Technical Writing and Presentation Skills

WRITING A RESEARCH
PROPOSAL - II

PROPOSAL STRUCTURE

Title page

Short statement of the problem

Review of research literature

Aim of the research project

Outline of your project

Tentative time table

Selective research bibliography

Attachments /Appendices

FACTS TO KEEP IN MIND BEFORE WRITING A

PROPOSAL

Fact 1: Reviewers
Fact 2: Overwhelmed (to defeat)
Managers
Fact 3: Perfection
Fact 4: First Page-First Impression

FACT 1: REVIEWERS

Your proposal is often read by one or

two experts in your field. However, the
program manager, and perhaps other
reviewers are not experts.

Remedy:

You must write your proposal for their

benefit too.

FACT 2: OVERWHELMED MANAGERS

The program managers and panel

members often see a large number of
proposals

Remedy:

You have to grab your reader's attention

from the beginning.

FACT 3: PERFECTION

Your proposal may not be perfect

Remedy:

Keep a humble attitude

Ask people to suggest ways to improve your
proposal. Dont be defensive

If they misunderstand what you were trying to

say, rewrite it to clear the misunderstanding
If they don't immediately see the merit of your
proposal, rewrite it until they do.

FACT 4: FIRST PAGE-FIRST IMPRESSION

It is safe to assume that many readers will get no further than

the first page.

Remedy:

Make sure that the first page is a good summary of the entire proposal.
Don't fill it up with technical background.
Instead, address the following:

what you want to do

whether the idea is new
why it is important
why the proposed solution is sound
why you should succeed
how much it will cost

TECHNICAL CRITERIA

The proposal should articulate (express) a new

idea

The proposal should address a well-formulated

problem

The proposed work should be research, not just

a routine application of known techniques

The problem should be important to the society

TECHNICAL CRITERIA

The scale of the problem is large

enough to require a special funding to
solve it

if the problem can be solve quickly, or

could be solved using the normal resources
of a well-found laboratory, it is not a good
proposal

TECHNICAL CRITERIA

The proposal must explain the idea in

sufficient detail to convince the reader
that the idea has some substance

The proposal should explain why there is

reason to believe that it is indeed a good
idea.
It is a mistake to merely identify a wish-list
of desirable goals (a very common fault).
There must be significant technical
substance to the proposal.

TECHNICAL CRITERIA

The proposal must explain clearly what work will be

done

What results are expected

How they will be evaluated
How would it be possible to judge whether the work was
successful

The PIs much show evidence that they know about

the work that others have done on the problem

GUIDE TO WRITING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL FOR

AN ENGINEERING MASTERS/PHD

The proposal does not need be long, but the quality

should be high and no more than 2-3 pages should be
sufficient.
Ideally your proposal should address following points:

Ensure that your research interests match those in the School

of Engineering.

View:Available projects
View:Research areas

Outline the main objectives of your research, providing details

of two or three key aspects.
State your target audience for this project.
Explain what the main outcomes of the project are that you
would want to see.

GUIDE TO WRITING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL FOR

AN ENGINEERING MASTERS/PHD

Outline what methods/approaches you intend to use to

achieve the aims of your project.
Indicate your suggested data collection procedures,
including sources and any possible difficulties.
Explain any analytical techniques you intend to use for
your research.

Avoid

Broad research areas which would be unmanageable as

a Masters or PhD topic or that have no relevance to the
University of Warwick research areas.
Vague (not clearely expressed) descriptions of your
research interests.

COMMON MISTAKES

The proposal is vague in key areas

The
The
The
The

question addressed by the proposal

outcome of the research
measure of success or failure
contribution to human knowledge

The proposal lacks evidence of clear

thinking

The formulation of the problem is poor

The planned solution is unclear or illogical

COMMON MISTAKES

The proposal doesnt address the importance of

the problem being addressed
The proposal is just a routine application of
known techniques

The research funding agencies prefer sponsoring

research instead of development works
Industry or venture capital (money that is available
for investment in a new company) are expected to
fund development work

If no industry is interested then the question of

the proposal has no commercial value.

COMMON MISTAKES

Other researchers have addressed the same problem

and failed
There is no evidence that the PIs will succeed this
time.
The goals must be substantiated (to show
something true) by solid evidence of potential
success
The proposal is written in such a way that gives the
impression of "give us the money and we will figure
out how to do the work
Clearly state all of your ideas
Describe your preliminary work that shows
evidence that the idea is good.

COMMON MISTAKES

The proposal is heavy on showing off

your good track record

Include a relevant list of publications in the

appendix.

Sufficient technical details of the idea

are not given

The reviewers are underwhelmed

COMMON MISTAKES

The proposal is comprehensible to only

expert in the field.

Some of the evaluators are not experts in all

areas of the proposal.
A good proposal should be comprehensible to
non-experts, while also convincing experts that
you know your subject.
Keep highly-technical material in specially
marketed section
Avoid highly technical material in the introduction

COMMON MISTAKES

The proposal did not address related research, even if

you are dismissing (end importance) it

The proposed research appears to have been done.

The reviewers will think that the PIs are unaware of the stateof-the-art
A common mistake is to give references only to your own work
competitor solutions must be discussed and their inadequacies
identified.

The PIs seem to be attempting too much for the funding

requested and project time.

It is perceived as a lack of realism (reality), poor understanding

of the problem, or poor research methodology.

COMMON MISTAKES

The proposal is too expensive for the probable

gain.

Expensive proposals are more likely to be rejected.

The proposal sounds like it might be done by a

graduate student on the departmental computer.

These type of works should be funded by own

institutions.
If the research institutions are not adequate, then this
is taken to be a weak points against the PIs and the
institution.

HOW TO WRITE BAD RESEARCH PROPOSAL

1) Fill your proposal with technical language (it

makes you seem smarter)
2) Make sure your proposals argument is
exceedingly complicated (only smart people
should be able to follow your logic after all!)
3) Delight in irrelevant examples
4) Never provide any kind of synthesis (it should
be self-evident, right?)
5) Be overly vague or overly specific or both,
overly.

HOW TO WRITE BAD RESEARCH PROPOSAL

6) Clearly imagine your audience, then write

your proposal for someone else.
7) Never contextualize (consider something in
your contexts) your research
8) Humility does not win money overstate
your broader impacts with abandon
(uncontrolled).
9) Make sure your title either grabs the readers
attention (exclamation points help) or
summarizes the entire project.

HOW TO WRITE BAD RESEARCH PROPOSAL

10) Cite a lot (Im standing on the shoulders of [an
army of] giants!) or not at all (Who needs giants
anyway?)
11) Dont define A.C.R.O.N.Y.M.S (abbreviations)
12) Propose research with serious moral/ethical
concerns (Science aint for sissies!)
13) Propose research that cannot feasibly be
accomplished (Because you might be the one who
can finally do it)
14) Dont proofread (to find & correct mistakes)(If
stats can have margins of error so can your spelling)