Read on Twitter
I always start reviewing @CIHR_IRSC doctoral scholarship applications thinking of it as service that feels like a chore, but finish feeling super excited about the amazing health research trainees working in Canada. Wish we could fund (almost) all of them! #phdlife
My tips for success in this competition: 1. Remember that your application is likely reviewed by someone who has no expertise in your field. Contextualize the significance and feasibility of your research for us. Don't assume that we'll just get it. Connect the dots.
2. Reference letters are SO important. For candidates, choose someone who knows your research work well. The Prof you TA'd for is probably not the best choice. For supervisors, recognize that your work translating this candidate's excellence is key to their success.
3. The page where you explain your role in your publications is gold. Use it. Tell me how great that journal was, or that this was the first time anyone had demonstrated that finding. Chances are I'm not going to be able to ascertain that info from the citation.
4. "We will collect information on sex and run according analyses" doesn't count as a rigorous sex and gender analysis. CIHR has resources for this: http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/50836.html
5. No one is perfect. If your academic achievement was affected by extenuating circumstances, find a way to communicate that. Perhaps in a referee letter? Perhaps in your statement of training expectations?
6. When I read your research plan, I care most about the significance of the problem, your potential to complete this research, and the potential of that research to impact the health of Canadians. Don't waste precious word space detailing the minutiae of your stats plan.
7. When thinking about your Training Environment, tell me why this program and supervisor are the best fit for your research. Don't bother telling me that you have space to do it, access to the library system, and courses to take. What's unique and special? What's necessary?
8. For all of these- provide the context. Don't assume that I'll know why the equipment is essential, or why this research network is helpful. It may be famous in your field, but chances are your reviewer is from a different field. Help us understand why you deserve the funding.
Your application is reviewed by an independent scientist (typically a faculty member at a Canadian university) who has expertise in the field of health research. CIHR does not solicit reviewers with specific expertise in the topic of doctoral scholarship applications.
They publish a list of reviewers for past years. You are assigned to either Panel A or B based on your field. Your application could be reviewed by any reviewer in that panel. Note diversity of expertise. http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/50543.html
CIHR is quite transparent about this- poke around in the website a bit and you’ll find lots of explanation. E.g http://www.cihr-irsc.gc.ca/e/48273.html
