Centre collégial de développement de matériel didactique


The Contestants apply as members of their college’s social science program and identify with one of the ten social science disciplines. 

As a members of separate professional associations (psychology, history, economics…), the Contestants are expected to think and act their way to winning the funds for their discipline affiliation.

  • Anthropology
  • Business
  • Economics
  • Geography
  • History
  • Philosophy
  • Political Science
  • Psychology
  • Religious Studies
  • Sociology

The Contestants must be students who:

  • Are currently enrolled in Québec’s CEGEP Social Science Program
  • Have worked on a written Research Proposal as a component of course work
  • Have worked under the supervision of a Research Director (teacher) who agrees to sponsor their submission 

The Winners get published, become Grant Holders and are honoured with a Research Work of Outstanding Merit award.



Since the Contestants’ Research Proposals have to be judged and reviewed before the beginning of the vacation period, you have to ensure that you can complete your Research Proposal weeks before the end of the semester. You may have produced most or all of a Research Proposal in a previous semester or while playing the Fund$ Game or the Research Institute. Determine whether you can meet all the requirements and the deadlines.

  • Read the Contestant Entry Form to determine whether you think your Research Proposal can meet the requirements within a reasonable amount of time.
  • Read the scripts for the Judges and Ethics Board Reviewers to assess your chances of winning.


Strategize how to align your Research Proposal to meet the requirements, especially for the Judges and the Ethics Board Reviewers. 


Once you have your Research Proposal in hand, make a To-Do list of improvements to your existing proposal that can be undertaken in a reasonable amount of time. These should include:

  • Taking note of recommended improvements received in teacher feedback and peer reviews
  • Consulting the key design tools on this website, particularly the CONFETTI WAY for writing a Literature Review and the DECISION CIRCUIT for the Method Plan
  • Targeting changes that will meet the criteria outlined in the Judges’ and Ethics Board Reviewers’ scripts


  • Modify the proposal as per your To-Do list. 
  • Consider having a peer review it.
  • Consult with your Research Director (teacher) if you have difficulty deciding what to modify or how.


  • Obtain your Research Director’s support as a sponsor for your entry to the Contest.
  • To qualify as your sponsor, this Research Director must have supervised the production of your Research Proposal in some form or another.

Some recommendations:

  • Get verbal agreement first.
  • Set up an appointment well in advance of the deadline.
  • Before the meeting, submit your modified proposal and your partially completed entry form.
  • Meet to confirm that everything is in order for the Research Director to sponsor you and sign the form.


Ensure your Proposal complies with the Code of Conduct guidelines before signalling your approval in the entry form.



  • The Winner will probably be announced shortly before the start of the vacation period or shortly before the beginning of the following semester. This is in the hands of the Lead Research Director who is supervising the Contest at your college. 
  • The Contest results will be communicated at large when the information is transmitted to the Secretariat Staff.

Contestant Checklist

Check off the items that are in order

  • Is your proposal document formatted according to the specifications?
  • Does your proposal meet the criteria outlined in the Judges’ Script?
  • Did you consider all the study design options? (see the Decision Circuit)
  • Did you follow the basic guidelines for writing a Literature Review? (see the Confetti Way)
  • Is the proposed research ethical?
  • Is the study design feasible for a full-time college student? 
  • Did you enter your signature in the two required fields (Code of Conduct and Contestant Entry Form)?
  • Did you obtain the sponsorship and signature of your Research Director?
  • Did you identify a featured discipline in the Entry Form?
  • Are you prepared to assume the rights and responsibilities of a Grant Holder?

Contestant Entry Form


  • Be a current day student in the Social Science program at a CEGEP in Québec.
  • Have authored an original Research Proposal or similar paper in a Research Methods course.
  • Submit a completed Entry Form with all fields of information completed by the deadline:
    1. Contact information
    2. 100-word statement of intent
    3. Signed agreement to enter Contest and abide by the Code of Conduct below
    4. Signed support from a sponsoring Research Director (teacher)
  • Submit an original Research Proposal that you have authored, formatted to specific standards. The most common formatting standards are shown below. Please verify the standards in effect for your local Contest.
    1. Page format: 8 1/2 X 11”, 1-inch margins, 12-point font, Times New Roman, single-spaced.
    2. Consistent and correct use of an appropriate formatting style such as APA or CMS.
    3. Word count (excluding title page, bibliography and appendices) between 2000 and 2500 words.
    4. Include a descriptive titleintroduction (consisting almost exclusively of a literature review), a Method Plan, a list of sources referred to in the proposal, and an appendix if necessary (for items such as consent forms, working questionnaires, list of qualitative interview questions or coding sheets, depending on actual methods chosen).
    5. Optional inclusion of a timetable and budget.


  • Being a Contestant is volunteer position, without financial compensation.
  • Student volunteer hours devoted to participation in this science-oriented activity aiming to fulfill the Ministerial criteria for “engagement contributif” in scientific activities that are certified by the various Student Involvement Recognition programs in the CÉGEP network. Their institution alone is responsible for verifying the conformity of the hours spent to the Ministerial criteria.
  • Contestants can only submit one application per Contest.
  • A supervising teacher must sign the sponsorship agreement included in this entry form.
  • For a team submission, no more than five authors can apply for any one proposal and the team members must come from the same college.
  • Once processed, the Contestant proposals will be assigned a code, with names and other identifiable information removed.
  • Submitted proposals will not be returned , but files will be deleted at the close of the Contest.
  • Late, unethical or incomplete/incorrect submissions will be automatically disqualified.
  • Only the winning entry will be notified of the Judges’ final decision.


The Contestants shall strive to advance knowledge on a topic with scientific rigor while showing respect for the integrity and rights of research subjects and authors.

The Contestants agree to:

Conduct their research in a way that honours accuracy and truth and formally recognizes the academic contributions of others.

Scientific fraud, forgery, fabrication of information and misconduct are not condoned at any level. This involves:

  1. Referring to sources from which they have extracted central ideas, theories, findings, specific arguments, definitions, conclusions, interpretations and scales of measurement, even when not using direct quotations.
  2. Avoiding fabrication of facts and figures, falsification by wrongful author attribution or exaggeration and plagiarism.
  3. Avoiding colloquial, emotional and non-academic expression.
  4. Consistently and correctly using a formatting style that is appropriate to the discipline(s) featured in the proposal.

Obey the general rules regarding the ethical treatment of human subjects, which are embodied in the ethical rules governing researchers and members of your institution’s community.

This mostly involves:

  1. Informed consent, which may include a consent form (attached as an appendix item for the Contest) or, when only verbal consent is viable, a consent script (embodied in the Method Plan).
  2. For subjects under 18 years of age, informed consent from a parent or legal guardian, the recognition of the subjects’ right:
    1. Not to be distressed, humiliated, dishonoured or harmed through their participation
    2. To withdraw from the study at any point in time
  3. Requesting permission from the director, board of directors, manager, owner, or other person in charge for access to institutions.
  4. Permission form to request access to and terms of use for personal possessions such as photos, personal diaries or letters.
  5. Refraining from direct contact with children and physically, emotionally or socio-economically vulnerable individuals.

Protect themselves and others from physical, emotional, legal, social or professional harm.

This mostly involves erring on the side of caution. It is best to exclude a technique if the related liability or potential for harm is unclear.


I, ______________________________ [please print], hereby declare that I have read and understood the Code of Conduct governing the Contestants in this Collegiate Contest.

I agree to adhere to the principles and values expressed in the Code and will, to the best of my abilities, assume the duties and obligations implied therein.

Signature: __________________________________

Date of signature: ______________________________


Contestant Name:

Names of team applicants (for a team submission):


College Name:


 Student ID #:


Date of birth:


Email address:


Mailing address:


Projected date of graduation:


Name of Research Director (sponsoring teacher):


Name of course(s) for which proposal was completed:


Date(s) of course completion (e.g., fall 2016):


Social science discipline(s) of proposal:



Please also include a STATEMENT OF INTENT (100-word account of reason for applying).

For team submissions, each Contestant must submit a separate entry form and write a separate Statement of Intent.


I, ______________________________ [please print], supervised this Contestant’s submitted proposal

in the course(s) _____________________________, in the ____________semester of 20___,

and I feel confident that the proposal meets the basic requirements of the Contest.

Briefly indicate how you supervised this Contestant’s proposal:


Signature: __________________________________

Date of signature: ______________________________