Assessment 3 Develop Research Proposal :
Assessment 3 – Research Proposal (40%)
Due date for submission: Friday 2350 Week 10 Weighting: Group (20%) and Individual (20%)
The proposal is to be designed as a template for you to undertake a research project in a field related to your future study.
As a group, you will develop a Research Proposal of between 4000 to 5000 words. The proposal will be assessed for Group and Individual components.
Sections for Group collaboration are: Project Title and Abstract Introduction
Research Design and Methodology References
Individual sections are: Literature Review Limitations and Ethical Issues
There are TWO submission points – Group and Individual. Further instructions will be provided closer to the submission date.
The proposal should include the following headings and details.
|Headings and details|
|Project Title and Abstract A succinct summary of between 400 to 500 words An overview of the and argument behind the study Description of the study Aim of the study (research questions / hypotheses) How would the study achieve the aims|
|Introduction – to provide a background and context Area under study Topic Research problem focus on issues relating to the central topic, identify some of the gaps, raise some of the questions that you want to answer through your study, knowledge gained from other studies and literature about the issues you are proposing to investigatehow would you study fill the identified gaps in the existing body of knowledge Purpose / Objective of the study Clearly stated. Use action – oriented verbs “to determine…, to explore….”. For hypothesis, use the hypothesis phrasing of specific objectives Research Question Your specific research question(s) or hypotheses should be stated clearly|
Outline for the Research Proposal (Cont)
|Literature Review (Individual) The research problem or objective needs to be situated within a context of other scholarship / studies in the area(s). The literature review presents a discussion and demonstrates knowledge of the most important research and theoretical work relating to the research problem/objective. It addresses the following kinds of questions: What have others said about this area(s)?What theories address it and what do these say?What research has been done (or not done) previously?Are there consistent findings or do past studies disagree?Are there flaws or gaps in the previous research that your study will seek to remedy?|
|Research Design / Methodology Describe how you will conduct your study. Regardless of the type of research you plan to do, you need to indicate how you will carry out your study. Include description of: Strategy and designSample and sampling methodData collection – instruments and procedures / methodsData analysis – brief explanation of how the data will be analysed or coded for expected outcomes Significance Why is the study worth doing? – the importance, contribution or intended outcome|
|Ethical Considerations and Limitations (Individual) Anticipate potential ethical issues involved in the proposed study and indicate how these would be managed: voluntary participationinformed consentanonymityconfidentialitypotential for harm Limitations of the study|
|References List the references cited in the proposal|
|Appendix: Data Collection Tool Questionnaire / Survey/ Interview questions or any other type|
Assessment Criteria: GROUP sections
|Sections / Score||Exemplary – 8,9,10||Accomplished – 5,6,7,||Developing – 1,2,3,4|
|Project Title and Abstract (20)||Title and abstract are informative, succinct, and offer specific details about the educational issue, variables, context, and proposed methods of the study.||Title and abstract are relevant, offering details about the research project.||Title or abstract lacks relevance or fails to offer appropriate details about the educational issue, variables, context, or methods of the project. Incomplete or irrelevant details in abstract.|
|Introduction (25) Research Problem Purpose / Objective of the Study Research Questions||An intriguing introduction based on facts. Leads clearly into the research proposal. Presents a significant research problem. Articulates clear, reasonable research questions or hypotheses given the purpose, design, and methods of the project. All variables and controls have been appropriately defined where applicable. Proposal is clearly supported from the research and theoretical literature. All elements are mutually supportive.||A fairly well formulated introduction with some evidence to support the topic that leads into the research proposal. Identifies a relevant research issue. Fairly well posed statement of the problem that provides evidence, but the evidence is not as strong as it could be. Fairly well stated purpose of the study but did not demonstrate its potential value. Research questions or hypotheses are succinctly stated, connected to the research issue, and supported by the literature. Variables and controls have been identified and described where applicable.||Introduction is not well constructed, uninteresting, or does not lead into the research proposal. Research issue is identified, but statement is too broad or fails to establish the importance of the problem as it lacks quality evidence. Purpose of the study is not clearly stated and/or the value is not stated. The research purpose, questions, hypotheses, definitions or variables and controls are poorly formed, ambiguous, or not logically connected to the description of the problem. Unclear connections to the literature.|
|Research Design and Methods (30) Strategy and design Sample and sampling Data collection methods Data analysis Significance of study||The purpose, questions, and design are mutually supportive and coherent. Attention has been given to eliminating alternative explanations and controlling extraneous variables. Descriptions of instruments and techniques include protocols and replications. Evidence of the validity and reliability is presented. Procedures are thorough, coherent, and powerful for generating valid and reliable data. Procedures are replicable. Analytical methods are sufficiently specific, clear, and appropriate for the research questions. Very clearly states significance of the study and demonstrates its potential value.||The research design has been identified and described in sufficiently detailed terms. Instruments and observation protocols are identified by name and described. Procedures for project are identified and described in an appropriate fashion. Both descriptive and statistical methods are identified. Level of significance is stated. Significance of the study is mentioned but does not clearly demonstrate its potential value.||Requires clarification in one or several of the elements – purpose, questions and / or design. Description of the instruments and techniques are confusing, incomplete, or lack relevance to the research questions and variables. Procedures are confusing, incomplete, or lack relevance to purpose, research questions, or sampling strategy. Descriptive or statistical methods are confusing, incomplete or lack relevance to the research questions, data, or research design. Insignificant or no mention of potential value of the study.|
|References (10) Thoughts and ideas well supported by correct and accurate in-text citations. In text corresponds to end of text references. Complete and accurate reference list in CHICAGO Author-Date (17th ed) format.||Meets criteria as per referencing style required. Very few errors in demonstrating referencing conventions for in text and end of text. Near perfect, a few addressable errors.||Generally, meets criteria as per set referencing style. Occasional errors. An obvious attempt to strive for formatting. Less than perfect.||Some errors and inconsistencies throughout. Poor attempt to strive for formatting.|
|Writing Mechanics (15)||Very well written proposal with few grammatical errors. Adheres to all the proposal writing format requirements as presented in the guidelines.||Well written proposal with few grammatical errors. Adheres to most of the proposal writing format requirements as presented in the guidelines.||Fairly written proposal that lacks clarity; has poor transition sentences. There are several grammatical errors. Adheres to some of the proposal writing format requirements as presented in the guidelines.|
Assessment Criteria: INDIVIDUAL sections
|Sections||Exemplary 8,9,10||Accomplished 5,6,7,||Developing 1,2,3,4|
|Literature Review (40 – Individual)||Narrative integrates critical and logical details from the peer-reviewed theoretical and research literature. Each key research component is grounded to the literature. Attention is given to different perspectives, threats to validity, and opinion versus evidence. Demonstrated basic knowledge of literature in the area, and of prior work on the specific research problem. Mentioned at least 1 theory. Cites relevant literature; includes citation for every fact not part of general knowledge; uses consistent, standard format.||Key research components are connected to relevant, reliable theoretical and research literature. Demonstrates basic knowledge of literature or previous research in the area but may not mention any theories. Cites relevant literature; uses consistent, standard format.||Key research component(s) is/are not connected to the research literature. Selected literature is / may be from unreliable sources. Literary supports are vague or ambiguous. Unclearly mentions some previous work in the area. Or did not mention any previous research, literature, or theories. Cites irrelevant literature; includes too few citations; uses inconsistent or nonstandard format.|
|Ethical Issues and Limitations (25 Individual) Ethical Issue – Choose ONE Anticipate potential ethical issues involved in the proposed study Indicate how these would be managed Voluntary participation Informed consent Anonymity Confidentiality Potential for harm Provide or discuss ONE limitation of this proposed research||Demonstrates highly comprehensive level of understanding. Provides well addressed measures to manage concern. Clearly states inherent and / or significant limitations of the proposed research. Appropriate and important limitations and assumptions are clearly stated.||Demonstrates robust level of understanding. Provides some measure to manage concern. Requires more clarity. Attempts to identify limitation – inherent or significant. Identifies some limitations and assumptions.||Demonstrates adequate level of understanding. Provides no or unclear measures to manage concern. No or poor attempt to provide limitation of proposed research.|
|Sections||Exemplary 8,9,10||Accomplished 5,6,7,||Developing 1,2,3,4|
|References (15) Thoughts and ideas well supported by correct and accurate in-text citations. In text corresponds to end of text references. Complete and accurate reference list in CHICAGO Author-Date (17th ed) format.||Meets criteria as per required referencing style. Very few errors in demonstrating referencing conventions for in text and end of text. Near perfect, a few addressable errors.||Generally, meets criteria as per required referencing style. Occasional errors. An obvious attempt to strive for formatting. Less than perfect.||Some errors and inconsistencies throughout. Poor attempt to strive for formatting.|
|Writing Mechanics (20)||Very well written proposal with few grammatical errors. Adheres to all the proposal writing format requirements as presented in the guidelines.||Well written proposal with few grammatical errors. Adheres to most of the proposal writing format requirements as presented in the guidelines.||Fairly written proposal that lacks clarity; has poor transition sentences. There are several grammatical errors. Adheres to some of the proposal writing format requirements as presented in the guidelines.|