Proposal Evaluation Sheet

Criteria Number of Pages Score

Introduction  Problem statement is clearly stated 1 to 2 pages /2
 Research question is clearly stated
 Significance is clearly stated
Review of the  Background information is clearly 10 to 14 pages /10
Literature presented
 Review displays knowledge of the field
 Review is well-organized
 More than 10 studies have been cited
Methods  Excellent choice of population 1 to 2 pages /2
 Sample size is appropriate
 Excellent choice of instrument
 Design and procedures are clearly laid out
Preliminary  Discusses what the results might mean in 1 to 2 pages /3
Suppositions regards to the theoretical framework
and Implications  Presents a tentative answer to the
research question
 Demonstrates mastery of theoretical
concepts

Conclusion  Expected results are discussed in terms 1 to 2 pages /2

of previous research
 Major ideas are summarized
 Recommendations for action are provided

References  Provides a list of sources in alphabetical /1

order

Quality of  The proposal follows the principles of Plagiarism will be /20

Writing academic writing result in a failing
 Thoroughly follows a consistent style: grade.
Times New Roman, size 12, double-spaced
 Few grammatical or spelling errors Plagiarism is using
 Organization is excellent others’ words or ideas
 Sources are cited in-text and a list of without citing the
references is added at the end source.
 Manuscript length is between 16 and 20
pages (excluding front and back matter)
Total /40
Sample Reference List Formatted in APA Style

References

Alibali, M. & Don, L. (2001). Children’s gestures are meant to be seen. Gesture, 1(2), 113-127.
Alibali, M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1993). Gesture-speech mismatch and mechanisms of learning: What the
hands reveal about a child's state of mind. Cognitive Psychology, 25 (4), 468-523.
Bates, J. (1975). The communicative hand. In J. Benthall & T. Polhemus (Eds.), The body as a medium of
expression (pp. 175-194). London: Allen Lane Penguin Books.
Gullberg, M. (1998). Gesture as a communication strategy in second language discourse. Sweden: Lund
University Press.
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Harms, W. (2000). Gestures add valuable information to teachers’ math lessons. University of Chicago
Chronicle, 19 (11), 1-2. Retrieved on 11/6/2008 from: http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/000302/
gesture.html.
Heath, C. (1992). Gesture’s discrete tasks: Multiple relevances in the contextualization of language. In P.
Auer & A. di Luzio (Eds.), The Contextualization of language (pp. 102-127). Amsterdam and
Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Jungheim, N. (1995). Assessing nonverbal ability as a component of language learners' communicative
competence. Doctoral Dissertation. Temple University.
Kita, S. (1993). Japanese adults’ development of English speaking ability: Change in the language-thought
process observed through spontaneous gesture. Paper presented at the Second Language
Research Forum. University of Pittsburgh.
Kita, S. (2000). How representational gestures help speaking. In D. McNeill (Ed.), Language and gesture
(pp.162-185). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
McNeil, D. (2002). Triangulating the growth point—arriving at consciousness. In L. S. Messing & R. Campbell
(Eds.), Gesture, speech, and sign (pp. 77-92). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schegloff, E. (1992a). Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in
conversation. American Journal of Sociology, 97 (5), 1295-1345.
Schegloff, E. (1992b). To Searle on conversation: A note in return. In J. R. Searle et al., (On) Searle on
conversation (pp.113-128). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (1995). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach (2nd ed.). Cambridge,
MA: Blackwell.
The New oxford dictionary of English. (2008). Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987 [1945]). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.