Research Statements
Research Statements
Embedded Files
When writing a Research Proposal (vs a Research Statement), you’ll move from describing what interests you to outlining what you plan to do. A research proposal is your opportunity to demonstrate that you can design a clear, feasible, and meaningful project. It combines your understanding of the field with your ability to ask focused questions, justify your approach, and explain why your work matters.
Strong proposals show that you’ve done your background research, understand the methods needed, and can connect your project to broader scientific or societal goals. Your proposal should make a convincing case for both the importance of your question and your ability to carry it out.
The following information is geared towards NSF GRFP applications, but can be applied to any research proposal preparation
Understand the Requirements:
Understand the Requirements:
Before you begin writing, carefully review the guidelines for your proposal. Different programs, fellowships, and advisors have different expectations for length, format, and focus.
Check submission details: word or page limits, font size, and required sections.
Clarify the scope: some proposals are short project summaries, while others resemble full grant-style applications.
Ask questions early: if anything is unclear, talk with your advisor, the program coordinator, or peers who have submitted successful proposals.
Research Title
Research Title
Your title is the first impression of your proposal—it should be clear, specific, and informative. A strong title tells readers what your project is about and hints at its broader importance.
Highlight key variables, species, or systems if relevant.
Concise, descriptive, and jargon-light
Should highlight the big question or novelty (what + why it matters)
Examples:
“The role of plant immunity in microbe-dependent heterosis”
“Dissecting Plant-Microbe Interactions: PAMP Recognition and Immune Evasion in Solanaceous Hosts”
Introduction and Literature Review:
Introduction and Literature Review:
This section sets the stage for your project. It should explain the scientific background, summarize relevant literature, and highlight the knowledge gap your work will address.
Start broad: introduce the general research area and why it matters.
Narrow down: summarize key studies that have shaped current understanding. Use citations!
Identify the gap: explain what remains unknown or unresolved.
Conclude with a clear rationale for your project—why it’s needed and how it will advance the field.
Tips & Tricks:
Be sure to look if there is a specific citation style
Hypotheses, Aims, & Questions:
Hypotheses, Aims, & Questions:
Your proposal should clearly communicate what you plan to discover or test. There are different ways to structure this depending on your field and stage of study:
Research questions are open-ended and exploratory.
Hypotheses are specific, testable statements predicting an outcome.
Aims or objectives break your project into focused goals or experiments that address your questions or hypotheses.
Notes, Tips, & Tricks:
Hypothesis: Each hypothesis should be (1) one sentence, (2) testable, and (3) clear given the background information
In one sentence/phrase, lay out what you’re going to test
Aim 1: [short action verb + research focus]
Aim 2: [short action verb + research focus]
Optional Aim 3: If applicable.
Are your aims independent?
Lead with the big picture → why should a non-specialist care?
Methodology:
Methodology:
The methods section shows that your project is doable and well thought out. Describe your experimental design, data collection, and analysis approaches in enough detail that reviewers can assess feasibility.
Explain your experimental system, materials, and analytical tools.
Justify why you chose these methods over others.
Include information about sample sizes, controls, and statistical approaches when appropriate.
Mention any collaborations or specialized facilities you plan to use.
This section should demonstrate both technical understanding and practical planning.
Tips & Tricks:
Think about how a general biologist would read this. Are your methods general, or specific to your subdiscipline?
Expected Results
Expected Results
Discuss what outcomes you anticipate and how they will contribute to your field.
Explain what results would support or refute your hypotheses.
Consider how your findings will advance theory, improve methodology, or inform future research.
Avoid overstating conclusions—acknowledge uncertainty but show you understand the implications of different outcomes.
Potential Pitfalls and Alternative Approaches
Potential Pitfalls and Alternative Approaches
No project goes exactly as planned. Reviewers appreciate when you’ve thought ahead.
Identify possible challenges (technical, logistical, or interpretive).
Propose reasonable backup strategies or alternative methods.
Show adaptability—this demonstrates both maturity and scientific rigor.
Tips & Tricks
Decide whether this would fall in your specific aims or overarching project. Include in the relevant section.
Should I include a Figure?
Should I include a Figure?
A figure can make your proposal more engaging and easier to understand. Consider including:
A diagram of your experimental design that outlines treatments, time points, or key comparisons.
A conceptual model showing how your hypothesis fits within existing knowledge.
Preliminary data that supports feasibility or helps justify your approach.
Keep visuals simple, clear, and labeled. A well-designed figure can often communicate more effectively than a page of text.
Tips & Tricks
If you are choosing an experimental design with a workflow, this is a great way to walk reviewers through the process
Use BioRender or a similar design program
Make sure to reference your figure in your text.
General Tips & Tricks
General Tips & Tricks
Think like a Reviewer
Think like a Reviewer
Can they find your Hypothesis, Aims, and Required Sections in <30 seconds?
Familiarize yourself with the solicitation's review criteria: What exactly are they looking for, and is it in your proposal?
Are there parallels between your proposal document and additional documentation (Personal Statement, Data Plan, etc.)
Common Pitfalls
Common Pitfalls
Weak Research Proposals
Don’t be vague in your proposal. Show a clear plan and understanding of your research.
Too much going on
Be careful using different fonts and formats. Minimal and clear is best.
Ignoring guidelines
Read and highlight the solicitation sections that you may need to pay attention to in your proposal
Not Seeking Diverse Feedback
Ask mentors, mentees, and colleagues to review. Have a non-STEM reviewer, or at least someone who is outside of your discipline
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse