small research project crossword

Crossword Nexus

Potential answers for "small research subjects".

Need help with another clue? Try your search in the crossword dictionary!

From the blog, massive pdf update.

Read More “Massive PDF Update” »

• Crossword Tips

Clue: Small research subject

Referring crossword puzzle answers, likely related crossword puzzle clues.

• Maze runner
• Maze-running rodent
• Experiment subject
• Test subject
• Maze scurrier
• Unwitting test taker
• Maze explorer
• Maze-solving rodent
• Maze solver
• Animal used in experiments

Recent usage in crossword puzzles:

• Newsday - Sept. 26, 2021

RESEARCH PROJECT Crossword Clue

All solutions for research project, top answers for: research project, definition of research project.

• research into questions posed by scientific theories and hypotheses

RESEARCH PROJECT Crossword puzzle solutions

We have 1 solution for the frequently searched for crossword lexicon term RESEARCH PROJECT. Our best crossword lexicon answer is: PAPER.

For the puzzel question RESEARCH PROJECT we have solutions for the following word lenghts 5.

Your user suggestion for RESEARCH PROJECT

Find for us the 2nd solution for RESEARCH PROJECT and send it to our e-mail (crossword-at-the-crossword-solver com) with the subject "New solution suggestion for RESEARCH PROJECT". Do you have an improvement for our crossword puzzle solutions for RESEARCH PROJECT, please send us an e-mail with the subject: "Suggestion for improvement on solution to RESEARCH PROJECT".

Frequently asked questions for Research project:

What is the best solution to the riddle research project.

Solution PAPER is 5 letters long. So far we haven´t got a solution of the same word length.

How many solutions do we have for the crossword puzzle RESEARCH PROJECT?

We have 1 solutions to the crossword puzzle RESEARCH PROJECT. The longest solution is PAPER with 5 letters and the shortest solution is PAPER with 5 letters.

How can I find the solution for the term RESEARCH PROJECT?

With help from our search you can look for words of a certain length. Our intelligent search sorts between the most frequent solutions and the most searched for questions. You can completely free of charge search through several million solutions to hundreds of thousands of crossword puzzle questions.

How many letters long are the solutions for RESEARCH PROJECT?

The length of the solution word is 5 letters. Most of the solutions have 5 letters. In total we have solutions for 1 word lengths.

More clues you might be interested in

• "silly" bird
• dilly-dally
• state of excitement
• widespreading dominion
• indubitably
• old british coin
• arboreal mammal
• continuing forever
• formal, dignified
• spock's father, but not his mother
• permissiveness
• begin shooting
• person to look up to
• increase the staff
• bird's crop
• Legal Notice
• Missing Link
• Made with love from Mark & Crosswordsolver.com

Search Answers

Search crossword answers.

Select Length

For multiple-word answers, ignore spaces. E.g., YESNO (yes no), etc.

Research project Crossword Clue

Here is the answer for the crossword clue Research project . We have found 40 possible answers for this clue in our database. Among them, one solution stands out with a 98% match which has a length of 5 letters. We think the likely answer to this clue is PAPER .

Crossword Answer For Research project:

You can click on the tiles to reveal letter by letter before uncovering the full solution.

40 Potential Answers:

To get better results - specify the word length & known letters in the search.

Fresh Clues From Recent Puzzles

• Smooth artificial fabric Crossword Clue The Telegraph Cross Atlantic
• Be fired over report on a mission (7) Crossword Clue
• 2024 tune that was Hozier's first #1 hit: 2 wds. Crossword Clue
• Somehow prepare to decorate again (7) Crossword Clue
• A wall of art Crossword Clue
• A large amount of money obtained for a melody! Crossword Clue
• We hear Harry, say goes to press (6) Crossword Clue
• Sued ___ no longer new (4) Crossword Clue
• Pizza turnovers Crossword Clue USA Today
• A bounding leap (4) Crossword Clue

Your Crossword Clues FAQ Guide

What are the top solutions for research project .

We found 40 solutions for Research project. The top solutions are determined by popularity, ratings and frequency of searches. The most likely answer for the clue is PAPER.

How many solutions does Research project have?

With crossword-solver.io you will find 40 solutions. We use historic puzzles to find the best matches for your question. We add many new clues on a daily basis.

How can I find a solution for Research project ?

With our crossword solver search engine you have access to over 7 million clues. You can narrow down the possible answers by specifying the number of letters it contains. We found more than 40 answers for Research project.

Crossword Answers

• Eugene Sheffer
• LA Times Daily
• New York Times
• The Telegraph Quick
• Thomas Joseph
• Wall Street Journal
• See All Crossword Puzzles

Crossword Finders

• Search by Clue
• Search by Puzzle
• Search by Answer
• Crowssword Hints

• Full IELTS Practice Tests
• Practice Tests

Research on web based crosswords

• View Solution

Solution for: Research on web based crosswords

Answer table.

 Found a mistake? Let us know!

 Share this Practice Test

Exam Review

So, the task I gave you both was to choose an article about a small-scale research project.

Jake: Yes ...

You were then required to try to reproduce the research procedures in your own context ... i.e. try it out for yourselves.

Yeah ... and that’s what we’ve done.

Great. So I’d like you to tell me a bit about the article and why you chose it.

Well, the article’s written by two university lecturers who had started using crosswords to help their students revise terminology for exams .

And the crosswords were designed and set on computers.

And we selected the article because ... well it seemed an accessible topic, even though we weren’t familiar with the technique ... you know ... using IT to design crosswords for higher education.

That’s a good reason. So these lecturers wanted to see how well this innovation was received by their students?

So how did you go about reproducing the research?

Well, we drew up a list of terms from one of our own modules ... and designed a crossword for revising these terms.

Then we asked our classmates to try out the crossword and give us feedback, you know, their opinions, on how they felt about using the technique.

Was it easy to find participants?

It wasn’t easy at first. But then we convinced them that by taking part in the research they were actually benefiting themselves by preparing for an exam which is coming up later this term.

Leela:              And it worked!

Tutor:              Good. So how did you find out what the students thought about doing the crosswords?

Jake:                A questionnaire . The original article used a two-page long questionnaire. There were lots of excellent questions on it but the whole section on difficulties using IT is now obsolete ... old-fashioned even, e ven though it had only been written a couple of years ago.

Tutor:              So you designed a shorter version?

Leela:              Yeah. Then we sent it to the forty students by email and got twenty-eight replies. I was  taken aback by the fact that everybody we talked to thought this was a good return! I mean the responses were well written, you know, people had taken a lot of care, but I was really disappointed with the low numbers .

Tutor:              Yes, an important lesson to learn for an apprentice researcher .

Leela and Jake: Yeah.

Tutor:              So what results did you get?

Jake:                Well, basically the responses were extremely positive. The students said that doing the crossword on a computer helped them really focus on the work in hand and not be distracted, which is something that commonly happens with other ways of doing of revision.

Yeah ... that was really clear. But something that struck me was that ‘having fun’ hardly featured in their responses ... nor did anything to do with spelling of hard words ... which I thought would be an obvious benefit.

Respondents also said that doing the crossword hadn’t really increased their general motivation to study but that it had highlighted the gaps in their memory so they knew what further work was necessary .

Right ... So how did your findings tally with those of the original researchers?

There were lots of similarities but ...

.there were probably two main differences. We found that more males than females liked the technique, whereas the original study found the reverse .

Also our respondents said they wouldn’t mind doing a crossword as a final official exam ... whereas in the original study students said they would hate doing it even if it meant having a shorter test .

But of course both sets of respondents said they’d be interested in doing more crosswords for informal purposes, revision and so forth.

Right, so let’s have a think about the whole project and what you’ve learned from doing it. Well ... it was very time consuming!

Yeah! And I don’t think we managed that aspect very well.

It could have been worse ... I mean we didn’t have a lot of data so we didn’t have to spend ages processing it. And of course, we’d already done a course on numerical data processing so there wasn’t much new there.

Yeah, that’s true. Anyway, I think we designed our questions well so that they gave us manageable data.

Yeah, it really helped having the original study to guide us, as it were ... and that helped us see what a good research instrument is ... .what a good questionnaire should be like.

Absolutely - we got a lot from that. But when we were writing up the project, I’m not sure whether we’ll know how to acknowledge the work of the original study ... you know, our referencing.

No ... that’s something we’ll both have to work on in the future.

Actually that part’s been great, finding ways to share and support another person .

That’s the real plus from the project ... learning ways to do that.

Well, it’s obviously been very successful ...

Questions 1-4

You will hear two undergraduates doing a research methods course - a girl called Leela and a boy called Jake - having a seminar with their tutor.

Choose the correct letter, A, B or C .

Research on web-based crosswords

1    Leela and Jake chose this article because

A it was on a topic familiar to most students.

B it covered both IT and education issues.

C it dealt with a very straightforward concept. Answer: C      Locate    Listen from here

2     How did Leela and Jake persuade students to take part in their research?

A They convinced them they would enjoy the experience.

B They said it would help them do a particular test.

C They offered to help them with their own research later on. Answer: B      Locate    Listen from here

3     Leela and Jake changed the design of the original questionnaire because

A it was too short for their purposes.

B it asked misleading questions.

C it contained out-of-date points. Answer: C      Locate    Listen from here

4      Leela was surprised by the fact that

A it is normal for questionnaire returns to be low.

B so many students sent back their questionnaires.

C the questionnaire responses were of such high quality. Answer: A      Locate    Listen from here

Questions 5-6

Choose TWO letters, A-E .

What TWO things did respondents say they liked most about doing the crossword?

A It helped them spell complex technical terms.

B It was an enjoyable experience.

C It helped them concentrate effectively.

D It increased their general motivation to study.

E It showed what they still needed to study. 5. Answer: C, E (in either order)      Locate    Listen from here 6. Answer: C, E (in either order)      Locate    Listen from here

Questions 7-8

In which TWO areas did these research findings differ from those of the original study?

A Students’ interest in doing similar exercises.

B How much students liked doing the crossword.

C Time taken to do the crossword.

D Gender differences in appreciation.

E Opinions about using crosswords for formal assessment. 7. Answer: D OR E IN EITHER ORDER      Locate    Listen from here 8. Answer: D OR E IN EITHER ORDER      Locate    Listen from here

Questions 9-10

What TWO skills did Leela and Jake agree they had learned from the project?

A How to manage their time effectively.

B How to process numerical data.

C How to design research tools.

D How to reference other people’s work.

E How to collaborate in research. 9. Answer: C, E (in either order)      Locate    Listen from here 10. Answer: C, E (in either order)      Locate    Listen from here

Other Tests

• 4 - Matching

Open a bank account

• Short Practice
• 0 unanswered
• 5 - Summary, form completion
• 5 - Sentence Completion

Global Design Competition

• 3 - Matching
• 7 - Summary, form completion

Booking tickets for the events

• Leisure & Entertainment
• 8 - Sentence Completion

Names and numbers

• Numbers and names
• 7 - Matching

Which number do you hear

• 10 - Summary, form completion

Travel to distant mountains

• Daily conversation

Found a mistake? Let us know!

Please descibe the mistake as details as possible along with your expected correction, leave your email so we can contact with you when needed.

Describe what is wrong with the practice test:

Please enter description

Enter your name:

Enter your email address:

Please enter a valid email

Research Project Crossword

Description.

Is the Cape Mountain Zebra a herbivore of carnivore What does the mountain zebra eat? What has declined the population of the Mountain Zebra Where is the Geometric Tortoise found What vegetation grows in the Karoo Where is the Tortoise conserved? What is the Savanna classified as ? What does the African wild cat feed on How is the Wild cat able to see in the dark is the Wildcat a herbivore or carnivore?

BIOME PROJECT PART II

Natural sciences Research Project- Crossword

Biology Biome Project

Three of south Africas biomes

Warriors: Into the Wild

Hunger Games Super Crossword

Frequently asked questions, what is a crossword.

Crossword puzzles have been published in newspapers and other publications since 1873. They consist of a grid of squares where the player aims to write words both horizontally and vertically.

Next to the crossword will be a series of questions or clues, which relate to the various rows or lines of boxes in the crossword. The player reads the question or clue, and tries to find a word that answers the question in the same amount of letters as there are boxes in the related crossword row or line.

Some of the words will share letters, so will need to match up with each other. The words can vary in length and complexity, as can the clues.

Who is a crossword suitable for?

The fantastic thing about crosswords is, they are completely flexible for whatever age or reading level you need. You can use many words to create a complex crossword for adults, or just a couple of words for younger children.

Crosswords can use any word you like, big or small, so there are literally countless combinations that you can create for templates. It is easy to customise the template to the age or learning level of your students.

How do I create a crossword template?

For the easiest crossword templates, WordMint is the way to go!

Pre-made templates

For a quick and easy pre-made template, simply search through WordMint’s existing 500,000+ templates . With so many to choose from, you’re bound to find the right one for you!

Create your own from scratch

• Log in to your account (it’s free to join!)
• Head to ‘My Puzzles’
• Click ‘Create New Puzzle’ and select ‘Crossword’
• Select your layout, enter your title and your chosen clues and answers
• That’s it! The template builder will create your crossword template for you and you can save it to your account, export as a word document or pdf and print!

How do I choose the clues for my crossword?

Once you’ve picked a theme, choose clues that match your students current difficulty level. For younger children, this may be as simple as a question of “What color is the sky?” with an answer of “blue”.

Are crosswords good for students?

Crosswords are a great exercise for students' problem solving and cognitive abilities. Not only do they need to solve a clue and think of the correct answer, but they also have to consider all of the other words in the crossword to make sure the words fit together.

Crosswords are great for building and using vocabulary.

If this is your first time using a crossword with your students, you could create a crossword FAQ template for them to give them the basic instructions.

Can I print my crossword template?

All of our templates can be exported into Microsoft Word to easily print, or you can save your work as a PDF to print for the entire class. Your puzzles get saved into your account for easy access and printing in the future, so you don’t need to worry about saving them at work or at home!

Can I create crosswords in other languages?

Crosswords are a fantastic resource for students learning a foreign language as they test their reading, comprehension and writing all at the same time. When learning a new language, this type of test using multiple different skills is great to solidify students' learning.

We have full support for crossword templates in languages such as Spanish, French and Japanese with diacritics including over 100,000 images, so you can create an entire crossword in your target language including all of the titles, and clues.

• Future Perfect

Science has a short-term memory problem

Scientists are trapped in an endless loop of grant applications. How can we set them free?

by Celia Ford

Back in 2016, Vox asked 270 scientists to name the biggest problems facing science . Many of them agreed that the constant search for funding, brought on by the increasingly competitive grant system , serves as one of the biggest barriers to scientific progress.

Even though we have more scientists throwing more time and resources at projects, we seem to be blocked on big questions — like how to help people live healthier for longer — and that has major real-world impacts.

This story was first featured in the Future Perfect newsletter .

Sign up here to explore the big, complicated problems the world faces and the most efficient ways to solve them. Sent twice a week.

Grants are funds given to researchers by the government or private organizations, ranging from tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars earmarked for a specific project. Most grant applications are very competitive. Only about 20 percent of applications for research project grants at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which funds the vast majority of biomedical research in the US, are successful.

If you do get a grant, they usually expire after a few years — far less time than it normally takes to make groundbreaking discoveries. And most grants, even the most prestigious ones, don’t provide enough money to keep a lab running on their own.

Between the endless cycle of grant applications and the constant turnover of early-career researchers in labs, pushing science forward is slow at best and Sisyphean at worst.

In other words, science has a short-term memory problem — but there are steps funding agencies can take to make it better.

Grants are too small, too short, and too restrictive

Principal investigators — often tenure-track university professors — doing academic research in the US are responsible not only for running their own lab, but also for funding it. That includes the costs of running experiments, keeping the lights on, hiring other scientists, and often covering their own salary, too. In this way, investigators are more like entrepreneurs than employees , running their labs like a small-business owner.

In the US, basic science research, studying how the world works for the sake of expanding knowledge, is mostly funded by the federal government . The NIH funds the vast majority of biomedical research, and the National Science Foundation (NSF) funds other sciences, like astrophysics, geology, and genetics. The Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H) also funds some biomedical research, and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) funds technology development for the military, some of which finds uses in the civilian world, like the internet .

The grant application system worked well a few decades ago, when over half of submitted grants were funded . But today, we have more scientists — especially young ones — and less money, once inflation is taken into account. Getting a grant is harder than ever, scientists I spoke with said. What ends up happening is that principal investigators are forced to spend more of their time writing grant applications — which often take dozens of hours each — than actually doing the science they were trained for. Because funding is so competitive, applicants increasingly have to twist their research proposals to align with whoever will give them money. A lab interested in studying how cells communicate with each other, for example, may spin it as a study of cancer, heart disease, or depression to convince the NIH that its project is worth funding.

Federal agencies generally fund specific projects, and require scientists to provide regular progress updates. Some of the best science happens when experiments lead researchers in unexpected directions, but grantees generally need to stick with the specific aims listed in their application or risk having their funding taken away — even if the first few days of an experiment suggest things won’t go as planned.

This system leaves principal investigators constantly scrambling to plug holes in their patchwork of funding. In her first year as a tenure-track professor, Jennifer Garrison , now a reproductive longevity researcher at the Buck Institute , applied for 45 grants to get her lab off the ground. “I’m so highly trained and specialized,” she told me. “The fact that I spend the majority of my time on administrative paperwork is ridiculous.”

Relying on a transient, underpaid workforce makes science worse

For the most part, the principal investigators applying for grants aren’t doing science — their graduate students and postdoctoral fellows are. While professors are teaching, doing administrative paperwork, and managing students, their early-career trainees are the ones who conduct the experiments and analyze data.

Since they do the bulk of the intellectual and physical labor, these younger scientists are usually the lead authors of their lab’s publications. In smaller research groups, a grad student may be the only one who fully understands their project.

In some ways, this system works for universities. With most annual stipends falling short of $40,000 , “Young researchers are highly trained but relatively inexpensive sources of labor for faculty,” then-graduate researcher Laura Weingartner told Vox in 2016 .

Grad students and postdocs are cheap, but they’re also transient. It takes an average of six years to earn a PhD , with only about three to five of those years devoted to research in a specific lab. This time constraint forces trainees to choose projects that can be wrapped up by the time they graduate, but science, especially groundbreaking science, rarely fits into a three- to five-year window. CRISPR, for instance, was first characterized in the ’90s — 20 years before it was first used for gene editing.

Trainees generally try to publish their findings by the time they leave, or pass ownership along to someone they have trained to take the wheel. The pressure to squeeze exciting, publishable data from a single PhD thesis project forces many inexperienced scientists into roles they can’t realistically fulfill. Many people (admittedly, myself included , as a burnt-out UC Berkeley neuroscience graduate student) wind up leaving a trail of unfinished experiments behind when they leave academia — and have no formal obligation to complete them.

When the bulk of your workforce is underpaid , burning out , and constantly turning over, it creates a continuity problem. When one person leaves, they often take a bunch of institutional knowledge with them. Ideally, research groups would have at least one or two senior scientists — with as much training as a tenured professor — working in the lab to run experiments, mentor newer scientists, and serve as a stable source of expertise as other researchers come and go.

One major barrier here: Paying a highly trained scientist enough to compete with six-figure industry jobs costs far more than a single federal grant can provide. One $250,000/year NIH R01 — the primary grant awarded to scientists for research projects — barely funds one person’s salary and benefits. While the NIH has specialized funding that students, postdocs, junior faculty, and other trainees can apply for to pay their own wages, funding opportunities for senior scientists are limited. “It’s just not feasible to pay for a senior scientist role unless you have an insane amount of other support,” Garrison told me.

How can we help scientists do cooler, more ambitious research?

Funding scientists themselves, rather than the experiments they say they’ll do, helps — and we already have some evidence to prove it.

The Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) has a funding model worth replicating. It is driven by a “people, not projects” philosophy, granting scientists many years worth of money, without tying them down to specific projects. Grantees continue working at their home institution, but they — along with their postdocs — become employees of HHMI, which pays their salary and benefits.

HHMI reportedly provides enough funding to operate a small- to medium-sized lab without requiring any extra grants. The idea is that if investigators are simply given enough money to do their jobs, they can redirect all their wasted grant application time toward actually doing science. It’s no coincidence that over 30 HHMI-funded scientists have won Nobel Prizes in the past 50 years.

The Arc Institute , a new, independent nonprofit collaboration partnered with research giants Stanford, UC Berkeley, and UC San Francisco, also provides investigators and their labs with renewable eight-year “no-strings-attached” grants. Arc aims to give scientists the freedom and resources to do the slow, unsexy work of developing better research tools — something crucial to science but unappealing to scientific journals (and scientists who need to publish stuff to earn more funding).

Operating Arc is expensive, and the funding model currently relies on donations from philanthropists and tech billionaires. Arc supports eight labs so far, and hopes to expand to no more than 350 scientists someday — far short of the 50,000-some biomedical researchers applying for grants every year.

For now, institutional experiments like Arc are just that: experiments. They’re betting that scientists who feel invigorated, creative, and unburdened will be better equipped to take the risks required to make big discoveries.

Building brand-new institutions isn’t the only way to break the cycle of short-term, short-sighted projects in biomedical research. Anything that makes it financially easier for investigators to keep their labs running will help. Universities could pay the salaries of their employees directly, rather than making investigators find money for their trainees themselves. Federal funding agencies could also make grants bigger to match the level of inflation — but Congress is unlikely to approve that kind of spending.

Science might also benefit from having fewer, better-paid scientists in long-term positions, rather than relying on the labor of underpaid, under-equipped trainees. “I think it would be better to have fewer scientists doing real, deep work than what we have now,” Garrison said.

It’s not that scientists aren’t capable of creative, exciting, ambitious work — they’ve just been forced to bend to a grant system that favors short, risk-averse projects. And if the grant system changes, odds are science will too.

Clarification, September 12, 2:15 pm ET: This story, published September 11, has been changed to make it clearer that Arc Institute is independent from its university partners.

Most Popular

• The impact of the Supreme Court’s reversal of affirmative action, explained in one chart
• Sign up for Vox’s daily newsletter
• Will Taylor Swift’s Kamala Harris endorsement actually matter?
• Take a mental break with the newest Vox crossword
• It happened there: how democracy died in Hungary

Today, Explained

Understand the world with a daily explainer plus the most compelling stories of the day.

This is the title for the native ad

More in Future Perfect

561 research papers in, the case for degrowth is still weak.

It’s not just the Princess of Wales. More and more young people are getting cancer.

We buy stuff. We throw it away. There’s a system to stop this toxic cycle.

Introducing Your Mileage May Vary, an unconventional new advice column.

ChatGPT didn’t write this and I can prove it.

Is anything really “cruelty-free”?