Journal #5: Reviewing Past Project Proposals 

#1 → “Can a Just God Allow Suffering?”(interdisciplinary studies in the humanities) 

I found this example of a capstone proposal to be very clear and direct which makes it easy for me to understand why this student is interested in this topic, the questions or a puzzle that they plan to work from, and what relevant skills they already have from coursework and what methods of aid are needed to continue. I also think that they did a good job of outlining the vast scope of the philosophical question of how can a just God allow suffering but then narrows down to this aspect of free will as a way to manageably go in depth to one aspect of this topic. However, it did make me wonder what prompted them to title their proposal “Can a Just God Allow Suffering” – I do think it makes sense but I wonder what it might have looked like if they were able to showcase that narrowing down into free will or maybe lend us as readers a clue that they aren’t trying to tackle this enormous principle but have an interesting point of interaction that raises their own argument. I also think there might have been room to get just a touch more in depth in what exactly they are trying to critique or raise in regards to this argument of free will – yet I understand not giving away the whole project itself. Perhaps for a reader like myself who might not be super familiar with those philosophical discussions, it could help to briefly quote that sparked some questions to the student and would strengthen the so what aspect of why they want to revisit these arguments and raise new ones. While reading this proposal and looking ahead to my proposal, I am thinking of how this student was able to draw from the course material they have taken outside of philosophy that helped frame this project and made a point to not just list the materials themselves but what they gained skill wise. Items they listed such as close reading, research methods, notes and familiarity with academic writing that can be drawn from for their project was really helpful for me to see how they incorporated those. 

#2  Research Proposal & Bibliography: Analyzing the Use of Animals in Popular Victorian Literature (English) 

To start, I find the topic of this really intriguing and in limiting their scope to just three novels and using that historical context of the Victorian period as an avenue to explore why cultural significance on animals was present during this one time in history allows for again a narrowed and detailed analysis. The central question of why literature uses animals is very broad but I do think that the unconventionality that those novels bring – for instance the idea of the creature as animal/human and the again cultural context of Mary Shelley and Victorian ideas surrounding animals – allows for the topic to become more manageable and not become lost in such a large question. One aspect of this proposal that I found compelling and might think about as I start to plan my abstract and proposal is how they incorporated possible responses – or negative critique – and addressed those concerns before someone might even air them. To me it shows you are comfortable with your knowledge of this area to anticipate what criticisms might be made and to showcase further that you have a specific goal in mind, sources/evidence, and can bring the focus back to that. One question or suggestion I might have in how this student could further improve this proposal would be to maybe lay out in a bit more detail those timetables and action plan – it is rather short and appears to rush in at the end and I know that I as a reader would have liked to hear more about the next portion of their project relating to this work in connecting the three novels. In what capacity? 

#3 → Interdisciplinary Studies in the Humanities 

The format of this proposal follows the second sample guidelines and has a very clear and well structured outline that delves into the specifics right from the beginning. Following this, I think a strength that is evident within this proposal is how well the student has thought about their project in the most condensed version which does allow us as a reader to understand the heart of this project and we can see that outlined in this question of what it means to attribute humanness to others within literature, history and social constricts. I do think that while the outline meets the general criteria from the guidelines, one way to develop this proposed argument even further would be to briefly discuss maybe one example of how literature addresses this question and maybe a bit of commentary on how that sparked further questions and interest for this student that ties into that deeper understanding from their courses. I am thinking about how we make room for extending our projects and creating space to do something new and expansive – from this proposal I feel it reads more like a revisiting of an interest and I might be missing the explanation which I am sure the student has explored further in this project but it would be nice to get a glimpse of how this topic answers something their courses or other experiences didn’t. I also wondered if in this proposal it was appropriate to include specific primary source materials or to just state what kind of source material will be utilized. I think it would be helpful if applicable to maybe cite an example or two that could really connect with those comments made about those questions that arose through certain course materials and experiences and could in a way address my other observation for development above.