I thought we were done with the posting last week.
Well, since you're all still here, I should take advantage and post a few comments/questions about the research proposal process.
1) Is anyone getting completely carried away with the "Background" portion? I have read a few posts from people who are feeling luke-warm about their projects, and I have to say that there is one advantage to that, and that is that you aren't consumed by intemperate enthusiasm. I feel very strongly about my subject, and am having a very hard time controlling my exuberance. When it comes down to actually explaining how I'm going to pull it off on the other hand, well, I'm a bit out to lunch.
2) How much of a lit-review is the mini-lit review supposed to be, exactly? In proposals I have had to submit in the past, the lit-review portion of the proposal was little more than a list of the things we intended to read and review, but I get the sense that here we need more. But how much more? Currently I am managing this issue by breaking the lit into camps, providing a list of readings in each camp and discussing why being well-versed in each area is important to the research, but not really going into further detail than that.
Now that I've posted these, I can at least refer to them in our workshop tomorrow, and as an added bonus anyone who reads this can be comforted by the whole "misery [or at least, befuddlement] loves company" principle.