How to Write A CAREER: Deconstructing the Award Workshop

该奖项将支持2022年3月24日至25日的虚拟研讨会，以指导早期职业教师在生物医学工程研究提案的成功写作中使用的最佳实践和修辞模式。 撰写研究提案的能力对于早期职业研究人员的成功至关重要，但很少有正式的技术写作技能指导来制作成功的研究提案。那些确实存在的倾向于关注内容和编辑，而不讨论获奖应用程序常见的修辞模式。修辞模式是组织信息的方式。成功的提案写作有其独特的修辞模式。 “如何写职业生涯：解构奖”研讨会将强调这些修辞模式和指导的重要性，以掌握他们。首先，与生物医学或生物工程相关的NSF CAREER奖项将由通信科学专家解构。第二，确定的共同修辞要素将为研讨会材料提供基础，与会者将获得可操作和实用的信息。这个提案写作研讨会将指导早期职业教师成为更好的提案作者，方法是识别成功提案中常见的语言结构，并教他们如何将该结构应用于自己的提案。参加者，优先考虑那些在工程领域代表性不足的人，将有能力提交有竞争力的职业生涯计划，这有可能扩大参与。这个研讨会将从修辞模式的角度推进生物和生物医学工程中NSF职业生涯计划书写作的相关知识。科技写作中的修辞模式也受到社会文化变量的影响。例如，女性被社会化为不吹牛，尽管使用修辞手段为自己的研究文章增加宣传价值以说服同行其价值很重要。新手和非英语母语的科技写作者在了解修辞模式后可以做出更好的修辞选择。修辞模式是组织和交流信息的方式，对于科学信息的清晰呈现至关重要。当英语形容词偏离“意见-大小-年龄-形状-颜色-起源-材料-目的名词”的顺序时，母语为英语的人会意识到这个句子很奇怪，但很可能无法清楚地表达这个列表。同样，经验丰富的提案撰写者和审核者理解技术写作中正确的修辞模式，而不一定能够将其传授给早期的职业调查人员。正如不正确的词序揭示了非英语母语者，提案作者谁偏离预期的修辞模式被确定为“非母语提案作者。”科学修辞学认为科学的实践是有说服力的在撰写计划书时，作者必须让评论者相信他们的研究是基于可靠的科学方法或工程原理。这种写作中的修辞模式涉及所谓的“情境-问题-解决方案-评估”模式，这些模式展示了研究人员的观察和实验能力，同时展示了解释和预测能力。如果不掌握这些修辞模式，尽管研究人员的能力，资助的可能性可能会受到影响。通过采用最成功的修辞模式来教授提案写作，可以减少提案审查中社会文化差异的影响。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

This award will support a virtual workshop March 24th-25th, 2022, to coach early-career faculty on best practices and rhetorical patterns used in successful writing of research proposals in biomedical engineering. The ability to write research proposals is critical to early-career researchers’ success, yet there is little formalized coaching in the technical writing skills necessary to craft a successful research proposal. Those that do exist tend to focus on content and editing, without discussing the rhetorical patterns that are common to award-winning applications. Rhetorical patterns are ways of organizing information. Successful proposal writing has its own rhetorical patterns. The “How to Write a CAREER: Deconstructing the Award” workshop will emphasize these rhetorical patterns and the importance of mentorship to gain mastery of them. First, NSF CAREER awards related to biomedical or bioengineering will be deconstructed by a communications science expert. Second, the identified common rhetorical elements will provide the foundation for workshop materials and participants will receive actionable and practical information. This proposal-writing workshop will coach early career faculty to be better proposal writers by identifying the language structure that is common across successful proposals and teaching them how to apply that structure to their own proposals. Participants, with priority given to those underrepresented in engineering, will be well positioned to submit competitive CAREER proposals, which has the potential for broadening participation.This workshop will advance knowledge related to NSF CAREER proposal writing in bio- and biomedical engineering from the perspective of rhetorical patterns. Rhetorical patterns in scientific writing are also influenced by sociocultural variables. For instance, women are socialized to not brag, despite the importance of using rhetorical devices to add promotional value to one’s research articles to convince peers of its value. Novice and non-native English technical writers can make better rhetorical choices when informed of rhetorical patterns. Rhetorical patterns are ways of organizing and communicating information and are critical to the clear presentation of scientific information. When English adjectives deviate from the order “opinion-size-age-shape-color-origin-material-purpose Noun,” a native English speaker will recognize that the sentence is odd but would likely be unable to articulate this list. Similarly, experienced proposal writers and reviewers understand correct rhetorical patterns in technical writing without necessarily being able to impart it to early career investigators. Just as incorrect word order reveals non-native English speakers, proposal writers who deviate from expected rhetorical patterns are identified as “non-native proposal writers.” The rhetoric of science contends that the practice of science is persuasive—in proposal writing, the author must convince reviewers that their research is based on sound scientific method or engineering principles. The rhetorical patterns in such writing involve patterns called “situation-problem-solution-evaluation” that showcase the researcher’s observational and experimental competence while demonstrating explanatory and predictive power. If these rhetorical patterns are not mastered, the likelihood of funding may be affected despite the competence of the researcher. Teaching proposal-writing by employing the most successful use of rhetorical patterns may lessen the impact of sociocultural differences in proposal review.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.