Selection Process/Criteria and Continuation Funding
Copies of all proposals received by the quarterly deadline are distributed to each member of the Research Review Committee that best fits the research topic. Committee members read the proposals, contribute to the discussion, and rank the proposal. The Chairs of the research review committees meet as a Steering committee to make the final decision on the allocation of funds.
Criteria used to rank the proposals are specific to the discipline and include:
- Does the project have the potential for the student to make
a meaningful intellectual contribution?
- Is the research setting appropriate? -are techniques established/equipment or subjects available/advisor oversight sufficient?
- Is the hypothesis/question important and clearly stated?
- Do the specific aims summarize the methods that will be carried
out to address the question?
- Does the student state why the problem selected is important
in the context of other research that has been carried out?
- relevant literature cited?
- Is the Experimental Design section detailed enough to
portray a clear understanding of the methodology? Does
the student state
the possible outcomes of each experiment and how the outcomes
will be interpreted with regard to the hypothesis? -does
the student consider
other interpretations and possible pitfalls? -if questionnaires
are being used are examples attached?
- Is the method of evaluation of the results sound? -how
will the data be gathered and analyzed?; how will the
design of the
(e.g. retrospective, case-control, etc) impact on the
conclusions that can be drawn?
- Are statistical tests described that will apply to
determining the confidence with which the hypothesis
can be accepted?
- Is the time-line for the project realistic?
Continuing a project?
For a “continuation” proposal, you should include a cover page to your proposal, that indicates:
- progress Made
- specific aims for the next period(s)
- updated timeline for completion
- Have you have ever had a MedScholars project funded before? YES
- Is this project related to any other MedScholars project you have had funded in the past? YES
- If the project is with a new mentor or in a different research group, the application should make reference to the previous project and describe the reasons for a transition.
- If the project encompasses an extension of a previous project into a new area, building from the previous project but not continuing to pursue the aims of the previous project, the project will normally be treated as a new project application.
highlight/bold or otherwise make clear any changes to the original proposal. The committee reviewing your “continuing” proposal should easily see your justifications for continuing your current project.
If the project involves continuing efforts to pursue the aims of the original project, the application should be very clear about the reasons that a continuation is needed. The committee generally does not view it as appropriate to fund continuations where there are not compelling reasons for extending the project timeframe beyond the originally.
When submitting the original application with revisions, you will be asked the following questions on the cover page:
By answering YES, the committee will understand it is a continuing project and by making the changes/additions clear within your proposal, they will easily see your reasoning for the continuing project request. When answering YES, MS Online will prompt you to note changes in the background and significance section of the proposal.
Minimally you have to ask for 25%, but the committee likes to see 50%+.
Additional considerations apply in the case of applications to continue research previous funded by the Medical Scholars program.