Principles: Designing Scientific Research Proposals

Context

In general terms, a research proposal sets forth both the exact nature of the matter to be investigated and a detailed account of the methods to be employed. In addition, the proposal usually contains material supporting the importance of the topic selected and the appropriateness of the research methods to be employed. The proposal also serves as a plan of action. All empirical research consists of careful, systematic and pre-planned observations of some restricted set of phenomena. The acceptability of the results is judged exclusively in terms of the adequacy of the methods employed in making, recording and interpreting the planned observations. Accordingly, the research plan, with its supporting arguments and explications, is the basis on which your final research project will be evaluated.

Most problems in preparing a proposal are straightforward and relatively obvious. The common difficulties do not involve the subtle and complex problems of design and data management. They arise instead from the most basic elements of the research process: What is the proper question to ask? Where is the best place to look for the answer? How best to standardize, quantify and record observations? Determining the answers to these questions remains the most common obstacle to the development of adequate proposals.

Simplicity, clarity and parsimony are the standards of writing that reflect adequate thinking about the research problem. Complicated matters are best communicated when they are the clear objects of terse, well-edited prose. When the task of preparing a proposal is well executed, the task of preparing the final report is more than half-done.

The actual format of the proposals will vary but the following should be seen as a general guide.

I. Abstract
1. 100 to 250 words
2. Describes the problem, methods, sample, results and conclusions

II. Research Problem
1. Introduction
2. Literature Review
a. Theoretical relevance
b. "Funnel-shaped discussion
3. Variables
a. Identify independent and dependent variables (primary variables)
b. Specify secondary variables
4. Variable specification
a. Operationalization

III. Hypothesis or hypotheses
1. Specify direction of hypothesized relationships

IV. Methods
1. Identify the source of the data
2. Identify the methods of data collection
3. Specify sampling method and size

V. Statistical findings
1. Identify the appropriate statistical test
2. State decision rule (.01 or .05 level of significance)
3. Compare results to decision rule
4. Interpret results

VI. Results
1. Identify important results
2. Summarize statistical results

VII. Discussion
1. Interpret results in light of literature review
2. Suggest improvements to research methods
3. Point out possible weaknesses in samples, etc
4. Suggest future research

General Structure

The following sections specify communication tasks that are present in nearly all proposals for empirical research. Your best examples of all of these sections will be published research in social science journals and the examples that I will provide you from previous student research.

•I. Abstract

An abstract must pack a lot of information into a few words. They are usually not more than 150 words long and must tell the reader something about the problem, methods, results and discussion sections. The abstract provides a broad synoptic view of what the reader can expect to read in the paper.

•II. Research Problem

1. Introducing the problem

Proposals like other forms of communication, are best introduced by a short, meticulously devised statement that establishes the overall area of concern, arouses interest and communicates information essential to the reader's comprehension of what follows. A careful and artful introductory section is the precursor of section 3 below (Background) and may, in fact, be written as the opening portion of that later section.

2. Stating the Problem

Early in the proposal it is wise to set forth an explicit statement of the problem to which the investigation will be directed. The statement of the problem need not be stated in the formal language of a research question or hypothesis. It should, however, provide a specific and accurate synopsis of the overall purpose of the study. Give the statement of the problem high visibility.

3. Discussing the Background of the Problem

Any research problem must show its lineage from the background of existing knowledge and previous investigation. This is the "Review of the Literature". The author must answer three basic questions:

1. What do we already know? (The purpose here is to support the legitimacy and importance of the question.)
2. How does this particular question relate to what we already know? (The purpose here is to explain and support the exact form of the questions or hypotheses that serve as the focus of the study.)
3. Why select this particular method of investigation? (The purpose here is to explain and support the selections made from the alternative methods of investigation.)

The main purpose of the review of the literature is to indicate the main directions taken by others in the area and the main issues of methodology and interpretation that have arisen. Only those studies, which provide a foundation for the proposed investigation, should be included. These studies should be discussed in sufficient detail to make their relevance entirely clear. Explicit note should be made as to how they contribute to the proposed research and the review should also give some indication of how the proposed research is designed to move beyond earlier work. The rule for selecting studies for the review is exactly the same as used throughout the proposal - limit discussion to that which is essential to the main topic! In citing the literature used in the review, a complete list of all references used in the preparation of the proposal is properly called a "Bibliography", while a list that contains only those cited in the proposal is referred to as "References".

•III. Formulating questions or Hypotheses

All proposals should formally specify research question or hypotheses. The question form is the most appropriate where the research is exploratory. Hypotheses must be related to a theoretical base and should be employed whenever the state of existing knowledge permits the formation of intelligent suppositions about the relationship of elements in the problematic area. A succinct restatement of the theory employed is sometimes useful when presenting the hypothesis or hypotheses. The hypothesis flow from the theory and the connection between the two must be explicit!

•IV. Method

1. Explaining Procedures

All proposals for empirical research must embody a plan for the careful and systematic observation of events. The methods selected for such observations determine the quality of the data obtained. This section provides a step-by-step set of instructions for conducting the research. The type of study being conducted will largely determine the content of this section but the following are items that may demand attention.

a. Identification and description of the target population and sampling methods to be used.
b. Presentation of instruments and techniques for measurement.
c. Presentation of a design for the collection of data.
d. Presentation of procedures for collecting data.
e. Presentation of plans for the analysis of data.

Many of the justifications for particular selections of methods will emerge in the development of the review of the literature.

V.Mechanics of the Proposal

a. Do not use computer-generated tables. (Retype SPSS generated tables!)
b. Use the spell checker frequently and edit carefully!
c. Literature citations and bibliographies must follow the ASA format! An abbreviated version of that format can be found on the last two pages of this outline!

The full version can be checked out from Sandy, the Soc secretary!

Criteria for the Evaluation of Student Research Proposal Drafts

Please make comments on a separate sheet of paper.

Research Proposal

The paper is typed and double-spaced on standard-sized paper (8.5 X 11 inches). yes, it is double-spaced
The margins of the paper are 1 inch on all sides. check margins to ensure that they are 1" on all sides
There is a title page. In the proposal that you submit, make sure that you have a title page that adheres to the criteria identified below
There is a running manuscript head in the upper right hand corner of each page that offers a short version of the title and a page number. review the APA requirements
The pages are numbered consecutively, beginning with the title page, as part of the manuscript header in the upper right corner of each page. review the APA requirements

The Title Page

The title page needs to include 4 items:

The title concisely states the topic of the paper and the variables or theoretical issues that are being explored in relation to that topic
The title is centered in the middle of the page
The author's name and institutional affiliation (the name of the place--usually a college or university--where the research was conducted) is centered and placed directly below the title
A running head (an abbreviated version of the title and no more than 50 characters (including spaces and punctuation) appears at the top of each page next to the page number throughout the paper
The running head designation is left justified and appears at the top of the page after the page number
Page numbers appear on the title page in the upper right hand corner, after the running head
Pages are then numbered consecutively in the upper right hand corner throughout the paper

Statement of the Problem

1. The topic is clearly defined: the topic is not clearly defined. In the opening paragraph, you indicate that you will look at the impact of drug use (among teens) on their education. You also indicate that you will look at why teens use drugs and how parents can help the situation. Yet in your discussion of the problem, you do not provide background information

Problem statements often have three elements: [These elements should be brief so that the reader does not get lost.]

ü the problem itself, stated clearly and with enough contextual detail to establish why it is important;
ü the method of solving the problem, often stated as a claim or a working thesis;
ü the purpose, statement of objective and scope of the document the writer is preparing.

2. The background of the research problem is described.
3. Evaluate how well the problem is defined.
a. How could the writer state the problem more clearly?

• i. You first need to be very clear on your research question (the question that guides your research in the first place). I recommend that you stick to one or two at the most.

• ii. Provide a brief description of socio-economic and cultural characteristics and an overview of status of drug use among youth in the country in as far as these are relevant to the problem. Include a few illustrative statistics, if available, to help describe the context in which the problem occurs

• iii. A concise description of the nature of the problem (the discrepancy between what is and what should be) and of the size, distribution and severity of the problem (who is affected, where, since when, and what are the consequences for those affected). Elaborate the different components of the problem.

• iv. An analysis of the major factors that may influence the problem

• v. A brief description of any solutions to the problem that have been tried in the past, how well they have worked and why further research is needed [this is the justification of your study]

• vi. Define the concepts you use in the paper, for example, drug abuse.

b. What information could the writer add about causes of the problem? consider for your paper
c. What information could the writer add about consequences of the problem? consider for your paper
d. What information could the writer add about the history of the problem? consider for your paper
e. What other facts or examples could the reader use to convince readers that the problem exists? consider for your paper
f. What other facts or examples could the writer use to convince readers that the problem needs solving? consider for your paper
g. What other questions might readers have about the problem?

Literature Review: Make sure that your literature review adheres to this criteria

1. The literature review has a clearly defined introduction
2. The author explained why the topic is important
3. The author gives the reader an idea of where she/he is going in her/his paper (i.e., what aspects of the topic you will be focusing on)
4. The relevant scientific literature is organized in a clear and easy to follow manner (chronologically, in order of importance, or as it relates to different perspectives on an issue or to sides of a controversial problem)
5. The relevant literature is reviewed (studies that are most important to what you want to say)
6. The literature review has a clear conclusion

Method: Make sure that your literature review adheres to this criteria

1. The methods section opens with a clear introduction
2. The population to be studied is identified, including basic demographic information (e.g., age, sex, location, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status)
3. Concepts are clearly defined
4. The procedures for answering each research question are clear
5. The data sources that will be used to answer the questions are described

References

1. The bibliography contains more than 10 references
2. The bibliography adheres to the A.P.A. style

Additional Items

Evaluate the appropriateness of the tone.

1. In your own words, describe the tone of the draft (ex., aggressive, apologetic, etc.).
2. How might the writer make his or her tone seem more authoritative, knowledgeable, and sympathetic?
3. Which parts of the essay might offend readers?
4. Where can you suggest word changes to make the tone more effective?

Consider the effectiveness of the organization.

1. How does the beginning capture your interest?
2. Does the beginning adequately establish the issue, state the thesis, and forecast the argument?
3. Is the sequence of arguments and counterarguments logical and easy to follow?
4. How might the sequence of arguments be revised to strengthen the writer's position?
5. Can you find any contradictions in the argument or any leaps in logic that need to be explained?
6. How might the writer fix any faulty reasoning that you find?
7. Which information should be eliminated because it doesn't support the thesis?
8. Point out any places where cueing devices-transitions, summaries, and topic sentences-could be clarified or added.
9. Point out any places where the writer should paraphrase instead of quote sources.
10. Point out any places where quotes, paraphrases, facts, or examples need to be introduced or explained in light of the writer's thesis.
11. How might the ending better frame the essay by referring to something in the beginning?
12. How might the ending more powerfully encourage readers to take action?

Share your final thoughts with the writer.

1. What part of the essay is strongest?
2. What part of the essay needs more work?
3.

Peer Review: Research Proposal [DRAFT]

Name:

Topic:

EVALUATION RESPONSES

UNIVERSITY OF KMT IS IN SESSION
ENROLL AT ANYTIME OF THE YEAR: Register Now at : www.ukmtpress.com/ukmt

KHEPERKARA (KA) IS ONLINE (Pan-African Voice of the African International). Subscribe at: www.ukmtpress.com/kheperkara