The proposal for a piece of research is a document which deals basically with
1. what the proposed research is about; what it is trying to find out or achieve;
2. how it will go about doing that;
3. what we will learn from it and why that is worth learning.
the proposal needs to be a stand alone document. That means it should by itself be like an independent article to answer the three questions above, and convince the judges a) on a general level, which are concerned with the overall viability of the proposed study as a dissertation; b) on a more detailed and technical level – such as, for example, those concerned with the appropriateness of the design, or quality control issues in data collection, or the proposed methods of data analysis.
WHAT
1. Research area; Research topic;
Research areas are usually stated in a few words, and sometimes just one word. Topics similarly are a few words, but usually more than those describing the research area. It defines a body of literature as relevant to this piece of research.
Research topic can be viewed as the title of the final research product. To deduce a topic form an area one can pose the questions on who, when, where, etc.
2. General research question(s); Specific research question(s):
General research questions are more general, more abstract, and (usually) are not themselves directly answerable, because they are too general. Specific research questions are more specific, detailed and concrete. They are directly answerable because they point directly at the data needed to answer them.
To develop a general question into specific researchable questions is the process of making a general concept more specific by showing its dimensions, aspects, factors, components, or indicators. (Here can refer to different types of data: for example, concept and indicator)
To sum up, as you develop your research questions, ask, for each question ‘What data are needed to answer this question?’.
The formulation of specific questions is done on the basis of hypothesis, or on the review of pertinent literature.
3. Data collection question(s):
A research question is a question the research itself is trying to answer. A data collection question is a question which is asked in order to collect data in order to help answer the research question.
research questions identify what you want to understand; interview questions, as data collection questions, provide the data you need to understand these things. The same is true of survey questions. Being the most specific level of questions, the actual data collection questions may well not be shown in the proposal.
* Do we need literature?
(a) What literature is relevant to this project?: Identification of the body of literature
(b) What is the relationship of the proposed study to its relevant literature?: verification, falsification. The answer will lead us to the research questions, and the signification of proposed study.
(c) How will the proposed study deal with the literature and how will the argument in the proposal use the literature? The proposal writer should place the research question(s) – or hypotheses – in the context of previous work in such a way as to explain and justify the decisions made for the proposed study, especially with respect to (i) how and why the research question or hypothesis was formulated in the present form, and (ii) why the proposed research strategy was selected. They see no other role for the literature in the research proposal, and regard the heading ‘review of the literature’ as inappropriate in a proposal.
(d) For some topics, the volume of related literature is so great that a dissertation literature review cannot be comprehensive, covering everything. In these cases, the researcher is forced to be selective. When that occurs, the writer should indicate why it is being done, and the basis on which the selection is made. Here is where previous reviews of the literature, if available and relatively contemporary, can be extremely valuable.
* Do we need hypotheses to develop research questions?
whether hypotheses are appropriate in a particular study:
for each specific research question, can I predict (in advance of the empirical research – that is, in advance of getting and analysing the data) what I am likely to find?
if so, is the basis for that prediction a rationale, some set of propositions, a ‘theory’ from which the hypotheses follow, and which ‘explains’ the hypotheses?
If so, I should by all means formulate and test hypotheses in the research, and, in so doing, test the theory. If not, I suggest we leave the matter at the level of research questions. I can see no logical difference between answering research questions and testing hypotheses, when it comes to what data we will get and how we will analyse them. The same operations are required.
* Do we need theory?
does the description–explanation distinction apply in the proposed project?
does the theory-generation–theory-verification distinction apply? it is historically true that theory verification studies in social science research have more often been quantitative, and theory generation studies have more often been qualitative.
Theory must be mentioned when the study is theory verification one.
* Do we need paradigm?
There might be a particular paradigm or metatheory or philosophical position behind the research. it there are various perspectives in the research area, it s an important clarifying task for the researcher, and an important safeguard against mistaken expectations on the part of the reader.
HOW
DATA
Data decides methods. Quantitative data are produced by quantitative methods; qualitative data are produced by qualitative methods.
Quantitative or qualitative data:
Re-examine the research questions and the way they are phrased – what implications for data are there?
Are we interested in making standardized comparisons, sketching contours and dimensions, quantifying relationships between variables and accounting for variance? - QUANTITATIVE
Or are we more interested in studying a phenomenon or situation in detail, holistically and in context, focusing on interpretations and/or processes? - QUALITATIVE
What guidance do we find from the literature about this topic on this methodological question?
What are the practical consequences of each alternative (including resources)?
Which way would we learn more?
Which sort of research is more ‘my style’?
To measure or not to measure:
(a) get the research questions clear;
(b) as far as possible, let questions dictate the nature of the data;
(c) measure if it is feasible and helpful to do so;
(d) use both types of data, if appropriate.
DESIGN
The data will be collected and analysed:
a) following what strategy? and within what framework? - General and procedural description of research method (analyze)
b) from whom? and how? - Sampling and data collection procedure (collection)
Research strategies
Quantitative research strategies:
the experiment, the quasi experiment and the (correlational) survey. But there are others, most of which are more specialized. Examples are: normative surveys, longitudinal studies, time series analysis, panel studies, causal path studies, structural equation modeling, hierarchical linear modeling, event history analysis, facet design and analysis, Q methodology, cluster analysis, cohort analysis, mobility analysis, unidimensional scaling and
multidimensional scaling, operations research and multiattribute evaluation.
Qualitative research strategies:
the case study, ethnography and participant observation, phenomenology, ethnomethodology and interpretive practice, grounded theory, the biographical method, the historical method, applied and action research, and clinical models, life history, oral history, field research or field study, naturalistic study, ecological descriptive study, descriptive study, symbolic interactionist study, microethnography, interpretive research, action research, narrative research, historiography, and literary criticism, discourse analysis and participant observation, qualitative ethology and ethnoscience.
However, the general description of the research method, such as ethnography, participant observation, grounded theory, and fieldwork are not useful to a reviewer unless they are described procedurally, in relation to the specific proposal.
Data collection
From who? - Sampling
For the proposal, the researcher needs to see sampling as part of the planning process for the research, to select among sampling possibilities in line with the logic of the study, and to indicate the sampling plan in the proposal.
If the study is quantitative, the proposal should indicate:
the sampling strategy, especially whether it is purposive, representative or both, and what claims will be made for the generalizability of findings; how big the sample will be; how it will be selected.
This description of the sampling plan should include justification of the sample size, since there are established methods for determining appropriate sample size in quantitative research. This is a technical matter, which essentially involves balancing cost and access against the level of precision required in relation to the variability of the population on the characteristics being measured. Also, the power of the statistical test to be used needs to be considered (Moser and Kalton, 1979; Lipsey, 1990) and many computer packages now include this (Schofield, 1996).
If the study is qualitative, the proposal should similarly indicate:
the sampling strategy, including what intention (if any) there is for the generalizability of findings; the extent of the proposed sample; how sample units will be chosen.
Qualitative sample sizes tend to be small, with no statistical grounds for guidance. The sample size here is usually a function of the purpose of the study in the light of its sampling frames and of practical constraints.
The proposal for the research may be to work (in whole or in part) with data which already exist. This is known as secondary analysis – the term used for the reanalysis of previously collected and analyzed data. In such a case, the proposal should discuss instruments, procedures and sample as appropriate, in describing how the initial data were collected.
How? - Instruments and procedure
Quantitative data collection instruments are questionnaires, standardized measuring instruments, ad hoc rating scales or observation schedules.
If the decision is to use existing data collection instruments, a brief description of their history, use in research and their psychometric characteristics should be included; If the decision is to construct an instrument(s) specifically for this study, an outline of the steps involved in doing that should be given, showing what pre-testing is involved.
Qualitative data may be mediated by the researcher as the primary instrument for data collection and analysis, or by other instruments such as questionnaires, documents, diaries and journals, other written materials, and non-written qualitative data such as audio-visual materials or artefacts.
If interviews are involved, what type of interviews, and especially what degree of structure and standardization is proposed? If standardized interview schedules are to be used, how will they be developed and pre-tested?
Similarly, if qualitative questionnaires are proposed, what will be the degree of structure and standardization? How would they be developed and (if appropriate) pre-tested?
The same considerations apply for observational data – what degree of structure and standardization is proposed, and how would proposed schedules be developed and pre-tested?
If documents are to be used, which ones and why? Are there sampling or access considerations?
If diaries, journals, critical incident reports, or other qualitative materials are involved, how would the collection of these, including any sampling aspects, be organized?
Procedures refer to the actual process of data collection, over and above any instruments proposed. If instruments are involved, the question here is how the instruments will be used or administered? In other words, what will be the actual data collection procedures? If fieldwork is involved, how would it be carried out?
For the proposal, data collection procedures raise three main questions:
quality of data – how will the proposed data collection and recording procedures ensure that data of the best quality will be obtained?
access – how will the researcher obtain access to the people, situations, and/or information required for the research?
ethics – what ethical issues are involved in the proposed data collection procedures and how will they be handled?
Data analyse needs to demonstrate the methodological mastery of a technique. Quantitative proposals should indicate the statistical procedures proposed. Similarly, the qualitative proposal needs to show how its data will be analysed, and how the proposed analysis fits with the other components of the study. If applicable, both types of proposal should indicate what computer use is planned in the analysis of the data.
STRUCTURE OF A PROPOSAL
i. Title and title page
ii. Abstract
iii. Introduction
– Area and topic
– Background and context
– Statement of purpose (or aims)
iv.Research questions
– General
– Specific
v. Conceptual framework, theory, hypotheses (if appropriate)
vi.The literature
vii.Methods
– Design
– Strategy and framework
– Sample
– Data collection
– Instruments and procedures
– Data analysis
viii.Significance
ix. Limitations and delimitations (if appropriate)
x. Consent, access and participants' protection
xi. References
xii. Appendices
QUALITATIVE UNFOLDING RESEARCH
Maxwell (1996: 59–60) defines five categories of understanding in qualitative research – description, interpretation, theory (explanation), generalization and evaluation. The first three categories include most types of questions that qualitative researchers develop.
The function of proposals is not to provide a watertight blueprint or formula the researcher is to follow, but to
develop a cogent case that makes it plain to a knowledgeable reader that the writer has the necessary background to do the study and has thought clearly about the resources that are likely to be used in doing the study, and that the topic, problem, or issue being addressed is educationally significant.
The writer should indicate early in the document the unfolding nature of the proposed research and why such an approach is appropriate for this study on this topic in this context at this time. The need to preserve flexibility, the unfolding nature of the study, and the ways in which this research will follow a path of discovery can be strongly stated. Against that background, it is good advice to develop likely research questions and issues of design and methods as far as possible in the proposal, indicating what methodological choices will be involved and the basis on which they will be made.
The proposal should indicate:
that the study (or some part of it) is of the unfolding, emerging type; why this is appropriate for the area, topic and approach; in general terms, how structure and specificity will emerge during the research – how research questions will be identified, how the design will be developed and how the analysis will uncover structure in the data. In other words, an unfolding type of study does not imply an ‘anything goes’ sort of proposal.
TACTICS
Two pages on the research questions and methods
Another simultaneous paper on literature and background/context
没有评论:
发表评论