Research Proposal Critique Format
Parlindungan Pardede
Universitas Kristen Indonesia
According to Merriam Webster Dictionary, to critique means to examine or to
evaluate critically. Thus, critiquing is a process of evaluating something.
Critiquing a research proposal is a great way to learn more about research
proposals, writing, and the research process itself. By doing so, you can analyze
how a good research proposal is written. To guide you critiquing a research
proposal, you can use the following format.
Reviewer’s (your) name :
Student Registration No. :
Research Proposal Critique of
……………………………… (Proposal
A. Introduction
In one or two paragraph, briefly but concisely describe the proposal you are
reviewing. Include the following info: the author(s)/writer(s), when and what it was
written for, how it is outlined (how many parts/chapters/pages), and other
relevant information.
B. Review
Review the proposal in terms of the following items, and write in terms of their
order. Please note that not all proposal include all these items. A qualitative
research proposal, for instance, does not include hypothesis and validity and
reliability sections.
1. Title
Does the title give a clear and concise description of the scope and nature of the
research? Do you think it’s too long or too short? Does it indicate the major
variables or theoretical issues to be considered in the study, the nature of the
research (descriptive, correlational, experimental, survey, or action research),
and the target population?
2. Table of Contents
Is the table of contents effective, in the sense that it locates each section and
major subdivision of the proposal?
3. Background
Based on your reading of the proposal, do you think the background provide
information about (1) why the research is important; (2) what other studies have
been conducted in this area; (3) how this research will add to knowledge in this
area? Are these three convincing? Support your answer with argument and
quotation from the proposal.
4. Research Problem(s)/Question(s)
Is/are the research problem(s)/questions clearly stated?
5. Research Objectives (Purposes)
Is/are the objective(s)/purpose(s) clearly stated? Does it/do they express what
the study intends to accomplish? Is/are the objective(s)/purpose(s) directly based
on the identified and formulated problem(s)?
6. Significance of the study
Does this section point out the benefit(s) to get if the study is done and to whom
it is important?
7. Scope of the study
Is the scope of the study limited and for what reasons? Does/do the writer(s)
describe the extent to which he/they believe the limitations degrade the quality of
the research?
8. Operational Definitions
Are all the terms and abbreviations mentioned in the study clearly defined?
9. Literature Review
Based on your reading of the literature review, do you think the researcher(s)
have a good grasp of publications concerning the issue in ESL/EFL teaching and
learning? Is the literature review understandable? it well organized (Does it built
to a clear statement of “what next”)? Have all the relevant theories/models been
presented in a clear and concise manner? Are the works reviewed quite recent
and relevant to the research objectives?
10. Hypothesis
(Please note that only experimental researches, causal-comparative,
correlational studies, and some action researches have hypothesis). How many
hypotheses are being stated? How clearly each one is stated? based on and
consistent with the findings reported in the literature review? Do they match with
research purposes? Are the hypotheses a prediction of the expected outcome of
the study? Would you be able to tell if the outcome doesn’t support the
hypotheses?
11. Conceptual Framework
Does the writer show the relationship of the background to the problems and how
the present proposed research could provide solutions to the problems or
contribute to the literature in this section?
12. Methods
Is the research method and design appropriate for achieving the objectives and
types of data to be collected and analyzed?
13. Participants (Population and Sample)
Does this section describes the population accurately and explains what
technique
to be used to determine the sample? Does it describe how to recruit the
participants?
14. Data Collection Instrument and Technique
Does this section describe how the data will be collected? Does it include the
specific technique, its procedure and the instruments for collecting data?
15. Data Analysis Technique
Is data analysis technique to be used explained? Is it consistent with the
research method/design? What type of statistical analysis is suggested? Is it
appropriate with the obtained data?
16. Validity and reliability (Triangulation)
Does the proposal describe the steps to take to assess the instrument’s validity
and reliability? If the study is a qualitative research and action research, is there
any description of triangulation?
17. Research Procedure
Are procedures to follow for conducting the study described effectively? Is it
consistent with the research objectives and method/design?
18. Timetable and Place
Is a detailed timetable and place for performing the project provided?
19. References
Are all the citations that appear in the proposal body presented in the References
list? Are they recent and comprehensive to indicate the author’s familiarity with
the body of knowledge he or she is investigating?
20. Others.
Evaluate also the references list and the grammatical, syntax, typographical
aspects of the proposal.
C. Conclusion
Draw your conclusion based on the whole evaluation you have made. Finally, state
whether you are confident that the project will be able to deliver all that has been
promised.
