Posted: April 15th, 2015

Methods of Enquiry

Methods of Enquiry

(UMCDC9-30-2)

Individual Assessed Sessional Coursework 2014/15

Research Proposal

 

Submission details

Hand-in deadline:                              2pm Tuesday April 28^th 2014

Word limit:                                          4000 words maximum (excluding references).

Format:                                               Electronic submission via Blackboard in MS Word format

Spacing:                                               1.5

Contribution to module grade:           50%

 

Objectives/ Learning Outcomes

 

The coursework assessment is designed to enable you to partially demonstrate the learning outcomes required for the successful completion of the module, with particular reference to the business/market/academic research skills development outcomes for this component as detailed in the module specification and module handbook:

• Evaluating secondary data sources such as research reports and academic literature to frame research question
• Demonstrating understanding of development, conduct, analysis and interpretation of business, market and academic research to propose a research plan
• Working creatively with quantitative and qualitative (and potentially alternative research methods)
• Understanding of ethical issues in business, market and academic research that apply to your proposal
• Producing a succinct, well-argued and well-presented research proposal.

 

The Research Proposal

 

This Research Proposal is based on topics you have covered over your degree programme so far, giving you a choice of topics to focus upon (see separate document): you must choose just one to develop.

 

You are asked to play the part of a business or government researcher, submitting a proposal document to the client for their approval of your plan to research the question you choose. In order to create an appropriate proposal, you are required to analyse the existing academic and practitioner literature in the area, identify an aim and objectives, develop a strategy for sampling, collecting, analysing and interpreting data, and discuss the ethical and other limitations of your research.

 

Although practically-focused, this assessment requires an academic slant uniting academic and practitioner knowledge. You are expected to integrate academic concepts and theories from your other modules, and your own reading, to underpin your work and support the judgements you are making. In this regard it is essential that you properly reference all books, academic articles, websites and other reference sources used in your report.

 

No primary data collection is required. This is a maximum 4000 word proposal, to be submitted electronically by 2pm on April 28^th, 2015.

 

 

Your Research Proposal is expected to cover the following:

• Executive Summary (c.100 words)
• Introduction briefly covering justification for research (c.200 words)
• Background – a short literature review identifying clear gap in theoretical and practical knowledge (c.900 words)
• Aim and objectives (c.75 words)
• Research methods covering both quantitative and qualitative approaches in a mixed methods study. These approaches should be covered separately (in whichever order you prefer and which makes sense for your study) and in each of the two sections should cover:
  • Clear sampling plan for each stage, including sampling frame, sample size, intended recruitment methods and any requirements for incentives (c.200 words)
  • Outline of data collection methods for each approach, and commentary on how any surveys or moderators guides will be developed. This should include consideration of issues such as socially desirable responding, issues with literacy etc. Details about conducting the research (e.g. environment, recording data, any materials required) should be covered (c.800 words)
  • Plans for data presentation, coding, analysis and interpretation suitable for each research approach (c.300 words).
• Consideration of ethics issues arising from the research and how you would address these (c.300 words)
• Description of any limitations of the research (c.150 words)
• Proposed time frame for the research, ideally using Gantt chart (c.150 words)
• Brief closing summary

 

More detail is provided below about content for each section and marking criteria.

(N.B.: word counts are guidelines only)

 

 

Formatting

The report should

• Be in a Microsoft Word format to allow feedback, with 1.5 line spacing
• Be submitted online via Blackboard
• Use headings and subheadings to provide clear structure
• Use diagrams, charts or images where they help support your argument
• Be spellchecked and grammatically correct
• Be referenced in the UWE Harvard style (see Library website for details)
• For the avoidance of doubt, anything in the main body of the report beyond this word limit of 4000 words will not be read or marked. The word count includes everything in the main body of the text listed here: abstract, text, headings, tables, citations, quotes, lists, acronyms and numbers expressed as digits or in words. It does NOT include the contents page or the references.

 

 

 

 

Criteria for marking

 

Overall we are looking for cohesive and logical research methods that build upon each other to achieve your research aim and objectives. The marking criteria have been split between the key sections of the assignment, and reflect the content and quality of each section and the proposal as a whole. See the marking grid below for how this is applied at each grade level, and this section details expected content.

 

Background and literature review: 20%

• Effective summary of, and introduction to, the research issue
• Clear signposting of structure and content of proposal
• Review of key academic literature (8-10 papers) on the research topic, identifying key theoretical constructs and leading to justified aims and objectives

 

Aims and objectives: 10%

• Clearly defined overall research aim
• Objectives suitable for each research approach
• All answering research brief while using theory from literature review

 

Rigorous and appropriate methods: 30%

• Clearly defined sampling, data collection and data analysis methods
• For both quantitative and qualitative approaches: these can be sequential or parallel, and in whichever order is most suitable to address the research aim
• Described simply using terminology from module
• Detailing any special considerations such as addressing socially desirable responding (if appropriate), use of incentives, or access to difficult to reach groups
• Detailing measures taken to avoid errors or bias to ensure robust and valid findings

 

Meaningful coherence: 20%

• Sections of the proposal should make sense and ‘hang together’
  • Aims and objectives should be clearly linked to practitioner and academic literature
  • Sampling and data collection methods should support the aim and objectives
  • Data analysis and presentation methods should be suitable for the type of data collected and aims and objectives
  • Interpretation methods should be suitable for the type of analysis used
• Plans for integrating the quantitative and qualitative methods should be briefly outlined

 

Ethics & Limitations: 10%

• Ethical considerations (including researcher safety if applicable) should be outlined and addressed
• Limitations of the study should be outlined and addressed

 

Overall presentation: 10%

• Develop an effective structure for addressing all the tasks
• Maintain a succinctand compelling style throughout
• Clear links between sections to build arguments consistently
• Provide accurate references for all researched or quoted material (including background information on organisations)
• Use grammatically correct English without spelling errors

 

Methods of Enquiry – Research Proposal Marking Grid

	Background and literature review 20%	Aims and objectives 10%	Rigorous and appropriate methods 30%	Meaningful coherence 20%	Ethics & Limitations 10%	Presentation 10%
A   70% +	Engaging review of relevant academic literature and practitioner sources. Well structured argument justifying aim and methods, using a highly cited and more recent papers to identify appropriate theoretical constructs. Good use of diagrams and tables to illustrate points. 14-20 marks	Highly specific aim and objectives clearly derived from literature review and addressing brief.           7-10 marks	The proposed study uses sufficient, robust and appropriate sampling methods, data collection methods and data analysis procedures to provide valid findings for the stated aim and objectives. Using both quantitative and qualitative approaches, which are clearly integrated. Clear measures are taken to avoid errors or bias. 21-30 marks	Meaningful connection of academic and practitioner literature to aims and objectives, using appropriate sampling, data collection and analysis methods. Concludes with strong ideas for interpretation, presentation and combination of quantitative and qualitative findings. Strong structure and well reasoned arguments throughout. 14-20 marks	Strong attempt to consider ethical implications of all aspects of the proposed study, and any limitations of the study, with appropriate ideas to address these and minimise potential harm to all participants. Ethics form used extensively.   7-10 marks	Presentation skills are immaculate, using appropriate referencing, citing sources correctly and with excellent spelling and grammar. Within word limit.       7-10 marks
B   60-69%	Good review of the findings of the body of literature. Well interpreted and documented, well organised, identifying theoretical constructs and contributing clearly to research aim and methods.   12-13 marks	Strong aim and objectives clearly derived from literature review and addressing brief.   6 marks	Proposed study uses good sampling, data collection and data analysis methods but may have minor aspects that threaten validity of findings. Good description of both quantitative and qualitative approaches, which are clearly integrated. 18-20 marks	Well structured proposal which shows good connections between sections but may lack coherence in places. Concludes with suitable ideas for interpretation, presentation and combination of quantitative and qualitative findings. Good structure. 12-13 marks	Good attempt to consider ethical implications of aspects of proposed study, and any limitations of the study, with good ideas to address these and minimise potential harm. Ethics form included. 6 marks	Presentation skills and referencing which are generally competent, but with some minor errors. Within word limit. 6 marks
C   50-59%	Brings out key issues from the literature on the topic, but will miss more subtle points and recent developments. Identifies key theories. Less clear links to final research aim. 10-11 marks	Good aim and objectives with links to literature review and addressing brief.     5 marks	Proposed study uses robust sampling, quantitative and qualitative methods and analysis, but lacks detail and some aspects threaten validity of findings.     15-17 marks	Proposal may lack clear structure in areas and the justification for choice of objectives or methods in some sections may be unclear. Adequately combines quantitative and qualitative findings.   10-11 marks	Some attempt to consider the ethical implications of the proposed study, and any limitations of the study, with basic ideas to address these. Ethics form included.   5 marks	Presentation and referencing are competent, some errors or omissions. Occasionally fail to give sources. Within word limit.   5 marks
D   40-49%	Review focuses on only a few authors so is descriptive and superficial. Recent developments and some key areas missing.   8-10 marks	Broad aim and objectives that are weakly linked to literature review and brief.   4 marks	Proposed study uses basic methods but lacks detail. Aspects seriously threaten validity of findings.       12-14 marks	Basic structure with basic research methods but lacks clear justification for these. Fails to adequately combine quantitative and qualitative findings.   8-10 marks	Little attempt to address ethical implications or limitations of the study. Lacking appropriate ideas to remedy these. Ethics form used basically. 4 marks	Poor or careless presentation, poor referencing. Minor infringement of word limit. 4 marks
E   0-39%	Basic review, purely descriptive and lacking structured argument for the research aim or methods.   0-7 marks	Fails to provide clear aim and objectives, or link these to literature review or brief. 0-3 marks	Proposed study lacks clear methods and any detail about measures to ensure validity of findings.     0-11 marks	Proposal lacks clear structure and coherence and fails to justify research objectives, sampling and data collection methods.   0-7 marks	No attempt to address ethics or limitations, missing key issues that undermine study. NO ethics form.   0-3 marks	Consistently fail to give sources, poor spelling, grammar, poor presentation, or over word limit. 0-3 marks

 

 

A final word on assessment offences…