Self Evaluation of your paper ' CYBER CRIME"

r30

Fir.rAr THoUGHTS ABoUT PROPoSAL WRITING \7hen drawing up a contract, an attorrley meticulously

includes allof the :1c-h::*":l::fft:l:

Chopter 5 Writing the Reseorch Proposol

Onceyouhavewrittenwhatyor-rbelievetobeyourfinalproposal,youshouldscrurinizeir one more time, preferably after you l-rave set it asicle for

a few more days' Take a critical approach'

loaking far ttbat's urr,,rg r:nthff tban u'hat's right' The following checklist can provicle guidance

about what to look for.

; #;;ilj:';;ti#;1. rhe contract. The proposal writer should prepafe a proposar with the

same precision. ln a sense, a proposal is, uncler aartrir-t circumstances, a form of contract' or what

rve might call a qta-ri contract' Are you submitting a proposal for a grant to underwrite

a research project?, If so, you (as the

party of the first part) o.. p-poring to ,rnJ.r.uk ." research project in exchange for a monetary con-

sicleration From the or.,',., p-"iaiig the grant (the party oflhe second part) Regarded from a legal

standpoint, your proposal, on u...1ro,-t.e by the g.ur-tiir-rg ug"ncy, is a formal contractr-ral relationship'

Evotuoting on Eorly Droft of,o Reseofch,:Propossl

Check each i66rn-6p have a friend or colleague in your cliscipline check it-to be sure that your

,rroposal exhibits natte of the following characteristics:

Fon Anv RgsraRcu PBoPosal l.Thestatementoftheproblemisvague,oritissoobscuredbydiscussionsofother

topics that it is impossible to find'

2.Themethodologyisincomplerelydescribed;anexpianationofexactlyhowthe research will be conducted is not specifically deiineated'

3.Theproposedtfeatmentofeachsubproblemisgeneralandcursory;itdoesnot Conveyclearlyhowthedatawillbeusedundinterpretedtoresolvethesubproblem or the overall research Problem'

4.Theproposallackssharpness'ltisnotlogicallyorganized'\i7ithoutcleardivisions that set lbrth the

^,.u, of.h. research project, it rambles. Readers have dilficulty iso-

latingthedisctlssionoftheproblem,thesubproblems,therelatedstudies,themeth- odology,theinterpretatio.'ofthtdata,andotherimportantpartsoftheproposal'

1 . The proposal is phrased in terms that are too general' ambiguous' or imprecise to

be useft,l for evaluation. Such phrases as ..tests will be given,, and

..measurements

rvill be taken" are largely meaningless'

6. The format of the proposal deviates from the guidelines set forth by the approval

group or funding agency'

7'somecitedsourcesdonotappearinthereferencelist;alternatively,theyarein- completeiY or incorrectlY cited'