RESEARCH PROPOSAL STUCTURE
The Research Proposal should be 3000 words and should be structured as follows:
PRELIMINARIES*
A Title Page Detailing the title of the Research Proposal, the name of the student and programme of study, word count and the submission date (Appendix 1)
Declaration: Please download the declaration form from GCULearn and insert a completed and signed form after the title page in your Proposal. A copy of the form is in Appendix 2 for information.
A Contents Page Detailing content headings and page numbers, and list of appendices and page numbers
SECTIONS
Introduction
Research Background
Aim and Objectives
(together this section should be approximately 400 words)
Literature Review (approximately 1000 words)
Methodological Framework (approximately 1000 words)
Planning and Critical Analysis (approximately 600 words)
One Reference List Following the Harvard Referencing System (Alphabetical Listing) with all sources cited in the text. You do not need to include a bibliography.
APPENDICES Well presented collection of any relevant supplementary material where appropriate. Appendices should be sequentially numbered, labelled and referenced appropriately in the text.
* The Preliminaries, charts, and List of References are NOT included in the word count.
RESEARCH PROPOSAL – Style Guide
The following requirements must be adhered to in the submitted proposal:
Front Page giving Title of Project and student details (see Appendix 1 for example) followed by the completed and signed declaration (see Appendix 2)
Length of Proposal : 3,000 words
A4 white paper, typed on the recto side of the page only
Text should be ‘1.5 lines’ spaced except for appendices.
Quotations should be identified as a quotation with double quotation marks and the page number
Example:
According to Fallows and Steven (2000), higher educational institutions (HEIs) have a particular responsibility in employability skills development:
“higher education in particular must provide its graduates with the skills to be able to operate professionally within the environment required for the learning age or learning society.” (p76)
Margins should be 25 mm (Top, Bottom, Left and Right)
Pages should be numbered consecutively using Arabic (1, 2 …)
Main text should be in Ariel, font size 12
Section titles, headings and sub-heading should be appropriately and consistently formatted generally using font sizes larger than 12.
References should be in one list arranged alphabetically by first author and following Harvard Referencing system
Please do not put the Proposal in a folder or plastic pocket
An electronic copy of the Proposal should be submitted through GCULearn
RESEARCH PROPOSAL CONTENT: SOME ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION
This section provides some further guidelines concerning the structure and content of individual elements of the proposal.
INTRODUCTION AND RESEARCH BACKGROUND (approximately 600 words)
Introduction:
Purpose of proposal
Outline of proposal structure
Research background:
Introduction to the topic to be explored: developing rationale for topic
Aim and objectives:
Overall aim clearly stated
Related objectives identified and importance to achievement of aim justified
In this opening section you should detail the underlying rationale for the project. Think about this as the reasons that explain your choice of topic and its importance. This should be an introductory discussion that provides a background to the subject area and the main focus of the project. This discussion must lead to the development of one clear aim for the project.
This section should also include a list of objectives which you are proposing to achieve with the research There should be between 3 and 6 objectives, although more or less is acceptable depending on the nature of the project. Remember this is the plan for the rest of the work you will do towards producing your Project. The objectives should relate to what you are going to do.
The reader of the plan should have no doubt or uncertainty about the boundaries of the final project. If the scope is restricted to a particular country, region, industry, time period then this should be made explicit. If you need to carry out further analysis to establish the scope of the research then this should be highlighted here.
LITERATURE REVIEW (Approximately 1000 words)
The Literature Review
The literature review is very important because it demonstrates the main theories which are relevant to the topic of research. This is done by identifying the main texts and authors in the area (in books or journals) and discussing the key issues. The review of the existing literature should compare and contrast the relevant writers in the field of interest and link these to your proposed area of research. You should be able to show that you have undertaken sufficient reading on the respective topic to be able to justify the choice of project topic and to demonstrate where the contribution is located within the main body of theory and current knowledge, incorporating relevant core concepts, frameworks and theory. This section should reflect:
Expertise of the body of theory including the implications of recent developments
Engagement with and critical exploration of core concepts
Progressive argument/idea development
Citation of sources
Although textbooks are a valuable resource when doing research, contemporary issues are more likely to be discussed in the journals relating to the field. It is expected that recent developments, theories, or studies will be contained in journal articles and evidence that you have accessed these is required.
METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK (approximately 1000 words)
Theoretically underpinned presentation, discussion and justification of the proposed methodological framework to be adopted in the study. Each design choice must be identified, discussed and defended regarding suitability for study. Overall, the methodological framework should demonstrate appropriateness to the study aim and objectives and be capable of practical implementation.
This section presents, discusses and justifies the proposed methodological framework and the design choices made (Research Philosophy; Approach; Strategy; Time Horizon; Data Collection Tools, Sampling and Data Analysis). Robust theoretical underpinning is essential.
PLANNING AND CRITICAL ANALYSIS (Approximately 600 words)
Research Plan:
Planning and Critical Analysis (approximately 400 words)
This section focuses on multiple issues pertinent for the research.
Firstly, based on a Gant Chart there should be a detailed timetable scheduling all aspects of the research. This should include time anticipated to conduct background research, data gathering tool design, data collection, data analysis and Project writing. This is best achieved by working backwards from the final submission of the Project. Remember the proposal provides the plan for the research you will conduct so the Gantt chart should provide detail of the activities you will conduct during the course of the research. (You can download a model for the Gantt chart from BB).
Ethical considerations relating to the study must be discussed. Research involving human participants in particular requires consideration of research ethics. A brief discussion of such consideration is required.
Finally, a discussion of any anticipated challenges in the conduct of the study and potential limitations of the study is required to show that the researcher is aware and informed and thus better able to manage the research process. A good proposal will not only show awareness but also highlight potential options to overcome challenges and minimise limitations.
WRITING STYLE AND PRESENTATION
Formal, academic and mature style
Good grammar which is free from spelling errors and carelessness
All reference appropriate and in Harvard Reference style
RESEARCH PROPOSAL: A GUIDE TO INTERPRETING THE MARKS
The table below provides an indication of the interpretation of the overall mark awarded:
Please note that a mark of less than 50% constitutes a fail, whilst a mark of 70% or more is considered a pass with distinction for this module.
Generic Assessment Criteria for Research Proposal
>80% Exceptional performance
• Remit set for the assignment is fully covered.
• Mastery of the subject area that demonstrates exceptional insight into relevant literature and both breadth and depth of knowledge and understanding.
• Extensive evidence of critical and deep knowledge and understanding of the subject area.
• Demonstrates outstanding ability to make inter-relationship between concepts, theories and industry policy and practice.
• Displays outstanding effort to undertake research.
• Excellent presentation, writing style, and accurate referencing/citation.
• Fully meets the module learning outcomes covered by the assessment.
71-80%
Excellent performance [distinction mark is 70%]
• Remit set for the assignment is fully covered.
• Very good and critical comprehension of the subject area with some evidence of deep knowledge and understanding of a number of relevant theories, principles and concepts.
• Presents evidence of critical and deep knowledge of the subject area and literature.
• Demonstrates a clear ability to make relationships between concepts, theories and industry policy and practice.
• Displays excellent secondary research skills.
• Demonstrates significant ability in synthesising knowledge from different sources.
• Excellent presentation, writing and referencing/citation style.
• Fully meets the module learning outcomes covered by the assessment.
60-70% Good performance
• Full coverage of the remit.
• Good comprehension of the subject area with some evidence of knowledge and understanding of key theories, principles and concepts, but lacking depth or critique in some areas.
• Demonstrates some ability to make relationships between concepts, theories and industry policy and practice.
• Good comprehension of how concepts and knowledge may be applied to improve business policies or practices.
• Demonstrates ability in synthesising knowledge from different sources and use findings from a literature review appropriately.
• Overall very good presentation, writing and referencing/citation style, with only minor flaws.
• Fully meets the module learning outcomes for the assessment.
50 -59% Satisfactory performance
• Satisfactory coverage of the report remit.
• Satisfactory comprehension of the subject area with some insight into relevant issues, theories, principles and concepts, but lacking depth of analysis or critique.
• Some relevant company/industry research undertaken and some appropriate literature has been drawn on in the discussion, but further evidence required to fill gaps in some parts of the report.
• Some ability to identify and comprehend how concepts and knowledge may be applied to improve business policies or practices.
• Further practice required in skills related to synthesising knowledge from different sources
• More attention required to presentation, writing or citation/referencing style.
• Meets the module learning outcomes for the assessment.
40 -49% Unsatisfactory performance – Marginal Fail
• Unsatisfactory coverage of the remit.
• Poor comprehension of the subject and little evidence of a full understanding of relevant theories, principles and concepts.
• Unsatisfactory evidence that sufficient industry/company research has been undertaken or literature reviewed.
• Demonstrates a poor ability to synthesise knowledge from different sources
• Significant weaknesses in presentation, writing and referencing/citation style also need to be addressed.
• Meets only some of the module learning outcomes for the assessment.
30-39% Poor Fail
• Unsatisfactory; significant gaps evident in meeting the remit set for the assessment.
• Only demonstrates a very basic and superficial level of knowledge of the subject area with inadequate evidence of industry/company research and/or engagement with literature.
• Minimal evidence of understanding of link between theories and business policy and practice.
• Demonstrates little evidence of an ability to synthesise knowledge from different sources.
• Incomplete evidence presented for arguments or conclusions presented.
• Does not meet the module learning outcomes for the assessment.
20-29% Bad fail
• Clear failure, does not meet the remit set for the assessment.
• Minimal knowledge of the subject area and lack of evidence of even a basic understanding of relevant theories, principles and concepts.
• Inadequate and incomplete evidence of research effort or of reading of appropriate literature.
• Severe weaknesses relating to the synthesis of knowledge from different sources.
• Little/no understanding of links between theoretical concepts and business policy or practice.
• Major flaws in presentation, writing style and referencing/citation style
• Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module.
<20% Very bad fail
• Demonstrates a serious and unacceptable lack of knowledge and understanding of the subject area.
• No evidence of understanding of relevant theories, principles and concepts.
• No evidence of appropriate company/industry research
• Very serious flaws in presentation, writing style and referencing/citation style.
• No ability to synthesise knowledge from sources.
• Does not meet the learning outcomes of the module.
PLAGIARISM
Plagiarism is considered by Glasgow Caledonian University to be a very serious offence, which can result in severe penalties. The regulations concerning this area are complex and students are strongly advised to study the definitions and interpretations that are contained in Appendix 7 of the University Assessment Regulations. It is vital that all students have read and understood this section of the University’s Assessment Regulations.
Plagiarism is defined in the Assessment Regulations as the deliberate and substantial unacknowledged incorporation in students’ work of material derived from the work (published or unpublished) of another. Essentially, to plagiarise means to steal from the writing or ideas of another . Whilst the writings and ideas of others form an important part of academic work, in particular the project, the work of others however must be clearly identifiable and distinguished from the students own writings and ideas. Failure to acknowledge properly the work of others is plagiarism, whether or not you intended to represent the work as your own.
Examples of plagiarism include:
The use of another’s material or ideas without due acknowledgment of the source.
Copying the work of another student with or without that student’s knowledge or consent.
Deliberate use of commissioned material or data collected by another and passing it off as the student’s own.
To avoid any possible allegation of plagiarism being made it is important to represent the writings of another person properly:
In the case of a short section of text that is taken unchanged from another’s work, the text must appear within quotation marks with an acknowledgement to the original work using the surname, year, page number convention [Example: (Hammer, 2004, p4)].
If a large section of text is taken unchanged, the selected text must be indented from both sides and appear within quotation marks with an acknowledgement given to the original work using the surname, year, page number convention [Example: (Hammer and Champy, 1993, p40-41)].
Where an idea, argument or work of another is paraphrased, the paraphrased version should be sufficiently removed from the original text version so that obvious copying, with only minor changes being made to the text, does not occur. An acknowledgement must also be given to the original idea, argument or work using the surname year convention [Example: (Doswell, 1995)].
Acknowledgement should be disclosed by the inclusion of a complete and comprehensive listing of all sources cited in the text.
The Harvard Referencing System is the required style for citation in the text and reference listing.
RESEARCH ETHICS ON HUMAN PARTICIPANTS:
GUIDELINES FOR GOOD PRACTICE
When planning any type of research involving human participants, it is now the policy of Glasgow Caledonian University that staff and students should take account of ethical issues. Ethical scrutiny ensures that the individual rights of all research participants are given full consideration and that these rights are taken into account in a consistent manner according to agreed principles. Further, it acts as a safeguard for researchers who may occasionally face complaints from research participants. Finally, formal ethical scrutiny is a useful learning experience, which helps students engage in ethically sound practice whilst conducting research.
Students are cautioned that any investigation that involves human participants (such as employees of the case subject organisation) regardless of the data collection tools used, requires a serious consideration of the ethical domain. Such consideration should be reflected in the design and execution of the selected data collection tools and in the treatment of the data collected. Some issues that require attention include: the level of stress or anxiety that may be experienced by participants, the level of detail provided by the researcher concerning the study and the implications for the respective participants, the use of a consent form and the option for participants to decline involvement in the study, the opportunity for participants to withdraw at a later stage in the study, adherence to the Data Protection Act, confidentiality and anonymity.
Students are further cautioned that when the intended investigation warrants a much deeper and more formal consideration of the ethical domain, the matter must be brought to the attention of the respective supervisor. Depending on the nature and scope of the study, in certain instances either internal (Glasgow Caledonian University Ethics Committee) or both internal and external ethical approval may be required prior to the commencement of the intended study.
Appendix 3
WRITING AND MANAGING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL
This section provides some guidance on developing a research proposal.
TOPIC CHOICE
This is one of the most difficult phases of your research and one which needs great consideration. You are required to select a topic, from which you will define your research aim and objectives. The selection of topic will be influenced by the placement and modules being studied this session.
The topic area you choose must:
Explore a substantial problem in your choosen field of study
Relate to themes drawn from taught modules
Be appropriately scoped to allow in-depth and meaningful exploration of theory and practice
Have a solid basis in the academic and research literature
Enable the collection and analysis of relevant data
It is important to ensure that the topic selected is one that you are interested in; the research process will be much more enjoyable.
WHAT MAKES A GOOD PROPOSAL
The Research ‘Aim and Objectives’ ‘Literature Review’, and ‘Methodological Framework’ are key elements in a research proposal. This section provides recommendations for effective articulation of issues and arguments.
Aim & Objectives:
The aim is your overarching research question, which you intend to investigate. It must be clearly articulated, reflect the boundaries of the research and link clearly to the case for the study developed in the Research Background.
Objectives help answer the overall research question. Ensure that they are comprehensive (address all aspects of the research question with no gaps evident). It is considered good practice to briefly explain why each of the objectives is relevant and important to achieving the aim.
Literature Review:
The literature review provides the context and develops the case for the proposed study. Accordingly, key to a good review are:
Deep knowledge and understanding of the topic and literature
If the research problem is set within a general and rambling review of the literature, there is a strong probability that the case for the study will be weakened and may appear trivial and uninteresting. However, if is placed within a focused and well structured review, the importance of the case is likely to be clearer and stronger. Extensive wider reading around the topic area is vital to develop the knowledge and understanding required.
Define and explain key concepts
Theory based definitions and elaborations of key concepts are important. They reflect the researcher’s understanding and appreciation of these concepts and their complexity.
Set the context for the study
Drawing on the literature, provide a brief overview of the topic focused on the area investigated.
Draw on the work of recognised theorists and use quality publications
Using the work of gurus and quality references to build your case adds credibility to the proposed work.
Use current publications when developing your case
Dated publications can weaken your case rather than strengthen it. It is important that you use the literature to demonstrate who you see as the authority in the field. You may need to do this by using seminal papers and work of particular authors as these are the ones that are most often cited. Conversely relying on papers from decades ago when the field has changed significantly will also weaken your work. This is particularly relevant when your topic may involve changing legislation.
Set clear boundaries for the work
Clear boundaries provide focus for the study. It is valuable to establish if there is a time or geographical element to your work. For example you may look at an issue following a change in legislation or you may only be looking at the problem from the perspective of one country or region.
Avoid:
Poor organisation and structure
Unnecessary repetition
Reliance on poor quality and dated publications
Descriptive writing style
Personalisation (use of ‘I’, ‘We’ ‘You’)
Methodological Framework:
This is a critical element of the research proposal. The methodological framework should contain adequate detail to convince qualified assessors of its appropriateness for the study. Key to a sound framework is appropriate choices and demonstration of knowledge. This is achieved through appropriate theory supported discussion and justification: key design choices, strengths and limitations/criticisms, suitability for study and precautionary measures. In addition, adequate detail is required with regards data collection tools, sampling considerations, representation of population and accessibility.
Common Mistakes in Proposal Writing :
1. Failure to provide the proper context to frame the research question.
2. Failure to delimit the boundary conditions for your research.
3. Failure to cite landmark studies.
4. Failure to accurately present the theoretical and empirical contributions by other researchers.
5. Failure to stay focused on the research question.
6. Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research.
7. Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues.
INDICATIVE READING LIST
You should use the following list of books as a starting point for your research
Alvesson, M. and Deetz, S. (2000), Doing Critical Management Research, London: Sage.
Arksey, H. and Knight, P. (1999) Interviewing for Social Scientists, London: Sage.
Blaikie, N. (1993) Approaches to Social Enquiry, Oxford: Polity Press.
Blaikie, N. (2010) Designing Social Research, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Blumberg, B. Cooper, D. and Schindler, P, (2008) Business Research Methods, Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education.
Bradley (2007) Marketing Research Tools and Techniques, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bryman, A. (2008), Social Research Methods, Oxford University Press.
Bryman, A. & Bell, E. (2007) Business Research Methods, 2nd ed., Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Burns, R. and Burns, R.P. (2009) Business Research Methods and Statistics Using SPSS, London, Sage Publications.
Chisnall (2001) Marketing Research, 6th ed., London: McGraw-Hill.
Collis, J. & Hussey, R. (2009) Business Research, 3rd ed., Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Crotty, M. (1998) The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process, St Leonards: Allen & Unwin.
Davies, M.D. (2007) Doing a Successful Research Project, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Denscombe, M. (2007) The Good Research Guide: For Small Scale Social Research Projects, 3rd ed., Maidenhead: Open University Press. (E-book)
Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. and Jackson, P.R. (2008) Management Research, London: Sage.
Fisher, C. (2010) Researching and Writing a Dissertation: An essential guide for business students, Pearson Education.
Ghauri, P. & Gronhaug, K. (2010) Research Methods in Business Studies, 4th ed., London: Prentice Hall.
Gray, C. & Malins, J. (2004) Visualizing Research: A Guide to the Research Process in Art and Design, Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Hammersley, M. (ed.) (1993) Social Research: Philosophy, Politics and Ethics, London: Sage Publications.
Hughes, J.A. and Sharrock, W.W. (1997) The Philosophy of Social Research, 3rd ed., London: Longman.
Jensen, K. (2002) A Handbook of Media and Communication Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Methodologies, Hove: Routledge.
Jesson, J., Matheson, L. and Lacey, F. M. (2011) Doing Your Literature Review, London: Sage.
Johnson, P. and Duberley, J. (2000) Understanding Management Research, London: Sage.
Kaplan, D. (2004) The Sage Handbook of Quantitative Methodology for the Social Sciences, London: Sage.
Kolb, B. (2008) Marketing Research: A Practical Approach, London: Sage Publications Ltd. (E-book)
Lance, C.E. & Vandenberg, R.J. (eds) (2009) Statistical and Methodological Myths and Urban Legends, Hove: Routledge. (E-book)
Leedy, P. and Ormrod, J., (2010) Practical Research: Planning and Design, Pearson.
Matthews, B. and Ross, L. (2010) Research Methods for Social Sciences, Pearson.
McDaniel, C. Jr. & Gates, R. (2010) Marketing Research Essentials, 7th ed., London: Wiley.
Pallant, J. (2007) SPSS Survival Manual, 3rd ed. OUP: Oxford (E-book)
Pickering, M. (2008) Research Methods for Cultural Studies, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. (E-book)
Remenyi, D. (2012) Case study Research: The quick guide, Academic Publishing International.
Remenyi, D. and Bannister, F. (2012) Writing up your research for a dissertation or thesis, Academic Publishing International.
Robson, C. (2008) Real World Research, Blackwell Publishers.
Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2009) Research Methods for Business Students, 4th ed., Harlow: Prentice Hall. (And available as E-book)
Seguin, J. (2005) Media Career Guide: Preparing for Jobs in the 21st Century, Bedford: Bedford Books.
Sekaran, U. and Bougie, R. (2013) Research Methods for Business, Chichester, Wiley.
Silverman, D. (2005) Doing Qualitative Research, London: Sage.
Silverman, D. (2004) Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice, 2nd ed., London: Sage.
Wickham, P & Wickham, L. (2008) Management Consulting: Delivering an Effective Project, 3rd ed., Harlow: Prentice Hall. (E-book)
Williams, M. and May, T. (1996), Introduction to the Philosophy of Social Research, London: UCL Press.
Wisker, G. (2008) The Postgraduate Research Handbook, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
