Science & Technology Studies (STS) Program

Proposals for Doctoral Dissertation Research Improvement Grants submitted to the STS Program must comply with or have information about the following bulleted items:

• Target Date: February 1, August 1

• Project Budget : The usual limit on a dissertation award is $8,000 for research in North America. The usual limit for international research is $12,000. No indirect costs are allowed.
• Proposal Title should read, "Doctoral Dissertation Research.”
• Project Description must not exceed 15 single pages.

• The major professor should be listed as the Principal Investigator. The dissertation student may be listed as the Co-Principal Investigator

• All proposals must be submitted electronically via Fastlane.
• Proposals which violate these regulations in an attempt to squeeze in more information antagonize reviewers and may be returned without consideration.

If you have additional questions, then please contact the Program Directors listed above.

Dissertation Advice to Students

Doctoral students eligible to apply have to be enrolled in U.S. graduate programs and must have passed -- or will pass -- the qualifying exams and completed all course work required for the degree prior to receiving the award. These awards provide funds for dissertation research expenses not normally available through the student's university. Follow the proposal preparation guidelines in the Doctoral Dissertation Program Announcement, and the NSF04-531 STS Program Announcement especially the instructions for spacing (one half or doubled-spaced), length (15 pages for the project description), font size (12 point is best, no smaller than 15 characters/2.5 cm), CVs (2 page maximum biographical sketch), and proposal summary (1 page max) The summary must address in separate paragraphs the "intellectual merit" and the "broader impacts". (See the GPG).

Awards are not intended to provide the full costs of a student's doctoral dissertation research. Funds may be used only for valid research expenses which include, but are not limited to, conducting field research in settings away from campus that would not otherwise be possible, data collection and sample survey costs, payments to subjects or informants, specialized research equipment, analysis and services not otherwise available, supplies, travel to archives, specialized collections, and facilities or field research locations, and partial living expenses for conducting necessary research away from the student's university. Funds are to be used exclusively for the actual conduct of dissertation research. These funds may not be used as a student stipend, for tuition, textbooks, journals, or for the typing, reproduction, or publication costs of the student's dissertation. Funds may be requested for research assistants only in very special circumstances, which should be carefully justified.

The proposal must include a letter from the faculty advisor. This document is not intended as a traditional recommendation, but should evaluate the student's promise as a researcher, the student's capabilities for undertaking this project, and the value and status of the proposed research. It should also discuss the student's current progress in the graduate program, affirming when the student passed -- or will pass -- the qualifying exams and completed all course work required for the degree. If the doctoral student will use the award for travel expenses to work with a specialist, the proposal should provide a justification for this choice and a letter from the specialist agreeing to work with the student. These requirements must be met before an award will be made. Letters should be submitted in the Supplementary Documentation section of the FastLane proposal.

The Project Description section should describe the scientific significance of the work, including its relationship to other current research, and the design of the project in sufficient detail to permit evaluation. It should also present and interpret progress to date if the research is already underway. The Results from Prior NSF Support section is not required with these proposals.

Outstanding proposals specify how the knowledge to be created advances our theoretical understanding of the study situation, so that people interested in similar situations in different contexts will learn from the project's outcome. The key is to be explicit in showing how the general theory explains the local situation, and in showing how the new knowledge from the local situation will advance the theory.

Use a clear and concise writing style. Reviewers will include scientists from a variety of specialty areas. It is possible that no specialist from your particular area of research will be on the panel. Defining key terms and keeping your proposal free of jargon will ensure that all reviewers will be able to understand your proposal and evaluate it fairly.

One of the areas in which the proposal will be evaluated is "Research Competence of the Student." You can provide information to reviewers in the body of the proposal as well as in your CV. Be sure to any other information which can help reviewers evaluate how well prepared you are to conduct the research.

The following are suggested allocations for the Project Description. These are not hard-and-fast rules, but indicate reviewers' interests:

• Statement of the research problem, specific aims, expectations, propositions or hypotheses

• Review of the literature and significance
• Preliminary studies by the student, if any
• Research Plan, Including:
• Research Design
• Research Site or source of data
• (References and citations are as important in your methods as in your theory section)
• Data analysis plans
• Research Schedule

The research plan should begin with an overview of the research design, relating it to the theory. This should be followed by a brief description of the research site. Data collection and analysis methods follow. Theories, setting and methods should be tightly linked: Readers should learn what the researcher is going to do and how the specific activities to be engaged in relate to both theory and setting. Note that a mere listing of a method is not enough to tell a reader what the researcher plans and why. The term "participant observation", for example, is extraordinarily general and should be unpacked into its specific components, each related to the information outcome that is then related to the research design and theory.

Sampling should be explicitly justified by discussing how data will generalize to a relevant population or theory. Each method, whether it generates qualitative or quantitative data, should be justified in terms of the research aims. The key issue is to impress reviewers that the new knowledge from your project will generalize to significant populations and theories.

Proposals also should include an analysis plan, although readers recognize that plans change in the process of fieldwork. Describe how you will use your data to answer your research questions and test your hypotheses. A mere listing of software programs will not demonstrate to reviewers that you have seriously considered all phases of the research process in designing your proposal. It should be possible for a reviewer to look back to your specific aims and understand why each kind of data is being collected, and why a particular analytic technique is planned.

Reviewers are well aware that there are no perfect strategies for conducting research, but will be looking for evidence that you understand the strengths and weaknesses of the approach selected. In a competitive review process where only a subset of excellent proposals can be funded, reviewers need to be told how the new knowledge to be gained from your particular study will yield generalizations that advance our theoretical understanding of the problem.

* Note: Students doing international research, having a formal affiliation with a foreign research institution, may be eligible for additional funding. Please contact the appropriate program in NSF's Office of International Science