table of content for research proposal

• Privacy Policy

Home » Table of Contents – Types, Formats, Examples

Table of Contents – Types, Formats, Examples

Table of Contents

Definition:

Table of contents (TOC) is a list of the headings or sections in a document or book, arranged in the order in which they appear. It serves as a roadmap or guide to the contents of the document, allowing readers to quickly find specific information they are looking for.

A typical table of contents includes chapter titles, section headings, subheadings, and their corresponding page numbers.

The table of contents is usually located at the beginning of the document or book, after the title page and any front matter, such as a preface or introduction.

Table of Contents in Research

In Research, A Table of Contents (TOC) is a structured list of the main sections or chapters of a research paper , Thesis and Dissertation . It provides readers with an overview of the organization and structure of the document, allowing them to quickly locate specific information and navigate through the document.

Importance of Table of Contents

Here are some reasons why a TOC is important:

• Navigation : It serves as a roadmap that helps readers navigate the document easily. By providing a clear and concise overview of the contents, readers can quickly locate the section they need to read without having to search through the entire document.
• Organization : A well-structured TOC reflects the organization of the document. It helps to organize the content logically and categorize it into easily digestible chunks, which makes it easier for readers to understand and follow.
• Clarity : It can help to clarify the document’s purpose, scope, and structure. It provides an overview of the document’s main topics and subtopics, which can help readers to understand the content’s overall message.
• Efficiency : This can save readers time and effort by allowing them to skip to the section they need to read, rather than having to go through the entire document.
• Professionalism : Including a Table of Contents in a document shows that the author has taken the time and effort to organize the content properly. It adds a level of professionalism and credibility to the document.

Types of Table of Contents

There are different types of table of contents depending on the purpose and structure of the document. Here are some examples:

Simple Table of Contents

This is a basic table of contents that lists the major sections or chapters of a document along with their corresponding page numbers.

Example: Table of Contents

I. Introduction …………………………………………. 1

II. Literature Review ………………………………… 3

III. Methodology ……………………………………… 6

IV. Results …………………………………………….. 9

V. Discussion …………………………………………. 12

VI. Conclusion ……………………………………….. 15

Expanded Table of Contents

This type of table of contents provides more detailed information about the contents of each section or chapter, including subsections and subheadings.

A. Background …………………………………….. 1

B. Problem Statement ………………………….. 2

C. Research Questions ……………………….. 3

II. Literature Review ………………………………… 5

A. Theoretical Framework …………………… 5

B. Previous Research ………………………….. 6

C. Gaps and Limitations ……………………… 8 I

II. Methodology ……………………………………… 11

A. Research Design ……………………………. 11

B. Data Collection …………………………….. 12

C. Data Analysis ……………………………….. 13

IV. Results …………………………………………….. 15

A. Descriptive Statistics ……………………… 15

B. Hypothesis Testing …………………………. 17

V. Discussion …………………………………………. 20

A. Interpretation of Findings ……………… 20

B. Implications for Practice ………………… 22

VI. Conclusion ……………………………………….. 25

A. Summary of Findings ……………………… 25

B. Contributions and Recommendations ….. 27

Graphic Table of Contents

This type of table of contents uses visual aids, such as icons or images, to represent the different sections or chapters of a document.

I. Introduction …………………………………………. [image of a light bulb]

II. Literature Review ………………………………… [image of a book]

III. Methodology ……………………………………… [image of a microscope]

IV. Results …………………………………………….. [image of a graph]

V. Discussion …………………………………………. [image of a conversation bubble]

Alphabetical Table of Contents

This type of table of contents lists the different topics or keywords in alphabetical order, along with their corresponding page numbers.

A. Abstract ……………………………………………… 1

B. Background …………………………………………. 3

C. Conclusion …………………………………………. 10

D. Data Analysis …………………………………….. 8

E. Ethics ……………………………………………….. 6

F. Findings ……………………………………………… 7

G. Introduction ……………………………………….. 1

H. Hypothesis ………………………………………….. 5

I. Literature Review ………………………………… 2

J. Methodology ……………………………………… 4

K. Limitations …………………………………………. 9

L. Results ………………………………………………… 7

M. Discussion …………………………………………. 10

Hierarchical Table of Contents

This type of table of contents displays the different levels of headings and subheadings in a hierarchical order, indicating the relative importance and relationship between the different sections.

    A. Background …………………………………….. 2

      B. Purpose of the Study ……………………….. 3

      A. Theoretical Framework …………………… 5

             1. Concept A ……………………………….. 6

                    a. Definition ………………………….. 6

                     b. Example ……………………………. 7

              2. Concept B ……………………………….. 8

       B. Previous Research ………………………….. 9

III. Methodology ……………………………………… 12

       A. Research Design ……………………………. 12

             1. Sample ……………………………………. 13

               2. Procedure ………………………………. 14

       B. Data Collection …………………………….. 15

            1. Instrumentation ……………………….. 16

            2. Validity and Reliability ………………. 17

       C. Data Analysis ……………………………….. 18

          1. Descriptive Statistics …………………… 19

           2. Inferential Statistics ………………….. 20

IV. Result s …………………………………………….. 22

    A. Overview of Findings ……………………… 22

B. Hypothesis Testing …………………………. 23

V. Discussion …………………………………………. 26

A. Interpretation of Findings ………………… 26

B. Implications for Practice ………………… 28

VI. Conclusion ……………………………………….. 31

A. Summary of Findings ……………………… 31

B. Contributions and Recommendations ….. 33

Table of Contents Format

Here’s an example format for a Table of Contents:

I. Introduction

C. Methodology

II. Background

A. Historical Context

B. Literature Review

III. Methodology

A. Research Design

B. Data Collection

C. Data Analysis

IV. Results

A. Descriptive Statistics

B. Inferential Statistics

C. Qualitative Findings

V. Discussion

A. Interpretation of Results

B. Implications for Practice

C. Limitations and Future Research

VI. Conclusion

A. Summary of Findings

B. Contributions to the Field

C. Final Remarks

VII. References

VIII. Appendices

Note : This is just an example format and can vary depending on the type of document or research paper you are writing.

When to use Table of Contents

A TOC can be particularly useful in the following cases:

• Lengthy documents : If the document is lengthy, with several sections and subsections, a Table of contents can help readers quickly navigate the document and find the relevant information.
• Complex documents: If the document is complex, with multiple topics or themes, a TOC can help readers understand the relationships between the different sections and how they are connected.
• Technical documents: If the document is technical, with a lot of jargon or specialized terminology, This can help readers understand the organization of the document and locate the information they need.
• Legal documents: If the document is a legal document, such as a contract or a legal brief, It helps readers quickly locate specific sections or provisions.

How to Make a Table of Contents

Here are the steps to create a table of contents:

• Organize your document: Before you start making a table of contents, organize your document into sections and subsections. Each section should have a clear and descriptive heading that summarizes the content.
• Add heading styles : Use the heading styles in your word processor to format the headings in your document. The heading styles are usually named Heading 1, Heading 2, Heading 3, and so on. Apply the appropriate heading style to each section heading in your document.
• Insert a table of contents: Once you’ve added headings to your document, you can insert a table of contents. In Microsoft Word, go to the References tab, click on Table of Contents, and choose a style from the list. The table of contents will be inserted into your document.
• Update the table of contents: If you make changes to your document, such as adding or deleting sections, you’ll need to update the table of contents. In Microsoft Word, right-click on the table of contents and select Update Field. Choose whether you want to update the page numbers or the entire table, and click OK.

Purpose of Table of Contents

A table of contents (TOC) serves several purposes, including:

• Marketing : It can be used as a marketing tool to entice readers to read a book or document. By highlighting the most interesting or compelling sections, a TOC can give readers a preview of what’s to come and encourage them to dive deeper into the content.
• Accessibility : A TOC can make a document or book more accessible to people with disabilities, such as those who use screen readers or other assistive technologies. By providing a clear and organized overview of the content, a TOC can help these readers navigate the material more easily.
• Collaboration : This can be used as a collaboration tool to help multiple authors or editors work together on a document or book. By providing a shared framework for organizing the content, a TOC can help ensure that everyone is on the same page and working towards the same goals.
• Reference : It can serve as a reference tool for readers who need to revisit specific sections of a document or book. By providing a clear overview of the content and organization, a TOC can help readers quickly locate the information they need, even if they don’t remember exactly where it was located.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

How to Cite Research Paper – All Formats and...

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Paper Format – Types, Examples and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Structure the Table of Contents for a Research Paper

4-minute read

• 16th July 2023

So you’ve made it to the important step of writing the table of contents for your paper. Congratulations on making it this far! Whether you’re writing a research paper or a dissertation , the table of contents not only provides the reader with guidance on where to find the sections of your paper, but it also signals that a quality piece of research is to follow. Here, we will provide detailed instructions on how to structure the table of contents for your research paper.

Steps to Create a Table of Contents

• Insert the table of contents after the title page.

Within the structure of your research paper , you should place the table of contents after the title page but before the introduction or the beginning of the content. If your research paper includes an abstract or an acknowledgements section , place the table of contents after it.

• List all the paper’s sections and subsections in chronological order.

Depending on the complexity of your paper, this list will include chapters (first-level headings), chapter sections (second-level headings), and perhaps subsections (third-level headings). If you have a chapter outline , it will come in handy during this step. You should include the bibliography and all appendices in your table of contents. If you have more than a few charts and figures (more often the case in a dissertation than in a research paper), you should add them to a separate list of charts and figures that immediately follows the table of contents. (Check out our FAQs below for additional guidance on items that should not be in your table of contents.)

• Paginate each section.

Label each section and subsection with the page number it begins on. Be sure to do a check after you’ve made your final edits to ensure that you don’t need to update the page numbers.

• Format your table of contents.

The way you format your table of contents will depend on the style guide you use for the rest of your paper. For example, there are table of contents formatting guidelines for Turabian/Chicago and MLA styles, and although the APA recommends checking with your instructor for formatting instructions (always a good rule of thumb), you can also create a table of contents for a research paper that follows APA style .

• Add hyperlinks if you like.

Depending on the word processing software you’re using, you may also be able to hyperlink the sections of your table of contents for easier navigation through your paper. (Instructions for this feature are available for both Microsoft Word and Google Docs .)

To summarize, the following steps will help you create a clear and concise table of contents to guide readers through your research paper:

1. Insert the table of contents after the title page.

2. List all the sections and subsections in chronological order.

3. Paginate each section.

4. Format the table of contents according to your style guide.

5. Add optional hyperlinks.

If you’d like help formatting and proofreading your research paper , check out some of our services. You can even submit a sample for free . Best of luck writing your research paper table of contents!

What is a table of contents?

A table of contents is a listing of each section of a document in chronological order, accompanied by the page number where the section begins. A table of contents gives the reader an overview of the contents of a document, as well as providing guidance on where to find each section.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

What should I include in my table of contents?

If your paper contains any of the following sections, they should be included in your table of contents:

●  Chapters, chapter sections, and subsections

●  Introduction

●  Conclusion

●  Appendices

●  Bibliography

Although recommendations may differ among institutions, you generally should not include the following in your table of contents:

●  Title page

●  Abstract

●  Acknowledgements

●  Forward or preface

If you have several charts, figures, or tables, consider creating a separate list for them that will immediately follow the table of contents. Also, you don’t need to include the table of contents itself in your table of contents.

Is there more than one way to format a table of contents?

Yes! In addition to following any recommendations from your instructor or institution, you should follow the stipulations of your style guide .

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

3-minute read

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

How To Write A Research Proposal

A Straightforward How-To Guide (With Examples)

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | August 2019 (Updated April 2023)

Writing up a strong research proposal for a dissertation or thesis is much like a marriage proposal. It’s a task that calls on you to win somebody over and persuade them that what you’re planning is a great idea. An idea they’re happy to say ‘yes’ to. This means that your dissertation proposal needs to be   persuasive ,   attractive   and well-planned. In this post, I’ll show you how to write a winning dissertation proposal, from scratch.

Before you start:

– Understand exactly what a research proposal is – Ask yourself these 4 questions

The 5 essential ingredients:

• The title/topic
• The introduction chapter
• The scope/delimitations
• Preliminary literature review
• Design/ methodology
• Practical considerations and risks 

What Is A Research Proposal?

The research proposal is literally that: a written document that communicates what you propose to research, in a concise format. It’s where you put all that stuff that’s spinning around in your head down on to paper, in a logical, convincing fashion.

Convincing   is the keyword here, as your research proposal needs to convince the assessor that your research is   clearly articulated   (i.e., a clear research question) ,   worth doing   (i.e., is unique and valuable enough to justify the effort), and   doable   within the restrictions you’ll face (time limits, budget, skill limits, etc.). If your proposal does not address these three criteria, your research won’t be approved, no matter how “exciting” the research idea might be.

PS – if you’re completely new to proposal writing, we’ve got a detailed walkthrough video covering two successful research proposals here . 

How do I know I’m ready?

Before starting the writing process, you need to   ask yourself 4 important questions .  If you can’t answer them succinctly and confidently, you’re not ready – you need to go back and think more deeply about your dissertation topic .

You should be able to answer the following 4 questions before starting your dissertation or thesis research proposal:

• WHAT is my main research question? (the topic)
• WHO cares and why is this important? (the justification)
• WHAT data would I need to answer this question, and how will I analyse it? (the research design)
• HOW will I manage the completion of this research, within the given timelines? (project and risk management)

If you can’t answer these questions clearly and concisely,   you’re not yet ready   to write your research proposal – revisit our   post on choosing a topic .

If you can, that’s great – it’s time to start writing up your dissertation proposal. Next, I’ll discuss what needs to go into your research proposal, and how to structure it all into an intuitive, convincing document with a linear narrative.

The 5 Essential Ingredients

Research proposals can vary in style between institutions and disciplines, but here I’ll share with you a   handy 5-section structure   you can use. These 5 sections directly address the core questions we spoke about earlier, ensuring that you present a convincing proposal. If your institution already provides a proposal template, there will likely be substantial overlap with this, so you’ll still get value from reading on.

For each section discussed below, make sure you use headers and sub-headers (ideally, numbered headers) to help the reader navigate through your document, and to support them when they need to revisit a previous section. Don’t just present an endless wall of text, paragraph after paragraph after paragraph…

Top Tip:   Use MS Word Styles to format headings. This will allow you to be clear about whether a sub-heading is level 2, 3, or 4. Additionally, you can view your document in ‘outline view’ which will show you only your headings. This makes it much easier to check your structure, shift things around and make decisions about where a section needs to sit. You can also generate a 100% accurate table of contents using Word’s automatic functionality.

Ingredient #1 – Topic/Title Header

Your research proposal’s title should be your main research question in its simplest form, possibly with a sub-heading providing basic details on the specifics of the study. For example:

“Compliance with equality legislation in the charity sector: a study of the ‘reasonable adjustments’ made in three London care homes”

As you can see, this title provides a clear indication of what the research is about, in broad terms. It paints a high-level picture for the first-time reader, which gives them a taste of what to expect.   Always aim for a clear, concise title . Don’t feel the need to capture every detail of your research in your title – your proposal will fill in the gaps.

Need a helping hand?

Ingredient #2 – Introduction

In this section of your research proposal, you’ll expand on what you’ve communicated in the title, by providing a few paragraphs which offer more detail about your research topic. Importantly, the focus here is the   topic   – what will you research and why is that worth researching? This is not the place to discuss methodology, practicalities, etc. – you’ll do that later.

You should cover the following:

• An overview of the   broad area   you’ll be researching – introduce the reader to key concepts and language
• An explanation of the   specific (narrower) area   you’ll be focusing, and why you’ll be focusing there
• Your research   aims   and   objectives
• Your   research question (s) and sub-questions (if applicable)

Importantly, you should aim to use short sentences and plain language – don’t babble on with extensive jargon, acronyms and complex language. Assume that the reader is an intelligent layman – not a subject area specialist (even if they are). Remember that the   best writing is writing that can be easily understood   and digested. Keep it simple.

Note that some universities may want some extra bits and pieces in your introduction section. For example, personal development objectives, a structural outline, etc. Check your brief to see if there are any other details they expect in your proposal, and make sure you find a place for these.

Ingredient #3 – Scope

Next, you’ll need to specify what the scope of your research will be – this is also known as the delimitations . In other words, you need to make it clear what you will be covering and, more importantly, what you won’t be covering in your research. Simply put, this is about ring fencing your research topic so that you have a laser-sharp focus.

All too often, students feel the need to go broad and try to address as many issues as possible, in the interest of producing comprehensive research. Whilst this is admirable, it’s a mistake. By tightly refining your scope, you’ll enable yourself to   go deep   with your research, which is what you need to earn good marks. If your scope is too broad, you’re likely going to land up with superficial research (which won’t earn marks), so don’t be afraid to narrow things down.

Ingredient #4 – Literature Review

In this section of your research proposal, you need to provide a (relatively) brief discussion of the existing literature. Naturally, this will not be as comprehensive as the literature review in your actual dissertation, but it will lay the foundation for that. In fact, if you put in the effort at this stage, you’ll make your life a lot easier when it’s time to write your actual literature review chapter.

There are a few things you need to achieve in this section:

• Demonstrate that you’ve done your reading and are   familiar with the current state of the research   in your topic area.
• Show that   there’s a clear gap   for your specific research – i.e., show that your topic is sufficiently unique and will add value to the existing research.
• Show how the existing research has shaped your thinking regarding   research design . For example, you might use scales or questionnaires from previous studies.

When you write up your literature review, keep these three objectives front of mind, especially number two (revealing the gap in the literature), so that your literature review has a   clear purpose and direction . Everything you write should be contributing towards one (or more) of these objectives in some way. If it doesn’t, you need to ask yourself whether it’s truly needed.

Top Tip:  Don’t fall into the trap of just describing the main pieces of literature, for example, “A says this, B says that, C also says that…” and so on. Merely describing the literature provides no value. Instead, you need to   synthesise   it, and use it to address the three objectives above.

Ingredient #5 – Research Methodology

Now that you’ve clearly explained both your intended research topic (in the introduction) and the existing research it will draw on (in the literature review section), it’s time to get practical and explain exactly how you’ll be carrying out your own research. In other words, your research methodology.

In this section, you’ll need to   answer two critical questions :

• How   will you design your research? I.e., what research methodology will you adopt, what will your sample be, how will you collect data, etc.
• Why   have you chosen this design? I.e., why does this approach suit your specific research aims, objectives and questions?

In other words, this is not just about explaining WHAT you’ll be doing, it’s also about explaining WHY. In fact, the   justification is the most important part , because that justification is how you demonstrate a good understanding of research design (which is what assessors want to see).

Some essential design choices you need to cover in your research proposal include:

• Your intended research philosophy (e.g., positivism, interpretivism or pragmatism )
• What methodological approach you’ll be taking (e.g., qualitative , quantitative or mixed )
• The details of your sample (e.g., sample size, who they are, who they represent, etc.)
• What data you plan to collect (i.e. data about what, in what form?)
• How you plan to collect it (e.g., surveys , interviews , focus groups, etc.)
• How you plan to analyse it (e.g., regression analysis, thematic analysis , etc.)
• Ethical adherence (i.e., does this research satisfy all ethical requirements of your institution, or does it need further approval?)

This list is not exhaustive – these are just some core attributes of research design. Check with your institution what level of detail they expect. The “ research onion ” by Saunders et al (2009) provides a good summary of the various design choices you ultimately need to make – you can   read more about that here .

Don’t forget the practicalities…

In addition to the technical aspects, you will need to address the   practical   side of the project. In other words, you need to explain   what resources you’ll need   (e.g., time, money, access to equipment or software, etc.) and how you intend to secure these resources. You need to show that your project is feasible, so any “make or break” type resources need to already be secured. The success or failure of your project cannot depend on some resource which you’re not yet sure you have access to.

Another part of the practicalities discussion is   project and risk management . In other words, you need to show that you have a clear project plan to tackle your research with. Some key questions to address:

• What are the timelines for each phase of your project?
• Are the time allocations reasonable?
• What happens if something takes longer than anticipated (risk management)?
• What happens if you don’t get the response rate you expect?

A good way to demonstrate that you’ve thought this through is to include a Gantt chart and a risk register (in the appendix if word count is a problem). With these two tools, you can show that you’ve got a clear, feasible plan, and you’ve thought about and accounted for the potential risks.

Tip – Be honest about the potential difficulties – but show that you are anticipating solutions and workarounds. This is much more impressive to an assessor than an unrealistically optimistic proposal which does not anticipate any challenges whatsoever.

Final Touches: Read And Simplify

The final step is to edit and proofread your proposal – very carefully. It sounds obvious, but all too often poor editing and proofreading ruin a good proposal. Nothing is more off-putting for an assessor than a poorly edited, typo-strewn document. It sends the message that you either do not pay attention to detail, or just don’t care. Neither of these are good messages. Put the effort into editing and proofreading your proposal (or pay someone to do it for you) – it will pay dividends.

When you’re editing, watch out for ‘academese’. Many students can speak simply, passionately and clearly about their dissertation topic – but become incomprehensible the moment they turn the laptop on. You are not required to write in any kind of special, formal, complex language when you write academic work. Sure, there may be technical terms, jargon specific to your discipline, shorthand terms and so on. But, apart from those,   keep your written language very close to natural spoken language   – just as you would speak in the classroom. Imagine that you are explaining your project plans to your classmates or a family member. Remember, write for the intelligent layman, not the subject matter experts. Plain-language, concise writing is what wins hearts and minds – and marks!

Let’s Recap: Research Proposal 101

And there you have it – how to write your dissertation or thesis research proposal, from the title page to the final proof. Here’s a quick recap of the key takeaways:

• The purpose of the research proposal is to   convince   – therefore, you need to make a clear, concise argument of why your research is both worth doing and doable.
• Make sure you can ask the critical what, who, and how questions of your research   before   you put pen to paper.
• Title – provides the first taste of your research, in broad terms
• Introduction – explains what you’ll be researching in more detail
• Scope – explains the boundaries of your research
• Literature review – explains how your research fits into the existing research and why it’s unique and valuable
• Research methodology – explains and justifies how you will carry out your own research

Hopefully, this post has helped you better understand how to write up a winning research proposal. If you enjoyed it, be sure to check out the rest of the Grad Coach Blog . If your university doesn’t provide any template for your proposal, you might want to try out our free research proposal template .

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Research Proposal Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

30 Comments

Thank you so much for the valuable insight that you have given, especially on the research proposal. That is what I have managed to cover. I still need to go back to the other parts as I got disturbed while still listening to Derek’s audio on you-tube. I am inspired. I will definitely continue with Grad-coach guidance on You-tube.

Thanks for the kind words :). All the best with your proposal.

First of all, thanks a lot for making such a wonderful presentation. The video was really useful and gave me a very clear insight of how a research proposal has to be written. I shall try implementing these ideas in my RP.

Once again, I thank you for this content.

I found reading your outline on writing research proposal very beneficial. I wish there was a way of submitting my draft proposal to you guys for critiquing before I submit to the institution.

Hi Bonginkosi

Thank you for the kind words. Yes, we do provide a review service. The best starting point is to have a chat with one of our coaches here: https://gradcoach.com/book/new/ .

Hello team GRADCOACH, may God bless you so much. I was totally green in research. Am so happy for your free superb tutorials and resources. Once again thank you so much Derek and his team.

You’re welcome, Erick. Good luck with your research proposal 🙂

thank you for the information. its precise and on point.

Really a remarkable piece of writing and great source of guidance for the researchers. GOD BLESS YOU for your guidance. Regards

Thanks so much for your guidance. It is easy and comprehensive the way you explain the steps for a winning research proposal.

Thank you guys so much for the rich post. I enjoyed and learn from every word in it. My problem now is how to get into your platform wherein I can always seek help on things related to my research work ? Secondly, I wish to find out if there is a way I can send my tentative proposal to you guys for examination before I take to my supervisor Once again thanks very much for the insights

Thanks for your kind words, Desire.

If you are based in a country where Grad Coach’s paid services are available, you can book a consultation by clicking the “Book” button in the top right.

Best of luck with your studies.

May God bless you team for the wonderful work you are doing,

If I have a topic, Can I submit it to you so that you can draft a proposal for me?? As I am expecting to go for masters degree in the near future.

Thanks for your comment. We definitely cannot draft a proposal for you, as that would constitute academic misconduct. The proposal needs to be your own work. We can coach you through the process, but it needs to be your own work and your own writing.

Best of luck with your research!

I found a lot of many essential concepts from your material. it is real a road map to write a research proposal. so thanks a lot. If there is any update material on your hand on MBA please forward to me.

GradCoach is a professional website that presents support and helps for MBA student like me through the useful online information on the page and with my 1-on-1 online coaching with the amazing and professional PhD Kerryen.

Thank you Kerryen so much for the support and help 🙂

I really recommend dealing with such a reliable services provider like Gradcoah and a coach like Kerryen.

Hi, Am happy for your service and effort to help students and researchers, Please, i have been given an assignment on research for strategic development, the task one is to formulate a research proposal to support the strategic development of a business area, my issue here is how to go about it, especially the topic or title and introduction. Please, i would like to know if you could help me and how much is the charge.

This content is practical, valuable, and just great!

Thank you very much!

Hi Derek, Thank you for the valuable presentation. It is very helpful especially for beginners like me. I am just starting my PhD.

This is quite instructive and research proposal made simple. Can I have a research proposal template?

Great! Thanks for rescuing me, because I had no former knowledge in this topic. But with this piece of information, I am now secured. Thank you once more.

I enjoyed listening to your video on how to write a proposal. I think I will be able to write a winning proposal with your advice. I wish you were to be my supervisor.

Dear Derek Jansen,

Thank you for your great content. I couldn’t learn these topics in MBA, but now I learned from GradCoach. Really appreciate your efforts….

From Afghanistan!

I have got very essential inputs for startup of my dissertation proposal. Well organized properly communicated with video presentation. Thank you for the presentation.

Wow, this is absolutely amazing guys. Thank you so much for the fruitful presentation, you’ve made my research much easier.

this helps me a lot. thank you all so much for impacting in us. may god richly bless you all

How I wish I’d learn about Grad Coach earlier. I’ve been stumbling around writing and rewriting! Now I have concise clear directions on how to put this thing together. Thank you!

Fantastic!! Thank You for this very concise yet comprehensive guidance.

Even if I am poor in English I would like to thank you very much.

Thank you very much, this is very insightful.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

• Visit the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
• Apply to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln
• Give to the University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Search Form

Components of a research proposal.

In general, the proposal components include:

Introduction: Provides reader with a broad overview of problem in context.

Statement of problem: Answers the question, “What research problem are you going to investigate?”

Literature review: Shows how your approach builds on existing research; helps you identify methodological and design issues in studies similar to your own; introduces you to measurement tools others have used effectively; helps you interpret findings; and ties results of your work to those who’ve preceded you.

Research design and methods: Describes how you’ll go about answering your research questions and confirming your hypothesis(es). Lists the hypothesis(es) to be tested, or states research question you’ll ask to seek a solution to your research problem. Include as much detail as possible: measurement instruments and procedures, subjects and sample size.

The research design is what you’ll also need to submit for approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) or the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) if your research involves human or animal subjects, respectively.

Timeline: Breaks your project into small, easily doable steps via backwards calendar.

The Plagiarism Checker Online For Your Academic Work

Start Plagiarism Check

Editing & Proofreading for Your Research Paper

Get it proofread now

Online Printing & Binding with Free Express Delivery

Configure binding now

• Academic essay overview
• The writing process
• Structuring academic essays
• Types of academic essays
• Academic writing overview
• Sentence structure
• Academic writing process
• Improving your academic writing
• Titles and headings
• APA style overview
• APA citation & referencing
• APA structure & sections
• Citation & referencing
• Structure and sections
• APA examples overview
• Commonly used citations
• Other examples
• British English vs. American English
• Chicago style overview
• Chicago citation & referencing
• Chicago structure & sections
• Chicago style examples
• Citing sources overview
• Citation format
• Citation examples
• College essay overview
• Application
• How to write a college essay
• Types of college essays
• Commonly confused words
• Definitions
• Dissertation overview
• Dissertation structure & sections
• Dissertation writing process
• Graduate school overview
• Application & admission
• Study abroad
• Master degree
• Harvard referencing overview
• Language rules overview
• Grammatical rules & structures
• Parts of speech
• Punctuation
• Methodology overview
• Analyzing data
• Experiments
• Observations
• Inductive vs. Deductive
• Qualitative vs. Quantitative
• Types of validity
• Types of reliability
• Sampling methods
• Theories & Concepts
• Types of research studies
• Types of variables
• MLA style overview
• MLA examples
• MLA citation & referencing
• MLA structure & sections
• Plagiarism overview
• Plagiarism checker
• Types of plagiarism
• Printing production overview
• Research bias overview
• Types of research bias
• Example sections
• Types of research papers
• Research process overview
• Problem statement
• Research proposal
• Research topic
• Statistics overview
• Levels of measurment
• Frequency distribution
• Measures of central tendency
• Measures of variability
• Hypothesis testing
• Parameters & test statistics
• Types of distributions
• Correlation
• Effect size
• Hypothesis testing assumptions
• Types of ANOVAs
• Types of chi-square
• Statistical data
• Statistical models
• Spelling mistakes
• Tips overview
• Academic writing tips
• Dissertation tips
• Sources tips
• Working with sources overview
• Evaluating sources
• Finding sources
• Including sources
• Types of sources

Your Step to Success

Plagiarism Check within 10min

Printing & Binding with 3D Live Preview

Table of Contents

How do you like this article cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

A guide to the table of contents page

Inhaltsverzeichnis

• 1 Definition: Table of Contents
• 3 Everything for Your Thesis
• 5 Create in Microsoft Word
• 6 In a Nutshell

Definition: Table of Contents

The table of contents is an organized listing of your document’s chapters, sections and, often, figures, clearly labelled by page number. Readers should be able to look at your table of contents page and understand immediately how your paper is organized, enabling them to skip to any relevant section or sub-section. The table of contents should list all front matter, main content and back matter, including the headings and page numbers of all chapters and the bibliography . A good table of contents should be easy to read, accurately formatted and completed last so that it is 100% accurate. Although you can complete a table of contents manually, many word processing tools like Microsoft Word enable you to format your table of contents automatically.

When adding the finishing touches to your dissertation, the table of contents is one of the most crucial elements. It helps the reader navigate (like a map) through your argument and topic points. Adding a table of contents is simple and it can be inserted easily after you have finished writing your paper. In this guide, we look at the do’s and don’ts of a table of contents; this will help you process and format your dissertation in a professional way.

When adding the finishing touches to your dissertation, the table of contents is one of the most crucial elements. It helps the reader navigate (like a map) through your argument and topic points. Adding a table of contents is simple and can be inserted easily after you have finished writing your paper. In this guide, we look at the do’s and don’ts of a table of contents; this will help you process and format your dissertation in a professional way.

• ✓ Post a picture on Instagram
• ✓ Get the most likes on your picture
• ✓ Receive up to $300 cash back

What is a table of contents?

A table of contents is a list, usually on a page at the beginning of a piece of academic writing , which outlines the chapters or sections names with their corresponding page numbers. In addition to chapter names, it includes bullet points of the sub-chapter headings or subsection headings. It usually comes right after the title page of a research paper.

How do you write a table of contents

To write a table of contents, you first write the title or chapter names of your research paper in chronological order. Secondly, you write the subheadings or subtitles, if you have them in your paper. After that, you write the page numbers for the corresponding headings and subheadings. You can also very easily set up a table of contents in Microsoft Word.

Where do you put a table of contents?

The table of contents is found on a page right at the beginning of an academic writing project. It comes specifically after the title page and acknowledgements, but before the introductory page of a writing project. This position at the beginning of an academic piece of writing is universal for all academic projects.

What to include in a table of contents?

A sample table of contents includes the title of the paper at the very top, followed by the chapter names and subtitles in chronological order. At the end of each line, is the page number of the corresponding headings. Examples of chapter names can be: executive summary,  introduction, project description, marketing plan, summary and conclusion. The abstract and acknowledgments are usually not included in the table of contents, however this could depend on the formatting that is required by your institution. Scroll down to see some examples.

How important is a table of contents?

A table of contents is very important at the beginning of a writing project for two important reasons. Firstly, it helps the reader easily locate contents of particular topics itemized as chapters or subtitles. Secondly, it helps the writer arrange their work and organize their thoughts so that important sections of an academic project are not left out. This has the extra effect of helping to manage the reader’s expectation of any academic essay or thesis right from the beginning.

Everything for Your Thesis

A table of contents is a crucial component of an academic thesis. Whether you’re completing a Bachelor’s or a postgraduate degree, the table of contents is a requirement for dissertation submissions. As a rule of thumb, your table of contents will usually come after your title page , abstract, acknowledgement or preface. Although it’s not necessary to include a reference to this front matter in your table of contents, different universities have different policies and guidelines.

Although the table of contents is best completed after you have finished your thesis, it’s a good idea to draw up a mock table of contents in the early stages of writing. This allows you to formulate a structure and think through your topic and how you are going to research, answer and make your argument. Think of this as a form of “reverse engineering”. Knowing how your chapters are going to be ordered and what topics or research questions are included in each will help immensely when it comes to your writing.

The table of contents is not just an academic formality, it allows your examiner to quickly get a feel for your topic and understand how your dissertation will be presented. An unclear or sloppy table of contents may even have an adverse effect on your grade because the dissertation is difficult to follow.

Examiners are readers, after all, and a dissertation is an exercise in producing an argument. A clear table of contents will give both a good impression and provide an accurate roadmap to make the examiner’s job easier and your argument more persuasive.

Your table of contents section will come after your acknowledgements and before your introduction. It includes a list of all your headers and their respective pages and will also contain a sub-section listing your tables, figures or illustrations (if you are using them). In general, your thesis can be ordered like this:

1. Title Page 2. Copyright / Statement of Originality 3. Abstract 4. Acknowledgement, Dedication and Preface (optional) 5. Table of Contents 6. List of Figures/Tables/Illustrations 7. Chapters 8. Appendices 9. Endnotes (depending on your formatting) 10. Bibliography / References

The formatting of your table of contents will depend on your academic field and thesis length. Some disciplines, like the sciences, have a methodical structure which includes recommended subheadings on methodology, data results, discussion and conclusion. Humanities subjects, on the other hand, are far more varied. Whichever discipline you are working in, you need to create an organized list of all chapters in their order of appearance, with chapter subheadings clearly labelled.

Sample table of contents for a short dissertation:

Abstract ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii Acknowledgements ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. iii Dedication ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. iv List of Tables ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. x List of Figures ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. xi Chapter 1: Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Chapter 2: Literature Survey ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 13 Chapter 3: Methodology ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 42 Chapter 4: Analysis ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 100 Chapter 5: Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 129 Appendices ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 169 References ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 172

When producing a more significant and longer dissertation, say for a Master’s degree or even a PhD, your chapter descriptions should contain all subheadings. These are listed with the chapter number, followed by a decimal point and the subheading number.

Sample table of contents for a PhD dissertation:

Chapter 1 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Literature Review 1.3 Data 1.4 Findings 1.5 Conclusion

Chapter 2, and so on.

The key to writing a good table of contents is consistency and accuracy. You cannot list subheadings for one chapter and forget them for another. Subheadings are not always required but they can be very helpful if you are dealing with a detailed topic. The page numbers in the table of contents must match with the respective pages in your thesis or manuscript.

What’s more, chapter titles and subheading titles must match their corresponding pages. If your first chapter is called “Chapter 1: The Beginning”, it must be written as such on both the table of contents and first chapter page. So long as you remain both accurate and consistent, your table of contents will be perfect.

Create in Microsoft Word

Fortunately, the days of manually writing a contents page are over. You can still produce a contents page manually with Microsoft Word, but consider using their automatic feature to guarantee accuracy and save time.

To produce an automatically-generated table of contents, you must first work with heading styles. These can be found in the home tab under “Styles”. Select top-level headings (your chapter titles) and apply the Heading 1 style. This ensures that they will be formatted as main headings. Second-level headings (subheadings) can be applied with the Heading 2 style. This will place them underneath and within each main heading.

Once you have worked with heading styles, simply click on the “References” tab and select “Table of Contents”. This option will allow you to automatically produce a page with accurate page links to your document. To customize the format and style applied to your table of contents, select “Custom Table of Contents” at the bottom of the tab. Remember to update your table of contents by selecting the table and choosing “Update” from the drop-down menu. This will ensure that your headings, sub-headings and page numbers all add up.

Thesis Printing & Binding

You are already done writing your thesis and need a high quality printing & binding service? Then you are right to choose BachelorPrint! Check out our 24-hour online printing service. For more information click the button below :

In a Nutshell

• The table of contents is a vital part of any academic thesis or extensive paper.
• It is an accurate map of your manuscript’s content – its headings, sub-headings and page numbers.
• It shows how you have divided your thesis into more manageable chunks through the use of chapters.
• By breaking apart your thesis into discrete sections, you make your argument both more persuasive and easier to follow.
• What’s more, your contents page should produce an accurate map of your thesis’ references, bibliography, illustrations and figures.
• It is an accurate map of the chapters, references, bibliography, illustrations and figures in your thesis.

We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential, while others help us to improve this website and your experience.

• External Media

Individual Privacy Preferences

Cookie Details Privacy Policy Imprint

Here you will find an overview of all cookies used. You can give your consent to whole categories or display further information and select certain cookies.

Accept all Save

Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.

Show Cookie Information Hide Cookie Information

Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.

Content from video platforms and social media platforms is blocked by default. If External Media cookies are accepted, access to those contents no longer requires manual consent.

Privacy Policy Imprint

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research process
• How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates

Published on 30 October 2022 by Shona McCombes and Tegan George. Revised on 13 June 2023.

A research proposal describes what you will investigate, why it’s important, and how you will conduct your research.

The format of a research proposal varies between fields, but most proposals will contain at least these elements:

Introduction

Literature review.

• Research design

Reference list

While the sections may vary, the overall objective is always the same. A research proposal serves as a blueprint and guide for your research plan, helping you get organised and feel confident in the path forward you choose to take.

Table of contents

Research proposal purpose, research proposal examples, research design and methods, contribution to knowledge, research schedule, frequently asked questions.

Academics often have to write research proposals to get funding for their projects. As a student, you might have to write a research proposal as part of a grad school application , or prior to starting your thesis or dissertation .

In addition to helping you figure out what your research can look like, a proposal can also serve to demonstrate why your project is worth pursuing to a funder, educational institution, or supervisor.

Research proposal length

The length of a research proposal can vary quite a bit. A bachelor’s or master’s thesis proposal can be just a few pages, while proposals for PhD dissertations or research funding are usually much longer and more detailed. Your supervisor can help you determine the best length for your work.

One trick to get started is to think of your proposal’s structure as a shorter version of your thesis or dissertation , only without the results , conclusion and discussion sections.

Download our research proposal template

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

Writing a research proposal can be quite challenging, but a good starting point could be to look at some examples. We’ve included a few for you below.

• Example research proposal #1: ‘A Conceptual Framework for Scheduling Constraint Management’
• Example research proposal #2: ‘ Medical Students as Mediators of Change in Tobacco Use’

Like your dissertation or thesis, the proposal will usually have a title page that includes:

• The proposed title of your project
• Your supervisor’s name
• Your institution and department

The first part of your proposal is the initial pitch for your project. Make sure it succinctly explains what you want to do and why.

Your introduction should:

• Introduce your topic
• Give necessary background and context
• Outline your  problem statement  and research questions

To guide your introduction , include information about:

• Who could have an interest in the topic (e.g., scientists, policymakers)
• How much is already known about the topic
• What is missing from this current knowledge
• What new insights your research will contribute
• Why you believe this research is worth doing

As you get started, it’s important to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the most important research on your topic. A strong literature review  shows your reader that your project has a solid foundation in existing knowledge or theory. It also shows that you’re not simply repeating what other people have already done or said, but rather using existing research as a jumping-off point for your own.

In this section, share exactly how your project will contribute to ongoing conversations in the field by:

• Comparing and contrasting the main theories, methods, and debates
• Examining the strengths and weaknesses of different approaches
• Explaining how will you build on, challenge, or synthesise prior scholarship

Following the literature review, restate your main  objectives . This brings the focus back to your own project. Next, your research design or methodology section will describe your overall approach, and the practical steps you will take to answer your research questions.

To finish your proposal on a strong note, explore the potential implications of your research for your field. Emphasise again what you aim to contribute and why it matters.

For example, your results might have implications for:

• Improving best practices
• Informing policymaking decisions
• Strengthening a theory or model
• Challenging popular or scientific beliefs
• Creating a basis for future research

Last but not least, your research proposal must include correct citations for every source you have used, compiled in a reference list . To create citations quickly and easily, you can use our free APA citation generator .

Some institutions or funders require a detailed timeline of the project, asking you to forecast what you will do at each stage and how long it may take. While not always required, be sure to check the requirements of your project.

Here’s an example schedule to help you get started. You can also download a template at the button below.

Download our research schedule template

If you are applying for research funding, chances are you will have to include a detailed budget. This shows your estimates of how much each part of your project will cost.

Make sure to check what type of costs the funding body will agree to cover. For each item, include:

• Cost : exactly how much money do you need?
• Justification : why is this cost necessary to complete the research?
• Source : how did you calculate the amount?

To determine your budget, think about:

• Travel costs : do you need to go somewhere to collect your data? How will you get there, and how much time will you need? What will you do there (e.g., interviews, archival research)?
• Materials : do you need access to any tools or technologies?
• Help : do you need to hire any research assistants for the project? What will they do, and how much will you pay them?

Once you’ve decided on your research objectives , you need to explain them in your paper, at the end of your problem statement.

Keep your research objectives clear and concise, and use appropriate verbs to accurately convey the work that you will carry out for each one.

I will compare …

A research aim is a broad statement indicating the general purpose of your research project. It should appear in your introduction at the end of your problem statement , before your research objectives.

Research objectives are more specific than your research aim. They indicate the specific ways you’ll address the overarching aim.

A PhD, which is short for philosophiae doctor (doctor of philosophy in Latin), is the highest university degree that can be obtained. In a PhD, students spend 3–5 years writing a dissertation , which aims to make a significant, original contribution to current knowledge.

A PhD is intended to prepare students for a career as a researcher, whether that be in academia, the public sector, or the private sector.

A master’s is a 1- or 2-year graduate degree that can prepare you for a variety of careers.

All master’s involve graduate-level coursework. Some are research-intensive and intend to prepare students for further study in a PhD; these usually require their students to write a master’s thesis . Others focus on professional training for a specific career.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. & George, T. (2023, June 13). How to Write a Research Proposal | Examples & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved 27 May 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/the-research-process/research-proposal-explained/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, what is a literature review | guide, template, & examples, how to write a results section | tips & examples.

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Alert: Due to extended maintenance, NSF.gov will be unavailable from 11:00 PM on 5/31 to 2:00 AM on 6/1. Most other NSF systems, including Research.gov, will be unavailable from 11:00 PM on 5/31 to 1:00 PM on 6/1. We apologize for any inconvenience.

Active funding opportunity

Nsf 24-577: national stem teacher corps pilot program, program solicitation, document information, document history.

• Posted: May 23, 2024

Program Solicitation NSF 24-577

Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (optional) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

Regional Alliance Proposals – submission of an LOI is optional but recommended

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

Regional Alliance Proposals

Important Information And Revision Notes

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General information.

Program Title:

National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program

In response to the CHIPS Act of 2022 (Pub.L. 117-167), NSF is establishing the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program. The purpose of this program is to elevate the profession of STEM teaching by establishing a National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program to recognize outstanding STEM teachers in our Nation’s classrooms, reward them for their accomplishments, elevate their public profile, and create rewarding career paths to which all STEM teachers can aspire, both to prepare future STEM researchers and to create a scientifically literate public. With this solicitation, NSF is inviting proposals to establish an initial set of Regional Alliances responsible for (a) recruiting eligible applicants to become members of the National STEM Teacher Corps (see definitions in section II.A.); (b) screening, interviewing, and selecting members; and (c) supporting other activities detailed in the Program Description and the law (136 STAT. 1515). Each Alliance will be awarded as a cooperative agreement that represents the breadth of activities important to National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program and serves to elevate the public profile of STEM teachers within the region. Collectively these Alliances are expected to have a national impact. The National STEM Teacher Corps also welcomes planning proposals submitted at any time during the year. See Section II.E for additional information about the preparation and submission of planning proposals.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

Patrice Waller, Program Lead, telephone: (703) 292-4944, email: [email protected]

Alfred Hall, Program Co-lead, telephone: (703) 292-4895, email: [email protected]

Jennifer T. Ellis, telephone: (703) 292-2125, email: [email protected]

Leah McAlister, telephone: (703) 292-8712, email: [email protected]

Joel F. Schildbach, telephone: 703-292-1234, email: [email protected]

Joan Walker, telephone: 703-292-1234, email: [email protected]

Amy A. Wilson-Lopez, telephone: (703) 292-2606, email: [email protected]

• 47.076 --- STEM Education

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant or Cooperative Agreement

8-10 Regional Alliance Awards made as Cooperative Agreements

NSF also anticipates funding up to 15 planning grants, subject to relevance and availability of funds.

Up to $35,000,000 to support up to 10 Regional Alliances for an initial five years with the opportunity to extend the Alliances cooperative agreement up to 10 years.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) - Two- and four-year IHEs (including community colleges) accredited in, and having a campus located in the US, acting on behalf of their faculty members.

Who May Serve as PI:

The Principal Investigator must hold a terminal degree in a STEM discipline, Education, STEM Education, or a related field.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:

An eligible institution may submit no more than one proposal in response to this solicitation. An institution may have only one active National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program award at any given time.

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI:

An individual may serve as PI or Co-PI of one proposal submitted in response to this solicitation.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. proposal preparation instructions.

Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is optional. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

• Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required

Full Proposals:

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) guidelines apply. The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .
• Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov guidelines apply (Note: The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ).

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing Requirements:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

Not Applicable

Other Budgetary Limitations:

C. Due Dates

Proposal review information criteria.

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review criteria apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

Standard NSF award conditions apply.

Reporting Requirements:

Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

I. Introduction

NSF is establishing the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot per the statutory requirements in the CHIPS Act of 2022 (Pub.L. 117-167), Sec. 10311(c). The purpose of the National STEM Teacher Corps is to elevate the STEM teacher profession by recognizing outstanding STEM educators who advance equity in our Nation’s preK-12 classrooms. The pilot program rewards teachers for their accomplishments and elevates their public profile. The National STEM Teacher Corps Members serve as professional models to whom all teachers can aspire. The National STEM Teacher Corps Alliances will provide professional development, mentorship, and other support to STEM teachers, with specific attention to teachers certified in non-traditional or alternative methods, with the intent of enhancing the quality and preparedness of the STEM Teachers. The implementation of the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program is informed by previous programs sponsored by the National Science Foundation designed to transform STEM teacher preparation and professional development through collaboration and partnerships.

The National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program will support alliances tasked with identifying and selecting a cadre of teachers poised to contribute to substantial improvements in STEM education by heightening the STEM learning experience for all students which includes those from underserved and underrepresented communities. In addition to recognizing outstanding teachers, the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program will promote the retention of excellent STEM teachers and provide them with rewarding career paths. The recognition and retention of innovative STEM teachers will help to improve STEM education and in turn, heighten the STEM learning experiences and achievement of all students. By enhancing all students’ access to high-quality STEM learning experiences, the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program will prepare students for and attract students to future STEM careers and foster a scientifically literate public.

The National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program invites collaborative and innovative Regional Alliance proposals that recognize, support, help to retain, and uplift the STEM teachers, schools, school districts, and community partners that they serve. The goal of each Regional Alliance must be to leverage the talents, skills, abilities, and resources of teacher-leaders, campus leaders, and faculty at IHEs to create opportunities for synergistic and innovative collaboration among all Alliance partners to enhance the preparation of PreK-12 educators and further develop teaching practices that advance STEM education and the teaching profession.

As described in the table below, the NSF will make awards to Regional Alliances that submit competitive projects that fulfill the goals and duties of the program. Each Regional Alliance is responsible for:

• Creating and fostering communities of practice by engaging local partners, which may include state educational agencies (SEA) local educational agencies (LEA), institutions of higher education (IHE), STEM organizations, education nonprofit organizations, and/or a private entity, including a STEM-related business to develop and serve the community of National STEM Teacher Corps members within the region, coordinate professional development activities, including activities led by National STEM Teacher Corps members, connect National STEM Teacher Corps members with existing educator professional development programs and coordinate members' involvement as cooperating teachers or mentors.
• Screening, interviewing, and selecting members of the National STEM Teacher Corps with a focus on leveling strategies to recruit from the full spectrum of diverse talent that society has to offer. This includes recruiting STEM educators who support efforts to advance equity based on race, ethnicity, sex, socioeconomic status, age, disability status, geography, and language ability.
• Seeking opportunities to involve teachers who are not members of the National STEM Teacher Corps to participate in alliance activities that enhance teacher effectiveness and increase teacher retention rates across the region; teachers that have been certified in nontraditional methods may also be supported by an Alliance.

The NSF invites proposals from Regional Alliances from the Northeast (New England and/or Mid-Atlantic), South (South Atlantic, East South Central, and/or West South Central), West (Mountain and/or Pacific), and Midwest (West North Central and/or East North Central) regions and divisions as defined by the US Census Bureau ( us_regdiv.pdf (census.gov) . While Alliance compositions are flexible, the National STEM Teacher Corps will seek to fund at least one alliance from each of the regions. Regional Alliances do not have to contain all states within the region.

Regional Alliances must identify a critical need that the Alliance will aim to serve within the specified region. The Regional Alliance must also contain school educational partners and/or local educational partners in all states within the Alliance. The Regional Alliance is also encouraged to include educational partners, local non-profits, etc., that support and enhance the goals of the Alliance. Regional Alliances should identify the topical area(s)(i.e. science, math2, etc.) to be supported within the Alliance.

Regional Alliances must outline the ways in which the Alliance intends to elevate the STEM teacher profession in the region. Alliances must submit a detailed plan on how they plan to fulfill all required duties (see duties of the Alliance below). Alliances are also encouraged to outline the ways in which the Alliance will work to support teachers that have entered STEM teaching in non-traditional methods (i.e. alternative certification, etc.).

The National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program complements other STEM Education programs in the Directorate of STEM Education (EDU), such as The Robert Noyce Scholarship program (Noyce), Discovery Research PreK-12, (DRK-12), and Presidential Awards for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching (PAMEST), by providing additional opportunities to recognize and promote STEM teaching and learning. DRK-12 is the only NSF program whose primary purpose is to support applied research and development at PreK-12 levels of formal education in all areas of STEM. Its research-focused Teaching Strand aims to contribute to the development of science of teaching. It complements the Noyce program’s Research track while also complementing both PAEMST’s and Noyce’s efforts to recognize teachers as essential members of the STEM workforce. Noyce aims to recruit, prepare, and retain highly effective elementary and secondary mathematics and science teachers and teacher leaders who persist as classroom teachers in high-need Local Education Agencies. The National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program will augment the existing programs by highlighting the contributions of STEM teachers who have persisted over 5 years in the field of education and demonstrated continued excellence in teaching PreK-12 STEM content. The National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program will leverage the brilliance of STEM educators to elevate public awareness of the outstanding contributions of STEM educators across the country.

II. Program Description

A. Program Overview

The NSF’s National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program will fund Regional Alliances that demonstrate exceptional ability to fulfill the duties of the Alliances in an innovative and robust manner. NSF Seeks to fund Regional Alliances that will enact the goals of the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program in a novel and complete manner. Regional Alliances should aim to elevate the STEM teacher profession by recognizing a diverse cadre of outstanding STEM educators that advance equity in our Nation’s PreK –12 classrooms. The Regional Alliances should propose a plan for rewarding teachers for their accomplishments and elevating their public profile. Regional Alliances will be responsible for recruiting, screening, and selecting diverse STEM Teacher Corps members that serve as professional models to whom all teachers can aspire. The STEM Teacher Regional Alliances will provide professional development support to STEM teachers, including support for teachers certified in non-traditional or alternative methods, with the intent of enhancing the quality and preparedness of the STEM Teachers and to create a scientifically literate public.

Definitions

STEM Teacher- A state-licensed educator that teaches in one or more of the fields of science, technology, engineering, and/or mathematics.

Alliance/Regional Alliance- Communities of practice consisting of a lead IHE, that collaborates with a consortium consisting of Regional Alliance partners.

Regional Alliance Partner - Entities that are part of a Regional Alliance including Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs), State Educational Agencies (SEA), Local Education Agencies (LEA), education nonprofit associations, cross-sector STEM organizations, and/or private entities, including STEM-related businesses.

STEM Teacher Corps Member – An applicant that is selected by a Regional Alliance to be a member of the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program and agrees to fulfill the commitment and duties as outlined by the Alliance.

High-Need School— The term “high-need school” means a public elementary school or secondary school that is located in an area in which the percentage of students from families with incomes below the poverty line is 30 percent or more. Section 2211(b) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 19 6631(b)).

Professional Development—The term ‘‘professional development’’ has the meaning given the term in section 20 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 24 (20 U.S.C. 7801).

B. Regional Alliances

Composition -Regional Alliances must include a State Educational Agency (SEA) and/or a Local Education Agency (LEA) from each of the Regional Alliance states (definitions of an SEA and LEA provided in CHIPS Act of 2022 Sec.10311(c)(2)(B)(ii)). Alliances may also include education nonprofit associations, a cross sector STEM organization, and/or another type of entity, including a for-profit STEM-related business. Alliance proposals require letters of collaboration from all school and community partners, appropriate for the size and scope of the Alliance’s efforts.

Regional Alliances should be intentional about the selection of partners to ensure that the composition of the Alliance is well aligned with the identified needs of the region and that selected partners are capable of contributing to the support of its members and teachers. Alliance partners should be well aligned with the goals of the Regional Alliance and contribute directly to the aims as outlined by the Regional Alliance.

Alliances should aim to include PIs and Co-PIs that are both education and STEM faculty as prior research has indicated more positive results when there is a balance (CETP, 2001).

Duties of Regional Alliances - Activities carried out by the Regional Alliances must include, but are not limited to, the following:

(A) Creating and fostering communities of practice by engaging local partners to:

(i) develop and serve the community of National STEM Teacher Corps members within the region, in coordination with local partners, to carry out day-to-day activities including, but not limited to:

(ii) coordinating professional development activities, including activities led by National STEM Teacher Corps members;

(iii) connecting National STEM Teacher Corps members with existing educator professional development programs and coordinate members’ involvement as cooperating teachers or mentors;

(iv) seeking opportunities to involve and serve teachers who are not members of the National STEM Teacher Corps in National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program activities; and

(v) building partnerships with existing education organizations and other efforts by SEAs and LEAs that operate programs relevant to the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program and its Regional Alliances.

(B) Recruiting eligible applicants, with a focus on recruiting STEM educators who support efforts to advance equity based on race, ethnicity, sex, gender, socioeconomic status, age, disability, geography, language proficiency, and to promote access to high-quality and inclusive STEM learning experiences;

(C) Screening, interviewing, and selecting members of the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot using procedures and standards provided by the NSF's National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program;

(D) Coordinating the online network that supports all National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot members in the region;

(E) Convening meetings of National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot members in a region;

(F) Creating opportunities for the professional growth of National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot members, with a focus on increasing STEM student achievement and STEM participation rates for all students, particularly those from rural and/or high-need schools; and

(G) Supporting the retention and success of National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot members in the region.

Content and Grade-level Specificity - Proposals should specify the content and grade levels that will be of focus within the Regional Alliance. Alliances may choose to focus on a specific grade-level band (e.g., PreK, K-5, 6-8, 9-12) or PreK-12, as well as a specific topic or content area (e.g., science, mathematics, engineering, technology, CTE) within STEM. This decision should be made in collaboration with partners of the Alliance, as well as participating school districts and schools from which National STEM Teacher Corps members will be selected. Additionally, the focused designation should be data-driven, based upon actual needs of the region (e.g., STEM teacher recruitment/retention needs, student achievement results in STEM, student participation in STEM, etc.). Alliances can focus on all eligible STEM content areas and are able to select National STEM Teacher Corps members from eligible teachers in grades PreK-12.

Regional Alliances Obligations -Reginal Alliances must:

• Fulfill all duties of the Alliance as described in this solicitation.
• Ensure that all selected members meet the minimum requirements for membership as set by NSF’s National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program.
• Report on the National STEM Teacher Corps members’ teaching status and continued support for 3 years after the life of the project.
• Adhere to all other standard requirements as specified in the PAPPG.

C. National STEM Teacher Corps Members

Selection of National STEM Teacher Corps Members -Alliances will be responsible for the recruitment and selection of National STEM Teacher Corps members from PreK-12 schools within the region to participate in the program. Each Corps Alliance shall select a minimum of 5regional teachers yearly throughout the life of the project.

Alliances may recruit from groups of teachers previously identified as Presidential Award for Excellence in Mathematics and Science Teaching (PAEMST) Awardees and State Finalists, Robert S. Noyce Fellows (Track 3 Noyce participants), or Einstein Fellows to participate as members of the National STEM Teacher Corps. Additionally, Alliances may consider recruiting outstanding teachers as Corps members even if they have not participated in, or had access to, the aforementioned programmatic opportunities.

National STEM Teacher Corps members must be U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, or permanent resident aliens.

Regional Alliances should describe the recruitment, screening, and selection process for identifying National STEM Teacher Corps members for the grade-level(s) and content area(s) chosen for the Alliance. National STEM Teacher Corps member candidates must meet the following criteria;

• teach science, technology, engineering, or mathematics as part of their contracted teaching responsibilities at the K-12 grade level in a public (including charter) or private school;
• hold at least a bachelor's degree from an accredited institution;
• be a full-time employee of their school or school district as determined by state and district policies, with responsibilities for teaching students no less than 50% of the school's allotted instructional time;
• have at least five years of full-time employment as a K-12 teacher prior to the 2023-2024 academic school year, with science, technology, engineering, or mathematics teaching duties;
• teach in one of the 50 states, the Department of Defense Education Activity schools, or the U.S. Jurisdictions of the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Virgin Islands;
• have demonstrated leadership/impact in STEM education;
• have a deep knowledge of STEM content and pedagogical practices, and child or adolescent development;
• have a passion for STEM subjects and dedication to teaching;
• provide evidence of leadership skills, and demonstrated experience increasing STEM student achievement and STEM participation rates for all students, particularly those from rural and high-need schools;
• any other requirements set by the Alliance – requirements must be specified in the proposal.

Monitoring National STEM Teacher Corps Members - Each Alliance must provide a plan for tracking, monitoring, and supporting Teacher Corps members’ participation, retention, and effectiveness in the classroom, as well as in teacher leadership opportunities (e.g., school-based professional development, teacher mentoring, etc.). The Regional Alliance must also adhere to the monitoring and report requirements as noted by the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program.

Duties of the Member of the National STEM Teacher Corps -An applicant that is selected by a Corps alliance to be a member of the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot shall —

(A) serve a 4-year term with a possibility of reappointment;

(B) receive an annual stipend in an amount not less than $10,000; and

(C) have substantial responsibilities, including —

(i) working with other members of the National STEM Teacher Corps to develop and improve teaching practices, including practices that promote inquiry-based learning;

(ii) providing or participating in professional development that addresses innovative teaching methodologies, mentorship, and other topics (e.g., closing achievement gaps); and

(iii) continuing to excel in teaching their own students, with a focus on advancing equity and increasing STEM student achievement and STEM participation rates for all to include underserved students and students from rural and high-need schools.

Amount and Duration for Member Support – National STEM Teacher Corps members who are selected to join a Regional Alliance will receive no less than $10,000 per year for 4 years. After the 4 th year of membership, these members/teachers will no longer receive stipends but will still be recognized as a National STEM Teacher Corps member for the duration of their teaching/education career. Data regarding the members retention and impact in education must be submitted each year for three years post the stipend period.

Commitment of the Members of the National STEM Teacher Corps - Teachers who accept an award to serve as a National STEM Teacher Corps member are committing to maintain their role as a classroom teacher or to continue to serve as an educator in some capacity in a high-need school or LEA for the duration of their 4-year appointment. Members will be required to self-report their professional status in the education system to the NSF yearly for 7 years after the initial appointment.

IHEs are required to provide stipends in a staggered manner at least twice a year as the service commitment is being fulfilled by the member. Alliances will be required to include their stipend distribution plan in the project proposal.

National STEM Teacher Corps Member Obligations - National STEM Teacher Corps Members must:

• Submit yearly reports to NSF regarding their professional status. The report will also include information regarding work they are doing to impact STEM education.
• Fulfill all duties of National STEM Teacher Corps members as described in this solicitation and as further defined by the member’s alliance.

D. Key Project Information

Project Features – Proposals should describe the nature of the Regional Alliance and the plan for fulfilling the duties of the Alliance. In addition to outlining a plan for Alliance composition, content and grade level focus, meeting the Alliance duties, selecting, screening, and retaining National STEM Teacher Corps members, the proposal should also provide a plan for supporting STEM Teachers who are non-members of the National STEM Teacher Corps. The proposal for the Alliance should speak directly to the following three requirements:

• How will the Regional Alliance work to elevate National STEM Teacher Corps members while providing support to other teachers in the region? How will the Alliance support teachers who have entered STEM teaching in non-traditional methods?
• How will the Regional Alliance retain STEM educators focused on enhancing inclusive environments and advancing equity of access to high-quality STEM learning?
• How will the Regional Alliance create opportunities for the professional growth of National STEM Teacher Corps members, with a focus on increasing STEM student achievement and STEM participation rates for all students, particularly those from rural and high-need schools?

Project Evaluation Plan - Proposals should include strategies for formative and summative assessments, including goals, activities, metrics, research questions, data collection, data analysis, and milestones. The evaluation plan must consist of metrics for assessing the Alliance's strengths, the overall effectiveness of its efforts, and the immediate or short-term impact of the Alliance partnership, and Teacher Corps members' interventions, and it should also document how the Alliance’s collaborative efforts are anticipated to evolve over time. In addition, it is highly desirable to have a structured means of tracking Teacher Corps members beyond the completion of the program to gauge the degree to which the Alliance continues to impact their career paths, and to impact other STEM teachers who participated in professional development efforts sponsored by the Alliance. Should an independent evaluator be utilized for the project, a biographical sketch should be provided as a part of the supplementary documentation submitted. Proposals must follow the PAPGG concerning Institutional Review Board (IRB) requirements. Data management for the evaluation and assessment plan must be described in the required Data Management and Sharing Plan document.

E. OTHER TYPES OF PROPOSALS

Planning Projects - The National STEM Teacher Corps welcomes planning proposals submitted at any time during the year. This type of proposal must be submitted by an IHE eligible to submit to this solicitation. A consultation with a program officer is required prior to proposal submission. If the program director approves submission of a planning proposal, the proposal must be prepared in accordance with the instructions for the planning type of proposal contained in Chapter II.F of the PAPPG and must be submitted through Research.gov. Proposers should select the current PAPPG as the funding opportunity in Research.gov and direct the proposal to the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot program in the Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE) in the Directorate for STEM Education (EDU).

III. Award Information

Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

Estimated Number of Awards: 8-10 awards

Up to 10 Regional Alliance awards, made as cooperative agreements, are anticipated depending upon availability of funds. The budget for awards is up to $5,000,000 total per Alliance for the first 5 -year award with the opportunity to submit a renewal proposal to extend up to 10 years. Alliances can receive up to $1,000,000 per year up to year 10.

Anticipated Funding Amount:

Up to $35,000,000 to support up to 10 Regional Alliances for an initial five years with the opportunity to extend the Alliances cooperative agreement up to 10 years. The initial Regional Alliance award would be for five years.

IV. Eligibility Information

Additional Eligibility Info:

Regional Alliances must include a State Educational Agency (SEA) and/or a Local Education Agency (LEA) from each of the Regional Alliance states (definitions of an SEA and LEA provided in CHIPS Act of 2022 Sec.10311(c)(2)(B)(ii)). Alliances may also include education nonprofit associations, a cross sector STEM organization, and/or another type of entity, including a for-profit STEM-related business. National STEM Teacher Corps members must be U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, or permanent resident aliens.

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

Letters of Intent (optional) :

A Letter of Intent (LOI) is recommended to facilitate the NSF review process. The LOI should be submitted via Research.gov no later than the LOI deadline date.

Please note the following conditions:

Project Title: The title should begin with "National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program: (insert the rest of the title and the Project's acronym)". The title should reflect the regional focus of the proposed Alliance.

Keywords: In order of decreasing emphasis, list four keywords that represent the scientific interdisciplinary content in the proposal.

Lead PI and Point of Contact for NSF Inquiries: The Lead PI will serve as the Point of Contact for NSF inquiries.

Other Senior/Key Project Personnel: Identify up to four co-PIs.

Participating Organizations: Anticipated partner organizations should be included in the Manage Participating Organizations section of the LOI.

Synopsis (not to exceed one page): A brief synopsis of the proposed plan to fulfill the goals of the National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program including relevance to Merit Review and Solicitation-Specific Review Criteria.

Letter of Intent Preparation Instructions :

When submitting a Letter of Intent through Research.gov in response to this Program Solicitation please note the conditions outlined below:

• Submission by an Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) is required when submitting Letters of Intent.

A Minimum of 0 and Maximum of 4 Other Senior Project Personnel are permitted

• Keywords is required when submitting Letters of Intent
• Submission of multiple Letters of Intent is not permitted

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions : Proposers may opt to submit proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Research.gov or Grants.gov.

• Full Proposals submitted via Research.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg . Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] . The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.
• Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of NSF Applications via Grants.gov . The complete text of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at: ( https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide ). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package and Application Instructions link and enter the funding opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

In determining which method to utilize in the electronic preparation and submission of the proposal, please note the following:

Collaborative Proposals. All collaborative proposals submitted as separate submissions from multiple organizations must be submitted via Research.gov. PAPPG Chapter II.E.3 provides additional information on collaborative proposals.

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

The following instructions supplement the guidance in the PAPPG:

Project Data Form : A Project Data Form must be submitted as part of all proposals. The information on this form is used to direct proposals to appropriate reviewers and to determine the characteristics of projects supported by the NSF Division of Undergraduate Education (DUE). In Research.gov, this form will appear in the list of required Proposal Sections for the proposal only after selecting the National STEM Teacher Corps solicitation number in Step 1 of the Proposal Creation Wizard. Grants.gov users should refer to Section VI.5 of the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide for specific instructions on how to submit the DUE Project Data Form.

Project Description : In addition to the guidance specified in the PAPPG, including the requirement for a separate section labeled “Broader Impacts,” the Project Description must include a Project Evaluation Plan (see Section II.D for additional information).

Supplementary Documents: In addition to the requirements contained in the PAPPG, the Supplementary Documents section of the proposal should include: (1) letters of collaboration from project partners, and (2) the biographical-sketch of the project's independent evaluator (if applicable) in the NSF standard format. No additional information may be provided as an appendix or as supplementary documents. Proposals that are not compliant with these guidelines may be returned without review.

Cost Sharing:

Budget Preparation Instructions:

For all submissions, costs to support Members of the National STEM Teacher Corps should be included as participant support costs in the proposal budget. All budgets should include the number of yearly proposed National STEM Teacher Corps members as well as any funds to support the duties of the National STEM Teacher Corps Members. All budgets should include funds for each National STEM Teacher Corps member and one (1) PI or Co-PI to attend a regional or national meeting or conference related to the work of the National STEM Teacher Corps pilot program.

National STEM Teacher Corps Members will meet annually in Washington, DC at the national recognition convening. These meetings will provide opportunities for members of the National STEM Teacher Corps to share their successes and challenges with developing and improving innovative teaching methodology and mentorship; and to share their strategies for advancing equity and the impact they are having by teaching and coaching in rural and high-need areas. The annual meeting will also be a way for STEM Teacher Corps members to network with other members and STEM education professionals. Funds should also be set aside for National STEM Teacher Corps Members to attend the national meeting

D. Research.gov/Grants.gov Requirements

For Proposals Submitted Via Research.gov:

To prepare and submit a proposal via Research.gov, see detailed technical instructions available at: https://www.research.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html . For Research.gov user support, call the Research.gov Help Desk at 1-800-381-1532 or e-mail [email protected] . The Research.gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.gov system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:

Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources webpage: https://www.grants.gov/applicants . In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide (see link in Section V.A) provides instructions regarding the technical preparation of proposals via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email: [email protected] . The Grants.gov Contact Center answers general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this solicitation.

Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed, the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The completed application will be transferred to Research.gov for further processing.

The NSF Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov informational page provides submission guidance to applicants and links to helpful resources including the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide , Grants.gov Proposal Processing in Research.gov how-to guide , and Grants.gov Submitted Proposals Frequently Asked Questions . Grants.gov proposals must pass all NSF pre-check and post-check validations in order to be accepted by Research.gov at NSF.

When submitting via Grants.gov, NSF strongly recommends applicants initiate proposal submission at least five business days in advance of a deadline to allow adequate time to address NSF compliance errors and resubmissions by 5:00 p.m. submitting organization's local time on the deadline. Please note that some errors cannot be corrected in Grants.gov. Once a proposal passes pre-checks but fails any post-check, an applicant can only correct and submit the in-progress proposal in Research.gov.

Proposers that submitted via Research.gov may use Research.gov to verify the status of their submission to NSF. For proposers that submitted via Grants.gov, until an application has been received and validated by NSF, the Authorized Organizational Representative may check the status of an application on Grants.gov. After proposers have received an e-mail notification from NSF, Research.gov should be used to check the status of an application.

VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ .

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026 . These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

1. Merit Review Principles

These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

• All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
• NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
• Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

2. Merit Review Criteria

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

• Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and
• Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

• Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
• Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
• To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
• Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
• How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
• Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and other underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management and Sharing Plan and the Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

Reviewers will also be asked to review the following solicitation Specific criteria:

• How will the Regional Alliance work to elevate National STEM Teacher Corp members while providing support to other teachers in the region? How will the Alliance support teachers that have entered STEM teaching in non-traditional methods?

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new recipients may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

VII. Award Administration Information

A. notification of the award.

Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

B. Award Conditions

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF . Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

Administrative and National Policy Requirements

Build America, Buy America

As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers (86 FR 7475), it is the policy of the executive branch to use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards to maximize, consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.

Consistent with the requirements of the Build America, Buy America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made available through this funding opportunity may be obligated for an award unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States. For additional information, visit NSF’s Build America, Buy America webpage.

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final annual project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

Failure to provide the required annual or final annual project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final annual project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

Regional Alliances are required to report on the National STEM Teacher Corps members’ teaching status and continued support for 3 years after the life of the project.

National STEM Teacher Corps Members will submit yearly reports to NSF regarding their professional status up to 3 years after their 4-year term as a National STEM Teacher Corps Member. The report will also include information regarding the work being done to impact STEM education.

All projects are required to participate in program monitoring (including tracking) that will require annual data collection reported to a third party as part of National STEM Teacher Corps Pilot Program monitoring. In addition, projects are required to participate in evaluation activities conducted by a third party or NSF.

VIII. Agency Contacts

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

• NSF Help Desk: 1-800-381-1532
• Research.gov Help Desk e-mail: [email protected]

For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [email protected] .

IX. Other Information

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences . Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website .

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov .

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.F.7 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

Privacy Act And Public Burden Statements

The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by proposers will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding proposers or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Record Notices , NSF-50 , "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," and NSF-51 , "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records.” Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:

Suzanne H. Plimpton Reports Clearance Officer Policy Office, Division of Institution and Award Support Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management National Science Foundation Alexandria, VA 22314

Numbers, Facts and Trends Shaping Your World

Read our research on:

Full Topic List

Regions & Countries

• Publications
• Our Methods
• Short Reads
• Tools & Resources

Read Our Research On:

Public’s Positive Economic Ratings Slip; Inflation Still Widely Viewed as Major Problem

1. views of the nation’s economy, table of contents.

• Views of top problems facing the nation
• Americans’ views of the state of the nation
• Similar shares in both parties view personal financial situation positively
• Americans’ views on the future of the economy and their financial situation
• Changes in views of the country’s top problems
• Acknowledgments
• The American Trends Panel survey methodology

Fewer than a quarter of Americans (23%) currently rate the country’s economic conditions as excellent or good, while 36% say they are poor and about four-in-ten (41%) view conditions as “only fair.”

While positive ratings of the economy have slowly climbed since the summer of 2022, there has been a slight drop  since the start of the year – when 28% rated economic conditions as excellent or good.

This change has been largely driven by Democrats and Democratic leaners: In January of this year, 44% of Democrats rated the economy positively, compared with 37% now.

Still, ratings among Democrats remain higher than they were last year.

Views among Republicans and GOP leaners remain negative: Just one-in-ten rate economic conditions as excellent or good, while half say they are poor and another four-in-ten view them as “only fair.”

Views of the nation’s economy have long been partisan.

• Republicans expressed far more positive views of the economy than did Democrats throughout most of Donald Trump’s presidency.
• Democrats have been consistently more likely than Republicans to rate conditions as excellent or good during Biden’s presidency. However, their ratings have been far less positive than Republicans’ ratings of the economy were when Trump was president. 

There also are wide differences in views of the economy by age and race and ethnicity – especially among Democrats.

Age, race and ethnicity

As in the past, Democrats under age 50 express much less positive views of the nation’s economy than do Democrats 50 and older:

• Just 21% of Democrats under 30 rate economic conditions positively, as do 29% of those 30 to 49.
• By contrast, nearly half of Democrats ages 50 to 64 (47%) and a majority of those 65 and older (55%) say conditions are excellent or good.

However, since January there has been a steeper decline in positive views among Democrats 65 and older (from 70% to 55%) than among Democrats in younger age groups.

Republicans are much less likely to view current economic conditions in positive terms across age groups.

There are also significant differences among Democrats by race and ethnicity. White Democrats are more likely than Black, Hispanic and Asian Democrats to rate the economy positively. However, ratings have dropped across these groups since January.

Views of personal finances and national economic ratings

As might be expected, those who rate their personal finances positively also are more likely to rate national economic conditions as excellent or good.

Among the roughly four-in-ten Americans (41%) who rate their own finances positively, 40% rate the national economy positively. Among those who say their finances are only fair or poor, far fewer say national economic conditions are excellent or good (14% among only fair, 6% among poor).

However, partisanship is a factor here as well. Among Democrats who have a positive evaluation of their finances, 58% rate economic conditions positively. That compares with just 19% of Republicans who give similarly positive ratings of their financial situation.

Overall, personal financial ratings have fluctuated less dramatically than national ratings.

However, the share of Americans who rate their personal finances as excellent or good declined from about 50% in 2021 to about 40% in 2022 and has remained at about that level since then.

About four-in-ten say their financial situation is in excellent or good shape (41%), while a similar share say their situation is in “only fair” shape (39%). Another 19% say their situation is in poor shape.

Americans’ ratings of their personal finances are considerably less partisan than their views of the nation’s economy. Roughly four-in-ten Democrats (44%) say their financial situation is in excellent or good shape.

When asked for their expectations of the country’s economic conditions a year from now, 43% of Americans say they expect it to be about the same as it currently is. About a quarter (24%) say they expect the economy will be better a year from now, and nearly a third (32%) expect conditions to worsen.

And when asked for their expectations of their own family’s financial situation a year from now, 49% of adults say they expect it to be about the same. Roughly a third (34%) say they expect their financial situation will be better a year from now, and 16% expect their situation to worsen.

The shares of the public who expect economic conditions to worsen on either a national level or personal level is smaller than in recent years .

Among partisans, similar shares expect economic conditions of the country to be better a year from now (23% of Republicans, 26% of Democrats). However, a larger share of Republicans than Democrats expect the country’s economic conditions to worsen (38% vs. 25%).

Republicans remain less hopeful than Democrats about the future of their personal financial situation. About three-in-ten Republicans (29%) say their family’s personal finances will be better a year from now, compared with 39% of Democrats who say the same. And twice as many Republicans as Democrats say they expect their own financial situation to worsen (22% vs. 11%).

Sign up for our weekly newsletter

Fresh data delivery Saturday mornings

Sign up for The Briefing

Weekly updates on the world of news & information

• Economic Conditions
• Issue Priorities
• National Conditions
• Partisanship & Issues
• Political Issues

Is College Worth It?

A look at small businesses in the u.s., state of the union 2024: where americans stand on the economy, immigration and other key issues, americans’ top policy priority for 2024: strengthening the economy, americans more upbeat on the economy; biden’s job rating remains very low, most popular, report materials.

1615 L St. NW, Suite 800 Washington, DC 20036 USA (+1) 202-419-4300 | Main (+1) 202-857-8562 | Fax (+1) 202-419-4372 |  Media Inquiries

Research Topics

• Email Newsletters

ABOUT PEW RESEARCH CENTER  Pew Research Center is a nonpartisan fact tank that informs the public about the issues, attitudes and trends shaping the world. It conducts public opinion polling, demographic research, media content analysis and other empirical social science research. Pew Research Center does not take policy positions. It is a subsidiary of  The Pew Charitable Trusts .

© 2024 Pew Research Center