File:THOMAS Redesign Proposal.doc

for 21W.732 class as a MIT Freshman. We had to write out a proposal we may or may not submit for funding. I chose this so I could talk more about Government and User Experience Design

I have significantly revised my proposal to make it much clearer and hopefully better laid out.

The proposal, by its very nature, is not appropriate for funding by the hypothetical funding agencies you presented. I should have picked a proposal that would have been acceptable for those guidelines. The error I initially made was choosing this topic, since I had wanted to write about making changes to THOMAS for some time. In my head, I wanted the paper to motivate the government to take on the project – not that I was going to do it by myself over the summer. I was thinking of this paper as a call to action, not a proposal to fix it myself. This battle between trying to shape it to induce real life action vs fit the hypothetical constrains of the project made it unsuitable for either.

I realize now that I should have made up some project and written an ordinary proposal which fit the guidelines. But I could not think of anything I wanted to write about - especially because I was already booked for the summer so it would be something that I had no interest in actually pursing. I thought I could make THOMAS work inside the constraints, but I could not.

In addition, I have not included many implementation details because I was not sure about how it would work. I’m sure if I had written a typical summer project, I could have written more about how it would work since I have experience with estimating time frames on one person projects. I should have done a UROP proposal, or a project similar to ones I have already built. However, my desire to advocate to changes to THOMAS led me astray.

I hope that the proposal could be reevaluated under these circumstances – focusing on the writing and not the appropriateness of the scenario. I realize that focus and organization were the reasons that I failed the FEE. However, this issue has cause me to think a lot about the issue and presenting my ideas clearly. For dining, I am in the middle of writing an opinion piece. Each time I plan it out, I simplify and clarify my original idea. I am also recognizing how authors are doing this in their own articles and persuasive writing.

The paper in its revised form still attempts to straddle real life influence and fitting the constraints of the hypothetical scenario. I was unsure about which method to choose.