On choosing a topic:

In the social sciences, humanities, and the arts, often students find topics by exploring life experiences that have touched them deeply -- either things lived directly or witnessed. In the sciences/engineering/behavioral science, your topic must be negotiated with those in your lab, as someone must be assigned to guide you and you will be using lab resources. In all cases, it may be useful to look through the courses you've taken and make a list of favorite courses and readings -- what patterns do you see? Also, you may want to consider what skills/knowledge you've already acquired that you can build on.

On choosing between several "finalist" topics:

•For which topic would you have better opportunities for guidance?
•Which topic are you more excited about?

Note that there are sometimes tradeoffs between these two criteria. However, the ideal topic will be exciting to you AND to your mentor AND your mentor will be qualified to guide you on it.

•For which topic are you better prepared, i.e., for which do you have more coursework/knowledge/background?
•Which topic would better allow you to explore new interests, possibly ones related to your future plans?

Note: The ideal topic will build on your previous coursework, knowledge, and skills, but will also depart from your past work significantly enough that it allows you to grow intellectually and explore new interests (and not get bored).

Writing the proposal once you've defined the topic

A note on length and format:
Sections a-d of your project proposal should not exceed five double-spaced pages, 12 pt. font, standard margins. Please put your name and the page number on the header of each page.


A. Statement of Purpose

In no more than a paragraph (i.e. 150-175 words), this section asks you to capture the big picture of your project in as small a space as possible, answering the following questions (not necessarily in this order):

1) Purpose/product: What will the final product of your research be? A senior thesis? An art project? A new software? Specify.

2) Question: I want to find out (what?) Remember your question should really be something you don’t know yet – not a foredrawn conclusion that you want to “prove”. Creative projects; here identify the major issues that you wish to explore with your project.

3) Justification: It’s an important question because -- (A. Why have you chosen this particular case to examine? Is it an anomaly? Typical of a trend? Chosen b/c lots of previous research on it? Other reason? B. What gap in the literature are you filling? Building on/departing from what other efforts? Creative projects: who are your major influences, and how are you drawing on them and going beyond them?)

4) Method: How will you narrow your topic down into a manageable “case study”or sample to focus on (see hints on narrowing your topic)? Procedure/type of method used for gathering data and analyzing it? (Social scientists, see "summary of social science methodologies"). Sequence of phases? Creative projects: what will be the major steps in carrying out your project?

5) Rationale: What will be some of the larger implications of your findings? (e.g. theoretical implications? For whom? Policy or public health implications?)


B. Background and Justification (1 1/2 – 2 p.)

This section answers the why question. Why is your proposed project needed?

A. Justify your choice of case: Is it typical of a trend? An anomaly that violates expectations or dominant theories/trends? A good choice for some other reason/s? This part should be relatively brief.
B. Show that you are familiar with the relevant literature that addresses your question, then clearly situate your own project in relationship to these other efforts, in order to show how you are contributing to your field(s) of specialization. What has been done already that you are you building or drawing on? (You are ALWAYS drawing on something, even if it’s not precisely on your topic). How are you building on it and/or departing from it? What hasn’t been done yet, and how does your project fill this gap?

More hints:
Justification sections often use one of these different rhetorical strategies:
1) Adding a piece to the collective puzzle: We know A, B, and C about this phenomenon, but we don’t yet know D. This implies a sense of consensus and collective purpose in the field rather than a raging debate. This model is the probably most common in the sciences/engineering.
2) Debate and adjudication: Some people think A is the cause of this phenomenon; others think B is. I want to find out who’s right. This is more common in social science, esp. quantitative social science.
3) Synthesis: I’m borrowing this from theory A, this other thing from theory B, and this other thing from theory C to create a new approach. Probably more common in social science and humanities.
4) Extending a theory/approach to a new case: This approach works wonderfully to explain this kind of cases – can it explain this other kind of cases, and if so, how will it need to be altered?

Sequence:
•A format often used for this section is to describe first the authors whose work is farthest from your own (but still relevant); then those closer to yours, then those closest to yours – but still not quite right; then your own hypotheses/approach and how you derived it.
•For each approach named, say what you use from it, then why it still isn’t quite right.

Hints on not feeling overwhelmed as you face the writing of this part:
•Often your mentor and other faculty members with similar specializations can help direct you to the most essential readings on your topic, which can save you a lot of time by prioritizing your reading.
•Students in laboratory settings are advised to read grant proposals which have come out of the lab, to see which literature is cited there.
•Also be on the lookout for review articles, with titles like "Recent Research On (Your Topic)". These summarize recent things written in the field and put them in "clumps", i.e., show the relevant trends and debates within the field. They are usually found in specialized journals, e.g., if you're planning to do a high school classroom ethnography on teacher/student race dynamics, you might look for a title like "Journal of Research on Secondary Education".
•Once you have a few recent, relevant readings in hand, trace the bibliographies: any works cited by all of the articles you've found, probably you should read.

C. Project Plan (Aim for about 1 1/2 – 2 p.)

This section answers the how question. How you will go about answering the central question and accomplishing the goals described in your statement of purpose? Although your plan is provisional and will inevitably be revised in the course of your research or creative efforts, you should have a well-developed PLAN with as many specifics as possible.

Tip: For research projects, give a detailed description and justification of the methodology you will use to A) collect, B) analyze and C) interpret data. Describe it chronologically, step by step, with a timeline and make clear why it’s the best choice. Pretend that you will not be able to carry out the research directly, and that you are giving instructions for someone else to carry it out. For creative projects, give a thorough narrative description of activities to be undertaken, again, making clear the sequence and timeline for tasks. Your description needs to be clear and specific enough for this other person to figure out what you wanted done. Social science applicants may want to consult the summary of social science methodologies, also linked to the Haas Scholars documents page.
-Make sure the data you collect will really answer the question you’ve identified. The different pieces of your proposal need to match.
-Also bear in mind that most research projects are, at least implicitly, comparative. It can be helpful to make this comparison explicit.
-For projects involving human subjects, you will want to discuss your responsibilities to them to avoid causing them any harm; you will also want to discuss your plan and timeline for writing and submitting the protocol to Committee for the Protection of Human Subjects, and getting it approved. See “Overview of Human Subjects Review Process” for hints.



D. Qualifications (Aim for about 1/2 page – use succinct language to save space for the all-important “plan” and “background and justification” sections)

This sections answers the who question. Your task in this section is to tell the committee relevant information about why you are qualified to undertake the project described above. You should include
A) information about any relevant academic qualifications or awards, including relevant substantive, methods, and theory courses as well as previous related research undertaken.
B) describe other skills you’ve mastered that you’ll need to undertake the research, e.g. specialized techniques, language skills, interviewing experience, etc.
C) extracurricular activities or life experiences that indicate your special qualifications/knowledge/interest in your proposed area of research
D) your access to or familiarity with the people, tools and/or institutions necessary to successfully complete your proposed project. (Attach letters of support if possible).
E) Your access to guidance: discuss your relationship with your mentor in this section, as well as your contacts with other faculty members or academic/professional advisors, post-docs, etc. who are willing to offer you guidance or assistance. If possible, attach letters expressing willingness to help you (letters can also say you’re great, but the key is that you’ll get guidance if you need it).

E. Budget (please use this format and these headings)

- Travel*: includes transportation, meals, lodging, conference fees, tuition at other institutions, and any other expenses directly associated with travel to another location to perform research.
- Equipment: includes non-expendable equipment such as computer hardware, cameras, audio or video equipment, and any other equipment that will have a life after the end of the project period.
- Supplies: includes books, subscriptions, computer software, film/photographic supplies, audio and video tapes, office supplies, expendable laboratory supplies, copying/printing, postage and any other expendable supplies whose primary use will occur during the project period.
- Professional Services/Payments to Research Subjects: includes payments to individuals such as translators, research subjects, interviewees, processing labs that you’ll send specimens to, or any other person/entity who receives payment in return for specified services. In some cases, meals or other gifts may be acceptable as payment to interviewees.
- Other Expenses: includes only those expenses that do not fall into the above categories. These might include: equipment rental, internet access fees, phone calls, professional association dues, library cards etc.

Create your budget using the following headings and format. Each of your expenses should be placed in one of these categories (do not use “miscellaneous” as a category). Amounts listed for the different items should include tax.

Sample budget (the real thing would be more specific about dates and brands, etc.)

Maximum amount that can be requested for the Haas Scholars Program: $5,000.00




General tips:

Aim for a budget that is realistic but not extravagant, luxurious, or wasteful. The general cultural expectation for students is a somewhat ascetic existence, i.e., making do with less. Especially equipment expenditures should be carefully justified. Money not spent by you is money that can fund futures scholars.

Use real numbers, for example go to a web site to specify the exact tape recorder you plan to buy and its exact price, rather than just posting a “ballpark figure”. That shows you’ve done some research.

Haas Scholars budget policies:

Travel

The university has special regulations governing allowable travel expenditures, as follows

meal ceiling per day: $46.00 (receipt for any meal over $20). Note that this is a "worst case scenario", e.g. a conference at an expensive hotel in Europe where there is no possibility of walking to a cheaper restaurant. Normally, we will expect scholars to be more thrifty than this.

private car mileage reimbursement: $ 0.505/mile for February 2008 proposals; $.585 for February 2009 proposals. However, private car reimbursement is only permissible if this is the cheapest transportation option.

tolls, taxi, parking: actual cost (within reason)

car rental: generally, public transportation will be cheaper and we much prefer you go this route. If you ask for car rental, please justify why the additional cost is justified in your case. Include the entire actual cost including rental, gas and insurance required by law. Students without credit cards or younger than 24 will have difficulty renting cars.

-limit: The Haas Scholars Program will pay full expenses for you to travel to one conference; if you wish to attend a second conference, we will pay for registration fee/membership only.

-the applicant may propose to attend a conference as late as June of the year of graduation, but not beyond.

-Maximum hotel reimbursement amount is $100/day. If the hotel room costs more than that, plan to have a roommate (or two), or stay at a cheaper (non-conference) hotel. This is what grad students and even faculty do.

Equipment

Haas Scholars Budget policies for equipment:

Laptops: $2,000 limit, including all tax, peripherals, and pre-installed software; expense beyond this should be justified

Normally, if scholars will be going into the field and will need a computer there, purchase of a laptop is viewed as acceptable. Laptops are not normally approved for laboratory projects without special justification. If students want a more expensive computer, they can take the money out of their summer stipend.

All other equipment not discussed specifically in the rest of this section: generally also a $2,000 limit. It is recommended that you discuss these large budget items with the program coordinator before turning in the application. Expensive equipment should always be justified in the budget narrative and must be central to your project.

Printers: $175 limit (or justify any higher amount)

Camera: $200 limit (unless it is a photography project or there is some other reason why a higher quality camera is essential to the project)

-The visual component must be central to the project
-Justification for a digital camera is required
-Justification is needed for any camera over $200

$300 limit on transcribing machines.

Tape recorders: $150 (or justify any higher amount by reference to special needs)

Voice recognition software: Justifiable only for transcribing the scholar’s voice, not interviewees. – software must be trained to each voice.

Occasionally the need arises for a Haas Scholar to buy equipment which will stay in the lab after s/he graduates. In this case, the maximum that the scholar may contribute toward the purchase of the equipment is $1,500.

Services

The Haas Scholars Program does not usually allow payment to for others to transcribe your interviews, except under exceptional circumstances. Payments to subjects are permissible, within reason: usually $10-20/interview is the acceptable range.

Charges to publish in an Open Access Journal: the scholar may propose to pay proportionately to his/her extent of authorship, e.g. if the scholar will be one of four authors, s/he may contribute 25% of the fee to publish the article.

Supplies

Maximum of $200 to purchase books. If your book needs go beyond this, you should plan to request that the library purchase them, or get the books by inter-library loan.

Maximum expenditure of $45/book. If the book costs more, you should justify why the book is especially expensive, and also why the book is very central to your project.

Normally there will be a maximum of $150 on non-book supplies (binding your thesis, photocopies, toner, etc.).

F. Budget Narrative (optional)

This optional section provides an opportunity to justify any expenses that are not clearly accounted for elsewhere in the application narrative or which are not in accordance with usual Haas Scholars practice, or where you may feel the review committee will need supplemental information to determine the validity of particular expense items.


G. Selected Bibliography (optional)

This optional section provides an opportunity to demonstrate your familiarity with the literature in your field(s). You may list books, articles and other resources that you have read or consulted in the course of preparing your project proposal. Works should be listed alphabetically by author, using the accepted manual of style in your discipline/s. Think of this appendix as a supplement to the background and justification section of the application. Select the most important, recognized, widely cited, and/or relevant works to the project you are undertaking. In general, your bibliography, if you decide to include one, should list no more than ten works.


H. Letters of Recommendation and Support

Letters of recommendation and support are crucial in establishing the credibility of both you and your project. As part of your application, you must include a letter of recommendation from your faculty mentor--the individual who will be sponsoring your research project. You can also request additional letters of recommendation from faculty members or other relevant individuals who are familiar with your work. These letters may be submitted directly to the Haas Scholars Program by the recommenders or can be delivered by the applicant if they are in sealed envelopes signed across the flap. If your project involves the cooperation or involvement of outside individuals or institutions, it can also be useful to include letters of support from them as an appendix to your proposal. Such letters can help to establish your credibility as well as to convince the review committee of the feasibility of the project you are proposing. For more on this topic, see “frequently asked questions about letters of recommendation and letters of support.". For the appropriate etiquette for asking for either kind of letter (such etiquette can maximize your chance of getting a strong letter), see "How to ask a professor for a recommendation".


Questions to ask yourself:

• Who is in a position to evaluate my abilities and qualifications to undertake the proposed project? Ask them for letters of recommendation.
• Who is in a position to evaluate the feasibility and value of the proposed project? Ask them for letters and for feedback on the proposal.
• Whose cooperation do I need in order to execute the proposed project successfully? Ask them for letters of support.
• What could go wrong? What are the risks involved in my plan? Have I acknowledged potential problem areas and considered alternative solutions? How will I troubleshoot or problem-solve around potential pitfalls?
• Have I talked to other people in my field (including but not limited to my faculty mentor) to determine the soundness, uniqueness and originality of my plan?




Written by Cynthia Schrager, Ph.D; and subsequently revised extensively by Leah Carroll.
Rev. 12/07