"Thesis/Dissertation Proposal Writing Checklist and Evaluation Form"

Copyright © 2012 by John V. Richardson Jr.

UCLA Professor of Information Studies

jrichard (at) ucla dot edu

 

 

 

1. Problem Statement and Justification ( ____ out of 10 points)

            A. Is the problem established as a knowledge void or theoretical conflict?

            B. Is the problem related to its antecedents?

            C. Is it adequately justified?

            D. Is the problem original, truly significant, of national importance?

 

2. Review of the Literature ( ____ out of 6 points)

A. Does the review describe all the relevant literature, the process by which the literature was identified, and is the (APA, CMS, MLA or other) bibliographic style consistently applied?

            B. Does it identify the literature's strengthens and weaknesses?

            C. Does the review relate the literature to the problem at hand as well as show how the substance and method depend or deviate from prior work?

 

3. Theoretical Structure or Logical Framework ( ____ out of 9 points)

A. Are there at least three dimensions/perspectives (i.e., known, theory, and unknown) to the study? What are they?

            B. Are all the structural elements operationally defined and expounded?   If so, please list.

            C. Is the structure validated in terms of its advantages or disadvantages?  If not, derive them.

 

4. Objectives ( ____ out of 9 points)

            A. Are the objectives clearly proposed or stated?

            B. Does the P.I. propose different levels of vision, mission, or goals and objectives (i.e., to describe; to undertake analysis or compare/contrast; and to test a hypothesis)?

            C. Does the P.I. justify these specific objectives?

D. "Are the aims original and innovative?"

5. Research Questions ( ____ out of 8 points)

            A. Does the P.I. propose a limited number (i.e., key) of questions?  Name the key one.

            B. Are the questions clearly stated?

            C. Do the questions relate to the previous sections?

            D. Does the P.I. justify these questions?  If not, what might be justification?

 

6. Propositions or Thesis/Hypothesis ( ____ out of 8 points)

    1. Does the P.I. identify a specific proposition (a set of conceptual relationships for a qualitative study; if so, what are they) or a thesis/hypothesis (especially for statistical analysis)? Is it stated in the correct form (i.e., is a relationship stated between two or more concepts or variables)? Is a causal relationship present?
    2. Are all terms operationally stated?
    3. Can the thesis be inferred from the theory or logical structure?
    4. Regardless of qualitative or quantitative orientation, are consequences considered (i.e., Type I and Type II errors) and a statement of which is worse/better? And then is the level of significance (a=.01 or a=.05) set accordingly?

 

7. Methodology ( ____ out of 10 points)

            A. Is the method outlined? Is the method detailed?

B. Is the population defined in quantitative terms?   Give the exact population, even if you have to estimate it.

C. Is a (stratified) sample necessary?

D. Is the sample size accurate or is it a convenience, purposive, quota, nonrandom, and/or accidental one?

E. Are any remaining terms operationalized?

F. Does this section indicate that data screening (e.g., missing data, outliers, and normality) will be performed?

G. Is a bivariate or multi-variate model specified; are the statistical tests appropriate and have all the assumptions of these tests been examined and will these assumptions be met?

            H. Is there any organizational (e.g., step by step) plan?

            I. Is there a statement about ethical conduct, informed consent, or OPRS/HSPC exemption, and certification present?

            J. If necessary, are qualifications or limitations stated?

 

8. Schedule ( ____ out of 8 points)

            A. Are all the necessary tasks identified?

            B. Are they related to the organizational plan?

            C. Are specific milestones (i.e., dates) provided for each task?

            D. Can the P.I. accomplish it in the time allotted?

 

9. Budget ( ____ out of 10 points)

            A. Are natural expense objects used (examples of natural expense classifications include salaries and wages, employee benefits, travel, equipment, and supplies)?

            B. Do figures add up correctly?

            C. Is the budget reasonable and adequate?

D. Is the contingency calculated correctly (by adding it to the direct costs) and included when appropriate?

E. Is the overhead (i.e., the negotiated federal indirect costs) calculated correctly?

F. And added to make the total budget figure?

G. Is some quantitative measure of justification provided such as ROI or cost-analysis provided? If not, do the math.

 

10. Personnel ( ____ out of 10 points)

    1. Are all individuals involved in the project identified?
    2. "What prior experience have you had that are relevant to your topic or setting? What assumptions about your topic or setting have resulted from these experiences? What goals have emerged from these...? How have these experiences, assumptions, and goals shaped your decision to choose this topic, and the way you are approaching this project?"
    3. "What potential advantages do you think the goals, beliefs, and experiences that you described have for your study?"
    4. "Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work?" (i.e., does the P.I. have the necessary skills for successfully accomplishing the study? If not what do they plan to do; e.g., take courses, hire consultants?)
    5. "Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? And, is there evidence of institutional support?
    6. Are resumes or job descriptions appended?
    7. Can the P.I. disseminate the results of the study? Locally? Regionally? Nationally? Internationally?  What conferences and journals?

 

11. Evaluation Component ( ____ out of 7 points)

            A. "Are the proposed methods of evaluation appropriate to the project?

            B. Will the proposed evaluation be objective?

            C. Will the proposed evaluation methods measure the effectiveness of project activities in meeting project objectives?

            D. Will the evaluation plan produce valid and reliable data concerning the accomplishment of project objectives?

            E. Does the evaluation plan measure the project's effect on the project audience?"

 

12. Conclusion ( ____ out of 1 point)

            A. Does this paragraph summarize each of the preceding sections?

B. Does it restate the potential importance and impact?

C. "If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced?"

 

13. Format ( ____ out of 4 points)

            A. Is there a cover page with title of proposal, name, title, date, complete mailing address, telephone number, and an email address?

            B. Is there a table of contents, is every page double-spaced and numbered, are there adequate margins, and proofed and spell-checked?

C. Is there an informative rather than indicative abstract or complete executive summary including schedule, budget request, and four-to-six keywords used for selecting reviewers?

            D. Is there a list of colleagues who have reviewed the proposal as well as a list of four-to-six potential reviewers outside your institution who could review this proposal?

 

 

TOTAL POINTS: ______ out of 100 possible points.

 

Alpha proposals:

100-98 points, Outstanding Proposal (Grade A+)

97 - 95 points, Superior Proposal (Grade A)

94 - 90 points, Excellent Proposal (Grade A-)

 

Beta proposals:

89 - 80 points, Very Good Proposal (B+)

79 - 70 points, Good Proposal (B)

69 - 60 points, Satisfactory Proposal (B-)

 

NOTE: Points 5D, 11D-E and 13D are taken from the peer-review procedures of the National Institute of Health (see Science 276, 9 May 1997, p. 888) while points 11B-C are "Researcher Identity Memo" in Joseph A. Maxwell, Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach, 2nd edition. Applied Social Research Methods Series, vol. 41 (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2005) and point 12 is taken from Reviewing Applications for Discretionary Grants and Cooperative Agreements: A Workbook for Application Reviewers (Washington, DC: Horace Mann Center, March 1988), page II-33.

 

Additional Guidelines for Book Proposals

 

14. Market Characteristics ( ____ out of 10 points)

            A. Are all the primary and secondary markets identified?

            B. Are specific numbers provided about the size of these markets?

            C. Are mailing lists identified which could be used to reach these markets?

 

15. Manuscript Characteristics ( ____ out of 10 points)

            A. Does the proposal indicate the total number of double-spaced typed pages in the manuscript?

            B. Does the proposal indicate the type of word-processing and availability of diskettes for driving the typesetting?

            C. Is a tentative table of contents appended?

            D. Are draft chapters available for perusal?

            E. Does the proposal indicate with whom the copyright will reside?

 

16. Competition ( ____ out of 10 points)

            A. Is the proposed work unique?

            B. If not, are all similar works already in the marketplace fully identified?

            C. How is the proposed book different from these extant books?

 

  

Last update: 3  March 2012.

 

R;tw