You are required to write a 4,000 word Research Proposal (excluding cover page, timescale,
resources, references sections) as Research Methods module assessment. Below provides a guide for
the contents and quality in each section and can be used as a Template).
Cover page
The cover page should include:
 Name of the University
 Title of your research project
 Your name and student ID
 Course name
 Module name and cohort
 Tutor’s name of research methods module
Title (normally 10 – 20 words)
Try here to reflect as accurately as possible the content of the proposal
Introduction (around 1200 words)
This is an important part of the proposal. You should place the proposed study in a context which will
assist your assessor in understanding why it is you have chosen this particular topic. In short, you
need to convince the assessor that the research is worth pursuing: not just by you as part of the
course, but by a competent researcher who will add to an understanding of the particular topic you
are studying. Therefore you may wish to demonstrate the topical relevance of your proposal if it is
concerned with something that is generating current debate and your assessor will be keen to see if
you are knowledgeable about the topic and can relate it to existing theory.
Research questions and objectives (around 200 words)
The research questions may be one overall question, or a number of questions that the research
process will address. Research objectives are clear, specific and formulated statements that identify
what the research process seeks to achieve as a result of doing the research. So the movement from
research questions to research objectives is a developmental one: objectives follow questions to
provide precision to that which is more general.
Literature review (around 1300 words)
A critical review is something that you would normally include in a final written project report (e.g. a
dissertation). However, in a proposal, your assessor is more concerned with if you are knowledgeable
about the literature that relates to your research topic. Therefore you should use this opportunity to
explain how your proposal relates to the academic debate which is being conducted in the literature.
You will be expected to show a clear link between the previous work that has been done in your field
of research interest and content of your proposed. Put simply, you should show in your review of the
literature where your research questions came from and how your research objectives will move the
debate forward by, say, applying a new perspective or setting your research in a new context: the
literature is both a point of departure and a signpost pointing to your destination.
Clearly, you should include references to key articles and texts, but you must show that you
appreciate their relevance to your research area.
Methods (around 1000 words)

This section flows directly from your research objectives and shows how you will go about achieving
them. In the method section, you have the opportunity to show the assessor the extent to which you
really understand the research process through ensuring this close connection between research
objectives and methods.
Whether it is possible to collect the data is an important consideration for your assessor. A key
question that will be going through your assessor’s mind will be, ‘Are the methods being proposed
likely to deliver credible results that can lead to sound and valid conclusions?’ Therefore it is vital
that you think this through thoroughly when preparing the method section of your proposal. This
raises the issue of validity and reliability.
Validity is the extent to which: (a) data collection method or methods accurately measure what they
were intended to measure and (b) the research findings are really about what they profess to be
about. Reliability is the extent to which data collection methods and analysis procedures will produce
consistent findings. You should justify your choice of methods in the light of the question about
credibility.
Your methods section can be divided by into two parts: research design and data collection.
Research design
In this part, you should explain why you chose the particular design. Your reasoning will be judged
against the extent to which your choice of design is consistent with your research objective and the
need to provide credible data. You will also need to describe and justify the population from which
you propose to collect data.
Data collection
In this part, you should include an explanation of the way in which you intend to carry out the
research. It could involve, say, examination of secondary data, questionnaires, semi-structured or
unstructured interviews, observation, or use a combination of data collection techniques. It is
essential to explain why you have chosen your approach and this explanation should reflect upon
whether this is the most effective way of meeting your research objectives and providing credible
data. The data collection section should be much more detailed about how specifically the data are
to be collected. For example, if you are using questionnaires, you should specify your population and
sample size, and how your sample will be collected. You should also clarify how the questionnaires
will be distributed, the likely response rate, and how the data will be analysed. If you are using
interviews, you should explain how many interviews will be conducted, how long they will last,
whether they will be audio recorded, and how they will be analysed. You should show your assessor
that you have thought carefully about all the issues regarding your method and their relationship to
your research objectives and data credibility.
Research ethics
You should write a short statement to inform how your research will follow research ethical
principles and how you plan to protect your participants.
You are also required to submit a research ethics form (see Appendix) with your proposal. If your
project is not involving human participants, i.e. only conducting secondary data, you are required to
sign and submit the “LOCAL LEVEL AUTHORISATION” form and provide the information indicated in
the form. If your project is involving human participants, e.g. conducting primary data by
questionnaire, and/or interview, you are required to sign and submit the “LOCAL LEVEL APPROVAL”
form, and provide the information indicated in the form. Please seek advice from your dissertation
coordinator (the Research Ethics Coordinator)/Research Methods tutor/supervisor as to the level of
ethics clearance required based on your study.

Timescale
This is a useful part of your research proposal. Clearly breaking down the research process into a
series of steps will show you whether it is reasonable to expect the various tasks to be done within
the timescale. An example timescale for a research project as follows:
An example timescale for a research project
Task To be completed by
Begin research idea formulation and first coverage of literature 01/10/2015
Main part of literature research completed, research questions and
objectives defined 20/11/2015
Research proposal submitted 30/11/2015
Make arrangements of data collection 31/12/2015
Literature research finished and review written 31/12/2015
Secondary data research 31/12/2015
Primary research and analysis 20/02/2016
Draft dissertation 31/03/2016
Revised draft of dissertation 15/05/2016
Final submission of dissertation 30/05/2016
Resources
You may list the resources required for the completion of the project you propose. This will assist
your assessor in considering the viability of your proposal, i.e. your data availability. For example, if
you are using secondary data, you should indicate the database and contents of data. If you are using
primary data (e.g. questionnaires or interviews), you need to convince your assessor that you get
access to the potential respondents.
References
You should impress your assessor with a long list of references. You should only list those references
that clearly use the literature to inform the choice of topic, the questions and objectives and
research methods. You should list them by the Harvard referencing style.