Criteria for Review of Applications

REAP

URA and SURF USA

SURF Abroad

IROP (pdf)


REAP

The application will be reviewed by the directors of the Hamel Center and the University Honors Program, as well as a third individual appointed by these directors.  Applications will be evaluated using the following criteria:

Quality of the Proposal: 10 points

  • Is the proposed project well defined, with clear learning objectives and potential educational value for the student?
  • Is the proposal complete and detailed? Are all parts clearly explained in accordance with the proposal outline?
  • Is the project manageable and appropriate for the 10-week time frame?

 Quality of the “Student Applicant Statement of Interest” Essays: 10 points

  • Are the essays well developed and written clearly?
  • Does the student exhibit enthusiasm for the REAP experience?
  • Does the student have a sound understanding of what the REAP research activities will entail?  Is the student prepared for engaging in the REAP experience?
  • Do the student essays articulate a clear relationship between the REAP project and the student’s academic goals?

 Appropriateness of the Budget: 5 points

  • Is the budget itemized?
  • Is it clear why the items are necessary to the project?

 Faculty Recommendation and Honors Course Instructor Nomination: 5 points

  • Does the student demonstrate good potential for planning and carrying out the proposed research activities in the time period allowed? 
  • Does the student have both academic abilities and personal qualities that will enable him/her to undertake a successful summer research apprenticeship? 

URA and SURF USA

The Hamel Center’s Faculty Advisory Board reviews all applications. Each proposal is read by at least three reviewers drawn from one of the following two general areas of study: 1) departments in COLSA and CEPS, and 2) departments in COLA, HHS, and WSBE.  You and your mentor should read the following criteria as you prepare your application. Your application may receive a maximum of 25 points from each reviewer.

Quality of the proposal: 12 points

  • Is the proposal well written, well defined, convincing?
  • Is it complete? Are all parts clearly explained in accordance with the proposal outline?
  • Is the project manageable and appropriate for the time frame?

Qualifications of the applicant: 5 points

  • Are the qualifications, preparation, and experience of the student adequate for carrying out the project?

Appropriateness of the budget: 2 points

  • Is the budget itemized?
  • Is it clear why the items are necessary to the project?

Faculty recommendation(s): 6 points

  • Past or present experience supervising the student in coursework, research, or independent work
  • Preparation of the student to undertake the project in the time period allowed
  • Significance of the project and its potential educational value for the student
  • Relationships between the student's project and the faculty mentor's own research, scholarly, or creative work or areas of expertise

SURF Abroad

Members of the Hamel Center’s Faculty Advisory Board review all applications. Each proposal is read by at least three reviewers, drawn from the appropriate colleges/departments.An application may receive a maximum of 25 points from each reviewer.

Quality of the Proposal: 12 points

  • Is the proposal well written, well defined, convincing?
  • Is it complete? Are all parts clearly explained in accordance with the proposal outline?
  • Is the project manageable and appropriate for the time frame?
  • Is the project manageable in light of possible cultural/language barriers?

Qualifications of the Applicant: 5 points

  • Are the qualifications, preparation, and experience of the student
    adequate for carrying out the project?
  • Is the student’s knowledge of the culture and language adequate for conducting research at the foreign site?
  • Does the student demonstrate sufficient knowledge of resources and contacts at the research site?
  • Does the student show evidence of adequate preparation for the project prior to leaving the U.S.?

Appropriateness of the Budget: 2 points

  • Is the budget itemized?
  • Is it clear why the items are necessary to the project?

Faculty Recommendations: 6 points

  • Past or present experience supervising the student in coursework, research, or independent work
  • Preparation of the student to undertake the project in the time period allowed.
  • Significance of the project and its potential educational value for the student
  • Relationships between the student’s project and the faculty mentor’s own research, scholarly, or creative work or areas of expertise
  • Emotional and intellectual maturity of the student to conduct research in a foreign culture.
  • Ability of the student to be a good representative of the U.S. abroad.