The Proposal

The real-world, academic model for the SCE you will complete (in your senior year) is a 25-30 page essay that we scholars publish in journals, books, and other venues, based on extensive research (an Annotated Bibliography due in the fall of your senior year) and substantial drafting and revision (the essay composed in the spring of your senior year). You have likely encountered and started to work on initial ideas in other English courses that could serve as the foundation for the SCE. But you probably don’t know it yet.

So, how do we work toward that substantial project, explore a direction before we know where we are going? There are various models scholars use to explore and develop their initial thinking/reading/writing on the way to more substantial, publishable scholarship: sometimes they’ll take the form of a conference presentation, other times a proposal for a grant or fellowship.

For this assignment, you’ll be writing a substantial proposal for future research. At 1750 words or so (inclusive of abstract), it will be on the longer end for SCE proposals in the English department, but this length is common to professional research proposals and as such will give you the space to fully articulate your research findings and your claims in relation to them.

Guidelines:
1500 words + 250 word abstract. Your project proposal should begin with a re-revised abstract summarizing your proposed project. Remember, that proposed project is essentially an academic article, examples of which you’ve been reading all semester. The body of your proposal should:

• describe the project, explaining the topic and the significance of the argument;
• place the work in the context of your field (methodological, geographical, and period-based as applicable);
• indicate how the project would contribute to that field;
• be clear about the critical theory and methodology informing your argument; and
• make sure to situate your work in relation to others. You may use *revised* portions of your literature review to do this.

For some further guidance on an Academic Proposal, consult this resource from the University of Toronto.

Evaluation Rubric [100 points]

[1]Critical Reading and Thinking [25 points]

Focuses on the comprehension, analysis, and interpretation of texts.

The author recognizes possible implications of the text for contexts, perspectives, or issues beyond what’s already given; uses strategies for relating ideas and textual features to build insight and scholarly significance; uses appropriate epistemological theoretical or critical lens to engage in reading as part of continuing dialogue within and beyond a community of readers.

[2]Rhetorical Knowledge [25 points]

Focuses on the clarity, complexity, and coherence of the argumentation.

The author articulates a stake for the argument, answering “So What? Who Cares?”; uses keywords and terms effectively, complicating simplistic ways of thinking about the topic, using the arguments of authors including views counter to your own; refines and reiterates the threads of the argument while avoiding logical fallacies.

[3]Writing Process [25 points]

Focuses on the arrangement, development, and revision of the composition.

The author moves/transitions the reader effectively from introduction through the body of the argument to the conclusion; develops the argument with supporting evidence; actively uses feedback and revision strategies to move from initial drafting to final product.

[4]Awareness of Conventions [25 points]

Focuses on the author’s grasp of language, usage, and audience.

The author is deliberate in attention to word choice and sentence style; edits for violations of academic and print writing conventions not deliberately chosen for effect; attends to the formal presentation of the narrative such as titles, signposting, and other ways of addressing the audience of the composition.

Scale: Each of the categories will be worth 25 points. The scale I will use is the following:

• 23-25: excellent; the element is prominent in the composition, demonstrating a thorough and impressive grasp—ready to work on other elements from the rubric and/or to-do list.
• 20-22: strong; the element is present and effective, demonstrating a good grasp with room to continue development to enhance effect—keep on list, but almost ready to check off.
• 17-19: emerging; the element is present in spots, but not effectively or consistently present, demonstrating an emerging grasp in need of further development—keep on list and follow up in conference.
• 15-16: weak; the element is mostly absent, not effective in the composition, demonstrating a limited grasp in need of more extensive development—keep on list and take into conference with me and/or writing center before next project.
• 10-14: insufficient; the element fails to be present or is not addressed as expected, demonstrating a poor grasp in need of immediate attention—plan a conference right away to discuss further what should be improved for the next project.
• 0-9: not completed as expected.