View source for Writing a Project Proposal

= Why write a literature review ? =

: summarise current state of the art
: identify key gaps in knowledge or its application
: set context for your theoretical framework, methodology and research project
: engage and entertain yourself and your audience

=Process: =

=== Before we begin: ===

: Take time to define your Topic very clearly
: Imagine your audience (perhaps pick a particular person and think of the review as for them to read !)

=== In this strict order: ===
  
# '''Define your Audience''' : This is an act of communication. You need to be very clear about what you have to say and who you are saying it to !
# '''Search''' the literature for sources
# '''Evaluate''' sources
#  '''Identify themes''', debates and gaps
#  '''Outline the structure''' : Make a complete bulleted outline of what you will discuss
# '''Develop a Narrative''': 
## Think about your  overall story
## Does this lead the reader to where you need them to be ?
## Is this a page turner ? Will it be enjoyable to read ?
#	 '''Write''' your literature review
## Ideally each section can now be written independently - you can focus on each element - as you have a clearly defined structure and narrative
## Stick to your structure to avoid a terrible mess / or go back two steps and redo the structure / narrative


There are some notes on each of these steps below.


== Search ==
*   Go back and test that theme definition: if it is flawed you’ll waste a lot of time
*   Keywords - brain storm all possible terms related to your topic and write them down
*   Search all sources and save searches — WoK, Inspec, Muse NOT just google which is a tiny subset
          : learn how to search efficiently and to use the binary logic of searching

== Evaluate ==
*    	Pick out influential works (citation counts help but aren’t the whole story)
**	     Identify influential persistent authors / research groups and institutes
**	     Check out the major conferences, plenaries, invited talks….

*	     Skim read your sources and make bulleted notes of contents - typically 3-4 key contributions per article 
**	ideally electronically & searchable
**	we are identifying what the authors were trying to communicate


==   Identify Current Themes: ==
*      Draw a picture of the key data / facts / concepts and their relationships
**   what is agreed on ?
**   what is controversial ?
**   where are the gaps in knowledge
**   what are the mains schools of thought

==   Outline: ==
*      Draw a route through your analytic picture (YES - I do use coloured pencils for this)
*       We want a story that moves from “Known” (+ evidence) to “Speculated on” to “Unknown (gaps)”

== Time out: == 
*      Look at your outline and imagine that the reader is someone like you…..
*       They want to know as succinctly and efficiently as possible something like… 
** what evidence has been gathered ?
** what valid conclusions can be drawn from it ?
** what theories are there ?
** what isn’t known ?
** what might be done next ? (technically, conceptually, ….)

It will be different in every case.. write down the list of questions you are trying to answer for your reader.
* Pin your list to the wall.  
* We want to make this lovely reader very very happy.
*   PS: Imagine you are the reader …. Someone had done all of this and written the perfect review for you : write that review

=== Define the Narrative ===
* Take your outline and turn it into a story line - a compelling narrative - maybe define headings and subheadings for now

* Take your time to get the logic and narrative of the story right; think of the journey your reader will go on,  Known --> Speculations --> Unknown --> Proposal

== Write: ==

* In each section add bulleted lists of the points you are going to make (very succinct)
* Add images and references if appropriate to each bullet
* Step back, read it all, check the narrative, check coverage of the literature

* Take a lot of time now - think about all the connections and how the reader will make them.

* Start at the top and convert all the bullets into paragraphs of text. Take your time, work when you are in the zone, take breaks when you are not, do not hammer out rubbish when you are tired… REALLY DON’T … it is much slower to rework than it is to express yourself clearly when you ideas are flowing.
** NB: If you are concerned that it is not the right literature, doesn’t hang together, is a waste of time ….. that’s just your brain trying to get off lightly. Stick to your plan. Stick to your bullets. Trust the smart person who decided on the narrative and contents (YOU) and just write each section.

* Proof read carefully
* Do it again

== Finally:  (now that its perfect !) ==

* Send it to your considerate and thoughtful Prof. and he / she will read it and send you helpful comments ; try to set a timeline
* Read the comments carefully
* Take any criticism on the nose ! You are not perfect and neither are they. 
* Take time to think carefully before changing anything…. If you did miss something, how did that happen ?
* Do you agree with the comment, If not seek clarification, if you still don’t agree… Remember, '''IT'S YOUR PROPOSAL''' so you make the final decision 



== Golden Rules: ==
* Write for a general reader - don’t assume background in your specialism
* Try not to overstate the case - for example, clear, realistic goals are usually more convincing than claiming that your project will “save the planet”
* Justify your statements - quote if you can, give data if you have it, or assert as a strongly held belief at worst but do not say something like  “CO2 causes global warming …. “ without backing it up.
* Think carefully about your reader and help them to share in your enthusiasm and belief in the work
* Have fun - it is a privelidge to be able to share your thoughts and plans in this way; what a '''JOY'''