Qualitative Research Proposal Structure is given below:
1 Introduction:
Sections
1) Background to the Problem
2) Problem Statement
3) Rationale for the Study
4) Significance of the Study
5) Objectives of the Study
6) Theoretical framework
Layout of the Research
2 Literature Review:
Literature review needs to demonstrate that you have reviewed broadly on the topic and its wider context.
Additional notes:
1) LR should highlight trends in the literature relating to your research topic (research areas, methodology, theoretical approaches and findings).
2) LR should identify gaps in the literature (a critique) and shows the contribution your research will make to the subject area/discipline in general.
3) LR should also outline some of the limitations.
4) You need to draw on your literature review to justify your own research.
5 Draw on at least ten resources.
5)
4 Methodology:
Sections:
1) Study design
2) Sampling design
3) Data collection procedure
4) Data analysis methods
5) Ethics
Additional notes:
• Explain how you will conduct your research (as much detail as possible) with possible limitation.
• Describe the kind of research you will conduct to answer your research question
• Data collection methods (interviews, observations, etc.)
• Discuss the tool/s that you will use
6 Timeline, Budget, Limitations & Future Work:
Sections:
1) Timeline
2) Budget
3) Limitation
4) Future Work
7 Reference List:
All cited sources must be properly referenced in APA style.
5) Additional notes: Make a list of texts you have consulted. This should be a list of 10 potential scholarly and industry-specific/government sources.
Marking Rubric
Total Mark Title Page: 2
Introduction:
1) Background to the Problem 2 1 Mark if Briefly described 2 Mark if Well thought through and contains Good critical analysis
2) Problem Statement 2 1 Mark if Briefly described 2 Mark if Well thought through and contains Good critical analysis
3) Rationale for the Study 2 1 Mark if Briefly described 2 Mark if Well thought through and contains Good critical analysis
4) Significance of the Study 2 1 Mark if Briefly described 2 Mark if Well thought through and contains Good critical analysis
5) Objectives of the Study 2 1 Mark if Briefly described 2 Mark if Well thought through and contains Good critical analysis
6) Theoretical framework 5 1-2 Marks if illustrations and descriptions of theoretical and conceptual frameworks are not appropriate with the research questions and research design. Vague and confusing descriptions of frameworks in a few paragraphs without supporting and relevant literature. 2-3 Marks if theoretical and conceptual frameworks are illustrated and briefly described in line with the research questions and research design. Brief descriptions of frameworks in a few paragraphs with relevant literature are presented. 4-5 Marks if theoretical and conceptual frameworks are appropriately illustrated and described in line with the research questions and research design. Clearly describes frameworks in a couple of paragraphs with relevant literature.
7) Layout of the Research 2 1 Mark if Briefly described 2 Mark if Well thought through and contains Good critical analysis
Literature Review:
1) Brief LR that highlight trends in the literature relating to your research topic 10 1-3 Marks if briefly described. Simplistic critical analysis and argument. The Assessment is weak in terms of the conceptual argument. 4-7 Marks if developing critical analysis. Somewhat simple coverage and understanding of both sides of the debate. 8-10 marks if well thought through assignment, described in detail. The Assessment has a strong argument that covers the relevant issues.
2) Identify gaps in the literature and shows the contribution the research to the subject area/discipline in general. 10 1-3 Marks if briefly described. Simplistic critical analysis and argument. The Assessment is weak in terms of the conceptual argument. 4-7 Marks if developing critical analysis. Somewhat simple coverage and understanding of both sides of the debate. 8-10 marks if well thought through assignment, described in detail. The Assessment has a strong argument that covers the relevant issues.
3) You need to draw on your literature review to justify your own research. 10 1-3 Marks if briefly described. Simplistic critical analysis and argument. The Assessment is weak in terms of the conceptual argument. 4-7 Marks if developing critical analysis. Somewhat simple coverage and understanding of both sides of the debate. 8-10 marks if well thought through assignment, described in detail. The Assessment has a strong argument that covers the relevant issues.
4) Research Question 8 1 -2 Mark if question is inadequate or insufficiently connected to the topic. Student chooses a report topic rather than a research question, a yes/no question or a question that can be easily answered with a web search. 4-7 Mark if Research question is related to the topic but is too broad or too narrow. Topic cannot be realistically researched with available resources. Question may be basic enough to be easily answered with general background resources instead of requiring deeper investigation.
5-6 if Research question is fairly focused, and is a good fit for available resources. Research question shows some understanding of issues and concepts related to the subject. Displays some aspects of original thought or investigation. 7-8 Marks if Research question is well developed with a scope appropriate to available resources and the terms of the assignment. Question is grounded in background information, but displays a high level of independent thought and inquiry.
Methodology:
1) Study design 10 1-3 Marks if The proposed research design is appropriate to answer the research questions. The purpose, questions, and design are mutually supportive and coherent. 4 – 6 Marks if The proposed research design has been identified and described in sufficient and detailed terms. The proposed research The proposed research design is relevant to address the research
questions. 7 -10 marks if The proposed research design is confusing or inaccurate to answer the research questions and sampling strategy.
2) Sampling design 6 1-2 Marks if the description of the context where the sample was situated and sampling strategy was vague and lacked of relevance to the purpose of the study. 3-4 Marks if the sample of the study was identified appropriately to the context of the study. Description of the sampling procedure was sufficient with the research design, but lack of justification. 5 – 6 Marks if the description of the sample is based on the context of the study. The sampling procedure was appropriate with the research design. Justification is provided.
3) Data collection procedures 6 1-2 Marks if the relevant descriptions of research protocol and ethics were not included. Descriptions to assure dependability, confirmability and credibility of data through data collection procedures would be achieved were insufficient. 3-4 Marks if Proposed data collection procedures for generating data were identified and described in a systematic way. Descriptions of procedures involved in data collection include protocol and ethical considerations are sufficient. Evidence of dependability, confirmability and credibility of data through data collection procedures was insufficient. Proposed data collection procedures were confusing, incomplete, or lacked relevance to purpose (issues that understudy), research questions, or sampling strategy. 5 – 6 Marks if Proposed data collection procedures were thorough, manageable, coherent, and powerful for generating rich and in-depth data. Descriptions of procedures involved in data collection include protocol and ethical considerations are clear and structured. Reasonable evidence of dependability, confirmability and credibility of data through data collection procedures was presented.
4) Data analysis methods 6 1-2 Marks if Proposed analytical method was confusing, incomplete or lacked relevance to the research questions, data, or research design. 3-4 Marks if Proposed data analysis procedures and its specific features were appropriately described with little relevance to the research questions and research design. 5 – 6 marks if Proposed data analysis procedures and its specific features were well-described and appropriate with given research questions and research design.
5) Ethics 2 1 Mark if Briefly described 2 Mark if Well thought through and contains critical thinking
Timeline, Budget, Limitations & Future Work:
1) Timeline 2 1 Mark not well thought through 2 marks if Feasible and appropriate
2) Budget 2 1 Mark not well thought through 2 marks if Feasible and appropriate
3) Limitation 2 1 Mark not well thought through 2 marks if Feasible and appropriate
4) Future Work 2 1 Mark not well thought through 2 marks if Feasible and appropriate
APA Referencing 5 1 mark if Limited APA style in-text citations used throughout the document. 2-3 Marks if Some APA style in-text citations used in the document. Reference list maybe missing some information 4 – 5 Marks if APA style in-text citations used throughout document and is correctly listed at the end
Sample Solution
