IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0243973.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Biosciences Proposal Bootcamp: Structured peer and faculty feedback improves trainees’ proposals and grantsmanship self-efficacy

Author

Listed:
  • Crystal M Botham
  • Shay Brawn
  • Latishya Steele
  • Cisco B Barrón
  • Sofie R Kleppner
  • Daniel Herschlag

Abstract

Grant writing is an essential skill to develop for academic and other career success but providing individual feedback to large numbers of trainees is challenging. In 2014, we launched the Stanford Biosciences Grant Writing Academy to support graduate students and postdocs in writing research proposals. Its core program is a multi-week Proposal Bootcamp designed to increase the feedback writers receive as they develop and refine their proposals. The Proposal Bootcamp consisted of two-hour weekly meetings that included mini lectures and peer review. Bootcamp participants also attended faculty review workshops to obtain faculty feedback. Postdoctoral trainees were trained and hired as course teaching assistants and facilitated weekly meetings and review workshops. Over the last six years, the annual Bootcamp has provided 525 doctoral students and postdocs with multi-level feedback (peer and faculty). Proposals from Bootcamp participants were almost twice as likely to be funded than proposals from non-Bootcamp trainees. Overall, this structured program provided opportunities for feedback from multiple peer and faculty reviewers, increased the participants’ confidence in developing and submitting research proposals, while accommodating a large number of participants.

Suggested Citation

  • Crystal M Botham & Shay Brawn & Latishya Steele & Cisco B Barrón & Sofie R Kleppner & Daniel Herschlag, 2020. "Biosciences Proposal Bootcamp: Structured peer and faculty feedback improves trainees’ proposals and grantsmanship self-efficacy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-22, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0243973
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243973
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0243973
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0243973&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0243973?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kyle R. Myers, 2022. "Some Tradeoffs of Competition in Grant Contests," Papers 2207.02379, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0243973. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.