Is the problem one that has generality beyond the local scene?

Does the section strike a balance between brevity and complete exposition appropriate to the

reviewing agency?

Can a succinct statement of the purpose of the research be found?

Does the opening suggest this will be a creative proposal and intrigue the reader to read further?

Do these materials include the recent literature in both content and method?

Have these materials been summarized so that the reviewer need not know the article to

sense its significance?

Have these studies been critically reviewed and suggestions (though not necessarily a

complete explanation) een given on how to avoid their flaws?

Have ongoing studies been included?

Have you discussed selected sources and related them to this approach, rather than trying

to cover the related literature too comprehensively, resulting in little comment and discussion?

Did you use this opportunity to demonstrate scholarly competence?

Is there a theoretical base for the study?

of ideas?

If there is no literature bearing on the problem, have you mentioned the studies closest to the

problem and discussed why, if it is not self-evident, they fall short?

Is there evidence that you have made an attempt to find your precursors in the field?

Is the bibliography cited meaningfully in the discussion of the problem and not merely left as a

list of undiscussed references?

Are the objectives flagged so they are easily found in the text?

Are the objectives listed in order of importance, potential contribution, or time sequence?

Is the relation of objectives to underlying theory made clear if it is not self-evident to the

intelligent nonspecialist?

Are the objectives clear-cut, specific, and achievable, lending themselves to operational

definitions?

Are the hypotheses and questions testable?

Are value judgments that may have crept into treatment of the problem separated from the

researchable questions that data can answer?

Are the hypotheses stated so they tell what is expected to happen?

Are directional rather than null hypotheses used when there is any reasonable basis for

predictions?

Are questions used when there is no basis for predictions (exploratory or some survey studies)?

philosophical, longitudinal, etc.)?

Is the definition of the population to be sampled consistent with the generality the reviewer

has been led to expect by the problem statement?

Is the basis for stratification or other controls given?

Is it clear where randomization enters the sampling and/or assignment process?

Is the unit of sampling used consistent with that implied by the hypotheses and the intended

analysis?

Is the basis for sample size indicated?

Is the sample size consistent with the methods to be employed so that, for example, follow-up

of dropouts and nonreturns is practical?

Is the sampling plan consistent with the statistical model used for data analysis?

If a nonrandom sample is being used, is there an indication of how this is justified and how the

results are generalizable?

Is it clear which variables are expected to produce the experimental effect (independent

variables) and which will be measures of it (dependent variables)?

If the independent variables are to be manipulated in experimental fashion, have you shown

how this will be done?

Are contaminating variables indicated and their method of control described?

When variables are left uncontrolled (as is necessarily the case since each design is a compromise

between what ought to be and what can be done), is the nature of this compromise explained and

its rationale given?

Is expediency avoided as a reason for leaving an important variable uncontrolled?

Are all hypotheses accounted for in the design plans? Does each aspect of the design plans have

a counterpart in the objectives section?

If cost is a factor in the control program, has an option been prepared in the budget indicting what

it will cost additionally to control potentially important factors?

Have some of the common design errors been avoided? Did you

Have copies of new instruments or sample items and/or formats of instruments that are to be

developed been included?

If this is a measurement problem that even the top experts have failed to solve, are there concrete

indications of a possible breakthrough?

Have measures of objectivity been indicated or provisions for their development made when

important--scoring of protocols, standardized interviews, essay tests, observations, etc.?

When the topic being investigated, the questions asked, or the subject's participation are

controversial, have special provisions for data collection been made?

Is observation being done "blind"?

If special analytic tools will be used (e.g., new computer programs, new statistical techniques)

are they adequately described and their advantages over commonly used ones explained?

Are there flow charts and diagrams to show the time and working relations in a complex project?

Will the institution or other agency take over at the end of the project?

Are the responsibilities of personnel clear?

to this project?

Is there evidence (e.g., copies of correspondence) of the interest and cooperation of the other

schools, agencies, research centers, and institutions that will be involved?

checked the work?

After overhead is deducted, is the amount left sufficient to perform the activities described?

proposal?

In a complex project, has the match of personnel to required skills been included?

Have special clearances from human or animal subject protection committees been obtained?

Is it interesting?

Does it avoid jargon and controversial terms?

Has a distinctive cover been used?