Student Project Description
| Item/Points | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Purpose statement | No statement of investigation or guiding question is presented. | N/A | A statement is presented; however, it is poorly defined, too vague, or unlikely to be answered through research. | N/A | A clearly defined purpose in the form of a question or investigation has been presented. |
| Evidence gathering | No mention of data collection or evidence gathering. | N/A | Amount of information to be collected may be inappropriate for summer research or type of information to be collected is unclear. | N/A | The type and amount of information to be gathered or generated is well-defined. |
| Techniques | No information provided about the tools and techniques to be used in the research. | N/A | Techniques presentation is too vague or too detailed or assumes the audience is an expert in the field of study. | N/A | Techniques are clearly presented with sufficient detail and clarity. |
| Expected outcomes | No evidence presented that the student has thought about expected status of the project at its conclusion. | N/A | Outcomes are mentioned but not clearly defined or are not obviously linked to the evidence and question posed. | N/A | The student adequately proposes outcomes that could arise as a result of the research to be performed. |
| Warrant | No attempt to link evidence to the purpose statement. | N/A | The links between evidence, purpose statement and outcomes are tenuous or obfuscated by technical jargon. | N/A | Clear connections between evidence, purpose statement and outcomes are presented. |
Student Preparation
| Item/Points | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preparation level | The student has engaged in no preparation and presents no plan to do so. | N/A | Preparation plan is present but does not involve interactions with faculty mentor. | N/A | Preparation is adequate and appropriate for the proposed project. |
| Timeline | No timeline provided. | N/A | The provided timeline is inconsistent (too ambitious, too sparse) for an 8- or 10-week research program. | N/A | The timeline is appropriate and well-thought-out for a summer research program. |
| Confidence | The reviewer is not convinced that the student is prepared to engage in summer research. | N/A | The reviewer has concerns about how much the student will learn from the experience. | N/A | The reviewer has confidence that the student will grow from this experience and develop new knowledge in their field. |
Faculty Description
| Item/Points | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alignment with student | The project proposed by the student does not appear to be the same as the one described by the faculty mentor | N/A | Discrepancies suggest that the student does not understand their role in the research. | N/A | Alignment between faculty and student project descriptions suggests a high degree of interaction and preparation. |
| Alignment with discipline | It is not possible to assess alignment of faculty mentoring plan with the discipline | N/A | Missing information to adequately assess alignment or alignment is not strong. | N/A | A clear connection between mentoring in the discipline and mentoring to be performed is presented. |
Faculty Mentorship Plan
| Item/Points | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mentorship Plan | No evidence that mentorship plays a role in the proposed project. | N/A | Mentorship plan is weak or deficient in some way. | N/A | A plan to provide the student with mentorship suited to the discipline is presented and will be implemented. |
Student Interview
| Item/Points | Weak (0-2) | Below Average (3-4) | Good (5-6) | Excellent (7-8) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 15 minute student interview | The student is unable to articulate the goals and plans of the project; their relationship with the mentor seems weak and that there has been little preparation with the mentor; the student is unsure how the experience can serve future goals. | The student can explain the project but has more unknowns than knowns. The student has limited insight as to how the experience will serve future goals. Communication with mentor appears to be minimal or lacking. | The student can explain project well. The student can explain how summer project will contribute to their future but gaps remain. Some uncertainty on either the project or relationship with the mentor. | The student clearly understands the project and the approach. The student can explain how the summer project will contribute to their future. It is clear that the student and the faculty mentor communicate. |
* The term purpose statement to refer to the guiding question or creative project investigation. The term evidence is used to refer to the data that will be collected or cultural practices that will be explored. The term warrant is used to assess the connections between the purpose statement, evidence and expected outcomes.
Score
| Category | Score |
|---|---|
| GPA | Out of 4 |
| Student Project Description | Out of 4 |
| Student Preparation | Out of 4 |
| Faculty Description | Out of 4 |
| Faculty Mentor Plan | Out of 4 |
| Interview | Out of 8 |
| Total | Out of 28 |
Interview
A 15-minute student interview is part of the application process and will be scheduled for every qualified applicant. Invitations will be sent after the written application is reviewed. Interviews will require students to answer some or all of the following questions:
- Please describe your project in terms that individuals from any discipline can understand.
- What is the overall objective, or goal, for your project?
- Briefly describe the approach for your project.
- What have you done to prepare for this work?
- How will this experience help you to achieve your personal goals?
- How do you view this summer research project in comparison to classes?
The interview is intended to help reviewers determine student preparedness and understanding for the summer project. It is expected and encouraged for faculty to discuss these questions and/or to practice interview skills.