Hints for Writing a Successful Proposal
Factors important in writing a quality proposal
- Does the proposal demonstrate a thorough knowledge of the field?
- Is there a well-defined gap?
- Are the objectives clearly stated?
- Is the study well-designed with appropriate methodologies?
- Does the description of methods demonstrate the technical competence needed to successfully carry out the project?
- Is the proposal well-written? Does it look good?
- Typos & grammatical errors create a negative impression of the author's competence & attention to detail.
Introducing the research problem & objectives
A proposal's introduction will be similar in structure & content to the introduction of a research paper. In other words, the Introduction should:
- Summarize the current state of knowledge
- Identify the gap, question, or problem that the study will address
- State the objective(s) of proposed study
The primary goal of a proposal is to convince reviewers of the significance of the proposed work. It's not enough to assert that a problem exists or that a question has not been answered. Providing relevant background information in the Introduction is important in letting reviewers know:
- how well you have searched the literature to find relevant citations
- how well you understand and explain the place of your proposed work within the context of the current literature
"Refer to the literature thoroughly and thoughtfully. Explain what gaps in the literature would be filled by your project. In the past, research proposals have not been funded when applicants seemed to be unaware of relevant published work or when the proposed research or study design had already been tried and judged inadequate." (NIH guidelines)
KEEP IN MIND that you are reviewing previous research to introduce YOUR study & to explain how your study will further the field's knowledge. Don't simply write a literature review. Use the literature to focus a reviewer's attention on the importance of YOUR study.
Describing proposed methods
The methods section of a journal article should be so detailed that another investigator could replicate the study. For a proposal, fewer details (but more explanation of rationale) are needed. In other words, you should do more than just explain how the study will be carried out; explain why this approach, & not others, was chosen. So, the methods section of a proposal should be well-documented, with references used where possible to lend support to your choices. Providing such information helps reviewers understand what's needed to accomplish the project & helps reviewers determine whether you understand what's needed to carry out this project. As pointed out in the NIH (1993) guidelines:
"While you may safely assume the reviewers are experts in the field and familiar with current methodology, they will not make the same assumption about you . . . Since the reviewers are experienced research scientists, they will undoubtedly be aware of possible problem areas, even if you don't include them in your research plan. But they have no way of knowing that you too have considered these problem areas unless you fully discuss any potential pitfalls and alternative approaches."
Some reasons why applications aren't funded
- Lack of new or original ideas
- Proposals that extend previous work to a limited degree, e.g., we know that individuals in many species of birds engage in extra-pair copulations but we don't know if they do in my species, or we know that individuals breeding in small forest fragments have lower nesting success than those in larger fragments but we don't know if they do in my state, are probably less likely to be funded than proposals that describe more original work.
- Unfocused research plan
- All other things being equal, a proposal that is hypothesis-driven is likely to be more favorably received than one that is not. "Fishing expeditions" and primarily "descriptive" proposals are less likely to be funded.
- Insufficient knowledge of relevant, published work
- Questionable reasoning in experimental approach
- Unrealistically large amount of work
- Lack of sufficient experimental detail
- Badly written
- The ideas may be good but the writing is such that reviewers have trouble understanding what the writer is proposing.
- Submission of an application that isn't well written suggests that the writer wasn't willing to invest sufficient time and effort. If not willing to do so with the application, then the applicant may not be willing to do so when carrying out their study.
Hints for improving your application
As noted above, applications with typos & grammatical errors create a negative impression of the author's competence & attention to detail. Here are some hints for improving your application:
Omit unneeded words and shorten wordy phrases. For example:
- WORDY: There is now a method, which was developed by Jones (1973), for analyzing the vegetation around bird nests.
- BETTER: Jones (1973) developed a method for analyzing nest-site vegetation.
- WORDY: It has been reported by Smith (1988) that the majority of warblers are insectivorous.
- BETTER: Most warblers are insectivorous (Smith 1988).
- WORDY: It should be noted that most nests were in close proximity to the forest edge.
- BETTER: Most nests were near the forest edge.
- WORDY: Singing will be monitored in order to determine if older males
- BETTER: Singing will be monitored to determine if older males produce more complex songs.
- WORDY: Mist nets will be checked on an hourly basis.
- BETTER: Mist nets will be checked hourly.
- WORDY: It was demonstrated that juvenile sparrows lack the ability to forage as efficiently as adults.
- BETTER: Juvenile sparrows forage less efficiently than adults.
Important Hint: Modifiers such as very, quite, and rather are usually meaningless in scientific writing.
Use active voice (but not excessively)
PASSIVE: Most seedlings were eaten by rabbits.
ACTIVE: Rabbits ate most seedlings.
PASSIVE: Territory size was found to vary with population density.
ACTIVE: Territory size varied with population density.
PASSIVE: From field observations, it was found that all radio-tagged individuals remained on the study area.
ACTIVE: All radio-tagged individuals remained on the study area.
PASSIVE: Several marking techniques were used.
ACTIVE: I used several marking techniques.
A well-written, easy-to-read methods section includes a mixture of active and passive writing!
Make sure all pronouns can be easily identified. For example:
UNCLEAR: Northern Cardinals have been the focus of work by several investigators (Smith 1985, Jones 1992). They typically initiate breeding behavior in March.
BETTER: Northern Cardinals typically initiate breeding behavior in March (Smith 1985, Jones 1992).
FAULTY: Farrar and Calie (1993) examined the foraging behavior of House Sparrows. They reported that their diet consisted primarily of seeds.
BETTER: Farrar and Calie (1993) reported that House Sparrows feed primarily on seeds.
BETTER YET: House Sparrows feed primarily on seeds (Farrar and Calie 1993).
Make sure each verb agrees with its subject
Do not lose sight of the subject in a sentence by focusing on modifying words, such as prepositional phrases, occurring between the subject and verb. For example:
The size of all territories was [not were] reduced at high population densities.
The dominant male, along with his subordinates, defends [not defend] the den site.
The color and shape of the beak are [not is an] important taxonomic features [not feature].
Some sentences or paragraphs are wordy because the writer includes the same information twice. For example:
WORDY: In Cupp's study, he found that temperature had no effect on display rates (Cupp 1993).
CONCISE: Cupp (1993) found that temperature had no effect on display rates.
WORDY: The ostrich is of moderate economic importance according to Hamilton (1988), who reviewed the importance of the ostrich in detail.
CONCISE: The ostrich is of moderate economic importance (Hamilton 1988).
Make sure that paragraphs are coherent units of thought
Paragraphs should be logically constructed passages organized around a central idea often expressed as a topic sentence. A writer constructs, orders, and connects paragraphs as a means of guiding the reader from one topic to the next, along a logical train of thought. Topic sentences often occur at the beginning of a paragraph, followed by material that develops, illustrates, or supports the main point. Also, be sure to vary your sentences. Pay attention to the structure, length, and rhythm of your sentences. If your writing is unvarying and one-dimensional, you will not get your message across as effectively.