Proposal
Element
Abstract
Introduction/Back
ground:
Relevance,
Significance and
Purpose of the
Project
Missing or
unacceptable
0-1 pt
Abstract was omitted or
inappropriate given the
problem, research
questions, artistic or
scholarly goals and
methods.
Statement of the
relevance, significance,
purpose,
questions/hypotheses, or
definitions of constructs
and variables were
omitted or inappropriate.
Developing
2 pts
Accomplished
3 pts
Exemplary
4 pts
Abstract lacks relevance or fails
to offer appropriate details about
the research question, artistic or
scholarly goals, variables,
context, or methods of the
proposed study.
Although relevance is stated, the
statement is too broad or the
description fails to establish the
importance of the research
question or creative/scholarly
goal. Connections to the
literature and previous work are
unclear, debatable, irrelevant or
insignificant.
Description of the innovative
nature or originality of the
project is present but underdeveloped or weakly compelling
Abstract is relevant, offering
appropriate details about the
proposed project.
Abstract is informative, succinct, and
offers sufficiently specific details about the
research question, artistic or scholarly
goals, variables, context, and proposed
methods of the project.
Identifies a relevant research
issue. Connections
established with the literature
and/or previous work.
Articulates a specific, significant
relevance/significance by connection to
the literature and/or previous work.
Statement of purpose flows logically from
the introduction. The research problem
and the statement of significance clearly
establish relevance to the discipline.
Description of the innovative
nature or originality of the
project is present and
adequate.
Research questions, artistic
goals or scholarly
questions/goals are stated,
connected to the discipline,
and supported by previous
work and/or literature.
Constructs have been
identified and variables have
been operationally defined.
Assumptions and limitations
are present.
The research design or
creative/scholarly methods
have been identified and
described in sufficiently
detailed terms. Applicant has
demonstrated access to
needed resources; some
limitations and assumptions
have been identified.
Description of innovative nature or
originality of the project is clear, well
articulated, and believable; and likely to
contribute to an advancement or
paradigm shift in the field.
Articulates clear, reasonable, and
succinct research questions, artistic goals
or scholarly questions/goals and
definitions given the purpose, design, and
methods of the proposed project. A
thorough, reasonable discussion of
assumptions, previous work and
limitations is provided. All elements are
mutually supportive.
Innovative
nature; originality,
novelty, and
creativity of the
proposed activity
Research
questions, artistic
or scholarly
inquiry/goals,
assumptions,
limitations
Statement of the
innovative nature or
originality of the project is
missing or inappropriate.
Research questions,
artistic or scholarly
inquiry/goals,
assumptions and
limitations were omitted
or inappropriate given the
context, purpose, or
methods of the study.
Elements are poorly formed,
ambiguous, or not logically
connected to the description of
the problem, questions, goals,
purpose, or research methods
Methods
The research design or
project methods/materials
is inappropriate or has
not been clearly identified
or described; applicant
has not demonstrated
access to all resources
needed to perform the
work; limitations and
assumptions are omitted.
The research design is
confusing or incomplete given
the research questions and
sampling strategy. Methods,
materials and resources have
not been identified or access
sufficiently demonstrated;
important limitations and
assumptions have not been
identified.
The research design or creative/
scholarly methods, purpose, questions,
resources and design are mutually
supportive and coherent. For research
projects, attention has been given to
eliminating alternative explanations and
controlling extraneous variables.
Appropriate and important limitations and
assumptions have been clearly stated.
Qualification of
applicant
Applicant has not
demonstrated that s/he is
qualified to carry out the
work.
Outcomes/Impact
and
Dissemination
Outcomes and/or impact
are not appropriate,
unlikely to be realized or
not described.
Dissemination plan is
weak or missing.
Budget and/or
Justification are missing;
budget doesn’t reflect
costs described in or
implied by the narrative
Budget and
Budget
Justification
Applicant seems to lack
qualifications to carry out some
of the work; may be lacking
suitable collaborators or support
staff.
Outcomes and/or impact are
insufficient for the inputs or
project impact is not clearly
demonstrated. Dissemination
plan lacks obvious mechanisms.
Applicant seems qualified to
carry out the work.
Collaborators and/or support
staff are adequate.
Applicant is well-qualified to carry out the
work; collaborators and support staff are
well justified, highly qualified, and
accessible.
Outcomes and impact are
appropriate and adequately
described. Dissemination
plan is adequate.
Budget is inaccurate; budget
justification does not explain the
basis for some or all costs;
salary request(s) seem(s)
excessive for the project and/or
level of effort is not adequately
justified
Budget and justification are
adequate and complete; level
of effort is justified and overall
project cost seems
appropriate.
Outcomes and impact are appropriate for
the inputs and are well-described.
Dissemination plan is well-articulated,
believable, and describes numerous and
resourceful mechanism(s) for
disseminating outcomes.
Budget and justification are complete and
accurate; explanations are
comprehensive; costs are appropriate and
tie back to the narrative; effort justification
is thorough and appropriate.