Standard Research Grant Writing Seminar

1. Standard Research Grant Writing Seminar Nouhad Hammad September 2006 Notes:Notes:

2. 2 Grant Writing Seminar What is new at SSHRC: Appointment of a new president.

3. 3 Grant Writing Seminar Objectives of the Standard Research Grants Program Peer-reviewed independent programs of research Training of future researchers New theoretical or methodological approaches Disciplinary and multidisciplinary research Communication of research results SSHRC is the messenger; we are not the ones who are making the decisions on your applications; they are judged by your peers. Supports the training of future researchers by engaging them in the research. Encourages new theoretical or methodological approaches Supports disciplinary and multidiscip. research And assist in the communication of the research results. SSHRC is the messenger; we are not the ones who are making the decisions on your applications; they are judged by your peers. Supports the training of future researchers by engaging them in the research. Encourages new theoretical or methodological approaches Supports disciplinary and multidiscip. research And assist in the communication of the research results.

4. 4 Grant Writing Seminar Characteristics Three-year cycle Team and individual applications Funding of a program of research $100,000 per year or $250,000 over 3 years March 2006 : Success rate was 40.4% with an average three-year grant awarded of $83,500. Team and individual applications are accepted. The myth about SSHRC favouring team applications is not true. The average team applications received is around 39% mostly in Social Sciences Program of research: is defined as a set of research activities designed to advance knowledge. It could have an overall objective or a group of objectives; it may encompass one or more projects. We accept one-year or two projects, but they are not ranked as high as a 3 year program of research because of the comparison process; as well, you’re not doing yourself any favour because by applying to a 2 year program you have to wait to the 3rd year to apply. Should give a good justification of the budget, specially if it’s a high budget Team and individual applications are accepted. The myth about SSHRC favouring team applications is not true. The average team applications received is around 39% mostly in Social Sciences Program of research: is defined as a set of research activities designed to advance knowledge. It could have an overall objective or a group of objectives; it may encompass one or more projects. We accept one-year or two projects, but they are not ranked as high as a 3 year program of research because of the comparison process; as well, you’re not doing yourself any favour because by applying to a 2 year program you have to wait to the 3rd year to apply. Should give a good justification of the budget, specially if it’s a high budget

5. 5 Grant Writing Seminar Eligibility Affiliation with a Canadian post-secondary institution Submission of the Final Research Report Not a student: Ph.D. rule Citizenship: not an issue anymore. Talk about instructors (chargés de cours) Talk about instructors (chargés de cours)

6. 6 Grant Writing Seminar NEW SCHOLAR CATEGORY Has not been awarded, as a principal investigator, an SRG, MCRI or a Strategic Grant Completed highest degree less than five years OR Held tenure-track position less than 5 years OR Never had a tenure-track position OR Career interrupted or delayed for family reasons Score weighting - Should meet only one of these conditions - Applications in this category are adjudicated together (compared to each other while the stage of career is taken into consideration).- Should meet only one of these conditions - Applications in this category are adjudicated together (compared to each other while the stage of career is taken into consideration).

7. 7 Grant Writing Seminar NEW ADJUDICATION COMMITTEES (23) 23 committees 2 new adjudication Committees and five modified: Committee 27 New – Psychology 2: Counseling, developmental, human assessment and psychometrics, psychotherapy, industrial/organizational, sports and health. Committee 10 -Psychology 1: Social, personality and individual differences; behavioural, community and environmental; cultural Committee 28 New – Education 3: Counseling and career guidance, early childhood education, educational psychology, health sciences education, health promotion and disease prevention, measurement and evaluation, physical education, special education, teaching methods, pedagogy Last year, we had 21 committees. Every year we revise the committees structure and if needed new committees will be created.Last year, we had 21 committees. Every year we revise the committees structure and if needed new committees will be created.

8. 8 Grant Writing Seminar ADJUDICATION COMMITTEES Committee 12 (Education 1): Arts education, bilingual education, second language education, civic and environmental education, curriculum, geography and history education, moral, values and religious education, reading and writing, science and math education, teacher education Committee 17 (Education 2):Library and information science, archival science, adult, continuing and community education, comparative education, computer assisted instruction, distance education, educational administration, educational technology (media), higher education, history, philosophy and theory of education, sociology of education, vocational education

9. 9 Grant Writing Seminar ADJUDICATION COMMITTEES Special attention to Committees 21 (Management) and 22 (Finance and Accounting): Some sub-disciplines were moved from one to another. Committee 21: Human resources management, international business, management; marketing, organizational studies, business policy, industrial relations Committee 22: Accounting, finance,  management of information systems, management science, productions and operations management Notes:Notes:

10. 10 Grant Writing Seminar Choosing committee members Overall competence and credibility Scholarly stature of the individual nominees Appropriate representation on the basis of: areas of expertise small/mid-size/large university geographical region language gender The program officer recommends the names of the committee members and SSHRC’s president approves the slate. All committee slates are approved by SSHRC’s president. Scholarly stature: well published; well known in their fields; a good track record; doesn’t mean we’re only recruiting les têtes grises; younger scholars are also well represented in our committees.The program officer recommends the names of the committee members and SSHRC’s president approves the slate. All committee slates are approved by SSHRC’s president. Scholarly stature: well published; well known in their fields; a good track record; doesn’t mean we’re only recruiting les têtes grises; younger scholars are also well represented in our committees.

11. 11 Grant Writing Seminar Choosing external assessors Two assessors chosen per file Conflict of interest: a close friend a relative a research collaborator a departmental colleague a student previously under the applicant’s supervision a person with whom the applicant is involved in a dispute a person with whom the applicant is involved in a partnership We do make effort to chose from your suggested list for external assessors; however, we are not bound by it. We do apply some criteria and rigour in choosing the external assessors. Therefore, be careful when you nominate your suggested assessors.We do make effort to chose from your suggested list for external assessors; however, we are not bound by it. We do apply some criteria and rigour in choosing the external assessors. Therefore, be careful when you nominate your suggested assessors.

12. 12 Grant Writing Seminar EVALUATION CRITERIA (Record of Research) over the last 6 years unless career interruption Quality and significance of published work Originality and impact of previous research Quantity of research activity Importance of other scholarly activities Recentness of output Relevance of dissemination to non-academics Productivity from previous grant(s) Training of future researchers Notes:Notes:

13. 13 Grant Writing Seminar EVALUATION CRITERIA (Program of Research) Originality and contribution to advancement of knowledge Intellectual, social and cultural significance of research Appropriateness of the theoretical approaches/framework Appropriateness of the research strategies/methodologies Good literature review Suitability of plans to communicate research results The nature and extent of research training Committee members are looking for originality and the impact of the proposed research. Theory: could be a killing point. Method: anothor killing point Avoid saying that in the first year you will be doing Lit review….Is Lit review fairly complete? Is it up to date? Does it cover all aspects of the proposed research? 3rd killing point. Communicate: avoid saying that you’ll be going to 3 conferences the 1st year; What are you communicating? Variety of communication venues. What will the student do?Committee members are looking for originality and the impact of the proposed research. Theory: could be a killing point. Method: anothor killing point Avoid saying that in the first year you will be doing Lit review….Is Lit review fairly complete? Is it up to date? Does it cover all aspects of the proposed research? 3rd killing point. Communicate: avoid saying that you’ll be going to 3 conferences the 1st year; What are you communicating? Variety of communication venues. What will the student do?

14. 14 Grant Writing Seminar Preparation Do not submit a “premature” proposal. Invest time in the preparation of your proposal. Ensure that there are no errors Present a well-written and carefully crafted proposal. This is what we call the ‘fishing expedition’: if you decide to apply that means you know what you’re talking about; otherwise, how can you convince the committee? Some people do it for the experience of applying to SSHRC, that’s o.k. but you know that it’s going to take about 2 months to prepare a good proposal; at the same time it takes around the same time to write an article. Which one you chose is up to you; my advice to you is build your research record because this is your ticket for a better chance in getting a SSHRC grant. There are also other mechanisms to explore a premature idea; you could apply to the Research Development Initiative (RDI) or to some internal grants that SSHRC funds through Aid to Small Universities and Institutional Grants programs. Don’t wait until October 1st to start working on your proposal…. It shows (it’s an October 14 application) Don’t annoy your committee by having a spelling and grammar errors; these are the most annoying factors; some of the errors might also be factual like typing Louis XIV instead of Louis XVI when your proposal is about Louis XVI If by reading the summary page we don’t know what your research is about, I believe your chances of succeeding are very slim. Don’t take it for granted that all committee members and external assessors understand what you’re talking about, specially if you’re applying to a multidisciplinary committee. Advice: ask a colleague or two from your discipline or from other disciplines to read your proposal. This is what we call the ‘fishing expedition’: if you decide to apply that means you know what you’re talking about; otherwise, how can you convince the committee? Some people do it for the experience of applying to SSHRC, that’s o.k. but you know that it’s going to take about 2 months to prepare a good proposal; at the same time it takes around the same time to write an article. Which one you chose is up to you; my advice to you is build your research record because this is your ticket for a better chance in getting a SSHRC grant. There are also other mechanisms to explore a premature idea; you could apply to the Research Development Initiative (RDI) or to some internal grants that SSHRC funds through Aid to Small Universities and Institutional Grants programs. Don’t wait until October 1st to start working on your proposal…. It shows (it’s an October 14 application) Don’t annoy your committee by having a spelling and grammar errors; these are the most annoying factors; some of the errors might also be factual like typing Louis XIV instead of Louis XVI when your proposal is about Louis XVI If by reading the summary page we don’t know what your research is about, I believe your chances of succeeding are very slim. Don’t take it for granted that all committee members and external assessors understand what you’re talking about, specially if you’re applying to a multidisciplinary committee. Advice: ask a colleague or two from your discipline or from other disciplines to read your proposal.

15. 15 Grant Writing Seminar Overall presentation Convey and inspire confidence Present a challenging topic Establish clearly the need for the research. Demonstrate its importance and originality. Present your proposal in such a way to convey and inspire confidence and convince your peers that the likelihood of success is high. Avoid being tentative; avoid using words like ‘I hope’ or ‘I wish’ because it doesn’t convey the message that you are sure about the success of the research. There’s always an element of risk in any research, but for the committee, this risk should be calculated. A topic that sparks the interest and engages the imagination of the peer reviewers. If you are excited about your research, this should be evident in your proposal How this research is different from other research in the same area; don’t say you are doing it because you want to fill a gap; heard it from several committees not all gaps need to be filled… again you should demonstrate why it is necessary to do it Like it’s a new approach that would contribute to new knowledge in the field. Don’t forget that committees are in the business of refusing grants since SSHRC has not enough money to fund all submitted applications. Therefore, they look for faults in a proposal to be able to justify the refusal.Present your proposal in such a way to convey and inspire confidence and convince your peers that the likelihood of success is high. Avoid being tentative; avoid using words like ‘I hope’ or ‘I wish’ because it doesn’t convey the message that you are sure about the success of the research. There’s always an element of risk in any research, but for the committee, this risk should be calculated. A topic that sparks the interest and engages the imagination of the peer reviewers. If you are excited about your research, this should be evident in your proposal How this research is different from other research in the same area; don’t say you are doing it because you want to fill a gap; heard it from several committees not all gaps need to be filled… again you should demonstrate why it is necessary to do it Like it’s a new approach that would contribute to new knowledge in the field. Don’t forget that committees are in the business of refusing grants since SSHRC has not enough money to fund all submitted applications. Therefore, they look for faults in a proposal to be able to justify the refusal.

16. 16 Grant Writing Seminar Overall presentation (continued) Prepare your proposal with the assessors and committee in mind. Strike a balance between ambition and realism. Demonstrate how this new research builds upon past work. Have your grant proposal read by colleagues who have been successful in the SRG competition Follow the application and CV instructions Anticipate possible questions of objections that may arise.. Specially on the theory and methodology used, e.g why this theory and not that one? Specially for new scholars. One of the committee comments: it’s overly ambitious. In saying that, their main concern is it deliverable in 3 years? You can set challenging but realistic goals. Also, be as specific as possible about the parameters of your research specifically if it’s chronological or if it’s a comparison (why 1930-1960 or why comparing these two and not these two) It’s a new dimension and a new perspective as well as a new research question. If you are changing your research field, my advice is to show credibility before applying like published one article or presented in a conference before applying. Print both application and CV instructions and follow themAnticipate possible questions of objections that may arise.. Specially on the theory and methodology used, e.g why this theory and not that one? Specially for new scholars. One of the committee comments: it’s overly ambitious. In saying that, their main concern is it deliverable in 3 years? You can set challenging but realistic goals. Also, be as specific as possible about the parameters of your research specifically if it’s chronological or if it’s a comparison (why 1930-1960 or why comparing these two and not these two) It’s a new dimension and a new perspective as well as a new research question. If you are changing your research field, my advice is to show credibility before applying like published one article or presented in a conference before applying. Print both application and CV instructions and follow them

17. 17 Grant Writing Seminar Summary Page Clearly indicate the purpose, the objectives, the context and impact. - This is sometime the only page that all of the committee members would read; it is also used as a reference page during adjudication.- This is sometime the only page that all of the committee members would read; it is also used as a reference page during adjudication.

18. 18 Grant Writing Seminar Statement of objectives and theoretical framework Clear and precise objectives. Clear theoretical or conceptual framework. Define all key terms or concepts. Complete literature review. Append a list of all references cited. Present your objectives and key research questions in a clear and precise manner Place it in the current debates: show that you know them and that you have chosen A instead of B and why. And if possible, be aware of pitfalls and how to address them. Present differences in viewpoints in a positive and constructive manner Committee members don’t understand everything; the underlying assumptions should be made explicit and justified Reasonably complete literature review Not everything written on the subject but mainly current and key bibliography. We use this list to select external assessors for the application (don’t include only dead people).Present your objectives and key research questions in a clear and precise manner Place it in the current debates: show that you know them and that you have chosen A instead of B and why. And if possible, be aware of pitfalls and how to address them. Present differences in viewpoints in a positive and constructive manner Committee members don’t understand everything; the underlying assumptions should be made explicit and justified Reasonably complete literature review Not everything written on the subject but mainly current and key bibliography. We use this list to select external assessors for the application (don’t include only dead people).

19. 19 Grant Writing Seminar Methodology Explain and justify methodology. Synergy between objectives and methodology. There is no right or wrong method if it’s well justified and realistic: doable, realistic and justified There should be an evident synergy between the cited objectives and the chosen methodology and the budget justification: can’t plan on interviewing 10 people and ask for 4 graduate students ($12,000 each) to help you doing that!!!There is no right or wrong method if it’s well justified and realistic: doable, realistic and justified There should be an evident synergy between the cited objectives and the chosen methodology and the budget justification: can’t plan on interviewing 10 people and ask for 4 graduate students ($12,000 each) to help you doing that!!!

20. 20 Grant Writing Seminar Presenting your curriculum vitae 60% of the score to the Record of Research Follow the instructions. Organize your publications. Avoid “inflating” the c.v. Demonstrate productivity from previous grants. Print the instructions before starting to complete your CV organize: provide full references of your published work including publisher, the year and specially the page number for your articles. Organize them according to the categories specified in the instructions and in a logical manner according to your discipline Inflating: respect the 6 year limit for publication; also if article is translated in different languages, no need to cite them all Don’t forget the star beside publications from previous SSHRC grants.Print the instructions before starting to complete your CV organize: provide full references of your published work including publisher, the year and specially the page number for your articles. Organize them according to the categories specified in the instructions and in a logical manner according to your discipline Inflating: respect the 6 year limit for publication; also if article is translated in different languages, no need to cite them all Don’t forget the star beside publications from previous SSHRC grants.

21. 21 Grant Writing Seminar EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES/ CAREER INTERRUPTIONS LEGITIMATE EXCUSES Serious health problems, death of a loved one, ageing parents, and leaves (child birth, parental, adoption leave…) NOT LEGITIMATE EXCUSES Heavy teaching load, having to sit on committees, having to move, having to write a book, buying a car… Use this part carefully. Cttee members can identify with and understand exceptional circumstances like parental leaves, sickness or caring for aging parents. However, they are not very impressed when a researcher cites a heavy teaching load or moving a house, or buying a car (no joke) as exceptional circumstances that delayed his/her productivity. Use this part carefully. Cttee members can identify with and understand exceptional circumstances like parental leaves, sickness or caring for aging parents. However, they are not very impressed when a researcher cites a heavy teaching load or moving a house, or buying a car (no joke) as exceptional circumstances that delayed his/her productivity.

22. 22 Grant Writing Seminar Budget Reasonable and fully justified budget. Check list of eligible and ineligible expenses. Explain the role of students. Link between research objectives and budget. Budget must not be an afterthought. You will not fail on the budget but it may raise a reasonable doubt that if you can’t put a budget together… if your numbers don’t add up … these are annoying factors. Eligible: in the grant holder’s guide; not sure, contact program officer. Students: Remember that slavery has been abolished long time ago…. What are the anticipated benefits to their training. If 20 why? Post-doc why not a graduate student. Don’t view your SRG application as the pipeline for increased graduate funding. Travel: 1st year travel to conferences, why needed? 4 star hotel or business class? a computer for 10k? Why… no one should drive a Lexus when Kia’s are available. Also remember that committee members suddenly become accountants: committees will fund what they are convinced is necessary, and nothing more.Budget must not be an afterthought. You will not fail on the budget but it may raise a reasonable doubt that if you can’t put a budget together… if your numbers don’t add up … these are annoying factors. Eligible: in the grant holder’s guide; not sure, contact program officer. Students: Remember that slavery has been abolished long time ago…. What are the anticipated benefits to their training. If 20 why? Post-doc why not a graduate student. Don’t view your SRG application as the pipeline for increased graduate funding. Travel: 1st year travel to conferences, why needed? 4 star hotel or business class? a computer for 10k? Why… no one should drive a Lexus when Kia’s are available. Also remember that committee members suddenly become accountants: committees will fund what they are convinced is necessary, and nothing more.

23. 23 Grant Writing Seminar Team applications Applicant should demonstrate the value of team application Each member is assessed MYTH: SSHRC favors team applications. TRUTH: only 39 % of applications are from teams Don’t cobble together a team to mask any shortcomings in the PI’s CV. According to his/her role and to their contribution to the overall project. CV assessed accordingly. If you team up with a senior scholar who is doing very little that doesn’t help. Last year, 39% of the applications received were team applications. Don’t cobble together a team to mask any shortcomings in the PI’s CV. According to his/her role and to their contribution to the overall project. CV assessed accordingly. If you team up with a senior scholar who is doing very little that doesn’t help. Last year, 39% of the applications received were team applications.

24. 24 Grant Writing Seminar Things to Keep in Mind! Do not be discouraged by a previously unsuccessful application. In 2006, success rate was 40.4%. Another 39% were recommended but not funded. Past applications are not brought in to the committee. each application is treated as a new one. The Response to Previous Critique page (which is optional) should be used in a constructive way. (Don’t say that last year’s committee members were complete idiots) Past applications are not brought in to the committee. each application is treated as a new one. The Response to Previous Critique page (which is optional) should be used in a constructive way. (Don’t say that last year’s committee members were complete idiots)

25. 25 Grant Writing Seminar COMMITTEE COMMENTS: THE TOP 4 Incomplete or outdated literature review Lack of theoretical rationale Lack of specificity and justification in the methodology No link between the conceptual framework and the methodology From the committee’s perspective, these are the most common comments. We are also looking to improve the communication of committee comments to applicants.From the committee’s perspective, these are the most common comments. We are also looking to improve the communication of committee comments to applicants.

26. 26 Grant Writing Seminar PEER REVIEW PROCESS Peer review fatigue: Becoming more difficult to recruit committee members And more difficult to find external assessors Streamlining the adjudication meetings: Pilot Project 2006: All but 4 committees were pilot committees Top 15%, bottom 35%, no committee comments Flagging system Teleconference and benchmark files ranking They sit for free, they all hold SSHRC grants and all hold research positions; they read and comment 30 to 40 applications; takes around 3 weeks to do a proper job in reading. Becoming more difficult to convince them to participate if they have to be in Ottawa for 4 or 5 days. External assessors: 2006 we contacted around 12,000 external assessors to secure around 5,000 evaluations. From all over the world (almost 50% foreigners) Pilot project to respond to committees membership fatigue: less days in Ottawa makes it easier for them to accept. And makes better use of their time in Ottawa. Non-pilot: multidisciplinary, philosophy, one of the lit committees and law and criminology committee. Based on readers preliminary scores, the top 15% and bottom 35% not discussed unless flagged; receive only external assessments and no committee comments. Flagging system: significant discrepancy between scores of the 2 readers; discrepancy between readers scores and external assessors comments; between committee members and readers; no external assessment; non-mainstream approach; research tools; anyone could flag including the program officer. Teleconference and Benchmark: controlled by committee Chair because it’s part of the peer review process; 4 to 6 files (depends on the committees); what constitutes a good, medium or bad file in this committee during this competition. This year, if the pilot continues (most likely), we will provide rankings to the bottom 35%. They sit for free, they all hold SSHRC grants and all hold research positions; they read and comment 30 to 40 applications; takes around 3 weeks to do a proper job in reading. Becoming more difficult to convince them to participate if they have to be in Ottawa for 4 or 5 days. External assessors: 2006 we contacted around 12,000 external assessors to secure around 5,000 evaluations. From all over the world (almost 50% foreigners) Pilot project to respond to committees membership fatigue: less days in Ottawa makes it easier for them to accept. And makes better use of their time in Ottawa. Non-pilot: multidisciplinary, philosophy, one of the lit committees and law and criminology committee. Based on readers preliminary scores, the top 15% and bottom 35% not discussed unless flagged; receive only external assessments and no committee comments. Flagging system: significant discrepancy between scores of the 2 readers; discrepancy between readers scores and external assessors comments; between committee members and readers; no external assessment; non-mainstream approach; research tools; anyone could flag including the program officer. Teleconference and Benchmark: controlled by committee Chair because it’s part of the peer review process; 4 to 6 files (depends on the committees); what constitutes a good, medium or bad file in this committee during this competition. This year, if the pilot continues (most likely), we will provide rankings to the bottom 35%.

27. 27 Grant Writing Seminar WAYS TO ENSURE YOU WILL ANNOY THE COMMITTEE Write in a really small font and rely exclusively on your spellchecker Avoid paragraph breaks and headings Reduce the space between lines Reduce the margins Do all the above and whine that you do not have enough space to explain your methodology Use as many acronyms as you can but then change their spelling part way through the application Notes:Notes:

28. 28 Grant Writing Seminar MORE WAYS TO ENSURE YOU WILL ANNOY THE COMMITTEE Justify your application to interdisciplinary studies on the basis that your colleagues in your discipline are hopelessly out of date Keep submitting the same application without taking any notice of previous committee’s comments Identify the leading figure in the field as an “idiot” Tell the committee all kinds of things about yourself which were not requested and which are not relevant to the application

29. 29 Grant Writing Seminar BE ANNOYING IN YOUR RESEARCH RECORD Double-count publications in your CV Avoid paragraph breaks Mix up your refereed publications Include articles that are more than six years old Invent your own method of referencing Do not include page #s Do not indicate what was produced from a past SSHRC grant Notes:Notes:

30. 30 Grant Writing Seminar MORE WAYS TO ENSURE YOU ARE ANNOYING Claim that nobody has ever done anything vaguely related to your topic before Insist that you are waiting for the science to catch up with you Insist that you have nothing to learn from recent scholarship Insist that there is a conspiracy out there trying to get you (Marxist, feminist, right-wing, etc.) Critique last year’s committee members Get together a team of three researchers and submit basically the same proposal three times (to the same committee) Notes:Notes:

31. 31 Grant Writing Seminar STILL MORE Assume you are so prominent you can get by on your record and don’t bother much about the program of research (the trust me application) Include a prominent researcher as a Co-applicant but do not give him/her a clearly defined role Do not indicate productivity from past grant(s) Ask for more money when the results of the last grant(s) have not yet been published.Ask for more money when the results of the last grant(s) have not yet been published.

32. 32 Grant Writing Seminar BE ANNOYING IN YOUR BUDGET Add up your budget incorrectly Say you need a full time research director Ask for an $8,000 notebook when all you need is a simple word processor Plan to attend many conferences and fly business class Do not give students definite and meaningful tasks Use lots of non-student personnel Put office furniture in your budget Conferences: specially year one to exotic places for example studying French Canadian in Mexico in January. Students: employ a graduate student to do your filing or to help cart books from and to the libraryConferences: specially year one to exotic places for example studying French Canadian in Mexico in January. Students: employ a graduate student to do your filing or to help cart books from and to the library

33. 33 Grant Writing Seminar How to stay informed and involved? Visit the web site for regular updates. www.sshrc.ca Contact your Program Officer http://www.sshrc.ca/web/apply/background/standard_officers_e.asp Notes:Notes:

34. 34 Grant Writing Seminar References: Merriam, S. B. (2002). Introduction to qualitative research. In S. Merriam & Associates (Eds.), Qualitative research in practice (pp. 4-17). San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons.   Maxwell, J.A. (2005). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (2nd ed.). U.S.A: Sage Publications.