What Reviewers Really Read — Lost in Translation
Lost in Translation — A Different Kind of Grantsmanship Curriculum
From the Lost in Translation Curriculum

What You Write vs. What a Reviewer Actually Reads

Eight phrases that feel like strong grant writing — but signal performance instead of communication.

Early career scientists often struggle to spot performance in their own writing because the phrases feel natural after years of reading published grants. These are the red flags — phrases that feel like good writing but tell a reviewer you're performing rather than communicating.

What You Write
What the Reviewer Reads
"It is well established that..."
"They're about to tell me something I already know."
"There is a critical need for..."
"Everyone writes this. What specifically is the need?"
"This novel and innovative approach..."
"Telling me it's innovative instead of showing me."
"We will examine..."
"Vague. Examine how? To what end?"
"Little is known about..."
"Is anyone trying to know? Does it matter?"
"We are uniquely positioned to..."
"Prove it. Don't announce it."
"This study will fill a critical gap..."
"Which gap, specifically? And is it actually critical?"
"We hypothesize that..." (buried on page 8)
"I had to hunt for the hypothesis."

"These phrases are not evidence of bad science. They are evidence of the translation gap — the distance between what you actually think and what you write."

— From Module 1: The Return

If you recognize your own writing in this table, that's not a problem. It's useful information. It means the gap between your thinking and your writing is where reviewers are losing you — and that gap is something you can close.

This Is Just the First Gap

The distance between your thinking and your writing is Translation Gap 1 — and it's what Module 1 addresses with the Coffee Conversation method. But there are four more gaps where grants lose reviewers:

  • Gap 1: Between your thinking and your writing — you are here
  • Gap 2: Between your words and a reviewer's interpretation
  • Gap 3: Between your logic and their ability to follow it
  • Gap 4: Between your confidence and their trust
  • Gap 5: Between your vision and their willingness to fight for your score

The full Lost in Translation curriculum addresses all five — across 12 modules and 12 companion workbooks, aligned with the NIH 2025 Simplified Review Framework.

Close All Five Translation Gaps

12 modules. 12 companion workbooks. Lifetime access. Built for scientists who know their work is strong but keep hearing it's not landing with reviewers.

Start the Full Curriculum →

Founding member rate: $297 through May 16, 2026