Final Design
Project Proposal: Format
1.
Letter of Transmittal:
This identifies the proposal so that it will be sent to the correct
reviewers in the agency at which it is being considered. A letter of transmittal will contain:
Contact information – where
can you be reached for questions. Include
name, address, phone number, FAX number, email address. (You may omit any information that you do not
feel comfortable to release. Remember
that these reports will be on file for other students in future years).
The date of submission.
Name and business address of the person
to whom the proposal is being transmitted – In this case it will be: Steven
A. Jones, Associate Professor, Biomedical Engineering Program,
A statement that you are submitting this
proposal for review, including the title of the proposal and
what it is being reviewed for (Final Design Project Proposal for Biomedical
Engineering Senior Design).
Any additional information that
you believe will help support your proposal.
Note: be brief.
Expression of gratitude for the
addressee’s effort and for that of the reviewers.
Closing, signature, and your name
(typed).
2.
Title Page: This provides the reviewers with
important information that he/she can reference quickly. Include:
a. Your
institutional affiliation (
b. The
title of your proposal. This should be
descriptive of your project. Do not use
a title like, “BME 402 Design Proposal.”
c. Your
name.
d. The date
of transmittal.
e. The
statement: Final senior design proposal presented to Dr. Steven A. Jones in
partial fullfillment of the requirements for
Biomedical Engineering 402.
3.
Table of contents.
Section headings must be included, along with the page numbers on which
these sections begin.
1.
List of figures and list of tables. Include figure/table captions and page
numbers.
2.
Project summary: This must be no longer than ˝ page in length (250 words). Include 1) The major
problem you intend to address and why it is important, 2) The specific aspect
of the problem that you will address, 3) A statement of how this problem will
be addressed, 4) Indications from your proposal as to how you evaluated the
feasibility of the project. 5) A
statement of the project’s feasibility. 6) The expected benefits of the
project. The summary should be 1 to 2
paragraphs long. It will probably be the
first part of the proposal that the reviewer reads, and he may use it as an
initial screening when he has to review a number of different projects. The summary can slant the reviewer’s attitude
toward your entire proposal, and conceivably the rest of your proposal may
never be read if the funding agency has large competition and if the summary is
poor, so it is highly important that your summary be straightforward and
clear. Generally this section does not
include figures.
3.
Specific Aims:
This section is intended to tell the reader specifically what you plan
to do and how you plan to do it. This section must be no longer than
1.25 pages (500 words max). Generally this section does not need to
include figures or a large amount of explanation because the reader knows that
you will elaborate on what you say in the Background section. A good form to take in your Specific Aims
section is:
a) Identify
the general problem you are trying to solve.
b) State
the specific hypotheses or research questions you are trying to answer.
c) State
each objective or experiment that you intend to carry out to answer your
hypotheses. It is highly recommended
that if you have 3 hypotheses, you should have 3 objectives, each of which
matches up with a stated hypothesis.
d) State in
what way the accomplishments of the objectives will address the hypotheses.
e) State
what impact the results of each hypothesis will have on the general problem.
Try not to make it obvious that
you are following this as a “formula.”
Parts a-f must hold together cohesively, not be separate items that you
“have to get in.” The argument you make
above will be expanded in the Background and Significance section. Provide authoritative references.
4.
Background and Significance:
The background has both major purposes and minor
purposes. The primary purposes are: 1)
To give the reviewer enough information that he/she can understand what will
follow. 2) To establish in detail the
importance of the problem 3) To show
that there is a need to solve the problem.
4) To demonstrate that the problem has not yet been solved. 5) To show that the direction you propose is
the next logical step in the evolution of the solution. The minor purposes are to 1) To demonstrate a
high likelihood of the project working and 2) To demonstrate that you are
knowledgeable about the subject.
Generally you do not show that
you have expertise by adding irrelevant information in this section. Rather you show your understanding through a
cohesive argument that addresses the primary purposes. When this is done, the reviewer will be
convinced of your competency. Think
carefully about what information is and is not needed. If you are designing a new total knee
replacement, for example, it is appropriate to list for the reviewer several
reasons why people need knee replacements and give figures as to the prevalence
of each one. If your project addresses a
specific disease that requires a specific type of replacement, you will need to
explain what is different about that disease and what the problems are. However, it is not appropriate to give a complete description about the
pathological processes involved in each knee-degenerating disease. Under the major heading of Background and
Significance you should use the following sub-headings:
a.
Background: Tell the reader what he/she needs to know
to understand the rest of the proposal.
b.
Analysis of Need: This section will convince the
reader that what you propose to do is reasonable and necessary. It will consist of the following subsections.
i.
The Overall Need: Provide a logical argument which
states the problem, justifies that it is
a problem, and states why the experimental design you propose is needed?
ii.
Current Status: Describe research that has been done in
this area and that has led to the specific question you are attempting to
answer. Describe why data from other
investigators may be ambiguous with respect to the question. State how the information in the literature
leads to the conclusion that the hypotheses or questions you have raised in the
Specific Aims section have not been answered yet and yet are important to the
progress of the field.
iii.
Enabling Technology: Give a reason why the atmosphere
is now right to address that aspect (for example, through some technological
aspect, change in attitudes of society, etc.). This is important. A reviewer will be skeptical if your idea
seems to come from nowhere and will not believe that you happened to come up
with an idea that nobody has ever though of before. The immediate reaction will be either 1)
someone has probably done it already or 2) someone has tried it and it turned
out not to work. However, if you say that Michaelangelo,
Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein all thought about it but they did not have the
technology available to them to carry it out at that time, it is much easier to
convince the reviewer that you are taking the logical next step in the
evolution of the problem.
iv.
Problem to be Solved: Having reviewed what is available
in part ii above, determine what central aspect is missing from all of the
current solutions. This aspect will be
the specific problem you will address, and it should follow logically from the
problems that have been shown to exist with other current solutions. Provide a direct statement of this problem,
as in, “The proposed project will determine whether pH affects the
incorporation of quantum dots into protein coatings constructed through layer-by-layer
assembly. The pH will be varied from 2
to 13 and the quantum dot incorporation will be measured directly through the
intensity of the emission spectrum under a standardized excitation.”
It is critical that the
subsections of the Background and Significance section be supported by current
literature references. References from
the world wide web, though often useful, are not sufficient to show that you
have made a thorough study of the literature.
Refereed journal articles must make up the bulk of your references for
your argument to be convincing.
8. Preliminary Results: This section will, to some extent,
support the major purposes of the Background and Significance section, however,
its major purposes are to show 1) That the project you propose has a strong
likelihood of success, based on some preliminary
experiments that you have done
(feasibility), 2) That your group has some expertise in the field (either
through experiments, surveys of patients, or contact with experts in the
field). Information gained through a literature review should not go in
this section, nor should you try to show your expertise by stating that you
have reviewed the literature extensively.
Because you will have worked for almost 10 weeks on your project, you
should have at least some results to report.
Even if you do not consider your results to be earth shattering, include
them as preliminary results.
9. Research Plan:
This section is designed to convince the reader that you have an idea as
to how to proceed and that your plan is organized and feasibile. Subheadings of this section will be:
a.
Detailed experimental design: Give a detailed description for
the experimental design you select. You
must have a figure that illustrates the experimental apparatus design. Don’t even think about turning your proposal
in without this figure.
b.
Experimental protocols: Be specific about experiments you
will run and the data that you will collect.
State what question each experiment is designed to answer. Be as detailed as possible, including such
information as buffers and reagents, types of fluorophores,
and incubation times.
c.
Theoretical development: You must indicate that some kind of quantitative analysis will
be applied in the design process, and you must state what that analysis will
be. You do not need to actually have this analysis completed at this time.
d.
Statistical Analysis: What statistical tests for
significance (e.g. T-test, F-test, Chi-Squared test, Pierson’s test) will you
use to evaluate the results of your measurements for significance?
e.
Organizational Structure and Schedule: State
how the project will be divided up among the design team. If you need expertise in a particular area
(e.g., mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, etc.) state this and
give the role of the expert in that area.
Use the precedence matrix to show that your time plan makes sense. Give a time-table of specific landmarks in
your design and display these in a Gantt
chart. Do not make this general
(e.g. project definition, evaluation of solution, etc.), but be specific about
your project (e.g., selection of knee material, machining of joint, etc.).
10. Acknowledgements:
Few projects can ever be done without the help of others. In your acknowledgements name each person who
has helped you, with a brief statement of what their contribution was. Use
complete sentences. Likely
candidates for this section are your sophomore assistant, professors with whom
you have consulted, people who have personal experience with your problem
(although subjects who participate in surveys that are quoted in your paper
should remain confidential), and experts in the field whom you have
contacted. Do not acknowledge anyone who
is listed on the title page of your proposal or report. They are already acknowledged on the title
page.
11. References: Any reference that is
listed in this section must be cited in the text of your proposal.
You should use references primarily to back up specific statements you
make throughout the proposal. Cite
references with the (author, date) format.
For example, “Nussbaum et al. (1990) states that …,” or “Myocardial
infarction is the result of coronary artery thrombosis (Nussbaum et al.,
1990).” Remember that “et al.” is an
abbreviation for “et alii,” so there is a period
after al., but not after et. Cite your
references as: Author List, Date,
“Title”, Journal, Volume,
12. Qualifications of the Research Group: State
who will work on this project and their qualifications. This will include you as the principle
investigator. Please specify what
special experience you have to work on this project. This section will also include other people
who you know will be working on the project (e.g. your sophomore
assistant). Since you do not know in
advance everyone who will be involved, specify the other people by their
qualifications. For example, “A
biomedical engineer with a concentration in electrical engineering will be
needed to perform ….”
13. Budget: State the cost of this project in
the following terms: 1) Personnel (in most cases this will be zero cost since
the students will be donating their time). 2) Supplies. 3) Travel. 4) Equipment
5) Other costs. It is likely that
supplies will be the largest category, and in many cases the only category that
is non-zero.
14. Budget Justification: Any costs specified in the budget section
must be justified. You should also
specify anything that may be considered “matching funds,” such as the time
donated by yourself and your fellow students.
15. Research Facilities: State
what facilities you will have available to you for this project and how they
will be used. If someone has stated that
they will provide a piece of equipment for your use, include that. This may include instrumentation from the
undergraduate laboratory, equipment committed to the project by one of your
professors, or equipment that you will be able to borrow from someone outside
of the university. But be specific. Do not just say that such-and-such laboratory
will be used. State what equipment will be used from that laboratory and why it is
needed for this project.
16.
Miscellaneous: Use good grammar, spelling and
organization. These aspects are
paramount in convincing your audience that you have the necessary competence to
carry out your work. Make your report as
easy to read for a reviewer as possible.
Make tables and figures as complete as possible. Do not make the reviewer flip back to the
text to find out what “Alternative 1” is, or what a particular abbreviation
stands for. Make table and figure
captions self-explanatory. In general
the table or figure caption should tell the reader what the overall point of
the figure/table is. For example, do not
say simply: “Number of Diabetics vs. Time.”
Rather say: “Number of Diabetics vs. Time. This shows that the number of diabetics have
increased exponentially in the past 10 years.”
Number all pages. The reports
must be typed double-spaced, with 1-inch margins on both sides, a 1-inch margin
on top and bottom of the page. Use
11-point type.
17. Writing Constructs
to Avoid: Please
avoid the following in your writing:
Do not use first person.
Passive voice is fine.
Never use the phrase “due to the fact that.” This is wordy and can be replaced by the more
succinct “because.”
Do not use words like “quite” and “very.” These are always superfluous and usually do
not add the intensification desired. Compare
the following two sentences: “Arthritis
is very painful.” vs
“Arthritis is painful.” Interestingly,
the use of the word “very” makes the sentence sound more subjective and less
authoritative, tending to reduce its impact rather than intensify it.
Do not indicate any signs of doubt.
Do not express opinion.
Nobody will care what you think.
If you say, “I believe that this project will lead to improved
diagnostic procedures for hepatitis,” it sounds less authoritative than, “The
proposed project will lead to improved procedures for hepatitis.” And you certainly do not want to say, “I
believe that the incidence of tuberculosis has increased over the last 5
years.” You want to say, “The incidence
of tuberculosis has increased from 4000 per year to 8000 per year from 1997 to
2002 (Nussbaum et al., 2002).
Do not use statements like, “The American Heritage
Dictionary defines bursitis as inflammation of a bursa, especially in the
shoulder, elbow or knee joints.” The
reader will infer that you did not know what bursitis was when you first
started this project, so you looked it up in the dictionary. This approach may be okay for someone who is
writing for a newspaper, but is inappropriate for someone who is working in the
field. Consider how much more convincing
it is to simply say, “Bursitis is an inflammation of a bursa (Boyer et al.,
1983).” Be aware also that the
dictionary may not be the best place to go for a clinical definition of a
disease.
Steven A. Jones
Research Experiences
for Undergraduates Program