NORDP Annual Research Development Conference

Pre-conference Concurrent Workshops

You have the option to enroll in a pre-conference workshop during the conference registration process. Click the Registration link above. Registration funds will be returned if the workshop is cancelled.

Collaborative Communication for Team Science

Holly J. Falk-Krzesinski, Ph.D.
Vice President, Global Academic & Research Relations, Elsevier
Senior Adjunct Lecturer, Northwestern University

Steven Crowley, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Philosophy
Boise State University

Michael O’Rourke, Ph.D.
Professor, Philosophy and AgBio Research
Michigan State University

The Toolbox Project1,2 Collaborative Communication Workshop provides an empirically-grounded, practical approach to fostering cross-disciplinary communication in team science. Rooted in philosophical analysis, the workshop enables investigators, research development professionals, project managers, and collaborators to engage in a structured dialogue about research assumptions and cross-disciplinary collaboration. This approach yields both self-awareness and mutual understanding, supplying individuals with the robust foundation needed for effective collaborative research.

Led by Toolbox Project developers and a leader in research development, the NORDP Collaborative Communication Workshop will offer a train-the-trainer approach to engaging research development professionals in conducting workshops at their campuses. Participants will engage in the Toolbox Project questionnaire via small group discussion, sharing respective views in response to a number of probing statements about science motivation, methodology, confirmation, objectivity, values, and reductionism. They will receive detailed instruction on how to facilitate workshop discussions with groups of researchers and/or trainees at their home institutions and learn how they can participate in ongoing research related to collaborative communication. After an initial overview, the workshop will be conducted through interactive small group activities.

Limit: 36 participants

  • Eigenbrode, S.D., O'Rourke, M., Wulfhorst, J.D., Althoff, D.M., Goldberg, C.S., Merrill, K., Morse, W., Nielsen-Pincus, M.A.X., Stephens, J., Winowiecki, L., et al. (2007). Employing Philosophical Dialogue in Collaborative Science. Bioscience 57, 55-64.
  • Crowley, S., Eigenbrode, S.D., O’Rourke, M., and Wulfhorst, J.D. (2010). Cross-disciplinary localization: A philosophical approach. MultiLingual, September, 1-4.


Maximizing the Effectiveness of the Red Team Review

Ruth Ann Hendrickson
Vice President, Corporate Bids and Proposals

Jeff Agnoli
Education, Funding, and Research Development
The Ohio State University

“Red teams” are a tool the Research Development professional can use to improve proposal quality. An effective proposal Red Team review requires a skilled leader who can select reviewers, train the team, and facilitate a review that contributes to the proposal team’s goals. Poorly conducted reviews often end up being disjointed peer reviews that provide conflicting messages, perfunctory check-mark milestones that interrupt writing without providing clear benefits or, at their worst, exercises that demoralize weary proposal teams. This workshop will address the purpose of the Red Team in the proposal development process, the roles of the Red Team leader and Red Team reviewers, and tools and techniques for conducting effective reviews.

The workshop will begin with an overview and brief Q&A session. Participants will then work in simulated red teams to review a solicitation, prepare score sheets, review a proposal document, evaluate and score the document, discuss their reviews, and prepare a debriefing for a proposal team.

Limit: 40 participants


Critiquing Proposals When You’re Not a Writing or Subject Matter Specialist: A Hands-on Experience

Paul Tuttle
Director of Proposal Development
North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University

Because they are not writing or subject matter experts, many pre-award administrators or proposal development specialists feel awkward when asked to critique proposals prior to submission. What aspects should they critique? What can add value?

This workshop will offer ways to implement the following four strategies via the associated activities: (1) assessing the persuasiveness of the writing from a classical rhetoric perspective, via a rhetorical analysis of a sample proposal; (2) assuming the persona of an educated reader with no knowledge of the field, via a script and related role-play scenario; (3) addressing the logic and structure of the proposal elements at the subsection and sentence levels, via guided small-group editing and revision exercises; and (4) reminding the writer of the inherent “sales pitch” aspect of a proposal’s rhetorical situation, via a summary of existing advice and best practices, a related script, and a related role-play scenario.

Limit: 50 participants