Research Plan & Proposal Writing: Quality Research Skills Research Methods

research plan &
proposal writing
Quality Research Skills Research Methods
Module 3. Research skills in practice & Research design:
Koen De Bosschere
UGent-ELIS
28/03/2012
Quality Research Skills / Research Methods
Module 3. Research skills in practice & Research design: Research plan & proposal writing Koen De Bosschere 28/03/2012
p. 1
Identikit
Koen De Bosschere
Department of Electronics and Information Systems
All types of research proposals: FWO, IWT, BOF, EC
Reviewer for FWO, IWT, EC, NWO, DFG

p. 2
Who are you?

Name
Department
Research area

p. 3
Schedule for todays lecture

Before the break
- What is a research plan?
- How are proposals evaluated?
After the break
- How to write a good proposal/research plan?

p. 4
Module 3 Research plan & proposal writing

A research proposal is like a business plan for research. A good proposal describes
various aspects of the research: it clearly states the problem (what is the problem you
want to work on?), the goals of the research (how do you think you can solve the
problem?), the relation with the state of the art (how were similar problems solved by
others?), the timing of the different research activities including a risk analysis, the
expected results (papers, a dissertation, a demonstrator, a patent,), and the financial
and environmental resources needed.
Obviously a research plan is needed to apply for funding, but even if there is no strict
requirement to write a project proposal, writing one helps to better focus the research
by trying to plan the complete research process in advance.
For a proposal to be funded, the writing process should be guided by the proposal
evaluation criteria. Therefore, this module starts from the proposal evaluation process,
and explains which aspects are important for a proposal to end up higher in the ranking,
and be funded. For the hands-on session, the participants will have to write their own
three page proposal, which will be evaluated and ranked by their fellow students and by
the instructor. By attending the evaluation of their own proposal, the students will learn
how convincing their proposal is for the evaluation committee, and they will learn from
the other proposals how they could improve their own.
p. 5
Who has an RP?

Why do you need an RP?
For funding
As a guideline
For reviewing
Was it easy to write?

p. 6
How to get your proposal funded?

Step 1: understand the evaluation
process
Step 2: have a bright idea
Step 3: convince the evaluation
committee

p. 7
understand the evaluation process
Know what funding agencies are looking for

Know which criteria are used in the evaluation
Know whom you are writing for
Know the constraints

p. 8
Know what funding agencies are

looking for
Fundamental research applied research
Consortium individual researcher
Particular topics/actions
Read the call for proposals carefully

Contact funding agency for more information
p. 9
Know which criteria are used in the

evaluation
Innovation
Approach
Valorization
Significance
Impact
Team
Lab
Contact funding agency for more information

p. 10
Know whom you are writing for

Experts/passing familiarity
Physical/virtual meeting
One/more committees
Evaluation load

Try to get in touch with them, lobbying?
p. 11
Know the constraints
Total budget
Acceptance rate
Distribution rules
Policy rules
p. 12
Contact the agency for more information

have
a
bright
idea

p. 13
An idea somebody is waiting for .

p. 14
convince the evaluation committee
The primary reviewer has to like the bright idea and

must be willing to champion it
Committee members must understand the proposal,
and be ready to be convinced by the primary reviewer
One advice: make it easy for the reviewer

p. 15
Make the reviewers life easy

Balance between technical
and non-technical writing
Clear structure
Highlight important messages
Short and simple proposal,
do not repeat arguments
Use graphics instead of text
Corect English, nice layout
Support facts with citations
p. 16
Capture attention
Your proposal
should be noticed

p. 17
Break
Before the break
- What is a research plan?
- How are proposals
evaluated?
After the break

- How to write a good
proposal/research plan?

p. 18
The elements of a proposal:

what why how who where how_much?
1. Title
2. Executive summary
3. Problem statement
4. Objective(s)
5. State of the art
6. Work plan
7. Work schedule
8. Results
p. 19
9. Koen
Resources
Module 3. Research skills in practice & Research design: Research plan & proposal writing
De Bosschere 28/03/2012
1Title
concise and descriptive
catchy title maybe a good acronym
predisposes the reader favorably towards the
proposal

p. 20
Talking plants: sensor-controlled greenhouse system to optimize plant growth
Snail saves rabbit: invertebrate toxicity model as an alternative

for the rabbit eye model

p. 21
Formulation of gold/silver nano conjugates/encapsulates with novel biactive synthetic 1HPyrazol-2 methoxyphenol derivatives
Modulation of serine acetyl transferase by sulfur for the control of cadmium-induced

oxidative stress in mustard types differing in ethylene sensitivity
p. 22
2Executive summary
Maximum one page with
-
the rationale for the research

problem statement
the hypothesis (if any)
the objective(s)
the method
expected results and perspectives
Non-technical so that everybody can understand it

p. 23
Good example:
Each day 14,000 people become infected with HIV/AIDS, making the
development of an effective vaccine one of the worlds top public health
priorities. Jan Peeters laboratory is attempting to develop HIV vaccines that
elicit cellular immune responses utilizing the simian immunodeficiency virus
(SIV) infected rhesus macaque animal model. A major component of the cellmediated immune response are cytotoxic T-lymphocytes (CTL). It is thought
that CTL play an important role in controlling HIV and SIV. Most standard
immunological assays do not measure antiviral activity directly, limiting our
understanding of CTL effectiveness. To address this, the Watkins laboratory
developed a novel neutralization assay that quantifies the ability of virus-specific
CTL populations to control viral growth. Evaluating the antiviral activity of CTL
of different specificities will identify those CTL most effective against SIV. This
information will likely impact the design of future HIV vaccines.

p. 24
3Problem statement
State the research problem

Provide definitions of key concepts. Provide the
context and set the stage for your research question
in such a way as to show its necessity and
importance
Present the rationale of your proposed study and
clearly indicate why it is worth doing
Non-technical so that everybody can understand it

p. 25

p. 26

p. 27
It is only since the start of the millennium that a new and more effective
generation of anti rheumatic drugs has become widely available to the relief of
patients. Most of these drugs target only the immunological component of chronic
rheumatic diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis (RA), spondylarthritides (SpA) or
osteoarthritis (OA).
Despite the availability of the current portfolio of anti-rheumatic drugs, the
restoration of joint homeostasis and function is still an important clinical challenge
in the treatment of chronic arthritis.
The major shortcomings with currently available therapies are: i) no control of
tissue responses; ii) severe adverse effects; iii) therapy resistance and lack of
disease-specific mode of action.

p. 28
Problem with the problem statement:

There is no problem!!
the problem is unimportant
a solution in search of a problem:
technology driven proposal
Solution:
invent a problem
(difficult)
p. 29

p. 30

p. 31
4Objective(s)
Research target
High level overview of the research plan + the
expected results
Important section of the proposal
Should be very clear
Non-technical
p. 32

p. 33

p. 34
OBJECTIVES
1. To identify the molecular pathway(s) underlying bone
remodelling using an interactome approach;
2. To validate the role of specific proteins as key actors in
bone remodelling (KI/KD models);
3. To evaluate the cross-talk between stress-induced and
mechanical-induced molecular pathways in bone
remodelling;

p. 35
Example too vague, too much blahblah

In this research, we wish to explore a new paradigm that could allow to
compose an architecture in a modular way, and in tiled fashion. We
believe that such approach would allow for a smart usage of the available
transistors while leaving open space to optimization of performance or
low power or building specialized hardware accelerators.
We advocate that research efforts should further focus on striking the
right balance between architecture, compiler and _user_ effort. We will
illustrate the performance and scalability of this combined
programming/architecture approach, called _Symbiotic Processing_, using
SMTs and several appropriately written programs corresponding to a set
of classic and non-trivial algorithms. Finally, we outline that, much like
SIMD, this approach can be progressively adopted through hardware
add-ons and C/C++ language extensions.
p. 36
Problems with the objectives

Double focus, no focus at all
Too vague
Objectives not linked to
the problem or the call
Too ambitious objectives
Too weak objectives
Not innovative
Not valuable
p. 37
Dont try to be too creative

p. 38
5State of the art

Demonstrates your knowledge of the research
problem. Shows your ability to critically evaluate
relevant literature information
Convinces your reader that you will make a significant
and substantial contribution to the literature
Ensures that you are not "reinventing the wheel"
Gives credit to those who have laid the groundwork
for your research
Must be technical
p. 39
Problems with state of the art
No link with own work

Lacking organization and structure
Lacking focus, unity and coherence
Being repetitive and verbose
Failing to cite influential papers
Failing to keep up with recent developments
Failing to critically evaluate cited papers
Citing irrelevant or trivial references
Depending too much on secondary sources

p. 40
6Work plan: How

Very important part of the proposal
Describes the attack plan + the expected results
Should be very clear, it should convince the
primary reviewer
Technical + non-technical
It better contains a risk analysis + plan B
Could contain a few milestones

p. 41
Work plan
Work package 1
- Task 1.1
- Task 1.2
Work package 2
- Task 2.1
- Task 2.2
- Task 2.3
- Task 2.4
Work package 3
- Task 3.1
- Task 3.2
- Task 3.3
Work package 4
- Task 4.1
- Task 4.2

p. 42
Example bad plan

The project consists of 4 work packages
In WP1 we will study the Wasabi architecture and compare the
Wasabi architecture with other similar architectures
In WP2 we will determine the weaknesses of the Wasibi
architecture
In WP3 we will improve the weaknesses of the Wasabi
architecture
In WP4 we will compare our results with the results that
competing teams will have found by then for the same
weaknesses
p. 43
Problems with the work plan

Work plan does not solve the problems of the
problem statement; no relation with the
objectives
No clear structure
Internally incoherent, non-logical
Too general, not enough detail
Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough
detail on major issues
Methods/methodology unsuited to the objective
No risk analysis
Root cause: lack of concrete attack plan
p. 44
Work plan: Methodology should be

generally accepted

p. 45
7Work schedule: When

p. 46
8Results
Publications
Patents
Products, tools, prototypes
Exploitation plan
A PhD thesis
Problems:
- Non quantifiable (give numbers)
- Vague
p. 47

p. 48
9Resources
Resources should
be adequate to
carry out the
research plan
1. Budget
2. Expertise
3. Facilities
p. 49
Financial resources
PhD-student: 40 000 euro/year

Researcher: 60 000 euro/year
Post Doc: 70 000 euro/year
Tech/admin: 50 000 euro/year
Costs: 5000 euro/year/person

Investments: ?
University overhead: 17%
p. 50
PhD-grant
PhD-student (40 k/y)
Working costs (5 k/y)
Compute server (investment)
Total
Overhead University (17%)
Requested budget
160 000
20 000
5 000
185 000
31 450
216 450

p. 51
Your research experience

I worked at the Visualization Lab at the University. This
lab performs research on scientific visualization of
molecular bonding processes. The lab has several
ongoing projects, including: ...

p. 52
Your research experience

I was a research assistant for the Synergy Lab at UCF. For
this project, which involved evaluating sickness related to
virtual environments (VEs) exposure, I was employed to run
experimental subjects and collect data. During this project I
identified that subjects were experiencing difficulty traversing
through the VE. To resolve this issue I redesigned the
harness for the VE helmet-mounted design, recalibrated the
mouse, and suggested redesigns to the VE software. I tested
the harness design by The result was that the difficulties
were reduced by 50%.
+ detailed CV
p. 53
Facilities and research environment
Building
Machines
Colleagues
Other projects

p. 54
Problems with resources

Too high or too low w.r.t. the work plan
Lack of background/experience
Wrong consortium

p. 55
Administrative problems
with proposals
Formal requirements not OK
- Missing pieces
- Layout/size restrictions not respected
- Not signed
carefully study the call!

p. 56
Success
Have a good idea
Check novelty
Show relevance
Make good plan
Be concise and clear
p. 57
writing
Get
feedback
and help
Module 3. Research skills in practice & Research design: Research plan & proposal
Koen
De Bosschere 28/03/2012
Failure
What if you fail?

Dont worry: the majority of the proposals do not
get accepted, it does not necessarily mean it was
not good, just that there was not enough money.
Learn from the feedback
Try again it is a game

p. 58
Success !
Module 3: Research plan & proposal writing
Koen De Bosschere
2010 UGent p. 59

Task
Write your own research proposal
- 1 page problem statement, objective(s), state of the art
- 1 page work plan
- 1 page results, schedule, resources
The font size should be 11 pt, the language English. The proposal can be on your personal
research, or on any topic you want. It does not have to be a full PhD proposal (it could be
about a single research question or a big project but make sure that the resources you
ask for are consistent with the amount of work). Your proposal should convince the
reviewers that it is better than the rest, and therefore can be funded.

p. 60
Evaluation criteria
Relevance of the problem
- How convincing is the problem statement?
Scientific and technological excellence

- How good is the description of the objectives?
- How does it advance the state of the art?
Feasibility of the project quality of the work plan

- How well is the work plan described?
- Logical structure and schedule?
Impact of the results

- How well are the expected results described?
Resources
- Are the requested resources justified by the work plan/impact?
- How well is the expertise of the proposer described?
- What about the available resources?
p. 61
Process before the meeting

Send your proposal http://escher.elis.ugent.be/research, before the
proposal deadline.
I will distribute the proposals among the group members 6 days
before the meeting, together with an evaluation form that you will
have to fill out.
I need to receive all evaluation forms 24h before the evaluation
meeting.

p. 62

p. 63

p. 64
+ global ranking:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Proposal B (best)
Proposal D (second best)
Proposal A ()
Proposal C
Proposal E
Proposal F

p. 65
Process during the meeting

During the meeting itself, we will discuss all the proposals, and try
to find a consensus about the evaluation per proposal. You can
change your mind about particular proposals during the meeting.
Eventually, we will rank the proposals. About 1/3 of the proposal
will selected.

p. 66
Schedule
Group
Deadline
proposal
Deadline
review
Meeting
Where
Group
1
April 7,
23h59
April 12,
9h00
April 13
9h00
Turing,
technicum -3
Group
2
April 11,
23h59
April 16,
9h00
April 17,
9h00
Turing,
technicum -3
Group
2

p. 67

Research Plan & Proposal Writing: Quality Research Skills Research Methods

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Plan & Proposal Writing: Quality Research Skills Research Methods

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

research plan &

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Who are you?

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Schedule for todays lecture

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Module 3 Research plan & proposal writing

Who has an RP?

Was it easy to write?

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

How to get your proposal funded?

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

understand the evaluation process

Know what funding agencies are looking for

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Know what funding agencies are

Read the call for proposals carefully

Know which criteria are used in the

Contact funding agency for more information

Know whom you are writing for

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Try to get in touch with them, lobbying?

Know the constraints

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

An idea somebody is waiting for .

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

convince the evaluation committee

The primary reviewer has to like the bright idea and

One advice: make it easy for the reviewer

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Make the reviewers life easy

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

After the break

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

The elements of a proposal:

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Talking plants: sensor-controlled greenhouse system to optimize plant growth

Snail saves rabbit: invertebrate toxicity model as an alternative

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Modulation of serine acetyl transferase by sulfur for the control of cadmium-induced

the rationale for the research

Non-technical so that everybody can understand it

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

State the research problem

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Problem with the problem statement:

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

Example too vague, too much blahblah

Problems with the objectives

Dont try to be too creative

Quality Research Skills / Research Methods

5State of the art

Problems with state of the art

No link with own work