SLRF 2006 Proposal Rubric Descriptors: Level 1 Category
Level 2
The problem or topic may be appropriate, but is not clearly defined in the proposal
Level 3
Level 4
The problem or topic addressed is specific, welldefined, and important to the SLA field The research process appears to be valid and thorough. Methods, results, and implications are all addressed. The proposal explains clearly and successfully the relationship between its project and previous research in SLA (and/or makes a clear case for the 'gap' in research fulfilled by this project)
Choice of Problem/Topic
The problem or topic is extremely vague, too general/specific, and/or not pertinent to SLA Research processes are extremely vague, invalid, or are completely unaddressed in the proposal
The problem or topic may be lacking in specificity, clarity, or relevance
Quality of Research (subjects, methods, results, interpretation)
Contribution to Field / Originality The proposal does not address this aspect of research Relevance to conference
[Conference Themes: interdisciplinarity, hybridity, learner identity, cultural identity, sociocultural issues ]
Two or more elements of the research process are lacking or are insufficently explained The proposal does not adequately explain the relationship between its project and previous research in SLA OR the project appears redundant with little justification
One element of research method appears to be lacking or insufficently explained
The proposal addresses the relationship between its project and previous research in SLA to some extent, but not fully.
The proposal is not relevant to current SLA issues (seems outdated)
The project may reflect a relevant issue, but is not tied to the conference theme.
Ties to current issues and conference theme seem to exist, but are not fully explained in the proposal
Clear ties to current issues and conference theme are evident and explained in the proposal,
CFP and other info: http://students.washington.edu/slrf/proposal.shtml