evaluation form sanitation

2
RESEARCH PROPOSAL EVALUATION (Evaluator’s Copy) Instruction: Evaluate the proposal by putting a check sign (√) in the box of your choice. LEGEND: 1: Not at all; 2: To a certain extent; 3: To a full extent Indicators 1 2 3 1. The proposed title is a good one, suggesting the research problem and the study population. / 2. The problem is stated clearly and is easy to identify. / 3. The problem statement makes clear the concepts and the population under study. / 4. The problem has significance to the institution/NHERA-2. / 5. There is a good match between the research problem and the paradigm and methods to be used. / 6. The literature review is thorough, up-to-date, and based mainly on primary sources. / 7. The review summarizes knowledge on the variables and the relationship between them. / 8. The literature review lays a solid basis for the new study. / 9. The key concepts are adequately defined. If not, the absence is justified. / 10. Research questions and/or hypotheses are explicitly stated, appropriately worded, and consistent with the literature review and the conceptual framework. If not, their absence is justified. / 11. The most rigorous design will be used, given the study purpose. / 12. The design will minimize threats to the internal and external validity of the study. / 13. The population is identified and described. / 14. The sample is described in sufficient detail. / 15. The best possible sampling design will be used to enhance the sample’s representativeness. / 16. The power analysis will be used to estimate sample size needs. / 17. The specific instruments are adequately described and are good choices. / 18. The instruments are valid and reliable. / 19. The statistical treatment is relevant and adequately presented and explained. / 20. The APA Sixth edition was accurately used in writing the proposal. / 21. The paper is well-structured, organized with few grammatical and syntactical errors. / TOTAL Total Mean Interpretation: 1-2 : Needs major revision before approval 2.1-3 : Needs minor revision for approval Instruction: Write your qualitative evaluation of the proposal by highlighting the strengths and your recommendations for the proposal’s improvement. Please use separate sheet if you need one. Proposal/Paper Strength Suggestions/Recommendations for Improvement 1.Title of Research 2.Introduction RDO-RPEc

Upload: raquelmendoza2003

Post on 28-Sep-2015

23 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

a tool assessing the environmental sanitation

TRANSCRIPT

RESEARCH PROPOSAL EVALUATION

(Evaluators Copy)Instruction: Evaluate the proposal by putting a check sign () in the box of your choice.

LEGEND: 1: Not at all; 2: To a certain extent; 3: To a full extent

Indicators 123

1. The proposed title is a good one, suggesting the research problem and the study population./

2. The problem is stated clearly and is easy to identify./

3. The problem statement makes clear the concepts and the population under study./

4. The problem has significance to the institution/NHERA-2./

5. There is a good match between the research problem and the paradigm and methods to be used. /

6. The literature review is thorough, up-to-date, and based mainly on primary sources./

7. The review summarizes knowledge on the variables and the relationship between them./

8. The literature review lays a solid basis for the new study. /

9. The key concepts are adequately defined. If not, the absence is justified./

10. Research questions and/or hypotheses are explicitly stated, appropriately worded, and consistent with the literature review and the conceptual framework. If not, their absence is justified./

11. The most rigorous design will be used, given the study purpose./

12. The design will minimize threats to the internal and external validity of the study./

13. The population is identified and described./

14. The sample is described in sufficient detail./

15. The best possible sampling design will be used to enhance the samples representativeness./

16. The power analysis will be used to estimate sample size needs./

17. The specific instruments are adequately described and are good choices. /

18. The instruments are valid and reliable./

19. The statistical treatment is relevant and adequately presented and explained./

20. The APA Sixth edition was accurately used in writing the proposal./

21. The paper is well-structured, organized with few grammatical and syntactical errors. /

TOTAL

Total Mean

Interpretation: 1-2: Needs major revision before approval2.1-3 : Needs minor revision for approval Instruction: Write your qualitative evaluation of the proposal by highlighting the strengths and your recommendations for the proposals improvement. Please use separate sheet if you need one.

Proposal/Paper StrengthSuggestions/Recommendations for Improvement

1.Title of Research

2.Introduction

3.Review of Literature and Studies

4.Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

5.Statement of the Problem

6. Method

7.Tool/Instrument

8.References

( ) Highly recommended for approval

( ) - Recommended for approval

( ) - Not recommended for approval unless revised Evaluators Name/ Signature:_____________________________________________________

Date:________________________________________RDO-RPEc