Research Proposal

• A research proposal is a relatively brief document that contains an outline plan for a
research project in terms of forward planning and organization.

• A research proposal is based on careful thought about how the project will be
conducted and involves the kind of advance planning that is required if a project is
to run smoothly.
• It is produced at the beginning of the research process (before research is commenced) in
advance of any data collection.

• A research proposal offers a blueprint for the research that shows what the parts look like and
how they will fit together.

• It describes what will be done, explains how it will be done, and justifies why the research
should be undertaken.

• It ensures that the project plan is coherent and viable (well structured) and acceptable and
that all resources (Skills, funds etc.) are available.
 Structure of Research Proposals
• There is logic to research proposals and it can be expressed as a sequence of
seven basic questions that it is reasonable to ask about any proposed research
Structure of Research Proposal
 Title
• It is the most prominent and most immediate statement about the proposed
research. Within the space of a few words the researcher has to capture the
essence of the research & therefore, the title should be Clear, Accurate, and
Precise.
Title-Clarity
A good title should be straightforward and presented in a way that
can be easily understood.

• There should be no chance of misinterpretation, no element of ambiguity

• The words chosen for the title should be correct in terms of language,
contains no errors of grammar or spelling

• Titles normally avoid the use of acronyms

• Titles should not try to be entertaining (use humorous language, puns

or clever (eye-catching headlines ) - proposals are serious, formal
documents used in relation to academic awards, funding applications, and
ethical approval.
Title-Accuracy
• Readers will have their vision of the project /research shaped by the title

• If what is actually presented in the body of the proposal does not faithfully
reflect that title, readers might think that the researcher is trying to fool them
about the real nature of the research

• Any mismatch will send a bad signal to those who evaluate the proposal
and will definitely harm the proposal’s prospects of success.

• TIP: Having finished writing the proposal go back to the beginning, look at the
title afresh and make sure that it still accurately depicts the research you
propose to do.
Title-Precision
• The title is required to capture the essence of the project ‘in a nutshell’.
Hence,
• If the title is too brief, it will not satisfy the need for precision because inevitably it
will be wide in terms of its scope and not contain enough information about the
specific nature of the of the inquiry

• If it is too long, it will probably deter people from reading on and worry those who
evaluate the proposal about the researcher’s ability to capture the essence of the
project ‘in a nutshell

• Overall, titles tend to be around ten to thirty words in length

Title-Precision
• To accomplish this balancing act may involve dividing the title into two
components, which are separated by a colon (:).
• a main title outlining the general area of the research;
• a supplement that includes more specific information. This tends to be a bit longer and
to include more specific details about things such as the factors to be investigated, the
methods to be used, the location, and the time scale of the study
Keywords
• keywords’ denote the content of the proposed research.
• They usually consist of three to six terms that pinpoint the core ideas behind the research.
• They provide a brief but carefully considered insight into the core features of the proposed research.
• Like the title, keywords also capture the essence of the research ‘in a nutshell’.

• They are presented either as a list of bullet points, or as a series of words on a single
line.

• Keywords do not have to be individual words; it is quite common to find

that a keyword can consist of two or three words, which, when combined specify a
concept or issue that can be recognized for the purposes of defining
what the research is about.

• Examples: ‘supply chain management’, ‘health-related behavior’ or ‘educational

achievement’.
Keywords
• In practice, keywords are likely to echo some of the words in the title. This is
not a problem.
•
Aims/ Objectives
• The aims or objectives or ‘purpose statement’ of the research indicate
• the direction in which the research will go and point to the target that the researcher hopes to reach.
• the scale and scope of the proposed investigation i.e. the size of the task the researcher is planning to
embark upon.

• They guide the reader’s expectations about the nature of the proposed investigation. It is
important, therefore, to ensure that the aims that are stated have been scoped and that they are
realistically achievable.

• Objectives should identify clearly whether the research is attempting to do one or more of the
following:
• explain the causes or consequences of something;
• criticize or evaluate some theory or belief;
• describe something;
• forecast some outcome;
• develop good practice;
• empower a profession
Presentation of aims /Objectives
• The conventional presentation of research aims/ objectives is to
uses a list of phrases, each of which starts with a verb – a verb that is
particularly relevant for research activity.

• There are normally about three to six of these phrases.

• The research aims/ objectives can be written as a paragraph using normal

prose.

• The list starts with the broad aim of conducting research

Example: Research into mass transport systems
Background
• To understand what the research ‘is all about’, readers need to know something
about the background or the ‘problem statement’ to the research.

• Researchers should operate on the premise that some readers might not know the
circumstances surrounding the proposed research and that it is not clear to them
why a specific piece of research is being proposed.

• A good research proposals always ensure that the background to the research is
stated explicitly and clearly so that all readers of the proposal should be able to
understand the rationale for the research.

• This is achieved by providing

• Context
• Evidence, Events and publications
• The most significant points
Context
• The Background section is an opportunity explains to the readers the
bigger picture; to outline the context within which the research will take
place.

• This can focus on the historical background or contemporary circumstances

within which the research is to take place.

• On many occasions the Background section will incorporate elements of

both the historical and the contemporary context.
Contextual information
• The Background section might include a combination of more than one of
the following contextual information
Evidence, Events, and Publications
• A few well-chosen bits of supporting evidence can have a significant impact on the
credibility afforded to the research and on the prospects of the proposal being
successful.

• Drawing on key published works, backed up by hard facts and figures, and directly linked
to events in the real world, the researcher provides supporting evidence relating to the
context of the proposed research.

• It is good practice to support the context argument made by:

• citing publications linked with prominent theories/writers/approaches in the field;
• noting the findings from recent published research in the area;
• using relevant data, including facts and figures (for example, to do with trends, prevalence rates,
proportions, volumes);
• referring to key events;
• specifying details of relevant legislation, regulations, policies, and official reports.
Selecting the most significant points

• means making choices and judgements about which of the many

contextual factors are the most relevant.

• When writing the Background section, the researcher needs to decide

what are the most important things for selling the idea of the research and
which things are less crucial.
Essential Elements of a Research Proposal
 Why do some research proposals get rejected?
Weaknesses related to the research problem:

• The description of the project is so nebulous and unfocused that the purpose of the
research is unclear

• The problem is unimportant or unlikely to yield new information

• The hypothesis is ill-defined, doubtful or unsound, or it rests on insufficient evidence

• The problem is more complex than the investigator realizes

• The problem is of interest only to a particular, localized group, or in some other way has
limited relevance to the field as a whole
 Why do some research proposals get rejected?

Weaknesses related to the research design and methodology:

• The description of the design and/or method is so vague and unfocused as
to prevent adequate evaluation of its worth

• The data the investigator wishes to use are either difficult to access or
inappropriate for the research problem

• The proposed methods, measurement instruments or procedures are

inappropriate for the research problem
 Why do some research proposals get rejected?

Weaknesses related to the investigator:

• The investigator does not have sufficient training or experience for the
proposed research

• The investigator appears to be unfamiliar with the literature relevant to the

research problem

• The investigator does not have sufficient time to devote to the project
 Why do some research proposals get rejected?

Weaknesses related to resources:

• The institutional setting is unfavourable for the proposed research
• The proposed use of equipment, support staff or other resources is
unrealistic