Theses and dissertations

About proposals

The first stage of a thesis or dissertation is the preparation of a proposal, which is essentially a request for permission to go ahead on a proposed topic. Put most simply, proposals really answer only a few questions:

• What do you want to do?
• Why do you want to do it?
• How will you do it?
• How could someone else understand the answers to these three questions?

Unfortunately, many students don't actually know the answers to these questions, even when they think they do.

The next step is to look another set of questions:

1. What are you proposing to do?
2. What is the problem you want to solve or the question you want to answer?
3. Why is it important? Why should others think that it is valuable? You need to show that it is worth doing and answer the questions: “So what?”, “Who cares?” and “Why bother?”
4. How is this a step ahead of present knowledge? Review the literature relevant to your topic to describe the state of present knowledge. What has been tried in the past to address the problem or answer the question?
5. What are your specific objectives? Αrun Sriniναsα advises, This is what you promise to do. However, don’t over-promise. If you think that you can do more but are not sure, don’t put it here. It is better to promise less and do more.
6. How does what you are proposing to do solve the problem or answer the question?

Characteristics of proposals

Whatever the level of the degree, and whatever form proposals take, they all have the following characteristics:

1. All research prospectuses or preliminary proposals are attempts to demonstrate that the student has a worthy research topic and that he/she knows how to carry out the research. The underlying purpose is to get the approval of a gatekeeper, either a committee or a prospective supervisor.
2. Students may continue only when their proposals have been approved.
3. The front page has identifying information: the student's name, the date, the institution, a title, and the name of the program.
4. Proposals identify precisely the topic.
5. Proposals identify what will be done.
6. Proposals demonstrate that it is feasible and well-conceived, and that it makes a worthwhile contribution to its area of study. To this end, the proposal must show that the student has thought about it clearly enough, and has planned how to carry it through.
7. To get anybody to even read it, the typing and language needs to be perfect, and the layout must follow the institution's procedures and practices.

Although they all have the same purpose of gaining approval, the specific rules vary greatly from one institution to another as to length and contents. Other than that, you should check your institutions' rules, ask advisory staff, and ask other students to see their proposals. For example, in some institutions, students use the proposal to recruit supervisors so the cover does not say to whom it is submitted.

After that, you need to present a compelling case for your research. It is not enough to be good and to meet all criteria; it needs to be good enough for the gatekeepers to get entheusiastic about your research.

A proposal is like an agreement with your institution that if you do this, you will get a degree. However, an accepted proposal does not imply that the final thesis or dissertation will be passed. A proposal might be acceptable, but the dissertation might have weaknesses that result in not passing. Moreover, in a few cases, student's projects can face an unforeseeable change of direction, such as a methodology that gives unexpected or spurious results, or further research that forces a radical re-formulation of the research problem.

Simple proposals

The simplest proposals are just long letters or filled-out sections in an application form, or separate documents of only a couple of pages each. They might also be called statements of intent. They typically state the topic or problem, its background, its scope or limitations, the significance of the research or project (expressed in terms of need, relevance, or potential implications), and an indication of methodology. They are often too short to include anything but a very brief literature review. To further define the topic, a basic proposal might also include:

• an hypothesis
• a purpose statement
• a population
• relevant topics for review
• any particular definitions and assumptions.

Full proposals

Full proposals might also include:

• Full statement of the problem and its significance
• Definition of the scope and nature of the research
• A full literature review, with bibliography
• Detailed planning of research strategies and methodologies, including any adaptations
• Statement of possible findings or outcomes
• Adaptation of policy for ethics, layout, or epistemological considerations
• Any necessary letters of permission. (At this stage, the student has done all necessary consultation with stakeholders, as evidenced in the letters.)
• A tentative outline (N.B. Don't commit yourself to a particular outline because it might need to be greatly changed in the course of the research.)
• A section on “Limitations” that contains a definition of the boundaries of the proposed study.

Another version

1. Title. State your topic in not more than ten words
2. Purpose
• Give a purpose statement, preferably of not more than ten words.
• You might also list objectives that support your aim.
3. Give the main research question and any subsidary questions
4. Background
• Explain why this is a good topic. Do a preliminary analysis of existing research on the topic. What is the current research climate in that area of interest and what does the current research literature show? (This is a miniature Literature review.)
5. Why is your proposed research needed? What outcomes do you expect and what benefit might they have?
6. Explain the “how”
• Describe the proposed methodology
• Give a work plan. Say what will you actually do, and show that is it feasible within the timeframe and resources available.
7. Bibliography of references used

Two stage proposals

Programs with very large research components often require two stages. During the first stage, the student writes a short document called a prospectus, which is a proposal of ten to fifteen pages and has a bibliography. It must present some serious, focused reading and thinking. An advisor will work with the student to refine the topic so that it is ready to be submitted, but the final document might also be integral to establishing a supervisory committee.

During the second stage, the student writes a full proposal with much more detail. It is usually submitted well into the research process, and, although it will be revised later on, it is the first version of the introduction, the literature review, and most of the methodology chapter.

Ask your committee if you can submit drafts of introduction, literature review, and methodology as you go instead of waiting until you complete all three. It's easier all round; the committee has less to go through, you might get more focussed advice, and you can write the next item while waiting for feedback. However, even if your committee approves all three chapters separately, they might still want you to submit them together to check that they are consistent as one document.

Logic: Construct validity /Alignment

Construct validity is the idea that the data collection methods must result in a data set that suits the research problem. For example, you will be in trouble if the proposed research method won't give you the data to help answer your research question. (Some instructors also call this alignment.)

The results of good alignment are that the collected data is all useful and no data is unnecessary. It is not as easy as it sounds, and is one of the most common problems for novice researchers.

In fact, all these elements must fit together and line up perfectly:

Researchers can also include other items that must be consistent with other parts of the research process, for example:

• The general problem. This is the wider problem, that is, the problem before it has been narrowed down to a topic specific enough for a single research paper.
• The conceptual framework.
• The ethical approval.
• The literature review.
• The choice and definition of population.
• The sampling method.
• The raw data report.
• Sub-hypotheses. If you use sub-hypotheses, they need to directly support your central hypothesis.
• Expected benefit. Some institutions require that research plans support social change or improvement in practices, and these are normally discipline-specific.

A simple, neat, consistent progression appears quite elegant and gives supervisors little opportunity to complain. For example:

• The problem statement and the literature review must be consistent. The literature review needs to cover the literature on the topic without going off-track to irrelevant information.
• The problem statement and the conceptual framework must be consistent.
• The methodology and data collection tools must fit the problem statement. The system for collecting data must result in data that will be useful in solving the research problem.
• The data collection tools and the conceptual framework must be consistent. (If you collect data based on a different theory, it will not be valid data.)
• The data collection tools must fit the population.
• The data must be useful to reach conclusions about the research question. (You need to get enough of the right kind of data.)

It is easy to express examples differently:

• The research question must match the research problem. That is, “To research for something, the way to start is to look for a problem to solve. Then ask it as a question.”
• The methodology must match the question. That is, “The method you use to get data must suit the question you’re trying to answer.” For example:
• Getting people’s personal opinions about an event will probably not tell you what actually happened.
• Getting people’s views on what they would like to buy might be quite different from what they actually decide to buy.
• The data must be analysed to reach a conclusion. For example, it would be a mistake to collect lots of data, and then just state your personal opinion. Your conclusions must be based on your data.

Some of these elements are easy to check. The statements of the specific research problem and the research question, the purpose statement, and the proposed title are all brief, and mostly in one sentence. They should closely resemble each other and use the same or similar language. It makes the statement simple, elegant, and easy to write.

However, if something doesn’t quite fit, your supervisor will probably suspect it even if he/she can’t put a finger on exactly what is wrong. It will be your job to find out what is wrong and make corrections.

Alignment problems

Assumptions and circular logic can cause problems:

1. The researcher looks for something and finds it. However, it was only there because the researcher was looking for it, and the researcher could have looked for and found something else. It's a case of assumptions in, same assumptions out. (Known in computing as Garbage in, garbage out.)
2. Some researchers start with an assumption that something is true, go through their research methodology, and then conclude that the assumption was correct. This is circular logic; the conclusion only appears to be true because the researcher assumed it in the first place. It is a mistake because the assumption was not actually tested as a hypothesis.
3. If the data do not suit your unproven assumptions, it is erroneous to tweek your assumptions to fit them and then conclude that your assumptions are now correct. (And notice how assumptions are magically transformed into conclusions.)

Ask other kinds of questions, for example:

• Can the result be derived by used the proposed method?
• Are you depending on an analogous measure? If so, is the analogy actually proven, or are you only assuming that it is proven?
• Are the conclusions justified by the results? (It is easy to introduce unjustified assumptions.)
• Is there another possible explanation that you haven't considered? Could there be other answers that the researcher wasn't seeking? Are assumptions or paradigms limiting your vision?

Check for other kinds of problems. For example:

• A definition or assumption is changed partway through the research, giving an incorrect result.
• The literature review should avoid irrelevant digressions.
• The suggestions for further research should be derived from the research.
• It is unethical to collect extra data beyond the needs of the research and outside the ethical approval, even though it might be a tempting and convenient opportunity.
• It is unethical to cherry-pick the data you like and ignore other data. For example, it is tempting to fail to report the full set of statistical data and ignore data that is not statistically relevant.

The interview or short proposal

The interview

In some programs, students must pass an interview with a supervisor in order to progress. The content is the same as a short proposal below. In fact, you might still be asked to write a short proposal.

The short proposal

The short proposal in some institutions is called a prospectus. The reasons for starting with a short proposal are:

1. An acceptable short proposal shows that you have planned well and that your research is ready to progress to the next stage.
2. The institution uses it to evaluate whether or not it has personnel who can supervise it.
3. You might be asked to enclose it in your application to the ethics committee.
4. It saves you from writing a large document on a topic before it has been approved. This gives you a better chance of successful completion.

A short proposal usually has a limit of 10 pages or 3000 words. The typing and layout need to be perfect and should follow the style guide. Even so, expect to be asked rewrite it multiple times to get it just right. Most students have difficulty refining their topic and it is much better to make adjustments at this stage than later.

This outline is fairly common:

1. A working title
2. Your name, the degree or unit for which is submitted, and the date
3. A research question
4. A statement of the problem
5. Background: How the problem came about
6. A purpose statement: What you expect to achieve in your research
7. Significance
1. Why is this topic important enough to be a full dissertation?
2. What particular benefits do you expect from it?
8. The body of theory with which you will interact
9. Background: How the problem came about
10. A short literature review:
1. Expect to include only 10 or 20 of the most relevant sources.
2. What is the current state of research related to your topic?
3. Where is the gap?
11. Method(s):
1. Population and sample
2. How you will collect data
3. How you will analyze data
4. Your reasons for choosing that method
5. What kinds of findings you anticipate
12. Ethical strategy and preliminary risk analysis (if you plan to have human subjects)
13. Resources required
14. Bibliography

The pitch

A pitch once meant a sales pitch, that is, a short speech that a salesperson used for selling, and you can be expected to give a pitch on your research topic to an audience. The strict limit of three minutes will force you to be very clear and focussed on what you want to do. You will have to omit any unnecessary detail and use plain language. Try this outline:

1. What is the problem and why is it important?
2. What do you plan to do?
3. What results do you expect?

Then answer any questions from the audience.

💡 Tips

• Practice first
• Be very clear
• Be entheusiastic
• Do not preach
• Use Powerpoint or some other kind of visual aid.