Things to Explicitly Check For (policy debate lingo is highlighted; borrowed from Surendranath Lab):
Abstract:
- Is it clear from reading the abstract what work will be performed?
- Does the abstract present a compelling problem that is being tackled?
- Does the abstract contain extraneous language?
Introduction:
- Does the introduction begin at the correct intellectual point? Is the funnel too wide or too narrow at the top?
- Is the problem significant? Is the status quo harm clearly articulated by the end of the first page?
- Is some form of inherency established? What is the obstacle preventing solving the SQ harm?
- Is the conceptual approach clearly articulated by the end of the intro?
- Depending on the proposal call - is it clear from the intro that the project is topical? Does it fit the directive of the funding organization or proposal solicitation?
Specific Aims:
- If you only read the specific aims, could you tell what is being proposed?
- Do the specific aims follow logically from the conceptual approach articulated in the intro?
Proposed Research:
- Is there a compelling case for solvency?
- Can you think of any obstacles towards solvency that have not been explicitly addressed?
- What parts of the research plan are unclear?
- Is it clear how the PI will determine if the solvency is achieved? What are the expected results? How will the outcome be measured or characterized?
- For those obstacles to solvency that are addressed, is the case compelling and adequately referenced? Are the references legit?
Conclusion:
- Is a compelling case made that the action plan will seed solutions to other problems?
- Is the PI qualified to do the work?
- Does the PI(s) have the necessary tools and infrastructure to execute the work?
Details (very important!):
- Are all the figures called out in the text?
- Are the figure and table call outs uniform in the text (ex. "Fig" vs. "Figure")
- Do the figures appear near appropriate text?
- Are the references correctly formatted?
- Are the figures clear? Is every piece of text in the figure readable from a distance?
- Are all figure objects perfectly aligned?
- Are drop shadows oppressive or overbearing?
- Are any figure colors offending?
- Are minus signs and dashes used appropriately?
- Data is always plural. Is it used correctly?
- Are there statements in the text missing references?
- Whenever even tangentially appropriate, are the suggested reviewers all referenced in the text? (Ask Athma for the list of suggested reviewers)
- Can any statements in the text be viewed as pejorative?