Anatomy of a Research Proposals Paper

December 10, 2022

Anatomy of a Research Proposals Paper

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

[Order Now]

Anatomy, Research, Proposals, Paper

Your proposal should have the following sections:

Introduction: The introduction is where you identify your specific research question and where you set the general context for the study. In this section you need to include: Comment by N Drum: This should flow as a narrative. You should not have a bunch of subheadings here calling out “Purpose statement” and the like. It should be clear from your writing what you are talking about and why its relevant. Make sure your discussion flows logically.

A statement of the problem or general research question and context leading to a clear statement of the specific research question;
Background and contextual material justifying why this case or topic should be studied; and
A purpose statement.

Literature Review: This short preliminary literature review section reviews the literature important to your specific research question. The literature review focuses on discussing how other researchers have addressed the same or similar research questions.

It introduces the study and places it in larger context that includes a discussion of why it is important to study this case. It provides the current state of accumulated knowledge as it relates to your specific research question. In this section you should: Comment by N Drum: In your assignment for this course, you were asked to do a literature review specific to a substantive theory.

You should NOT cut and paste that paper into this section. Instead, here you should be synthesizing the literature specific to what we already know about the topic you’d like to assess. What studies have already been carried out here that inform the development of your research question but just don’t go far enough? In the literature review section is also where you will discuss your substantive theory.

In terms of organization, you can do this first and then get into the studies that have already been carried out or last, each proposal is different so you need to feel this out for yourself and what makes sense for your research topic. You should be synthesizing the literature around your substantive theory. Here you might be able to further synthesize (condense) what you already wrote for your assignment 4.

Summarize the general state of the literature (cumulative knowledge base) on the specific research question. For example, if you discuss other studies that have been conducted you would summarize the researcher’s findings, how those findings were obtained, and conduct an evaluation of biases in the findings.
This section should provide a broad overview of the primary arguments related to the topic and organizes the general views on the main aspects of the topic by theme, which could be the prevailing arguments or schools of thought, or commonly held beliefs that your particular topic may challenge.
Include a short conclusion and transition to the next section.
For some additional information on how to organize your theoretical framework into your paper, check out this USC Library guide on Theoretical Frameworks.

In your literature review you should also discuss the theoretical framework to be used in the study. You should ensure you cover the following in your discussion:

A summary of the theory or model to be used in the study, including a diagram of the model if appropriate;
Comment on the kinds of questions this theory has been used to answer in the past and why it is appropriate to use in this proposed study
To really drive this home, you want to end your literature review with a discussion of the current knowledge gaps. This is an opportunity to once again promote the importance of your own research. How will your research fit within this larger body of knowledge? What are you doing differently? What gaps will your research fill?

From here you would then include a transition into your methodology section.

NOTE: Literature reviews can be a bit tricky to write. Think back to how you wrote your short theory lit review in week 4. Chances are you already started to write in a style similar to what one does when completing a literature review. Check out this video (the same one you were guided to in week 4) to help you further prepare to write this section of your proposal. This will not be the last time that you are asked to write a literature review in your academic career so it’s important to master this skill.

Research Design and Methods: Describes how you will answer your research question or test the hypothesis. This section describes your overall research design and how you plan to collect, synthesize, and interpret your data. It should include: Comment by N Drum: This section should be to the research design and methods you plan to use for your proposed study.

This proposal needs to be something that is realistic that you yourself can carry out on your own (not with a team of researchers, or with a ton of money). Think about a project that you can complete in 8 to 16 weeks. This should be a proposal for a research paper that you could present (once the project has been completed) to a professional conference, or as your MA thesis.

Identification and operationalization (measurement) of variables;
A sampling plan (i.e., study population and sampling procedures, if appropriate);
Justification of case studies used;
Data collection/sources (secondary literature, archives, interviews, surveys, etc.);
A summary of analysis procedures (pattern-matching, etc.); and
The limitations of study and bias discussion.

Conclusion: Reemphasizes the importance of your study and ties the proposal together.

Reference List: As with all academic papers you need to references the works that you have cited (direct quotes or paraphrases) in the text of your document and incorporate a complete reference list or bibliography at the end. This list needs to be in the style used within your field. APA= Criminal Justice, Turabian for all others in this course.

Comment by N Drum: The only references that should appear on this list are the ones you actually reference in the body of the paper. This is the rule across all papers unless your professor says otherwise. At the grad level papers the merit of papers often comes from the body of work that informs them so you really want to pack these in and show off your knowledge of the literature.

Remember that the references you use demonstrate your knowledge of the topic area. This research proposal is meant to convince your professor that you not only have identified a worthy question in need of investigation, but that you are also capable of carrying out the research involved to successfully answer that question. At the very least you should have referenced 12-15 peer-reviewed sources in this proposal.

Professional Plagiarism Free Paper in APA/MLA/Harvard/Turabian Format, Instant Delivery, High Quality Submissions, 100% Unique, Turnitin Report Attached

Anatomy of a Research Proposals Paper

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.