STAGES IN THE FORMULATION OF A RESEARCH PROPOSAL

The compiling of a research proposal is an integral part of the research process. The proposal must give the reader (possibly a funding body) a clear and meaningful intimation of what the researcher has in mind and how the exercise is to be accomplished. Scientific concerns to be considered include: Available knowledge about the research theme, based on a thorough analysis of the literature. Possible findings that are likely to be generated, with the prospect of a specific hypothesis(es) being postulated. The research strategy to be followed. The specific target of the research -- e.g. the nature and size of the test sample. The methods of data collection. The statistical or experimental techniques that will be implemented to systematize and analyse data. Planning of the work schedule. Cost accounting (where applicable)

The research proposal can therefore be regarded as a brief, systematic preview of the research theme and the way in which the research will be carried out. A further important objective is to enable a supervisor (or the funding advisory committee) to identify possible pitfalls and shortcomings in the planning and methodology of the research at an early stage and to make appropriate recommendations. The research proposal also compels the researcher to argue and think through the research theme thoroughly in order to structure a coherent train of thought before embarking on the exercise. Too many research themes are tackled before due and thorough consideration of the what and how of the research.

FORMAT OF THE RESEARCH PROPOSAL

In order to achieve its objectives, the research proposal must contain the following information about the proposed research theme:

Title
This constitutes a concise description of the research endeavour. Ideally, it should be possible to deduce the rationale (or problematic), scope and possible value of the project from its title.

Backround, Rationale and Justification

It is important that the following be included as motivation: Historical backround. The source of motivation for the interest/involvement in the specific research issue. The possible contribution of the research to academic theory, the expansion of knowledge or practical applications.

Survey of the literature

The identification and thorough study of relevant sources of information are fundamental requirements of the compilation of a research report. This enables the researcher to gain a clearer insight into the nature of the problem, its wider context and its ramifications. Importantly, it impels critical evaluation of initial premises, arguments and strategies (by revealing other paradigmatic viewpoints for example). The main theoretical foundation and concepts of the project should emerge from the initial literature survey. At this stage it is not necessary to provide a detailed review of the literature. Only sources that are relevant to support a scientifically valid plan for, and demarcation of, the research are required.

Problem formulation
On the basis of the theoretical foundation and insight obtained from the survey of the literature, the research problem and its purpose can be demarcated and formulated. Usually these flow logically from an analysis of the existing knowledge about the problem.The demarcation and statement of the aims and objectives of the research are the most critical step in the research project because it holds implications for all further steps in the research. The aim(s) is a precise statement of what the researcher hopes to achieve as a result of his/her investigations. The objectives constitute an equally precisely checklist of targets that need to be achieved or tasks that need to be accomplished in order to achieve the aim. It is essential that formulation of the research aim and objectives be expressed in functional terms (i.e. what is required) because problem formulation also has the function of problem demarcation. An added advantage of a specific formulation of the research aim and objectives is that it enables the researcher to devise a specific and correctly descriptive title for the research theme.

Hypothesis formulation
Hypotheses are generally only appropriate in experimental research and, when they are not required or relevant, they should not be formulated. When an hypothesis is clearly scientifically formulated and the task of the researcher can be deduced from it, it is easy for the researcher to determine when and where the research work will be finished. After the problem has been formulated and possibly also one or two research hypotheses, the variables (independent,

dependent and interference variables) to be investigated must be identified. This must be followed by a definition of concepts in order to clear up any remaining ambiguity.

Research methodology
A logical exposition of how the work is going to be done is necessary. This is crucial for obtaining scientifically valid results. The following should be included: The nature of the data required (variables; coverage; sample size) Critical comment on the quality of the data ( reliability, comparability etc.) The methods of data collection -- the procedures and techniques that can be used are generally determined by the nature of the research project, the availability of data and the facilities at the disposal of the researcher. Care must be taken that, at all times, data are accurately and precisely gathered. The methods of data systematization and analysis must be described. It is essential to decide beforehand which statistical methods will be used for the analysis and processing of the data. Never choose a particular analytical technique to define the question you ask. The nature of the data will determine whether parametric or non-parametric methods of data processing will be used.

Scheduling
It benefits the progress of the project (and imposes self-discipline) if a timetable with deadlines is drawn up. In fact a schedule is generally an integral requirement of funded or commissioned research. It should be constructed as realistically as possible and adhered to.

Budgeting
Invariably it is necessary to provide costing for a research programme. Aspects such as capital and running costs, including salaries of assistants, equipment, transport and production costs.

ASSESSMENT OF THE RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Assessment will be based entirely on the presentation in the seminar. Criteria will include: Is the scale of the project appropriate? (vs. too limited or too extensive) Clarity of identification and conceptualization of the problem. Is there a coherent logic in the presentation? Are the aims, objectives and/or hypothesis formulation concise and unambiguous? Are data requirements, their sources, and method of collection clearly stated? Is there clarity on the methodologies to be employed and awareness of their limitations? Is the researcher aware of other possible limitations and problems? Is the time - budget feasible? Quality and management of the verbal presentation: - enunciation - audibility and tone - speed of delivery - confidence level (positiveness) and enthusiasm - contact with the audience

- timing of presentation (20 minutes, maximum with 10 minutes for questions) - Use and quality of visual aids - Skill in fielding questions and discussion

N. DEWAR

SUMMARY: Elements of a Research Proposal

Title of proposed project of study An ABSTRACT with key words Statement of the research problem Hypothesis (or Aims and Objectives) Related studies already undertaken Significance of the research Research proceduees and methadology Scheduling (time budget or acttion plan) References

Most Common Pitfalls in Research Writing

Statement of the research problematicor question is too vague The project lacks a theoretical framework (where it fits into the academic debate is unclear) Researcher offers lists of questions to be investigated rather than an explicit question or problem Introducing material in one part of the proposal that logically belongs somewhere else The research plan is too descriptive and general rather than offering a clear plan of action Being vague about methods and not referencing methods to other work that has been done Claiming that no previous research has been done (leads to the impression that one has not read enough or made sufficient enquiries) Not giving good reasons as to why the project is significant (and should be funded) Lack of a developing logic or argument Verbosity, repetitiveness and stating the obvious The scale of the research is excessive (too much given limitations of manpower, money and time) The necessary facilities for the successful prosecution of the project are not available