I'm an undergraduate doing a research colloquium project which is a continuation of one from the last school year. For the first proposal I had an introduction, which told about the disease of interest, and gave a brief summary of the project's goals. That was followed by a section detailing the procedures that were to be done in the upcoming research.

So I was wondering, for this year's proposal, since it's a continuation should I go into the same detail about the disease again, then talk about what I did last year and then what I'll do this year? Or shorten up that background [on the disease part] and just focus on what was done last year and what I will be doing? Do you think it would it be more appropriate to shorted up that beginning part or keep it?

1 Answer 1


Consider your audience, they will need reminding what this is all about. As this is a continuation of last year's work, most of the initial description (placing the problem in context) is still relevant. The goals and results of the previous work should be summarized, after that you have to state this year's goals.

Yes, the document will probably somewhat longer than the first one. But that is to be expected, you know the problem better, and are not only describing the problem to be solved but also showing earlier results (thus reinforcing your ability to see the project through).


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .