Research project grant within educational sciences

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

Language

The application may be written in English, but may also be written in Swedish.

Sections of the application

The application form includes the following tabs:

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

Descriptions of the call-specific information requested under each tab follow below.

Descriptive information

Abstract

The abstract shall include a brief description of the following:

• what is to be done: purpose and aim
• how the research will be carried out: project organisation, time plan and the scientific methods to be used
• what is important about the planned research.

The abstract shall provide a summary guide to the purpose and implementation of the research. 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 (approximately one third of an A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing).

Popular science description

Describe the project 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, and explain in what way the new knowledge may be important.

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

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

The description may cover a maximum of 4 500 characters including blank spaces (approximately one A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing).

Research description

Ethical considerations

Describe the ethical issues raised by your project or corresponding. You must also describe how you plan to address ethical dilemmas that may arise. Please justify why the research should be carried out against the background of the ethical issues you have identified. How do your research 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.

Sex and gender perspectives

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

The following applies:

• If you answer “Yes”: Justify your answer, and describe also how you take account of sex and gender perspectives in the research plan (see further instructions under “Research plan”). If you have stated that sex and gender perspectives are applicable, but still choose not to include them in your research plan, you will need to justify this here.
• If you answer “No”: Please justify your answer.

Research plan

The research plan shall consist of a brief but complete description of the research task. The focus of the research plan shall be forward-looking, and it shall cover a maximum of 10 page-numbered A4 pages in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing, including references and any images.

The research plan shall include the following headings and information, listed in the following order:

• Purpose and aims: State the overall purpose and specific goals of the research project. If you have stated that sex and gender perspectives are applicable, please describe how these perspectives relate to the purpose, goal and questions of the research project.
• State-of-the-art: Summarise briefly the current research frontier within the field/area covered by the project. State key references. Describe briefly how sex and gender perspectives have been handled previously within the field/area the project relates to.
• Significance and scientific novelty: Describe briefly how the project relates to previous research within the area, and its importance in the short and long term. Describe also how the project moves forward or innovates the current research frontier. Please include sex and gender perspectives when relevant.
• Preliminary and previous results: Describe briefly your own previous research and pilot studies within the research area that make it probable that the project will be feasible. State also if no preliminary results exist. State whether the project contributes further to research and scientific results from a grant awarded previously by the Swedish Research Council.
• Project description: Describe the project design, including the following items:
  • Theory and method: Describe the underlying theory and the methods to be applied in order to reach the project goal. When applicable, describe how sex and gender perspectives relate to the choice of design, questions, method and materials, population/study participants and also data processing and analysis, for example statistics and presentation of results divided up by sex.
  • Time plan and implementation: Describe summarily the time plan for the project during the grant period, and how the project will be implemented.
  • Project organisation: Clarify the contributions of yourself and any participating researchers to the implementation of the project. Describe and explain the competences and roles of the participating researchers in the project, and also any other researchers or corresponding who are important for the implementation of the project.

Provide the following information also. If a heading is not relevant to your application, please leave it blank.

• Equipment: Describe the basic equipment you and your team have at your disposal for the project.
• Need for infrastructure: Specify the project’s need for international and national infrastructure. Specify also the need for local infrastructure, if depreciation costs for this are included in the application. Read more about research infrastructure supported by the Swedish Research Council. External link.
• International and national collaboration: Describe your own and the team’s collaboration with foreign and Swedish researchers and research teams. State whether you contribute to or refer to international collaboration in your research.
• Other applications or grants: If you are applying for or intend to apply for other grants from the Swedish Research Council, the relationship between the projects shall be clarified. This applies also if you are receiving ongoing grants from the Swedish Research Council with grant periods that wholly or partly overlap with the grant you are now applying for. You should also justify why you are submitting one or several further applications. Describe also the relationship with other applications to or grants from other funding bodies for the same project concept (from you or another researcher).

Budget and research resources

Project personnel

State the activity level (per cent of a full-time equivalent) of all personnel active within the project, that is to say yourself, any other researchers and other personnel. Please also state the salary you are applying for, for yourself and/or other personnel active within the project, both as a percentage of a full-time salary and as actual annual amounts (including social security contributions). Please state rounded amounts in SEK.

Other costs

Describe any other costs of the project (premises costs, running costs and depreciation costs). Please state rounded annual amounts.

You may include depreciation costs for equipment to be used in the project, provided that

• the equipment has an economic life of at least three years
• the equipment has an acquisition value exceeding a certain amount (please contact your administrating organisation for information about the amount that applies to your department)
• the equipment needs for your proposed project cannot be satisfied through use of national or international infrastructure open to all.

Read more about research infrastructure supported by the Swedish Research Council. Opens in new window.

You may only include the proportion of depreciation costs that corresponds to the use of the equipment in the proposed project. You may not include depreciation costs for equipment that is wholly financed via other grants. Please contact your HEI for information about what is included in local research infrastructure, acquisition values or how to calculate depreciation costs.

Total cost

Prisma will automatically add up your budget items listed in a table. The total amount you are applying for shall also include indirect costs. You will have to add these to the table yourself. Here you can also add any additional costs covered by the project (for which you are not seeking funding under this call).

Please contact your HEI for information on what constitutes indirect and direct costs.

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 (approximately one A4 page in Arial, font size 11, single line spacing).

Other funding

Please state your or any other researcher’s funding over and above what is applied for in this application. Please state rounded amounts in SEK.

Publications

Applicant’s publication list

Please attach your publication 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.

Please 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 corresponding that are published or accepted for publication at the time of applying. The author 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 maximum 10 publications of greatest importance to your application. For each publication, please state how you contributed to it, and its relevance to the research project described (maximum 4 lines per publication). Highlight your name in bold in the author list.
   
2. Relevant publications from the last 8 years: Sort the publications, with your 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 up into one file. The list for each researcher shall include a maximum of 10 publications, in the form of the most relevant publications for the research described, and shall cover a maximum of one 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 corresponding that are published or accepted for publication at the time of applying. The author 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 types: 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 administrating organisation and project site.

Review panels

Please propose the review panel or panels (in priority order) that you wish to carry out the scientific assessment of your application.

Review panels Opens in new window.

Participants

Here you as applicant may invite any participating researchers and administrators to your application.

CV

Under this tab, please upload your relevant CV information from your personal account in Prisma. Any 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 employment form) and longer relevant employment, postdoctoral visits (also included as employment if relevant), research exchanges relevant to the research described and any longer interruptions in the research that have impacted on your 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 to you), up to 10 of your most relevant grants awarded in competition, up to 10 of your 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 you; state up to 10 of your most relevant.
  

Scientific quality is the fundamental criterion when the Swedish Research Council allocates grants to research. Your application is assessed in competition with the other applications on the basis of the following assessment criteria. The purpose of the project grant is to give researchers the freedom to formulate by themselves the research concept, method and implementation, and to solve a specific research task within a limited period.

Assessment process

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

At least three members review and grade your application individually. The entire review panel then meets at a review panel meeting to discuss and prioritise the applications, and to make a proposal for a decision. The most highly prioritised applications from each review panel are then discussed at a subsequent meeting of the review panel chairs, and an overall proposal for a decision is then submitted to the Committee for Educational Sciences. The decision on which applications will be awarded funds is made by the Committee for Educational Sciences.

Up to 40% of the applications with the lowest grades from the members’ individual reviews are screened out before the review panel meeting. These applications will not be the subject of discussion, which gives room for more detailed debate and prioritisation of the applications of higher quality, which have a reasonable chance of being funded. The applications screened out only receive a summary grading and a standardised final statement after the decision is made. The other applications receive an individual final statement that reflects the review panel’s discussion and overall assessment of the scientific quality of the application.

Review panels External link, opens in new window.

Assessment criteria and guiding questions

The assessment of the scientific quality of your application is made based on four basic criteria (scientific quality of the project, novelty and originality, merits of the applicant, and feasibility). The purpose of using several criteria is to achieve a multi-faceted assessment. The criteria are assessed on a seven-grade scale, with the exception of feasibility, which is assessed on a three-grade scale.

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

Scientific quality of the project (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• Is the proposed project clear, well justified and convincing?
• In what way are the research summary, problem definition, and design well executed/described?
• In what way are the choices of theory, data/material, analysis method, infrastructure, equipment and field work suitable for answering the questions?
• How are ethical issues justified and handled in the application?
• How are issues relating to sex and gender perspectives justified and handled in the research plan?
  

Novelty and originality (1–7)

Guiding questions:

• In what way does the project have the potential to generate new fundamental questions, new knowledge and new focuses for research?
• Does the project show signs of innovative application of existing methods/technologies in new areas?
• Does the project show signs of use of new technologies, methods and ways of analysing data?
  

Merits of the applicant (1–7)

The assessment relates to both the project leader and the participating researchers who carry out the majority of the scientific work.

Guiding questions:

• Do the project leader and the participating researchers have the academic qualifications and merits to implement the proposed project?
• In what day is there relevant expertise within the project team to implement all parts of the project?
• Publication merits – how do the most relevant and important publications relate to the project applied for?
  

Feasibility (1–3)

Guiding questions:

• Is the project practically and technically feasible? Is the time plan realistic?
• Does the project have access to personnel, infrastructure and other necessary resources?
• Is the research environment suitable for implementing the proposed project?
• Is the project budget realistic in relation to the project’s purpose and design?
  

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 according to the following principles:

• The assessment of the scientific quality of the application is crucial for the overall assessment.
• It is a prerequisite for being awarded a grant within educational sciences that the proposal is feasible, and that the applicant has solid and relevant competence for the purpose.
• Novelty and originality shall be weighted heavily, but a high grade for this aspect cannot outweigh any lack of scientific quality.