate Education , Commission on the Future of Graduate Education in the United States, 2010; Advancing Graduate Education in the Chemical Sciences, American Chemical Society, 2012; Biomedical Research Workforce Working Group Report , National Institutes of Health, 2012; Understanding PhD Career Pathways for Program Improvement , Council of Graduate Schools, 2014; Revisiting the STEM Workforce: A Companion to Science and Engineering Indicators 2014 , National Science Board, 2015; Professional Development: Shaping Effective Programs for STEM Graduate Students , Council of Graduate Schools, 2017; Graduate STEM Education for the 21 st Century , The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, 2018; The Science of Effective Mentorship in STEM , The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, 2019; Promising Practices for Addressing the Underrepresentation of Women in Science, Engineering, and Medicine: Opening Doors , The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, 202; " PhD training is no longer fit for purpose — it needs reform now", Editorial, Nature, 613:414, 2023 .
2 Convergence: Facilitating Trans-disciplinary Integration of Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, Engineering, and Beyond , The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, 2014; Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science , The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, 2015; Kuh, G.D., High-Impact Educational Practices: What They Are, Who Has Access to Them and Why They Matter , Report from the Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2008.
A. Focus and Goals
The NRT Program is dedicated to shaping and supporting highly effective training of STEM graduate students in high priority interdisciplinary or convergent research areas through the use of comprehensive traineeship models that are innovative, evidence-based, and aligned with changing workforce and research needs. The goals of the program are to:
Creation of sustainable programmatic capacity at institutions is an expected outcome. Consequently, all proposals should describe mechanisms to institutionalize effective training elements after award expiration and provide appropriate documentation of institutional support for such efforts (see Full Proposal Content, section 8a).
B. NRT Traineeship and Trainees
NRT traineeships are dedicated to the comprehensive development of graduate students as versatile STEM professionals for a range of research and research-related careers within and outside academia. Accordingly, proposals should focus on and demonstrate strong commitment to technical and professional training of STEM graduate students that emphasizes research training and extends beyond into other aspects of students' professional development. Specifically, NRT projects are expected to develop trainees' technical skills broadly, including facility and/or familiarity with the techniques, languages, and cultures of fields integral to the interdisciplinary or convergent research theme; foster the development of transferable professional skills; and provide trainees with mentoring and vocational counseling from professionals who have the backgrounds, experience, and skills to advise trainees on how to prepare for a variety of STEM career pathways.
NRT is intended to benefit a population of STEM graduate students including and beyond those students who receive an NRT stipend. An NRT trainee is thus defined as a STEM graduate student who is accepted into an institution's NRT program and completes the required NRT elements (e.g., courses, workshops, projects, and other training activities specific to the NRT experience) set by the program regardless of whether they receive an NRT stipend or are funded by other sources. To further maximize the number of students benefiting from NRT activities, selected NRT program elements (for example, professional development opportunities) should be made available to other STEM graduate students who are not NRT trainees.
NRT trainees must be master's and/or doctoral STEM students in a research-based degree program that requires a thesis or dissertation. If an NRT proposal from an institution includes both master's and doctoral students, the proposal should identify any differences in NRT program requirements, as well as mechanisms to foster the development of a collective NRT graduate student community. NRT stipends and support for customary costs of education (tuition and required fees) are limited to U.S. citizens, nationals and permanent residents. However, international students can participate as non-stipend-supported NRT trainees or as non-trainees.
C. Key Features of NRT Projects
NRT projects demonstrate comprehensive approaches to graduate training and should include the following key features that are central to the NRT Program:
D. Priority Research Areas
The NRT Program accepts proposals in any interdisciplinary or convergent research theme of national importance and encourages specific priority research areas that change periodically. All interdisciplinary or convergent research themes should align with NSF or other national STEM research priority areas, for example as indicated in the NSF Strategic Plan and NSF Annual Budget Request to Congress , and have high potential to develop novel, innovative practices in graduate education. Proposers should describe the importance of the NRT project's thematic focus to the nation and the particular need to train students for a variety of careers in that thematic area.
All proposals, regardless of research area, must clearly describe an overarching interdisciplinary or convergent research focus and outline how the research theme will foster high-return, interdisciplinary synergies. Proposals should also describe how the training and research elements will be integrated and justify the need for bold and innovative approaches to train graduate students in the thematic area. In keeping with the broader goals of the NRT program, proposals should demonstrate significant impact on the design and testing of new curricula and career-focused training approaches specific to the research focus area. Proposals should also discuss the project's potential to have impact beyond the institution, including the possible broad adoption of approaches, curricula, and instructional material within the relevant disciplines.
E. Program Tracks
Proposals may be submitted under two tracks (i.e., Track 1 and Track 2).
Track 1 proposals may request a total budget of up to $3 million (up to five years in duration) for projects with a focus on STEM graduate students in research-based PhD and/or master's degree programs. All Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members and that award a research-based master's degree and/or a doctoral degree in STEM disciplines supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation are eligible to apply to Track 1.
Track 2 proposals may request a total budget of up to $2 million (up to five years in duration) for projects with a focus on STEM graduate students in research-based PhD and/or master's degree programs. Eligibility to submit to Track 2 is limited to non-R1 Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members, that award a research-based master's degree and/or a research-based doctoral degree in STEM disciplines supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation. Such institutions include Master's Colleges and Universities that award fewer than 20 research/scholarship doctoral degrees per year, Doctoral/Professional Universities (D/PU) that award fewer than 20 research/scholarship doctoral degrees per year, and Doctoral Universities: High Research Activity (R2, as defined in the Carnegie classification of higher education institutions). Doctoral Universities: Very High Research Activity (R1) are not eligible for Track 2 consideration.
Aside from these eligibility requirements, other requirements for Track 1 and Track 2 are identical.
F. Track 2 Planning Proposals
In addition to the tracks described above, the NRT program encourages submission of planning proposals to facilitate collaborative trans-disciplinary and training activities in anticipation of submission of Track 2 proposals.
To be eligible for submission of a planning proposal or receipt of a planning award, the submitting institution must be eligible to submit a proposal in response to this program solicitation. Track 2 planning proposals may be submitted outside the deadline dates specified in the solicitation by following the process outlined below.
Before preparing and submitting a planning proposal, the PI must contact an NRT Program Officer to provide a concept outline of the project and to discuss the types of activities for which funding would be requested in the proposal. If approved, the NRT Program Officer will invite submission of the planning proposal by email. The email confirming approval to submit a planning proposal must be uploaded in the Program Officer Concurrence Email section of Research.gov .
Additional guidance on the preparation and submission of planning proposals is contained in Chapter II.F of the PAPPG.
Pending availability of funds, the NRT program anticipates funding approximately 3-4 planning grants per year.
Estimated Number of Awards: 8 to 20
NRT Track 1 Awards (14-16 awards each year) are expected to be up to five (5) years in duration with a total budget up to $3,000,000.
NRT Track 2 Awards (4-6 awards each year) are expected to be up to five (5) years in duration with a total budget up to $2,000,000.
Additional Eligibility Info:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Track 1: All Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members and that award a research-based master's degree and/or a doctoral degree in STEM disciplines supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation. Track 2 and Track 2 Planning Grants: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members that award a research-based master's degree and/or a doctoral degree in STEM disciplines supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation including: Master's Colleges and Universities and D/PU Doctoral/Professional Universities that award fewer than 20 research/scholarship doctoral degrees and Doctoral Universities: High Research Activity (R2, as defined in the Carnegie classification of higher education institutions). Doctoral Universities: Very High Research Activity (R1) are not eligible for Track 2 consideration. Track 1 and Track 2: The NRT program encourages proposals from designated Minority Serving Institutions and Emerging Research Institutions .
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions : Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Research.gov or Grants.gov.
In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:
Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via Research.gov. PAPPG Chapter II.E.3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals.
See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.
The following instructions supplement or deviate from the guidance in the PAPPG. Proposals that are missing required sections and/or exceed the 20-page limit for the Project Description will be returned without review.
Project Title: Provide a short informative title that begins with the prefix "NRT:".
1. Cover Sheet: If international activities are proposed, whether or not they will be funded via the NRT award, the international activities box should be checked and the individual countries listed. For planning purposes, use March 1 as the award start date for FY2025 and subsequent competitions.
2. Project Summary : The Project Summary must include the following labeled sections: Overview, Intellectual Merit, and Broader Impacts. Overview: Provide a summary description, in a section labeled Overview, that addresses the research area and theme, the training plan, and the research-education integration. The project summary Overview must include the expected number of NRT trainees who will receive an NRT stipend, the number of additional NRT trainees who will not receive an NRT stipend, and the estimated grand total number of graduate students that will participate in project-funded activities. The number should be disaggregated to make clear the estimated number of master's students, doctoral students, or both that the program will serve. The summary should be written in a manner that will be informative to STEM professionals working in the same or related fields and understandable to a scientifically literate lay reader. Keywords: The last line of the Overview section must also include 5-10 keywords that describe the project's scientific/engineering research and/or education focus area(s). This information is intended to assist in identifying reviewers with the knowledge and expertise needed to review the proposal. Indicate as a keyword the Track (Track 1 or Track 2) for which the proposal should be considered. Keywords should be prefaced with "Keywords" followed by a colon and each keyword set should be separated by semicolons. For example, they might appear as, Keywords: sustainability; nanotechnology; water resources; renewable energy; equity; Track1.
3. Project Description (20-page limit): The Project Description must contain only Sections 3a through 3l as described below, with the provided headings used in the order listed. The Project Description cannot exceed 20 pages, including tables and illustrations. The relative attention given in the proposal narrative to the research and training elements should reflect the principal goal of the NRT program: highly effective training of STEM graduate students in an interdisciplinary or convergent research area through a comprehensive traineeship approach that comprises elements that are innovative, evidence-based, and aligned with changing workforce and research needs.
3a. List of Core Participants : Specify, in tabular form, up to 10 core participants, including the PI, co-PIs, other faculty and senior/key personnel, lead evaluator, and external collaborators. The core participants must be designated as Senior/Key personnel in the proposal and must provide the Senior/Key Personnel Documents required by the PAPPG. Provide each individual's name, project role, departmental and/or institutional/organizational affiliation, and discipline(s). The lead evaluator must be one of the 10 core participants. Proposals that include more than 10 core participants will be returned without review.
3b. Theme, Vision, and Goals : Describe the overarching research theme, vision, and goals of the proposed NRT with a focus on implementing new approaches to training STEM graduate students in the targeted interdisciplinary or convergent (see Convergence Research at NSF ) research area, through a comprehensive traineeship. Identify the potential of the NRT project to provide added value to the current degree programs and methods of graduate training at the institution(s). Emphasize the graduate training needs in the project's thematic research field, both at the host institution(s) and nationally. In addition, describe the need for professionals with master's and/or doctoral degrees in the project's thematic research area. Articulate how the proposed NRT project will foster interdisciplinary synergisms emerging from ongoing research activities and/or via NRT-funded initiatives. Describe how the proposed NRT complements and builds on other ongoing or prior institutional efforts to improve STEM graduate education, including discussion of lessons learned from any other prior or currently active NRTs at the institution. Proposers should describe how the NRT project would benefit STEM graduate students beyond NRT trainees and how training innovations from the program will be communicated broadly beyond the institution. Address implications of the proposed NRT project for broadening participation in STEM programs and STEM careers to students from underrepresented groups. NRT proposals should reference existing NRT literature and/or programs when appropriate to demonstrate how their proposed project advances the larger NRT program beyond the existing portfolio of graduate STEM educational innovation.
3c. Education and Training : The NRT program focuses on creating innovations in STEM graduate education within a traineeship environment to prepare scientists and engineers of the future. Describe the adopted traineeship model and its components, including the justification and rationale for their inclusion, and how they are integrated with NRT research activities. The approaches should be innovative, evidence-based, aligned with changing workforce and research needs, transferable, and dedicated to developing versatile STEM professionals. Identify what is lacking in the current approaches to STEM graduate education institutionally and nationally and how the NRT will help meet those needs, both within the participating departments and across the institution(s). Projects should be aligned with institutional missions, and proposals should include evidence of that alignment to support the expected outcome of developing sustainable programmatic capacity at an institution.
The proposal should describe the STEM graduate population that will be served. Accordingly, the proposal should specify the anticipated numbers of NRT trainees supported with NRT stipends and NRT trainees not supported with NRT stipends. An estimate of the number of other STEM graduate students expected to take one or more of the NRT project's elements should also be provided. These numbers should distinguish doctoral and master's degree students.
NRT training is expected to span the duration of a student's master's or doctoral program. Thus, proposals should include a timeline of logically phased, progressive training elements over the entire degree program(s). Training should be integrated with degree program requirements so that the anticipated time-to-degree is not extended.
Projects must articulate explicit approaches to provide trainees with training and vocational counseling for both research and research-related careers, within and outside academia; preparation and structured use of individual development plans for trainees is highly recommended.
3d. Required skills and competencies : Projects must provide explicit, formal training in the following:
3d(i). Communication. Improved communication skills are an expected outcome of the NRT program and communication training should include minimum competencies. The communication training should prepare trainees to identify and explain the potential benefits and broader impacts of their research discoveries to a range of stakeholders, including policy makers and the general public.
3d(ii). Teamwork. Improved skills in teamwork, team science, or collaboration is another expected outcome; projects should clarify how these skills will be developed, and their relevance to the proposed interdisciplinary or convergent research.
3d(iii). Ethics. Improved skills in ethical deliberation, ethical decision-making and/or competencies related to research ethics and social responsibility is another expected outcome of the NRT program. Projects should address: how the training will prepare trainees to conduct responsible research in a range of career environments, relevance of the training to the proposed interdisciplinary or convergent research, and how students will develop competencies.
Appropriate rubrics to measure the above skills and mechanisms for regular, structured feedback to trainees should be described in the Performance Assessment/Project Evaluation section (3i, below).
3d(iv). Additional skills. Projects should include plans to provide trainees with other transferable professional skills (e.g., project management, leadership, teaching, entrepreneurship, conflict resolution, mentorship, and outreach) that are relevant to the proposed research projects and potential trainee career paths.
Collaborations with non-academic partners (e.g., industry, national/government laboratories, non-government organizations, government agencies, independent laboratories, and research, education, outreach, and informal science centers) are encouraged to promote the trainees' professional development. Internships and international experiences are encouraged if they provide marked added value, including authentic mentorship by hosts. If internships are included, proposers should describe pre-internship orientation for trainees and hosts, duration, and expected outcomes. Letters of support from internship host organizations are strongly encouraged (see section 7a, below). The NRT program encourages projects that foster development of a global perspective, through experiences abroad and/or activities at the home institution(s).
3e. Major Research Efforts. Describe examples of the novel, potentially transformative research that the NRT will catalyze through interdisciplinary synergies emerging from currently funded activities at the institution(s) and/or via separate NRT-funded interdisciplinary or convergent initiatives. Explain the need for the proposed NRT research and how it would substantially advance, inform, and transform research beyond funded initiatives already underway at the institution(s). NRT funding should be used to complement rather than supplant other research funding. If the institution has prior or currently active NRTs, the novelty and distinction of the research themes and efforts should be clearly explained.
3f. Broader Impacts. The Project Description must contain, as a separate section labeled 'Broader Impacts' within the narrative, a discussion of how both the training components and the major research efforts will contribute more broadly to the achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes in the context of NRT include, but are not limited to: development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; full participation of the broad spectrum of diverse talent that society has to offer which includes underrepresented and under-served communities; improved STEM education and educator/faculty development; enhanced infrastructure for research and education; increased partnerships and collaborations (both domestic and international) between academia, industry, and others. Proposers should indicate how the project will impact the training of STEM graduate students beyond the disciplines and institutions described in the proposal, contribute to the development and adoption of evidence-based teaching and learning practices, and advance research on effective models for graduate education.
3g. Recruitment, Mentoring, and Retention. NSF recognizes the unique lived experiences of individuals from communities that are underrepresented and/or under-served in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) and the barriers to inclusion and access to STEM education and careers that impact some students. Describe plans for increased outreach and engagement to support recruitment, mentoring and retention of trainees representative of the full spectrum of diverse talent that society has to offer which includes members of underrepresented and under-served communities. All NRT projects are encouraged to use the NSF Education and Training Application (ETAP) for recruitment of applicants. ETAP is a free and customizable common application system that connects individuals (such as students and teachers) with NSF-funded education and training opportunities.
3g(i). Demographic Table. All proposals must include a TABLE with quantitative data showing recruitment (enrollment), retention, and graduation outcomes of domestic (i.e., NRT-traineeship eligible) graduate students from all groups, to include underrepresented groups and, separately, for students from other groups (combined) in participating departments for each of the five years preceding the submission date, including time-to-degree completion. Departmental data should be presented separately and should not be aggregated. Tables should include data on students from groups that will be the focus of project broadening participation efforts. Comparisons with national-level data are strongly encouraged. Proposals that do not include the required table will be returned without review.
3g(ii). Broadening Participation Strategy. Proposals should describe in detail: the evidence base for outreach and engagement efforts to support recruiting, mentoring, retention, and broadening participation strategies; the rationale for strategies that will be used to pursue diversity goals; and successes of any existing recruiting or retention programs that will be leveraged through the project. Proposers must explain how their processes for admission to the NRT program and their actions to broaden participation will be coordinated with the admissions policies and procedures of the department(s) and university. Proposers are especially encouraged to establish linkages, as appropriate, with the components of the national network of NSF INCLUDES projects as well as REU, LSAMP, S-STEM and other relevant NSF projects (see https://www.nsf.gov/od/broadeningparticipation/bp_portfolio_dynamic.jsp ).
3h. Organization and Management. Present the plans for the organization and management of the NRT project, including the responsibilities of key personnel and reporting lines. Describe how the leadership team will foster a sense of community among project participants (faculty, trainees, evaluator(s), staff, and collaborators) and convergence among the disciplines through activities and practices. The PI must possess the scientific, teaching, and mentoring expertise and the project management experience necessary to lead and administer the NRT; core teams should represent research expertise in all of the primary fields engaged through the project. Projects should include a NRT Project Coordinator (75%-100%) as a member of the management team. The Project Coordinator should not be a core participant described in the 3a Table. Proposers should identify formal mechanisms for recurring, substantive communication with administrators (e.g., department chairs, college deans, graduate school dean(s), provost(s), and others) about the NRT's progress and any institutional barriers.
If a collaborative project is proposed, describe the role of the non-lead institution(s) and its (their) participating personnel, the organizational structure(s), and the mechanisms for project communication. A collaborative proposal should be submitted only if the partner institution(s) has (have) a significant role and substantially enhance(s) the training program. Collaborative projects involving trainees at more than a single lead institution should describe practices to ensure that trainees at the participating institution(s) are equal partners, with strong mentorship and comparable access to training activities.
3i. Performance Assessment/Project Evaluation. Projects should include plans to evaluate the success of the research and traineeship activities. In particular, the proposal should identify specific competencies and outcomes along with performance measures and an evaluation timetable. Although the focus should be on trainees, the evaluation plan should also assess how the NRT project affects faculty teaching and research, academic programs, and institutional policies regarding interdisciplinary collaboration in STEM graduate education. The assessment plan should describe how and when assessment outcomes including trainee feedback would be shared with project participants, including trainees and institutional administration, and inform the project implementation practices. Proposals should include plans for communicating assessment results both within the NRT community and more broadly through publications and professional meetings. The description of the dissemination of these results should address how the evaluation and project team will work together to produce publications/reports that address the efficacy and/or effectiveness of the educational training approach through the collected evaluation data. Evaluation budgets should include time for the evaluator to work on publications with the project team.
The project team should ensure that the project benefits from an unbiased and external perspective in project assessment/evaluation activities. Project evaluator(s) can be from an internal or external assessment unit or consulting entity. If a project chooses to involve an individual or team from the lead or collaborating institution(s) in the evaluation, then the project must provide justification and explain how bias would be mitigated and managed. This section should also describe project evaluation sustainability plans including the efforts that will be made so that the assessment/evaluation tools that are developed/implemented during the project period are available to the academic community at the participating institution/s beyond the award period. The lead evaluator must be listed as one of the 10 core participants. This requirement does not impact institutional eligibility, as organizations participating solely as project evaluators are excluded from the institutional eligibility limits on numbers of proposals submitted (see Section IV).
3j. Independent Advisory Committee. An independent advisory committee composed of individuals external to the institution(s) is required to provide guidance on a regular basis throughout the project. Describe plans for regular advisory committee meetings to meet regularly and mechanisms for the committee to provide advice to the leadership team based on the evaluator's findings and other formal and informal information obtained from the leadership team, other participants, trainees, and administrators.
3k. Recent Student Training Experiences. Describe the experience of the PI and co-PIs and other senior/key personnel with leading or participating in STEM education and training over the past five years. Describe any overlap and/or complementarity between the training and the proposed NRT program.
3l. Results from Prior NSF Support. The PI and co-PIs who have received NSF funding (including any current funding) from an award with an end date in the past five years must provide information on the prior award, major achievements, and relevance to the proposed NRT project. Individuals who have received more than one prior award must report on the award most closely related to the proposal. A complete bibliographic citation for each publication resulting from an NSF award must be included in either the Results from Prior NSF Support section or in the References Cited section of the proposal.
4. Budget and Allowable Costs : Provide an annual budget for up to five years. The proposed budget for Track 1 proposals can be up to $3,000,000 (maximum). The proposed budget for Track 2 proposals can be up to $2,000,000 (maximum). Proposal budgets for both tracks should be consistent with the costs to develop, offer, administer, and evaluate the program elements (e.g., courses, workshops, internships) and the number of trainees supported. Requests for trainee support and programmatic elements must be commensurate with the goals specified in the proposal.
4a. Trainee Support. Include all trainee support (e.g., stipend, costs of education, travel) as Participant Support Costs in the budget. NRT stipend and education costs are intended for those trainees (i.e., research-based master's and/or doctoral students) whose research is aligned with the project's research theme or focus area(s). Trainees receiving stipend and cost-of-education support (i.e., NRT-stipend-funded trainees) must be full-time students and be United States citizens, nationals, or legal permanent residents. The NSF minimum contribution to NRT stipends is $37,000 per year per NRT-stipend-funded trainee for a 12-month appointment. Stipend-funded trainees are expected to minimally receive the equivalent of one year of $37K stipend support that may be distributed over their traineeship tenure. NRT-stipend-funded trainees cannot be charged tuition or any other required costs of education while they are receiving a NRT stipend. Thus, the budget should include customary costs of education (i.e., tuition and required fees) for NRT-stipend-funded trainees. NSF will provide not less than $16,000 per NRT-stipend-funded trainee for costs of education, so the budget should include at least that amount per trainee. Non-NRT-stipend-funded trainees may be supported to participate in training elements and research and/or travel related to the project. Additional costs for all trainees (NRT-stipend-funded and non-NRT-stipend-funded) to participate in programmatic and training elements should be designated as Travel, Subsistence, or Other Participant Support Costs in the budget.
4b. Faculty/Senior/Key Personnel Salaries. Salary support must be consistent with contributions to the traineeship. Support for postdoctoral fellows is not allowed unless they explicitly have an instructional or other training role.
4c. Other Budget Items. Other budget requests (e.g., non-trainee travel, equipment, and research support) must reflect the training focus of the program, including programmatic elements and non-NRT-stipend-supported trainee support. Projects should budget for an NRT Project Coordinator (75%-100% appointment) and an evaluator. The budget should include funds for the PI, one trainee, the Project Coordinator, and an evaluator to attend an annual NRT meeting in Washington, DC.
5. Facilities, Equipment, and Other Resources : Provide a description of the facilities and major instrumentation that are available for training purposes.
6. Senior/Key Personnel Documents : In accordance with the guidance in the PAPPG, the following information must be provided for all individuals designated as Senior/Key Personnel. For this solicitation, up to 10 core participants may be listed as Senior/Key personnel, including the PI, co-PIs, other faculty and senior/key personnel, lead evaluator, and external collaborators. The lead evaluator must be one of the 10 core participants. Proposals that include more than 10 core participants will be returned without review.
7. Special Information and Supplementary Documentation : Some supplementary documents are required (e.g., institutional support letter [maximum two pages], letters of collaboration for certain organizations that appear in the budget, and the Data Management and Sharing Plan), while others are optional (e.g., partner letters of support [maximum one page]). Letters of collaboration have mandatory eligibility language that must be added. Proposals that lack required supplementary documents or that exceed the page limitations described below will be returned without review.
7a. Letters of Collaboration and Support. (i) Institutional Letters of Support: For both Tracks, one letter of support, up to two pages in length and submitted as a Supplementary Document, is required from the appropriate senior university administrator at the lead institution. These support letters should describe institutional support for the traineeship program and how successful programmatic elements and any associated institutional policies and infrastructure will be sustained after award expiration. (ii) Letters of Support (Other): Up to eight other optional letters of support, each no more than one page long, may be provided from partner organizations or institutions, including international entities, that would play a significant collaborative role in the project but do not appear in the budget. (iii) Letters of Collaboration: A letter of collaboration (see the PAPPG for a recommended format) is required from each NRT-eligible partner organization that appears in the budget (e.g., external evaluator, collaborating higher education institution, etc.). Each letter of collaboration must include the following appropriate statement at the conclusion of the letter: "We agree to partner on this NRT project, understanding that serving as a non-lead organization on a proposal will count toward our organizational eligibility limit of two NRT proposals per annual competition." OR "We agree to partner on this NRT project as a sub-recipient" The letters of collaboration should not include endorsements or advocacy for the project.
7b. Data Management and Sharing Plan. The PI should follow the data management requirements and plans for the Directorate, Office, Division, Program, or other NSF unit most closely aligned with the research theme of the NRT traineeship. The Data Management and Sharing Plan should address project data collection associated with both research and educational activities.
No other items or appendices are to be included. Full proposals containing items, other than those required above or by the PAPPG, will not be accepted or will be returned without review.
Cost Sharing:
Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.
Other Budgetary Limitations:
Other budgetary limitations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
For Proposals Submitted Via Research.gov:
To prepare and submit a proposal via Research.gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.research.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html . For Research.gov user support, call the Research.gov Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected] . The Research.gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.gov system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.
For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:
Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources web page: https://www.grants.gov/applicants . In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: [email protected] . The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation. Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to Research.gov for further processing. The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov informational page provides submission guidance to applicants and links to helpful resources including the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide , Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov how-to guide , and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Frequently Asked Questions . Grants.gov proposals must pass all NSF pre-check and post-check validations in order to be accepted by Research.gov at NSF. When submitting via Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends applicants initiate proposal submission at least five business days in advance of a deadline to allow adequate time to address NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting organization's local time on the deadline. Please note that some errors cannot be corrected in Grants.gov. Once a proposal passes pre-checks but fails any post-check, an applicant can only correct and submit the in-progress proposal in Research.gov.
Proposers that submitted via Research.gov may use Research.gov to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgment and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.
A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ .
Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026 . These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.
One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.
NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.
The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.
1. Merit Review Principles
These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:
With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.
These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.
2. Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.
When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:
The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and other underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management and Sharing Plan and the Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.
Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.
After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new recipients may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.
After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.
Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.
A. notification of the award.
Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF . Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .
Administrative and National Policy Requirements
Build America, Buy America
As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America's Workers (86 FR 7475), it is the policy of the executive branch to use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards to maximize, consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.
Consistent with the requirements of the Build America, Buy America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made available through this funding opportunity may be obligated for infrastructure projects under an award unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States. For additional information, visit NSF's Build America, Buy America web page
Special Award Conditions:
Award recipients should be prepared to contribute to NRT program evaluation, including participation in systematic data collection via NSF monitoring systems, contributions at NSF-sponsored PI meetings, including PI attendance at a one-day virtual orientation meeting during the first year of the project, and periodic cross-award, joint video conferences to share insights, effective practices, and evaluation findings.
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final annual project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.
Failure to provide the required annual or final annual project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final annual project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.
More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .
PIs will be required to submit annual and final annual project reports that differ from the standard reporting format contained in Research.gov. Instructions for preparing and submitting such reports will be provided to the PI. NRT PIs are required to submit their annual and final annual project reports through a special NRT web-based reporting system that standardizes the collection of information across NRT sites.
Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences . Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website .
Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov .
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."
NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.
NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.F.7 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.
The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.
The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Aim to write a letter that compliments your resume and states why you deserve the position or monetary award. Follow these steps to compose your cover letter as part of your fellowship application: 1. Determine the recipient. Before you compose the main content of your cover letter, find out who reviews your application.
First, they can probably figure out your name. You don't need that to be in the first sentence (or any of the sentences—the closing is an obvious enough spot). Next, "the open position" and "your company" are too generic. That sounds like the same cover letter you sent to every single employer in a hundred mile radius.
FELLOWSHIPS AND AWARDS . Warren Center Dissertation Completion Fellowship, Harvard University, 2018-19 Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Merit/Term-Time Fellowship, Harvard University, 2017-18 Rockefeller Archive Center Grant-in-Aid, 2017-18 Taubman Center for State & Local Government Research Award, Harvard Kennedy School, 2017-18, 2016-17
Fellowship Cover Letter Writing Tips. It's no secret that academic jobs and fellowships in particular are highly competitive. Nature Magazine reports that most early-career researchers need to file at least 15 applications to land a single offer. Moreover, job seekers who submit more applications end up getting a higher number of on-site interviews.
To help you learn more about cover letters, here is a sample cover letter for a research fellow. Charles Ferris Sydney, NSW 0491 578 888 [email protected] 20 March 2024 Bob Richardson Wavewood University Dear Bob Richardson, I am writing to express my interest in the recently advertised research fellowship position at your institution. I am ...
Clearly define the vision and impact of your future research program. Differentiate yourself from colleagues, e.g. your advisors and other faculty candidates. Establish what your niche will be in the department. Clearly display excitement and passion. Keep the cover letter to 1 to 2 pages.
Cover letter template for fellowship. Do your research before you start the cover letter, as this helps you structure it correctly and assists with the writing process. If you're creating a cover letter for your fellowship application, use the template below to start: [Name] [Address] [Phone number]
Most fellowship and grant applications require a research proposal and personal statement; few ask you to write a cover letter. Still, there are some dissertation and postdoctoral fellowship applications where knowing how to write a strong cover letter can come in handy (take the Consortium for Faculty Diversity Dissertation Fellowship, for example).
The template below outlines the purpose for each paragraph and what it should include: Your Name. [Your phone number] [Your email address] [Your mailing address] [Date] [Scholarship organization name] [Organization address] [Organization phone number] Dear [Mr./Ms./Mx. Recipient's name] / [Scholarship Committee],
Keep your font size between 10 to 12 points and your margins to at least 0.5 inches around all edges. Try to match the font size, type, line spacing and margin size to your academic CV for neat and consistent presentation. Your cover letter should be addressed to the PhD supervisor, starting with a "Dear [academic title] [surname]", for ...
Also known as a "letter of introduction" or "letter of application," a cover letter accompanies your application and should answer the following questions: How do you meet the criteria for this award/ fellowship? Skills/abilities/qualities in the context of your experiences as they relate to the specified requirements.
How to Write the Research Fellow Cover Letter. 859 Hansen Brook. West Dwight, MA 67696-6621. Dear Tatum Koepp, In response to your job posting for research fellow, I am including this letter and my resume for your review. Previously, I was responsible for technical, research and analytical support and contribute to research efforts on areas of ...
Learn to write a cover letter for postdoc positions that gets you a seat in academia. Includes a professional sample cover letter for postdoc positions. ... Among world-famous corporations offering postdoc fellowships and research work, you can find Microsoft, Sony, and Adobe. 3. Write a Passionate First Paragraph of Your Cover Letter for ...
1. Preparing to Write a Cover Letter. Before writing a cover letter, spend time doing the following: Find a particular fellowship or job description you'd like to apply to. Having an end goal will help you write your cover letter. Tailor your resume or CV to the job or fellowship you're interested in pursuing.
At their most basic level, academic cover letters accomplish three things: one, they express your interest in the job; two, they provide a brief synopsis of your research and teaching; and three, they summarize your past experiences and achievements to illustrate your competence for the job. For early-career scholars, cover letters are ...
How to Write a Cover Letter for Research Jobs. 4 Tailoring your letter. is to:4aDo your researchYour cover letter needs to show what a grea. match you are for the job. The job and person specification. ill only give you so much. In order to understand the job context, how your own research interests will fit into the department's research ...
A cover letter is typically the first thing the recipient reads in your fellowship application, so it needs to be convincing and well-written. Start a new document on your computer and choose a cover letter template if one is available. Make a header that includes your name (in larger and bolder font), followed by your address, phone number ...
Sample cover letter for a research position. I am writing to apply for the postdoctoral position in marine biology in the Department of Life Sciences. Having recently completed my PhD in biology, I am excited for the opportunity to join the world-renowned research team at the University of Leipzig. My primary research interests are migration ...
The reception your cover letter will receive is more varied and unpredictable than the other elements of your application packet. Some readers, especially at large research universities, will skip it entirely, and focus instead on more direct indicators of your academic achievements and potential: the CV, letters, and writing sample.
Cover Letter - Describe your interest in the program and specific faculty projects; whether you prefer a one or two-year appointment; your familiarity with programming languages (Stata, R, Python, Matlab, etc.); your prior experience as a research assistant and with independent research (e.g., a senior thesis); any other relevant information.
Follow these steps to apply for junior research fellowships: 1. Complete the proper education. Typically, in order to get a JRF, candidates have to be current or newly graduated Ph.D. students. Before registering for a Ph.D. program, it's necessary to earn a bachelor's degree. While you're completing this undergraduate education, find a field ...
This document provides examples of cover letters for fellowship applications in different fields, including research, medicine, arts, public service, environmental work, STEM, and business. It emphasizes that a well-written cover letter can enhance an application by highlighting qualifications, experiences, and motivations. It then presents seven sample cover letter templates tailored for ...
The cover letter is an opportunity for you to explain not just why the fellowship would be a good fit, but also to complement your research statement by showing how the fellowship connects to future work (e.g., your dissertation, an article, a book draft, whatever). In other words, the research statement explains what your work is while your ...
The first step is selecting which fellowships to submit applications for, a complex and individual process. Considerations such as research and clinical experience offerings, location, culture of diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as work/life harmony all contribute to selecting a training program, among other factors.
The Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (SERC) is offering fellowship opportunities for independent research starting after June 1, 2025. Graduate, predoctoral, postdoctoral, and senior fellowships are available in a wide range of topics centered around some of the critical issues challenging our world today, such as habitat alteration, biodiversity loss, and climate change.
ELAINY MATA: So you want to know how to tackle the cover letter. I do too. I actually really hate cover letters. I hate cover letters. I hate cover letters. But the cover letter is important. It's time to face our fears, and just figure out how in the world we are actually going to write it. I got you, and we're going to do this together.
A cover letter is required for consideration for this position and should be included as the first page of your resume. The cover letter should address your specific interest in the position and outline skills and experience that directly relate to this position. Job Summary. Please note: This is a term-limited position funded for four (4) years.
Letters of support from internship host organizations are strongly encouraged (see section 7a, below). The NRT program encourages projects that foster development of a global perspective, through experiences abroad and/or activities at the home institution(s). 3e. Major Research Efforts.
Experts agree that mentioning salary requirements in a cover letter should be approached with caution. "Salary questions are designed to 'screen out' rather than 'screen in' candidates," says Alisa Cohen, Career Coach at Close Cohen Career Consulting.This means that revealing your salary expectations too soon could lead to your elimination from the candidate pool if your figures ...
Although you can speed up the process, writing a good cover letter takes time. So, you want to make sure your finished product is concise and easy to read. "[Recruiters] spend about 15-30 seconds [reading] the resume. They may spend even less time on the cover letter and many employers do not require a cover letter," Shreve Blake said.