幸运快三

This document is intended to be a resource, providing general guidance for developing research proposals. At the end is a list of items reviewers often pay attention to when evaluating research proposals for scientific merit.

1. Write a clear and concise abstract (generally less than 200 words) that at a minimum addresses your research topic and question, paradigm, use of theory (theories you incorporate, propositions, constructs), research design/methodologies, selection or sampling strategies, data capturing (collection, generation) methods, data coding and/or analysis, funders/collaborators, and proposed channels for communicating results (Write this at the very end).
2. Present research questions and/or hypotheses you plan to address. Besides an introduction to the problem or topic you have selected you might include: key definitions, corollary research objectives and/or research hypotheses, and the key concepts/constructs and/or variables of interest you are proposing to study, describe and/or measure.
3. Justify why the research you have described is important to conduct and explain how it will add to or refine knowledge and/or theory. In other words, what is its significance? How does it further scientific and/or practical inquiry? What is the relevance of your proposed project to the aims of the funding source? It also is often useful to discuss the audience for the research.
4. Demonstrate the role of theory in your research. What theories, if any, have been used to study your topic in the past? What are the strengths and limitations of these theories in light of your specific research question? Demonstrate how you are proposing to test theory, apply theory, generate theory, combine theory or use theory in some other fashion (e.g. as an interpretative tool).  Depending upon how you propose to use theory, it may be useful to clearly articulate key constructs and or propositions you are borrowing or are building on. Consider including a graphic theoretical model displaying relationships among constructs as a way to more clearly and concisely present its role in your study. If appropriate, synthesize how the theory has evolved and where your work fits in terms of its continued evolution.
5. Briefly explain your research paradigm (e.g. issues of ontology, epistemology and knowledge, desirable level of researcher intervention) and mention the aim of your research design or methodology.
6. Be sure to address how you will ensure scientific quality. For quantitative approaches make sure you address items such as internal and external validity as well as other threats to validity. For alternative inquiry paradigms make sure you use their accepted alternative approaches to address scientific quality such as trustworthiness and authenticity. If your work involves testing theories, be sure to describe how your theories are testable.
7. Set your boundaries, determine the sampling/selection approach (quantitative or qualitative strategies) and justify the setting/case/population you will study. Present an explanation of why you selected your unit(s) of analysis and be sure to adequately describe your sampling element, informant, case or other focus (setting, activity, etc.). Be sure to address issues of context, generalizability to a population and/or transferability to another case. Explain your instrumentation or how you will be measuring (qualitative or quantitative) attributes, justify your levels of measurement, and address relevant issues in moving from abstract levels of conceptualization to measurement levels or the reverse. Are your measurements aimed to develop a model or theory inductively, test theory or to describe some construct, case or situation? When appropriate, address measurement issues like validity and/or confirmability, reliability and/or dependability, as well as other relevant sources of error. When appropriate address the issue of researcher as instrument and insider/outsider issues as well as any ethical issues that might be involved in the generation of data.
8. If you propose to use a measurement instrument describe it and present the strengths and weaknesses of using it. In all cases measurement should be linked to specific research questions or hypotheses to allow us to clearly see how you are operationalizing and measuring (includes describing) phenomena of interest to you and your study. The more detail you can provide the better job we can do evaluating your proposal. Please use literature to justify the logic behind your instrumentation.
9. Select/develop and write up step-by-step procedures that you will utilize to collect/capture/generate your data. Will you be collecting primary or secondary data? How will you get from your raw data to the format you analyze (transcribing, encoding, formatting, etc.)? What will your database look like, and will you use some particular computer software to store, manage and/or manipulate your data?
10. Develop and justify your data anal