文章作者Paul T. P. Wong, Ph.D., C.Psych. (Rearch Director, Graduate Program in Counlling Psychology. Trinity Western University Langley, BC, Canada).
题为：How to Write a Rearch Proposal. 全文转载如下：
Most students and beginning rearchers do not fully understand what a rearch proposal means, nor do they understand its importance. To put it bluntly, one’s rearch is only as a good as one’s proposal. An ill-conceived proposal dooms the project even if it somehow gets through the Thesis Supervisory Committee. A high quality proposal, on the other hand, not only promis success for the project, but also impress your Thesis Committee about your potential as a rearcher.
A rearch proposal is intended to convince others that you have a worthwhile rearch project and that you have the competence and the work-plan to complete it. Generally, a rearch proposal should contain all the key elements involved in the rearch process and include sufficient information for the readers to evaluate the propod study.
Regardless of your rearch area and the methodology you choo, all rearch proposals must address the following questions: What you plan to accomplish, why you want to do it and how you are going to do it.
The proposal should have sufficient information to convince your readers that you have an important rearch idea, that you have a good grasp of the relevant literature and the major issues, and that your methodology is sound.
The quality of your rearch proposal depends not only on the quality of your propod project, but also on the quality of your proposal writing. A good rearch project may run the risk of rejection simply becau the proposal is poorly written. Therefore, it pays if your writing is coherent, clear and compelling.
This paper focus on proposal writing rather than on the development of rearch idea
s.
Title:
It should be conci and descriptive. For example, the phra, “An investigation of . . .” could be omitted. Often titles are stated in terms of a functional relationship, becau such titles clearly indicate the independent and dependent variables. However, if possible, think of an informative but catchy title. An effective title not only pricks the reader’s interest, but also predispos him/her favourably towards the proposal.
Abstract:
It is a brief summary of approximately 300 words. It should include the rearch question, the rationale for the study, the hypothesis (if any), the method and the main findings. Descriptions of the method may include the design, procedures, the sample and
any instruments that will be ud.
Introduction:
The main purpo of the introduction is to provide the necessary background or context for your rearch problem. How to frame the rearch problem is perhaps the biggest problem in proposal writing.
If the rearch problem is framed in the context of a general, rambling literature review, then the rearch question may appear trivial and uninteresting. However, if the same question is placed in the context of a very focud and current rearch area, its significance will become evident.
Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules on how to frame your rearch question just as there is no prescription on how to write an interesting and informative opening par
agraph. A lot depends on your creativity, your ability to think clearly and the depth of your understanding of problem areas.
However, try to place your rearch question in the context of either a current “hot” area, or an older area that remains viable. Secondly, you need to provide a brief but appropriate historical backdrop. Thirdly, provide the contemporary context in which your propod rearch question occupies the central stage. Finally, identify “key players” and refer to the most relevant and reprentative publications. In short, try to paint your rearch question in broad brushes and at the same time bring out its significance.
The introduction typically begins with a general statement of the problem area, with a focus on a specific rearch problem, to be followed by the rational or justification for the propod study. The introduction generally covers the following elements:
1. State the rearch problem, which is often referred to as the purpo of the study.
2. Provide the context and t the stage for your rearch question in such a way as to show its necessity and importance.
3. Prent the rationale of your propod study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing. 放不下的
4. Briefly describe the major issues and sub-problems to be addresd by your rearch.
5. Identify the key independent and dependent variables of your experiment. Alternatively, specify the phenomenon you want to study.
6. State your hypothesis or theory, if any. For exploratory or phenomenological rearch, you may not have any hypothes. (Plea do not confu the hypothesis with the statistical null hypothesis.)
7. Set the delimitation or boundaries of your propod rearch in order to provide a clear focus.
8. Provide definitions of key concepts. (This is optional.)
Literature Review:
Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introduction ction. However, most professors prefer a parate ction, which allows a more thorough review of the literature.
The literature review rves veral important functions:
小班涂色画图片1. Ensures that you are not “reinventing the wheel”.
2. Gives credits to tho who have laid the groundwork for your rearch.
3. Demonstrates 漫画的启示作文400字your knowledge of the rearch problem.
4. Demonstrates your understanding of the theoretical and rearch issues related to your rearch question.
5. Shows your ability to critically evaluate relevant literature information.
6. Indicates your ability to integrate and synthesize the existing literature.
7. Provides new theoretical insights or develops a new model as the conceptual framework for your rearch.
8. Convinces your reader that your propod rearch will make a significant and substantial contribution to the literature (i.e., resolving an important theoretical issue or filling a major gap in the literature).
Most students’ literature reviews suffer from the following problems:
* Lacking organization and structure
* Lacking focus, unity and coherence
* Being repetitive and verbo
* Failing to cite influential papers
* Failing to keep up with recent developments
* Failing to critically evaluate cited papers
* Citing irrelevant or trivial references
* Depending too much on condary sources
Your scholarship and rearch competence will be questioned if any of the above applies to your proposal.
There are different ways to organize your literature review. Make u of subheadings to bring order and coherence to your review. For example, having established the importance of your rearch area and its current state of development, you may devote veral subctions on related issues as: theoretical models, measuring instruments, cross-cultural and gender differences, etc.
It is also helpful to keep in mind that you are telling a story to an audience. Try to tell it in a stimulating and engaging manner. Do not bore them, becau it may lead to rejection of your worthy proposal. (Remember: Professors and scientists are human beings too.)
Methods:
黄焖鸡的制作方法
The Method ction is very important becau it tells your Rearch Committee how you plan to tackle your rearch problem. It will provide your work plan and describe the activities necessary for the completion of your project.
嘉庆年是哪一年The guiding principle for writing the Method ction is that it should contain sufficient information for the reader to determine whether methodology is sound. Some even argue that a good proposal should contain sufficient details for another qualified rearcher to implement the study.
You need to demonstrate your knowledge of alternative methods and make the ca that your approach is the most appropriate and most valid way to address your rearch question.
Plea note that your rearch question may be best answered by qualitative rearch. However, since most mainstream psychologists are still biad against qualitative rearch, especially the phenomenological variety, you may need to justify your qualitative method.
Furthermore, since there are no well-established and widely accepted canons in qualitative analysis, your method ction needs to be more elaborate than what is required for traditional quantitative rearch. More importantly, the data collection process in qualitative rearch has a far greater impact on the results as compared to quantitative rearch. That is another reason for greater care in describing how you will collect and analyze your data. (How to write the Method ction for qualitative rearch is a topic for another paper.)
For quantitative studies, the method ction typically consists of the following ctions:
英菲尼迪标志1. Design -Is it a questionnaire study or a laboratory experiment? What kind of design do you choo?
2. Subjects or participants - Who will take part in your study ? What kind of sampling procedure do you u?
3. Instruments - What kind of measuring instruments or questionnaires do you u? Why do you choo them? Are they valid and reliable?
4. Procedure - How do you plan to carry out your study? What activities are involved? How long does it take?
甜美的网名 Results:
Obviously you do not have results at the proposal stage. However, you need to have some idea about what kind of data you will be collecting, and what statistical procedures will be ud in order to answer your rearch question or test you hypothesis.
Discussion:
It is important to convince your reader of the potential impact of your propod rearch. You need to communicate a n of enthusiasm and confidence without exaggerating the merits of your proposal. That is why you also need to mention the limitations and weakness of the propod rearch, which may be justified by time and financial constraints as well as by the early developmental stage of your rearch area.
Common Mistakes in Proposal Writing
1. Failure to provide the proper context to frame the rearch question.
2. Failure to delimit the boundary conditions for your rearch.
3. Failure to cite landmark studies.
4. Failure to accurately prent the theoretical and empirical contributions by other rearchers.
5. Failure to stay focud on the rearch question.
6. Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the propod rearch.
7. Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues.
8. Too much rambling — going “all over the map” without a clear n of direction. (The best proposals move forward with ea and grace like a amless river.)
9. Too many citation laps and incorrect references.
10. Too long or too short.
11. Failing to follow the APA style.
12. Slopping writing.
下面是来自其他一些学术从业者关于如何写proposal的意见：精细化
* Writing Rearch Proposals, Drew University On-line resources for writers.
* Guide to Writing a Rearch Proposal, University of Technology, Sydney. (A rearch proposal is required for admission to the program.)
* Beginners Guide to the Rearch Proposal, University of Calgary Centre for Advancement of Health.
* The Art of Writing Proposals: Some Candid Suggestions for Applicants to Social Science Rearch Council Competitions, Adam Przeworski and Frank Salomon.
* The Elements of a Proposal, Frank Pajares, Emory University.
以及，关于如何写学位论文proposal的指导（Disrtation Proposal Writing and some strategies for completing the disrtation）
* Disrtation Proposal Workshop, Institute of International Studies, UC-Berkeley.
* Writing and Prenting your Thesis or Disrtation , LearningAssociates.
* Disrtation/Project Hints: Proposal Writing, Hazel Hall, School of Computing, Napier University, Edinburgh, UK.
* Writing Thes and Disrtations, Claremont Graduate University Writing Center.
