Doctoral programme grant within educational sciences

Please refer to the application form in Prisma in parallel with reading the instructions below, which describe the call-specific contents of the application. More information on what to do in practical terms is available in our Guide for applicants Opens in new window..

Language

We prefer completion of the application in English, but Swedish may also be used.

Sections of the application

The application form includes the following tabs:

• Descriptive information
• Research description
• Budget and research resources
• Publications
• Administrating organisation
• Participants
• CV

The information we request under each tab is described below.

Descriptive information

Abstract

The abstract shall include a brief description of the following:

• the focus of the doctoral programme
• the organisation planned
• the significance to the research area

The text shall provide an overview of the purpose and implementation of the doctoral programme. Please use wording to ensure persons with another subject specialisation can understand the information. The description may cover a maximum of 1 500 characters including blank spaces. This is approximately one third of an A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing.

Popular science description

Describe the activities of the doctoral programme in such a way that a person who is not familiar with the subject can understand it. Describe what is to be done, and why. Explain also in what way the doctoral programme will support research in educational sciences.

The popular science description is an important tool when we inform about the research funded by the Swedish Research Council. If we approve the application, we reserve the right to use the description for information purposes.

The description may cover a maximum of 4 000 characters including blank spaces. This is approximately one A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing.

Note: The popular science description must be written in Swedish, unlike the rest of the application.

Thematic classification

Educational sciences are divided up thematically into main areas. Here please state the theme that best describes the focus of the doctoral programme. An overview of all areas and themes is available via the following link:

“Thematic division of the educational sciences area” Excel, 13.3 kB, opens in new window. (Excel, 13.3 kB).

Research description

Ethical considerations

Describe the ethical issues raised by the doctoral programme. Also describe the plan to address ethical dilemmas that may arise. Please justify why the research should be carried out against the background of the ethical issues identified. How do the questions and expected results measure up in relation to the ethical issues? Please also state whether the research involves any handling of personal data, or experiments on animals or human subjects. If no ethical issues are raised, please justify this.

The justification may cover a maximum of 4 000 characters including blank spaces. This is approximately one A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing.

Sex and gender perspectives

Please state whether sex and gender perspectives are applicable to the planned doctoral programme, and justify the decision. Please note that we are not asking for information about the composition (men/women) of the doctoral programme. Read more about sex and gender perspectives in research content Opens in new window..

The following applies:

• If Yes, please state: Justify the answer, and describe also how sex and gender perspectives will be accounted for in the research programme. If stated that sex and gender perspectives are applicable, but these are not included in the research programme, this should be justified here.
• If No, please state: Justify the answer.

The justification may cover a maximum of 4 000 characters including blank spaces. This is approximately one A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing.

Research programme

The research programme shall consist of a brief but complete description of how the doctoral programme will be designed. It shall cover a maximum of 10 page-numbered A4 pages in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing and 2.5 cm margins, including references and any images.

The following information must be included in the research programme under separate headings, listed in the following order:

• Objective: Describe the theme and focus of the doctoral programme.
• Research environment: Describe the research environment/s supporting the doctoral programme. Describe the environment/s in terms of focus and management, and the focus of research in progress. Describe in particular how the environment/s may contribute to the development of the doctoral programme.
• Programme description: Summarise the planned educational activities of the doctoral programme, and describe the recruitment basis.
• Organisation: Describe in detail how the doctoral programme will be organised and administrated (courses offered, seminars, course development, coordinating, study follow-up, work allocation between supervisors, examiners and course providers). Describe also the planned dimensioning of the doctoral programme in terms of number of doctoral students.
• Significance: Describe the national doctoral programme’s plan to achieve the aim of strengthening the national recruitment base and quality, in order to support research in educational sciences. The description shall describe in particular how one intends to develop network build-up in the area (for example by linking postdocs to the education, mentor programmes, etc.).
• National coordination: Describe the other Swedish HEIs that are participating in the operation of the doctoral programme, and list the person/s (name, position, organisational unit) who will be responsible for this participation at each HEI. Describe summarily the planned allocation of roles, tasks and responsibilities for the operation of the persons participating (including the coordinator), and what specific competences each participant will contribute.
• International and other national collaboration: Describe the collaboration with Swedish and foreign research environments and/or other doctoral programmes.

Report the following under separate headings if relevant to the application:

• Equipment: Describe the basic equipment relevant to the programme that the doctoral programme has at its disposal.
• Need for research infrastructure: Specify the doctoral programmes need for international and national infrastructure. In the first instance, the research infrastructures supported by the Swedish Research Council Opens in new window., which are open to all, should be used. If other infrastructures are chosen instead, please justify this need (also applies for local research infrastructure).

Budget and research resources

Personnel

State the activity level (per cent of a full-time equivalent) of all personnel active within the operation of the doctoral programme, that is to say the project leader/coordinator, other researchers responsible for participation in the doctoral programme at other HEIs, doctoral students and other personnel.

Please also state the salary applied for the project leader/coordinator or other personnel active within the doctoral programme, both as a percentage of a full-time salary and as actual annual amounts (including social security contributions). Please state the amounts in Swedish krona, rounded to the nearest 1 000 SEK.

Other costs

Describe any other costs of the project (premises costs, running costs and depreciation costs). Please state the amounts in Swedish krona, rounded to the nearest 1 000 SEK.

Depreciation costs for equipment to be used in the operation may be included, provided that:

• the equipment has an economic life of at least three years
• the equipment has an acquisition value above a certain amount
• the need cannot be fulfilled by using national or international research infrastructure supported by the Swedish Research Council and which is thereby open to all users.

Only the proportion of depreciation costs that corresponds to the use of the equipment in the proposed operation may be included. Depreciation costs for equipment that is wholly financed via other grants may not be included.

Total cost of the doctoral programme

Prisma will automatically add up the budget items listed in a table. The total amount applied for shall also include indirect costs. These shall be added to the table by the applicant (project leader). Here the applicant (project leader) can also add any additional costs that the doctoral programme entails (for which you are not seeking funding under this call).

Justification of the budget applied for

Justify briefly each cost applied for in the budget stated. The description may cover a maximum of 4 000 characters including blank spaces. This is approximately one A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing.

Other funding

Please state any other funding of the project over and above what is applied for in this application. Please state the amounts in Swedish krona, rounded to the nearest 1 000 SEK.

Publications

Project leader’s/Coordinator’s publications list

Please attach the publications list drawn up according to the headings and information below. The list shall cover a maximum of 5 page-numbered A4 pages in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing and 2.5 cm margins.

Sort the publications under each heading in reverse chronological order, so that the latest publication is at the top of the list. Please only include articles or equivalent that are published or accepted for publication at the time of applying. The author name order shall be identical to that of the published work. The application cannot be supplemented with publications after the deadline for the call.

1. Selection of publications: List the publications (maximum 10) of greatest importance to the application. For each publication, please state how the researcher contributed to it, and its relevance to the doctoral programme described (maximum 4 lines per publication). Highlight the researcher’s name in bold in the author list.

2. Relevant publications from 2013–2021: Sort the publications, with the researcher’s name highlighted in bold in the author list, under each heading (publication type) in the following order:

• Peer-reviewed original articles
• Peer-reviewed conference contributions, the results of which are not included in other publications.
• Peer-reviewed edited volumes
• Research review articles
• Peer-reviewed books and book chapters
• Other publications including popular science books/presentations

Participating researchers’ publication lists

Attach all participating researchers’ publications lists joined together into a single file. The list for each researcher shall include the publications (maximum 10) that are the most relevant for the doctoral programme, and shall cover a maximum of 1 A4 page. The name of the researcher in question shall be highlighted in bold and also be included in the page header of each list.

Please only include articles or equivalent that are published or accepted for publication at the time of applying. The author name order shall be identical to that of the published work. The application cannot be supplemented with publications after the deadline for the call.

The publications shall be of the type Peer-reviewed original articles, conference contributions, edited volumes, research review articles, books and book chapters, and other publications including popular science books/presentations.

Administrating organisation

Please state the location of the doctoral programme.

Participants

Under this tab, the person invited to be the project leader/coordinator may in turn invite participating researchers and participating administrators to the application.

CV

Under this tab, the project leader/coordinator shall upload the relevant CV information from their personal account in Prisma. Participating researchers must upload their own CV information to the application.

The following information, where available, must always be included in each CV, taking into account the stated limitation in numbers:

• Education: First, second and third cycle higher education and specialist degrees.
• Work: Current employment (including whether permanent or not) and longer relevant employment, postdoctoral visits (including whether employment or not), research exchanges relevant to the research described and any longer interruptions in the research that have impacted on the researcher’s opportunity to gain merits as a researcher.
• Merits and awards: Docentship/associate professorship, supervisees (postdoctoral and doctoral students; state the overall number of each category and list the 10 most relevant), up to 10 of the researcher’s most relevant grants awarded in competition, up to 10 of the researcher’s most relevant prizes and awards, and up to 20 other merits relevant to the application.
• Intellectual property rights: For example, patents and open access computer programs developed by the researcher; state up to 10 of the most relevant.

Scientific quality is the fundamental criterion when the Swedish Research Council allocates grants to research. Your application is evaluated in competition with the other applications on the basis of the following evaluation criteria.

Evaluation process

Your application is assessed by a specialised subject review panel where the members are Nordic researchers.

At least three members review and grade your application individually. If needed, an external reviewer also assesses your application. The entire review panel then meets at a review panel meeting to discuss and prioritise the applications, and finally to make a proposal for a decision to the Committee for Educational Sciences.

Review panels Opens in new window.

Following the grant decision your application will receive an individual final statement containing the grades and a summary of the review panel’s discussion and overall assessment of the scientific quality of the application.

Here you will find a more comprehensive description of the Swedish Research Council's assessment of applications Opens in new window..

Evaluation criteria and guiding questions

The evaluation of the scientific quality of your application is made based on four basic criteria (Scientific quality of the proposed research, Novelty and originality, Merits of the applicant, Feasibility). The purpose of using several components is to achieve a multi-faceted evaluation. In addition to the basic criteria, your application is also evaluated based on the additional criterion Relevance for the call. The criteria are assessed on a seven-grade scale, except for Feasibility and Relevance for the call, which is assessed on a three-grade grade scale.

For each criterion, there are guiding questions to support the panel members’ evaluation of your application. These can also function as guidance for you when you write your application.

Scientific quality of the proposed research (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• Is the focus of the doctoral programme based on relevant and up-to-date research of high quality?
• Do the goals, contents and organisation of the doctoral programme contribute scientific added value to third-cycle education within the field in question?
• Do the international collaborations of the doctoral programme contribute to anchoring the third-cycle education in well-established international research within the field in question?
• Does the structure of the educational offer with joint courses, seminars, and supervision safeguard a high level of scientific theoretical and methodological quality in the doctoral programme?
• Does the structure of the educational offer safeguard a high level of pedagogical quality in the teaching and supervision?
• Does the doctoral programme emphasize the development of the doctoral student’ basic scientific competence?
• How are ethical considerations motivated and handled in the application?
• How are considerations pertaining to sex and gender perspectives motivated and handled in the application?

Novelty and originality (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• Do the goals, contents and organisation of the doctoral programme contribute to strengthening the originality and developing innovation in the doctoral students’ scientific work?
• Does the doctoral programme emphasize development of new knowledge and practice with respect to third-cycle education?
• Does the doctoral programme contribute to novel thinking about how doctoral students may participate in strong national and international research environments?
• Does the doctoral programme contribute to national and international networking?

Merits of the applicant (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• Is the host institution scientifically strong, with a solid experience of organising third-cycle education?
• Do both the applicant and the participating researchers have good merits within their respective areas?
• Do both the applicant and the participating researchers have experience organising third-cycle education?
• Are nationally leading researchers within the field engaged in the doctoral programme?

Feasibility (1–3)

Guiding questions:

• Does the doctoral programme have a clear organisation and leadership?
• Are the participating departments’ contribution to the doctoral programme made clear?
• Is there a sufficient supply of supervision competence?
• Has the applicant shown that there is a sufficient national supply of doctoral students?
• How is access to personnel, infrastructure and other necessary resources safeguarded?
• Does the doctoral programme have a sufficient access to international contacts and networks?

Relevance to the call (1–3)

Guiding questions:

• Is the doctoral programme oriented towards an area relevant to strengthening the competence in the area educational science?
• Is the doctoral programme oriented towards any of the prioritised areas specified in the call?

Overall grade (1–7)

The above subsidiary criteria are weighed together into an overall grade, which reflects the review panel’s joint evaluation of the application’s scientific quality.

The different subsidiary grades are weighed together into an overall grade on a seven-grade scale. Normally, the subsidiary grade for scientific quality is given the most weight in the overall grade. The subsidiary grades for novelty and originality or merits may only in exceptional cases balance weaknesses in scientific quality, and then only minor weaknesses.

Prerequisites for being awarded a grant are that the proposal is feasible, located in a well-functioning research environment of high quality, and that the applicant has solid and relevant competence for the purpose.