Choosing a Framework(s)
Why do you need a theoretical and/or conceptual framework for your study? How do these two frameworks differ from each other? .
With these thoughts in mind:
Post your Approach Statement in the form of a bulleted list of the steps you will take to select an appropriate theoretical or conceptual framework for your study. Your Approach Statement should also address how to determine which is appropriate: a conceptual or theoretical framework (some studies contain one framework and others both), as well as how you will identify what the framework is. In support of addressing this question, you may consult with your future dissertation Mentor as to the best approach for your study.
Note: Your response should identify the type(s) of framework you will employ (conceptual v. theoretical). The actual elements of the framework do not need to be presented at this time but are expected to be included in the final Prospectus draft,Walden University Dissertation Prospectus What’s New in 2015 The 2015 edition of the Dissertation Prospectus guide contains additional material to support prospectus development. What has not changed are the basic expectations for the content of the prospectus and how it will be evaluated and approved. Specific new items in this guide include x discussion of the prospectus process in My Doctoral Research (MyDR); x added clarity in the outline annotations; x enhanced formatting for better presentation, including a separate Purpose section; x updated sample prospectus to include more recent research; x a new data-driven section on tips for writing a quality prospectus; x and the sample prospectus as captured in the historic alignment tool (HAT), which is introduced in Residency 3. For internal use only Walden University Academic Offices 155 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 100 Minneapolis, MN 55401 1-800-WALDENU (1-800-925-3368) Walden University is accredited by The Higher Learning Commission and a member of the North Central Association, www.ncahlc.org; 1-312-263-0456. © 2015 Walden University, LLC Dissertation Prospectus Page ii Contents What’s New in 2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………….. ii The Prospectus……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1 Completing the Prospectus……………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 My Doctoral Research (MyDR) …………………………………………………………………………………….. 2 An Annotated Outline ……………………………………………………………………………………………………… 3 Sample Prospectus………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 6 Quality Indicators………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 16 Ten Tips for Writing a Quality Prospectus……………………………………………………………………….. 18 Sample Prospectus in the Historic Alignment Tool (HAT)…………………………………………………. 20 Dissertation Prospectus Page iii The Prospectus The Dissertation Prospectus is a brief document that provides preliminary information about your dissertation research and is used in two ways: x It serves as an agreed-upon plan for developing the proposal that is evaluated to ensure a doctoral-level project. x It serves as a step to finalize the structure of your dissertation supervisory committee, who will work with you on completing the dissertation. Completing the Prospectus The Dissertation Prospectus consists of several short sections, which are detailed in the annotated outline. Your goal for the prospectus is to create a plan for developing your dissertation proposal. Therefore, you need to have more information for the prospectus than for your earlier documents, such as the Dissertation Premise, but you do not need to know all the specific details of the study that you will ultimately conduct. For example, you may identify intelligence as a covariate in a quantitative study, but at this point, you do not yet need to identify the instrument that you plan to use to measure the covariate. Also, because every research project is unique, and because this outline is general, you may be asked to include additional information in your prospectus to help assure your supervisory committee that you are headed in the right direction. For example, feasibility will be one criterion for evaluating your prospectus, and if you are considering a very unique sample group, your committee may ask that you explore that aspect in more detail before moving forward. The Dissertation Prospectus should follow the guidelines in the sixth edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association and be saved as either a .doc, .docx, or .rtf file. As you work on the document, you may also want to review the Litmus Test for a DoctoralLevel Research Problem, which is available on the Research Resources page of the Center for Research Quality site, your historic alignment tool (HAT) from your academic residency experience, as well as the nine quality indicators included in this guide. Depending on your academic program, you will be in a course of some type that supports prospectus development and will work with your chair and second member to complete the document. See your specific program of study for more information on the type of course and the timing of it. Keep in mind that prospectus development is an iterative process and that you will receive feedback on working drafts, as will happen with the proposal and dissertation. When your supervisory committee members agree that your prospectus meets all the quality indicators discussed herein, they will endorse it for review by your academic program director or designee. After final approval of the prospectus and your supervisory committee is given by the program director or designee, you will start working on your proposal. This entire approval process will occur in My Doctoral Research (MyDR). Dissertation Prospectus Page 1 My Doctoral Research (MyDR) If you have not done so already, you should familiarize yourself with the MyDR system and other resources on the Center for Research Quality website. The MyDR system was designed to assist you and your committee in navigating your doctoral research journey, from the very beginning through the final approval. The various landing pages in MyDR will track your progress and will serve as a central location for resources to support that progress. The TaskStream element of the MyDR system is used to establish a process flow tool in which you exchange and store faculty evaluations and feedback of your work as you progress along that journey. You will be entered into the MyDR system when both your chair and second member nominees are approved by the academic program. At that point, you will be able to access MyDR from the homepage of your dissertation completion course in Blackboard. The first document that you will submit for approval in MyDR will be your prospectus. Dissertation Prospectus Page 2 An Annotated Outline The Prospectus document includes a title page (page 1) followed by pages containing the required elements in the prospectus. Please use the Prospectus template that is available on the Writing Center website. Title Page The recommended title length is 12 words or fewer to include the topic, the variables and relationship between them, and the most critical keywords. Double-space the title if over one line of type and center it under the word “Prospectus.” Please note that your dissertation title will likely change as the project evolves. Include your name, your program of study (and specialization, if applicable), and Banner ID number—double-spaced and centered under the title. Title Start with “Prospectus” and a colon, and then include the title as it appears on the title page. Double-space if over one line of type and center it at the top of the page. Problem Statement Provide a one- to two-paragraph statement that is the result of a review of research findings and current practice and that contains the following information: 1. A logical argument for the need to address an identified gap in the research literature that has current relevance to the discipline and area of practice. Keep in mind that a gap in the research is not, in and of itself, a reason to conduct research. Make sure to clarify the problem that led you to the gap. 2. Preliminary evidence that provides justification that this problem is meaningful to the discipline or professional field. Provide three to five key citations that support the relevance and currency of the problem. These references need not all be from peerreviewed journals but should be from reputable sources, such as national agency databases or scholarly books, and should ideally be from the past 5 years. Purpose Present a concise, one-paragraph statement on the overall purpose or intention of the study, which serves as the connection between the problem being addressed and the focus of the study. • In quantitative studies, state what needs be studied by describing two or more factors (variables) and a conjectured relationship among them related to the identified gap or problem. • In qualitative studies, describe the need for increased understanding about the issue to be studied, based on the identified gap or problem. • In mixed-methods studies, with both quantitative and qualitative aspects, clarify how the two approaches will be used together to inform the study. Dissertation Prospectus Page 3 • For other approaches, clarify why an alternative approach is needed and useful for this project. Significance Provide one or two paragraphs, informed by the topic in the problem statement, that describe the following: 1. How this study will contribute to filling the gap identified in the problem statement: What original contribution will this study make? 2. How this research will support professional practice or allow practical application: Answer the So what? question. 3. How the claim aligns with the problem statement to reflect the potential relevance of this study to society: How might the potential findings lead to positive social change? Background Provide a representative list of scholarship and findings that support and clarify the main assertions in the problem statement, highlighting their relationship to the topic, for example, “this variable was studied with a similar sample by Smith (2013) and Johnson (2014)” or “Jones’s (2012) examination of industry leaders showed similar trends in the same key segments.” Some of these resources may have already been mentioned in the first sections of the prospectus and can be included here, also. Framework In one paragraph, describe the theoretical/conceptual framework in the scholarly literature that will ground the study. Base this description on the problem, purpose, and background of your study. This theoretical or conceptual framework informs, and is informed by, the research question(s) and helps to identify research design decisions, such as the method of inquiry and data collection and analysis. Research Question(s) List the question or a series of related questions that are informed by the study purpose, which will lead to the development of what needs to be done in this study and how it will be accomplished. A research question informs the research design by providing a foundation for • generation of hypotheses in quantitative studies, • questions necessary to build the design structure for qualitative studies, and a • process by which different methods will work together in mixed-methods studies. Dissertation Prospectus Page 4 Nature of the Study Using one of the following terms as a subheading; provide a concise paragraph that discusses the approach that will be used to address the research question(s) and how this approach aligns with the problem statement. The subheadings and examples of study design are as follows: • Quantitative—for experimental, quasiexperimental, or nonexperimental designs; treatment-control; repeated measures; causal-comparative; single-subject; predictive studies; or other quantitative approaches • Qualitative—for ethnography, case study, grounded theory, narrative inquiry, phenomenological research, policy analysis, or other qualitative traditions • Mixed methods, primarily quantitative—for sequential, concurrent, or transformative studies, with the main focus on quantitative methods • Mixed methods, primarily qualitative—for sequential, concurrent, or transformative studies, with the main focus on qualitative methods • Other—for another design, to be specified with a justification provided for its use. Possible Types and Sources of Data Provide a list of possible types and sources of data that could be used to address the proposed research question(s), such as test scores from college students, employee surveys, observations of a phenomenon, interviews with practitioners, historical documents from state records, deidentified medical records, or information from a federal database. Sources of information that support and clarify the problem belong in the Background section. If you are thinking about collecting data on a sensitive topic or from a vulnerable population, an early consultation with the IRB (IRB@waldenu.edu) during your prospectus writing process is recommended to gain ethics guidance that you can incorporate into your subsequent proposal drafts and research planning. Find more information on the IRB Guides and FAQs page. Possible Analytical Strategies (Optional) Offer some possible ways to organize and analyze the results obtained by the research strategies detailed previously. A few examples of possible analytical strategies include multiple regression, content analysis, and meta-analysis. Keep in mind that data analysis approaches are generally decided after the research question and data collection approach are settled, so your strategy here may evolve and change as you develop your proposal. Other Information (Optional) Include any other relevant information, such as challenges or barriers that may need to be addressed when conducting this study. References On a new page, list your references formatted in the correct style (sixth edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, modeled at the end of this guide) for all citations within the Dissertation Prospectus. Dissertation Prospectus Page 5 Sample Prospectus Dissertation Prospectus Page 6 1 Prospectus How Online Doctoral Students Develop a Dissertation Problem Statement Alpha B. Gamma General Studies program – General specialization A00000000 2 Prospectus: How Online Doctoral Students Develop a Dissertation Problem Statement Problem Statement Conducting a supervised independent research project is a unique feature of completing a doctoral degree (Lovitts, 2008; Luse, Mennecke, & Townsend, 2012). Contrary to the commonly held belief of a 50% all-but-dissertation (ABD) rate, only approximately 20% of doctoral students are unable to complete the dissertation after finishing their coursework (Lovitts, 2008; Wendler et al., 2010). The challenge of the dissertation is not a new phenomenon in higher education, but what is new is the growing number of students who complete their academic programs online (Allen & Seaman, 2007; Kumar, Johnson, & Hardemon, 2013). Although many students are ultimately successful in defining the central argument for a doctoral capstone, how this process occurs in a distributed environment has not been well researched. Highlighted in the book on doctoral education by Walker, Golde, Jones, ConklinBueschel, and Hutchings (2009) is the need to develop more “pedagogies of research” (p. 151) to support teaching graduate students to be scholars. Although a modest body of scholarship exists on research training in traditional programs, emerging research suggests that the online environment offers some unique challenges and opportunities for doctoral students (Baltes, Hoffman-Kipp, Lynn, & Weltzer-Ward, 2010; Kumar et al., 2013; Lim, Dannels, & Watkins, 2008). Of the many aspects of a research project, development of the problem statement is arguably a key step because it provides the rationale for the entire dissertation (Alvesson & Sandberg, 2013; Luse et al., 2012). 3 Purpose The purpose of this study is to improve the understanding of the process by which doctoral students in online programs arrive at a viable problem statement for their dissertations. To address this gap, the approach will use the mixed-methods paradigm and will be primarily qualitative. Assessments of the quality of problem statements will be used in conjunction with interviews to develop an understanding of students’ strategies for formulating problem statements. Significance This research will fill a gap in understanding by focusing specifically on development of problem statements by students in online doctoral programs. This project is unique because it addresses an underresearched area of higher education (Gardner & Barnes, 2014) among a group of learners that has expanded over the past decade (Bell, 2011). The results of this study will provide much-needed insights into the processes by which increasing numbers of new scholars work through the beginning phase of their research. Insights from this study should aid doctoral committees and academic programs in helping students to succeed in their final projects, thus supporting eventual degree attainment. Education has long been a force for social change by addressing inequities in society. Because a broad range of students attends online institutions, supporting their successful attainment of a terminal degree allows for increased diversity in the types of individuals in key academic and scholarly leadership positions. Background Selected articles relating to doctoral education and the process of learning to be a researcher are described here: 4 1. Baltes et al. (2010) and Bieschke (2006) provided information on research selfefficacy, which has been shown as a key predictor of the future research of doctoral students. 2. Gelso (2006), Holmes (2009), Hilliard (2013), and Kim and Karau (2009) provided different views of strategies to support the development of scholar practitioners during the capstone experience. 3. Ivankova and Stick (2006) and Kumar et al. (2013) offered models that align well with the possible methodologies used in this study and that involved online students. 4. Research by Lim et al. (2008) addressed the role of research courses in an online program. 5. Lovitts (2008), Gardner and Barnes (2014), and Werner and Rogers (2013) gave different views of the transition from student to researcher. 6. Articles focusing on the student experience of learning to conduct research include Ismail, Majid, and Ismail (2013); Spaulding and Rockinson-Szapkiw (2012); and Stubb, Pyhältö, and Lonka (2014). Framework The theoretical base for this study will be Perry’s (1970) theory of epistemological development. Because this theory addresses ways of knowing in adults, Perry’s theoretical work has been used extensively in all aspects of higher education, albeit more frequently with undergraduates than with doctoral students. The approach provides details on cognitive-structural changes that emerge as a result of development and learning. Further, subsequent research and application of Perry’s theory offer guidance on 5 ways to facilitate academic development, thus allowing for insight into the pedagogical challenge of the dissertation (Gardner, 2009). Research Questions 1. RQ1–Qualitative: For students with a high-quality problem statement at the dissertation stage, what themes emerge in their reports of the process that they used to develop it? 2. RQ2–Quantitative: Based on objective ratings by doctoral faculty, are significant differences evident in the overall quality of problem statements as students progress through the dissertation process? Nature of the Study The nature of this study will be mixed-method with a qualitative focus. Qualitative research is consistent with understanding how students approach the work of creating a successful dissertation problem statement, which is the primary focus of this dissertation. Keeping the focus on how students make sense of their dissertation research should be consistent with Perry’s (1970) epistemological expectations at this point in their development (Gardner, 2009). To elucidate how a viable research problem emerges, objective ratings of student work products will be examined across time. This quantitative analysis should help pinpoint the amount of growth from the beginning to end of the project. Possible Types and Sources of Data 1. Problem statements written at four key points in a doctoral student’s career: the premise, the prospectus, the proposal, and the dissertation writing stage. 2. Ratings of problem statements by an expert panel of doctoral faculty. 6 3. Interviews with a representative group of doctoral graduates who have successfully defended their dissertations and whose work was highly ranked by faculty. 4. A measure of epistemological development, consistent with Perry’s (1970) theory, as a possible covariate. 5. Interviews or surveys of doctoral faculty who have helped students to succeed, as a possible source for triangulation. 7 References Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2007). Online nation: Five years of growth in online learning. Needham, MA: Sloan-C. Alvesson, M., & Sandberg, J. (2013) Constructing research questions: Doing interesting research. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications. Baltes, B., Hoffman-Kipp, P., Lynn, L., & Weltzer-Ward, L. (2010). Students’ research self-efficacy during online doctoral research courses. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 3, 51–58. Bell, N. (2011). Graduate enrollment and degrees: 2000 to 2010. Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools. Bieschke, K. J. (2006). Research self-efficacy beliefs and research outcome expectations: Implications for developing scientifically minded psychologists. Journal of Career Assessment, 14, 77–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1069072705281366 Gardner, S. K. (2009). The development of doctoral students: Phases of challenge and support. ASHE Higher Education Report, 34, 1–127. Gardner, S. K., & Barnes, B. J. (2014). Advising and mentoring doctoral students: A handbook. San Bernardino, CA: CreateSpace Independent Publishing. Gelso, C. J. (2006). On the making of a scientist-practitioner: A theory of research training in professional psychology. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, S, 3–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1931-3918.S.1.3 Hilliard, A. T. (2013). Advising doctorate candidates and candidates’ views during the dissertation process. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 10, 7–13. 8 Holmes, B. D. (2009). Re-envisioning the dissertation stage of doctoral study: Traditional mistakes with non-traditional learners. Journal of College Teaching and Learning, 6(8), 9–13. Ismail, H. M., Majid, F. A., & Ismail, I. S. (2013). “It’s complicated” relationship: Research students’ perspective on doctoral supervision. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 165–170. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.078 Ivankova, N. V., & Stick, S. L. (2006). Students’ persistence in a distributed doctoral program in educational leadership in higher education: A mixed methods study. Research in Higher Education, 48, 93–135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11162- 006-9025-4 Kim, K., & Karau, S. (2009). Working environment and the research productivity of doctoral students in management. Journal of Education for Business, 85, 101– 106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08832320903258535 Kumar, S., Johnson, M., & Hardemon, T. (2013). Dissertations at a distance: Students’ perceptions of online mentoring in a doctoral program. The Journal of Distance Education, 27(1), 1–12. Lim, J. H., Dannels, S. A., & Watkins, R. (2008). Qualitative investigation of doctoral students’ learning experiences in online research methods courses. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 9, 223–236. Lovitts, B. (2008). The transition to independent research: Who makes it, who doesn’t, and why. Journal of Higher Education, 79, 296–325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jhe.0.0006 9 Luse, A., Mennecke, B., & Townsend, A. (2012). Selecting a research topic: A framework for doctoral students. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 143–152. Perry, W. G., Jr. (1970). Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: A scheme. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Spaulding, L. S., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2012). Hearing their voices: Factors doctoral candidates attribute to their persistence. International Journal of Doctoral Studies, 7, 199–219. Stubb, J., Pyhältö, K., & Lonka, K. (2014). Conceptions of research: The doctoral student experience in three domains. Studies in Higher Education, 39, 251–264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.651449 Walker, G. E., Golde, C. M., Jones, L., Conklin-Bueschel, A., & Hutchings, P. (2009). The formation of scholars: Rethinking doctoral education for the twenty-first century. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Wendler, C., Bridgeman, B., Cline, F., Millett, C., Rock, J., Bell, N., & McAllister, P. (2010). The path forward: The future of graduate education in the United States. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service. Werner, T., & Rogers, K. (2013). Scholar-craftsmanship question-type, epistemology, culture of inquiry, and personality-type in dissertation research design. Adult Learning, 24, 159–166. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1045159513499549 Quality Indicators Nine key indicators have been identified to assure the overall quality of the dissertation project at this point in its development. Supervisory committee members will use these indicators to give ongoing feedback and to document their final evaluation of the Dissertation Prospectus in MyDR. Students should use these indicators to guide development of prospectus. Dissertation Prospectus Rubric A Dissertation Prospectus shows the potential of leading to a doctoral-quality dissertation only if the answer to all of the following standards is “Met” on the rubric. 1. Complete? Does the prospectus contain all the required elements? Refer to the annotated outline to see the required parts of the Dissertation Prospectus document. 2. Meaningful? Has a meaningful problem or gap in the research literature been identified? In other words, is addressing this problem the logical next step, given the previous exploratory and confirmatory research (or lack thereof) on this topic? It is not acceptable to simply replicate previous research for a PhD degree. 3. Justified? Is evidence presented that this problem is significant to the discipline and/or professional field? The prospectus should provide relevant statistics and evidence, documentable discrepancies, and other scholarly facts that point to the significance and urgency of the problem. The problem must be an authentic “puzzle” that needs solving, not merely a topic that the researcher finds interesting. 4. Grounded? Is the problem framed to enable the researcher to either build on or counter the previously published findings on the topic? For most fields, grounding involves articulating the problem within the context of a theoretical base or conceptual framework. Although many approaches can ground a study in the scientific literature, the essential requirement is that the problem is framed such that the new findings will have implications for the previous findings. 5. Original? Does this project have potential to make an original contribution? Addressing the problem should result in an original contribution to the field or discipline. 6. Impact? Does this project have potential to affect positive social change? As described in the Significance section (see annotated outline), the anticipated findings should have potential to support the mission of Walden University to promote positive social change. Dissertation Prospectus Page 16 7. Feasible? Can a systematic method of inquiry be used to address the problem? The tentative methodology demonstrates that the researcher has considered the options for inquiry, selected an approach that has potential to address the problem, and considered potential risks and burdens placed on research participants. 8. Aligned? Do the various aspects of the prospectus align overall? The nature of the study should align with the problem, research questions, and tentative approaches to inquiry. 9. Objective? Is the topic approached in an objective manner? The framing of the problem should not reveal bias or present a foregone conclusion. Even if the researcher has a strong opinion on the expected findings, he or she must maximize scholarly objectivity by framing the problem in the context of a systematic inquiry that permits multiple possible conclusions. Dissertation Prospectus Page 17 Ten Tips for Writing a Quality Prospectus Prospectuses tend to be as unique as the students writing them, so specific strategies are hard to offer. Based on a recent institutional analysis, the following general tips are provided to support successful approval. Students should ask themselves the following questions. 1. Is it complete? One of the most common reasons that a prospectus is sent back is one of the simplest to fix: Some pieces are missing. You should ask yourself, “Did I effectively respond to every item on the annotated outline?” 2. Is it well written? Your prospectus is the first time that your scholarly writing style is on full display for your committee. The prospectus needs to be a preview of what they can expect when they agree to work with you. Certainly, if your writing is unclear, your supervisory committee will have a difficult time ascertaining whether you have met the quality indicators. If you need added support with your writing, now is the time to find it. The Walden Writing Center offers webinars and multimedia resources to assist students improve their academic writing, and the Academic Skills Center offers courses to help students improve their writing skills. If you need refreshers and support with key research concepts, the Center for Research Quality site has additional resources. 3. Are the parts and sections aligned? Of all the quality indicators, alignment tends to be one of the more challenging because it transcends the content in the prospectus. Some examples of misalignment are as follows: research on children has been reviewed when the study is concerned with adults, the intended sample group does not seem appropriate to provide information to answer the research question, and the study is labeled as qualitative even though the intention is to draw inferences from a statistical test of group differences. Importantly, all the parts need to align, not just some. 4. Is the topic relevant to my discipline and program of study? Doctoral students are encouraged to explore scholarship from a variety of disciplines as they formulate their questions. When choosing their actual research topic, however, they need to be especially careful to not go beyond their own disciplinary program of study area. 5. Did I answer the “So what?” question? Too often, what is obvious to the student is not always captured in what is written in the prospectus. Ironically, one area that seems to get neglected is the social change statement, because the writer assumes that the reader understands the full impact of the situation and how this research will have potential for a positive impact. Make sure you are clear on why so many people, including your committee and your participants, will need to invest their time in this project. Dissertation Prospectus Page 18 6. Is the prospectus presented in an objective manner? Students are encouraged to develop a deep understanding of the problem and the people affected by it. When coupled with experiences gained through one’s work as a practitioner, however, it is tempting to lose sight of researcher objectivity. It is certainly acceptable to have a hypothesis based on your understanding of the research literature, but you should not suggest an answer before you have started the study (“I want to prove this point”) or offer solutions before the study has been completed (“I know what needs to happen here”). 7. Did I do my “homework”? Although the prospectus sets the stage for a more in-depth examination of a research topic, students are still expected to conduct a preliminary literature review. Be careful to not equate “Here’s a gap in the research” with “I haven’t looked at the research.” Students are sometimes shocked at how much research has already been done on a topic, after they start digging into it, even if more research is eventually needed. 8. Have I identified a research question? A common mistake that new researchers make is to confuse the broader social problem with the research question that will be the focus of the dissertation, because the two are related. Although much is often known about the scope and nature of the social problem (e.g., incident rates, outcomes), less information may be available on how to address the social problem, or it would not be a problem. What is often lacking in the situation is some piece of information or understanding that can used to address the social problem. That question or gap is what your research will address. 9. Is my topic too broad? Most doctoral students have overly ambitious research goals at the beginning, and we rarely have to ask someone to “do more.” Usually, the struggle is to identify a focused, doable question that fits within in the expectations of a dissertation. Exploring the existing research literature for similar studies is one way to see how other researchers have shaped their questions. Keep in mind that a tightly conceived, well-executed study of one robust research question is better than a dissertation that tries to answer a bunch of tangentially related questions with a variety of methods. 10. Have you considered the feasibility of the study? The prospectus is a plan to develop the proposal, and the proposal is where many key research decisions are finalized. Still, it is never too early to start thinking about the feasibility of conducting the study, which is why it is one of the quality indicators. Like all the indicators, feasibility is a quality that you will revisit as the project evolves. At the prospectus stage, you need to show your supervisory committee that you are considering your choices in light of previous scholarship and what you have learned about the research process in your courses. Dissertation Prospectus Page 19 Sample Prospectus in the Historic Alignment Tool (HAT) The HAT is a tool that is introduced in Residency 3 to help students see the alignment in their prospectus and to track the changes they have made along the way. What follows is a HAT that might have been developed for the Sample Prospectus that appears in this guide. Problem Statement A dissertation appears to be challenging to complete for online students, and not much is known about how they start the process. Purpose To provide information on the types of strategies that successful online doctoral students use to define their problem statement Potential Significance Results may help promote the success of online doctoral students. Research Questions RQ1–Qualitative: For students with a high-quality problem statement at the dissertation stage, what themes emerge in their reports of the process that they used to develop it? RQ2–Quantitative: Based on objective ratings by doctoral faculty, are significant differences evident in the overall quality of problem statements as students progress through the dissertation process? Theories or Conceptual Frameworks Perry’s theory of epistemological development Method of Inquiry Mixed methods, predominantly qualitative Data Collection Interviews of doctoral students, ratings by faculty members, assessment of epistemological thinking Data Analysis Method To be determined Implications for Positive Social Change Online education has expanded the reach of higher education to a more diverse group of learners, many of whom serve in key leadership roles. These results may support their success and eventual advancement. Dissertation Prospectus Page 20
- CapitalEssayWriting.com is a company which offers academic support and assistance to students. Our mission is to provide high quality academic services to our clients. This is done through quality writing and consistent follow-up of the students’ instructions. At CapitalEssayWriting.com, we have highly qualified and competent writers to handle any of your projects. Our past quality projects and assignments ideally speak for themselves.
Comments
Post a Comment