For the past few weeks I've been working on a grant application to develop a new course. I'm a bit inexperienced at writing these sorts of proposals within a university setting, so when I sent off my first (actually my fourth or so) draft to the guru of research, I had made some fairly key mistakes. RG told me s/he didn't think I would have time to get it together by the internal deadline, which is today. I was irritated--at myself, at him, and at his comments, where were not helpful for revising. So I talked to Archer who has applied for and been awarded this exact grant, and then I talked to a colleague who has also been awarded this grant. She generously allowed me to look at her application. Then I spent all day Wednesday, much of Thursday, and all day Friday reworking the proposal. Archer kept the boys occupied on Saturday so I could get the final touches done. I sent it back to RG and to Research Department chair. RD Chair responded almost immediately with some minor suggestions; s/he wanted me to add a few sentences and take out some other things. I finished those edits on Sunday morning in 10 minutes. As of last night I still hadn't heard from RG, making me think that RG was going to tell me not to submit the application.
RG sent me a long email and edits this morning. Based on the email I expected the edits to be huge. They are not. RG made very few changes, and RG wrote that the application is now worthy of consideration. I'm irritated again. Why? The changes I made are not substantial. I rewrote two sections entirely, and I provided a lengthy narrative for the budget. The proposal itself, however, is essentially the same. I am beginning to think that RG didn't think I'd be able to get all the supporting documentation together--which I already had. I just didn't realize I needed to send it to RG with the proposal. Even if my proposal isn't awarded, I'm feeling vindicated. I suspect RG thought I'd just give up. Guess what? RG was wrong.
2 comments:
YIKES!! That whole process sounds pretty painful to me. I'm glad that you MADE IT and proved him completely wrong. Good luck with the grant -- I hope you get it!
Thanks, Lilian. I've since spoken to Archer about this and to several female colleagues. The general consensus around CU is that RG treats female faculty members with "kid gloves" and pushes male faculty members. For example, Archer submitted a drafts of a different grant last semester, and he became very frustrated with the lack of feedback RG was giving him as well as all the rules and regulations. He decided to take a break from the application and reapply next year. RG phoned Archer's dept. chair, who then told Archer to get it done no matter what. Several of our female colleagues, however, had experiences similar to mine; they submitted drafts, hoping for feedback, and were told to take another grant cycle to revise. I'm very glad this particular RG is retiring at the end of the academic year.
Post a Comment