GOMBE STATE UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF POST GRADUATE STUDIES

FACULTY OF EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
COURSE CODE: EDUC 701
COURSE TITLE: EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH METHOD AND
STATISTICS

REGISTRATION NUMBER
PG21/PGDE/EDUC/1011
QUESTION
In not less than seven (7) pages’ write and explain the processes involve in a
research proposal

COURSE LECTURER:

DR. HABIBA ISAH

JANUARY, 2023

1
A research proposal is intended to convince others that you have a worthwhile research
project and that you have the competence and the work-plan to complete it. Generally, a
research proposal should contain all the key elements involved in the research process and
include sufficient information for the readers to evaluate the proposed study. Regardless of
your research area and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the
following questions: What you plan to accomplish, why you want to do it and how you are
going to do it.

Why a good preparation is needed?

A good preparation for a research proposal is necessary as:

 this is vital for grant application in a competitive environment. Funding is very

competitive.

 it assists the researcher in project formulation, planning, performance and monitoring

of the research.

 the quality of the proposal contributes to the evaluation outcome

 a poorly prepared proposal may not be considered at all or cannot be considered

fairly.

TEN (10) STEPS TO WRITING AN ACADEMIC RESEARCH PROPOSAL

This writing will discusses some of the common elements in a research proposal. Whether

you are doing quantitative or qualitative research, it is important that you outline the reasons

why you propose doing the study and what process or procedures you will follow to complete

the proposed study.

Some of the important parts of a good quantitative or qualitative research proposal include:

1. Determining the general topic;

2. Performing a Literature review on the topic;

2
 3. Identifying a gap in the literature;

4. Identifying a problem highlighted by the gap in the literature and framing a purpose

for the study;

5. Writing an Introduction to the study;

6. Framing research hypotheses and or research questions to investigate or guide the

study;

7. Determine the method of investigation

8. Outline the research design

9. Define the Sample size and the characteristics of the proposed sample;

10. Describe the procedures to follow for data collection and data analyses.

Determine A General Topic

The first step in writing an academic research proposal is to idenitfy a general topic or subject

area to investigate. Usually this first point is the easiest because the research proposal will be

tied to the overall theme of a course. In such a case, the the general subject for investigation

is normally determined by a professor who is leading the class, the school's department chair,

or academic advisory committee.

Perform a Literature Review

The next step is to read as much literature on the general subject matter as time will allow.

While you read the literature it is advised to take copious notes and then summarize the

purpose and findings of each study relevant to the general subject matter of the eventual

research proposal.

3
Identify a Gap in the Literature

The general purpose of the literature review is not to have notes on a whole bunch of

different journal articles and books on a particular subject. The purpose is to understand what

studies have already been done on the subject and then to identify any glaring gaps in the

literature. Identifying gaps in the literature will open up opportunities to add to the body of

knowledge within the general subject area.

For instance, both Kimura and Coggins found that servant leadership is actively admired and

taught in the Cambodian Christian community which makes up only a small percentage of the

Cambodian population. However, no one has yet investigated attitudes towards servant

leadership in the non-Christian Cambodian community which makes up over 90% of the

population. This is an obvious gap in the literature.

Identify a Problem and Frame a Purpose Statement

After you have performed the literature review and hopefully identified an obvious gap in the

literature, next you need to identify a problem related to the gap and frame a purpose

statement as to why you are investigating what you propose and why other should care about

the study. If your readers cannot answer the question so what? Or your answer the question

why should I care? Then it may be interesting to you, but not relevant to anyone else. 

Write an Introduction

After you have identified a pertinent problem and framed a purpose statement, then you need

to craft an introduction. Among other things, the introduction to the proposal will include

 The Problem Statement

 A brief summary of the literature

4
  A brief description of the gap in the literature

 A Purpose statement as to why you are proposing the study and why others should

care about the subject matter tied to your research proposal.

Determine Research Hypotheses and or Reseach Questions

Next, you need to identify and craft carefully defined research hypotheses and or research

questions. Research hypotheses identify what you are actually going to investigate and what

you expect to find from your research study. Research hypotheses are normally found in

quantitative research proposals which compare differences and/or relationships between

independent variables (or causes of phenomena) and dependent variables (or the effects that

result from causes). Research questions are normally found in qualitative research studies.

Most importantly, in good academic writing, research hypotheses and questions must be

informed or flow from the literature review.

Determine the Method of Investigation

The method section is the second of the two main parts of the research proposal. In good

academic writing it is important to include a method section that outlines the procedures you

will follow to complete your proposed study. The method section generally includes sections

on the following:

 Research design;

 Sample size and characteristics of the proposed sample;

 Data collection and data analysis procedures

5
Determine the Research Design

The next step in good academic writing is to outline the research design of the research

proposal. For each part of the design, it is highly advised that you describe two or three

possible alternatives and then tell why you propose the particular design you chose. For

instance, you might describe the differences between experimental, quasi-experimental, and

non-experimental designs before you elaborate on why you propose a non-experimental

design.

Determine the Sample Size and the Characteristics of the Sample

In this section of your research proposal, you will describe the sample size and the

characteristics of the participants in the sample size. Describe how you determined how many

people to include in the study and what attributes they have which make them uniquely

suitable for the study.

Determine the Data Collection and Data Analysis Procedures

The last section highlighted in this hub is the data collection and analysis procedures. In this

section you will describe how you propose to collect your data e.g. through a questionnaire

survey if you are performing a quantitative analysis or through one-on-one interviews if you

are performing a qualitative or mixed methods study.

After you collect the data, you also need to follow a scheme as how to analyze the data and

report the results. In a quantitative study you might run the data through Excel or better yet

SPSS and if you are proposing a qualitative study you might use a certain computer program

like ATLAi. to perform a narrative study or grounded theory study that exposes the main

themes from the proposed interviews.

6
Some others considerations for good research proposals are:

Read the Guidelines: Make sure that your proposed project meets the criteria of the grant

program. Would it be better suited for another grant program? In your narrative, address

explicitly how you meet the review criteria don’t make the reviewers guess.

Make an argument for funding your proposal: Don’t just say what you will do, but why it’s

important to do it. What impact will your project have on the field, institution, or community?

How? How is your proposal innovative? Strong, relevant letters of support can help you

make your argument about the proposal’s significance; it’s impressive when leading scholars

testify to a project’s importance, but a stack of weak, generic letters can make a proposal

seem, well, desperate.

Talk to the Program Officers: They’re there to help. Often they will review a draft proposal

prior to submission, provided that you get it to them at least 6 weeks in advance of the grant

deadline. I’m quite impressed by the staff of the ‘Digital Humanities Office’ - they’re smart,

knowledgeable, energetic, all-around good folks, the kind you would trust to lead one of the

most visible funding programs in digital humanities. In the review panels, they focus not on

how weak a proposal is, but how they can help the applicant to make it better.

Show that you have technical knowledge: Digital humanities projects demand both

sophisticated technical and subject knowledge. Cite the appropriate standards and best

practices and explain how you will apply them.

Focus: If you attempt to do too much, reviewers will wonder if you can pull it all off, and

question what exactly it is you’re trying to do, anyway.

7
Be realistic: It’s always hard to figure out how long a project will take and how much

everything will cost. Talk to others who have done similar work to get a sense of what it will

take to pull off your project. In the work plan, offer a detailed description of what will be

accomplished by what deadline and by whom. Don’t over-promise; remember, if you win the

grant, you’ll actually have to do what you said you would do.

Sweat the small stuff: Although reviewers focus on the substance of the proposal, a sloppy

application can detract from the overall quality. Proofread carefully to catch grammatical

errors. Think about the design of the document. If I see huge margins and jumbo fonts, I

wonder if the applicant is just trying to fill up space.

Ask to see the reviewers’ comments: Whether you’re successful or not, read the reviewers’

comments, which will likely be full of helpful suggestions about how to improve the project

and application. You’re getting free consulting from 5 or more experts in the field - take

advantage of it.

CRITERIA USED FOR ASSESSING SHORT RESEARCH PROPOSALS

1. Relevance: Is the research within designated priority areas? Does the research

address an important problem? What new information will the research produce

which is not already known? How can the results be operationalized into clinical or

public health practice? What are the probable health and/or economic benefits of the

research?

2. Quality of Protocol: Introduction; Aims; Methods; Analysis; Reporting.

3. Feasibility: Practicability; Experience of Researchers.

4. Ethics: Is the study lawful? Stage of Ethics.

5. Budget and Cost: Cost and Cost-effectiveness; Cost-benefit.

8
CRITERIA USED FOR ASSESSING LONG RESEARCH PROPOSALS

Introduction Is the context of the study adequately described?

 Is local and international information on the research topic adequately

reviewed?
 Is the scientific and health services rationale for the study adequately
explained?
 Is an explanation given concerning how the results of the study can be used? Is
there sufficient multi-disciplinary involvement in the study?

2. Aims
 Are the aims clearly stated in a way which is amenable to scientific
investigation?
 Are research questions and hypotheses explicitly stated - if this is
appropriate? Are the variables clearly described - if this is appropriate?

3. Methods
3.1 Study Design
 Is the type(s) of study and scientific approach(s) clearly described?
 Are the methods capable of answering the research questions?
 Are combinations of methods applied if this is required by the research
questions?
 Are standard methods being used (and described) or are new methods being
developed (and explained)?
 Are the methods described in sufficient detail?
 Are the outcome factor(s), study factors and confounders adequately
characterised and their measurement described?
 What is the validity of the measurement methods?
 Will assessment of the validity of some measurements be undertaken? How
will this be performed?
 Have all confounding factors been clearly defined and will data be collected on
these? What of unmeasured confounders?
 Are some measured variables being used as proxies for other unmeasured
variables and what is the legitimacy of this?

Sampling
 Is the source of specimens or study populations clearly identified?
 Is the method of selecting and sampling specimens, people, households or
communities appropriate for the study?
 Are the numbers of cases adequate for the study? Have sample size
calculations been performed where this is relevant?

9
Materials
 Are adequate laboratory and/or computer facilities available to perform the
research?
 Are adequate scientific instruments and/or reagents available to perform the
research?
 Is an adequate survey instrument (questionnaire or data form) available, or will
it be developed (and how)?
 Are skilled personnel available to collect the information or will they be
trained?

Implementation
 Can the research study be implemented? Is it practical?
 Can specimens be obtained? Will people and communities agree to participate?
 Will hospitals and health services agree to co-operate as required?
 Will collaborative arrangements between researchers work?
 Are there previous or pilot studies which indicate that this study can be done?
 Does the previous record of the researchers indicate that they have the required
skills and experience?
 What arrangements are there to ensure data quality and minimise information
bias during data collection?
 What arrangements are there to ensure maximum participation and avoid
selection bias?
 Is there a description or a diagram to indicate the time lines for implementation
of the study?

Analysis of information
 What is the basic strategy for the analysis?
 Are the proposed methods of analysis described in sufficient detail?
 Are the proposed methods of analysis appropriate for the type of study and kind
of information collected?
 Do the researchers understand the approach to analysis, have the tools (e.g.
computers and programs), and are they capable of analysing the information?
 Are the researchers aware of problems of bias and confounding and how do
they propose to deal with these at the analysis stage?

Reporting
 Do the researchers explain how the results of the research will be reported, and
to who? Will the researchers present information at meetings and conferences?
 Will the results be published as reports, conference papers, and/or in scientific
journals?
 Will the research reports be scientifically reviewed?
 Will information be transmitted to the public or patient groups?

4. Ethics
 Is the study ethical and lawful?

10
  Has the study been approved by, or will it be submitted to, an ethics committee
or assessor?
 Is the use of routinely or specially collected data or specimens for this research
covered by an appropriate law?
 Are subjects invited to participate and is consent obtained?
 Are consent and patient information forms acceptable?
 In cases of sensitive information, are questions relating to these topics in the
questionnaire acceptable?
 Are subjects allowed to decline or discontinue without sanction?
 Is confidentiality of individual information maintained? What security
arrangements are there for protection of identified physical and electronic
records?
 Is treatment and/or counselling offered for cases of disease which are detected?
 Could there be adverse effects of the questionnaire or invasive procedures, or
from new information uncovered on individuals, and how would these
situations be handled?
 Is there evidence of safety for new medications or procedures before clinical
trials begin?
 Are subjects in clinical trials being offered new treatments which can
reasonably be expected to be equivalent or better than standard treatments
available according to existing evidence?
 Is there provision to stop clinical trials if some groups show markedly better or
worse results than others?
 Are extra medical costs for patients resulting from research studies covered?
 Do the potential benefits of the research to the community outweigh the risks,
inconvenience and/or invasion of privacy for the individual?

5. Budget and Cost

5.1 Cost and cost-effectiveness
 Is the budget total within specified limits?
 Is the budget sufficiently detailed?
 Is each item in the budget adequately justified?
 Are some budget items excessive in relation to their justification?
 Are personnel too senior or junior for specified tasks?
 Is the equipment really necessary?
 Should some of the equipment and consumables applied for be covered by the
institution applying for the grant?
 Are there less expensive options for achieving a similar result?  Could some
less important parts of the study be deleted to reduce the  budget?

Cost-benefit
 What is the prospect for success of this research project?
 What are the likely benefits of this research?
 How does the ratio of cost to likely benefit for this research compare to the
ratio of cost to likely benefit for other competing health and medical research?

11
REFERENCES

Bowling A (2002) Research methods in health: investigating health and health services.
Open University Press, Milton Keynes

Charmaz K (2006) Constructing Grounded Theory: a practical guide through qualitative

analysis. Sage, Thousand Oaks CA

Cluett ER. Bluff R (2002) Principles and practice of research in midwifery. Churchill
Livingstone, London

Cresswell JW (2002) Research design: qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods

approaches. Sage Publications, London

Davies MB (2007) Doing a successful research project: using qualitative or quantitative

methods. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

Hollins Martin CJ (in press) The Birth Satisfaction Scale (BSS). International
Journal of Health Care Quality Assurance

Jadad AR, Enkin M (2007) Randomized Controlled Trials: questions, answers and musings.
Blackwell Publishing Ltd, London

Lawrence A, Lewis L, Hofmeyr GJ, Dowswell T, Styles C (2009) Maternal positions

and mobility during first stage labour. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2) Issue 2.
Art. No. CD003934. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003934.pub2

LeCompte MD, Schensul JJ (1999) Designing and conducting ethnographic research.

Walnut Creek, AltaMira CA.

Moustakas C (1994) Phenomenological research methods. Sage, London

Odent M (2001) New reasons and new ways to study birth physiology. International Journal
of Gynecology & Obstetrics 2001;75:S39-S45

Polgar SD, Thomas SA (2008) Introduction to Research in the Health Sciences Churchill
Livingston, Edinburgh

Shermer R, Raines D (2006) Positioning during the second stage of labor: moving back to
basics. Journal of Obstetric, Gynacologic & Neontal Nursing 26(6):727-734

12