Spring 2018

Collaborative Inquiry Grant Program

Technical Proposal Application

Undergraduate Research Opportunities Program

University of St. Thomas

Due by 4:30 p.m. onFriday, November 3, 2017

How to submit your application

  1. Complete all parts of this document (Parts 1-4 of your application) and save as a Word document named in the following format: “[Your last name] CIG Application Fall 2017.doc” (or .docx).
  2. View your unofficial transcript (Part 5 of your application) on Murphy Online and save as a PDF named in the following format: “[Your last name] CIG Transcript Fall 2017.pdf”
  3. Ensure that your mentor has all the materials required to submit a Mentor Endorsement Form (Part 6 of your application) before the deadline.
  4. Go to the online application portal, complete all parts of the form, and upload both your application and transcript where prompted.

All parts of your application must be received by the above deadline to be eligible for review.You as the applicant can expect to receive a completed application confirmation within one business day of the date when all parts of your application have been received by UROP.

Please direct any questions to Laura Bru at .

An Overview of Your Application

Please note that a complete proposal consists of the following components and will be assigned up to 400 points by reviewers on the Undergraduate Research Board.

Part 1: Press Summary (100 points)
In this section, you will be asked to briefly explain your proposed research to a non-specialist. Reviewers of your application will measure the extent to which you are able to articulate your research to someone outside of your field. Answer all of the questions as completely as possible, write clearly and concisely, and avoiddisciplinary jargon.

Part 2: Project Narrative (280 points total – 140 possible points from each of two reviewers)

This component of your proposal consists of sixmajor sections. Make certain that you address all of the sub-questions that appear in each. In this area of your proposal, you will be evaluated on the scholarly merit, anticipated impact, and potential for dissemination of your proposed project. Any necessary disciplinary jargon is allowed here, but be sure to include a glossary of terms in your appendices.

Part 3: Project Timeline

You must include a Timeline, succinctly stating what you plan to do and when over the course of the semester. Applications missing a Timeline will not be reviewed.

Part 4: Additional Appendices – see guidelines on website

Additional appendices may include at your discretion:

References or Works Cited; Glossary of Terms; Supporting Figures; Special Expenses Budget; Treatment of Human and Animal Subjects; External Letters of Support (when appropriate)

Part 5: Transcript of College Grades (unofficial)

Part 6: Mentor Endorsement Form (electronic submission)(20 points)

This component of your application must be completed and submitted by your project mentor.

Spring 2018

Collaborative Inquiry Grant Program

Technical Proposal Application

Student Applicant:
Student UST ID#:
Title of Proposed Project
Faculty Mentor Name
Mentor Department or Program

Part 1 – PRESS SUMMARY(limit: 400 words – application will be discarded if violated)

100 possible points

Describe your proposed research project using language that a non-specialist will be able to understand. You will be evaluated here exclusively on your ability to provide a comprehensive and clear description of your proposed project that someone outside of your field can understand. Avoid disciplinary jargon! Be sure to read the faculty mentor guidelines for assistance in writing this, and all other pieces of your proposal.

Be sure to address all of the following questions, entering your responses in the text box below each.

  1. What question(s) are you trying to address?
  1. How is your project important to your field and the broader community?
  1. How will you address the question(s) that you pose above in question (a.)? What will your methodology be?
  1. What would you predict will be the outcomes of your research? What are the possible alternate outcomes? How will you interpret the results?
  1. How will you disseminate the results of your research? If applicable, please describe how your research is part of a broader project designed for publication and/or presentation at a major academic meeting.
  1. What do you think will be the impact of your research on your academic and intellectual development? How will conducting this research contribute to your longer-term academic and professional goals?

Part 2 – PROJECT NARRATIVE(limit: 1,200 words – application will be discarded if violated)

280possible points – up to 140 from each of two reviewers.

Be sure to address all of the following questions, entering your responses in the text box below each.

1. Research Question(s)(10 points)

What question(s) are you planning to address in your research?

2. Background and Literature Review (40 points)

What is the background of your project? Why is your project important to your discipline and to the general community? What have scholars written about your project/question(s) in the past? Who are the most important researchers relating to your project? How does your project fit in with the existing literature?

3. Research Design and Methodology (40 points)

How will you address the question(s) that you pose? What methodologies will you employ? How do you plan to analyze your results?

4. Results and Interpretation (40 points)
What would you predict will be the outcomes of your research and what are some possible alternate outcomes? How will you interpret the results?

5. Anticipated Impact (5 points)
What do you think will be the impact of your research on your discipline, the general community, and your own intellectual development?

6. Dissemination Plan (5 points)
How will you share the results of your research? What specific conferences might you attend? What audiences do you hope to reach?

PART 3 – PROJECT TIMELINE (Required)

PART 4 – ADDITIONAL APPENDICES (See Guidelines)