怎样写好research-proposal(中文)教学文稿
research proposal 格式
research proposal 格式
编写研究提案（research proposal）的格式可能会有些变化，具体取决于学科、机构或项目的要求。
以下是一个一般性的研究提案的标准格式，供参考：
1. 标题：
-确定性而简明地概括研究内容。
2. 背景和引言：
-介绍研究问题的背景，阐明研究的重要性。
-提供相关文献综述，说明目前已有的研究和知识空缺。
3. 研究问题或目标：
-明确研究的主要问题或目标。
4. 研究设计/方法：
-描述研究设计，包括数据收集和分析方法。
-讨论实施研究的步骤，以及为什么选择这些方法。
5. 理论框架：
-如果适用，提供支持研究的理论基础。
6. 研究的意义和预期成果：
-阐述研究的理论和实际意义，以及预期的研究成果。
7. 研究计划和时间表：
-列出研究的阶段，包括起止日期。
8. 预算：
-提供研究所需的经费预算，包括任何可能的支出。
9. 参考文献：
-列举所有在研究提案中引用的文献。
10. 附录：
-如果需要，包含支持材料，例如调查问卷、图表、地图等。
请注意，研究提案的具体要求可能会因学科和项目而异。
在准备研究提案时，请仔细阅读和遵循特定机构或项目提供的指南和要求。
research-proposal范文
Research proposal1. Title：Cormac McCarthy’s The Road and American Modern EschatologyOr Modern Eschatology of the 21st century America in Cormac McCarthy’s The Road2. Introduction：1).about the author:a.Most Important achievements about Cormac McCarthy:Cormac McCarthy is an American novelist and playwright, who was once described as “the best unknown novelist in America”. So far McCarthy has written ten novels, one published five-act play, and one filmed screenplay, among which, novels are considered his most conspicuous literary achievements.On May 5th, 2009, Cormac McCarthy has won the biennial PEN/Saul Bellow award for lifetime achievement in American literature, for "a distinguished living American author of fiction whose body of work in English possesses qualities of excellence, ambition, and scale of achievement over a sustained career which places him or her in the highest rank of American literature".He received the Pulitzer Prize in 2007 for The Road, and his 2005 novel No Country for Old Men was adapted as a 2007 film of the same name, which won four Academy Awards, including Best Picture. He received a National Book Award in 1992 for All the Pretty Horses.His earlier Blood Meridian (1985) was among Time Magazine's poll of 100 best English-language books published between 1925 and 2005 and he placed joint runner-up for a similar title in a poll taken in 2006 by The New York Times of the best American fiction published in the last 25 years. Literary critic Harold Bloom named him as one of the four major American novelists of his time, along with Thomas Pynchon, Don DeLillo and Philip Roth. He is frequently compared by modern reviewers to William Faulkner.2. Proposed researched topicCormac McCarthy’s The Road and American Modern EschatologyOr Modern Eschatology of the 21st century America in Cormac McCarthy’s The Road3. Literature review:As Cormac McCarthy is a newly-rising writer, we can not see so many tremendous academic studies of him as of other classical writers.1)In USA, Cormac M cCarthy didn’t receive critical attention until the 1990s.So far the American critics and postgraduates have conducted studies of him in the following aspects with a few achievements. In spite of his numerous awards and prizes, McCarthy is frequently considered as the successor of William Faulkner; however, with the popularity of No Country for Old Men and the great success of The Road, more mainstream critics and media keep an eye on this unknown famous writer.a.Monologues, dialogues, sentence structures in spire scholars to explore autotextuality in McCarthy’s works. Christine Chollier brings forward the idea that the writer is a master in binding and interweaving different voices together to generate and enhance an impression of reality. It is the writer’s talent in picking and arranging wordsthat renders his works an organic unity rarely found in other western novels.Another thing that keeps attracting scholar’s attention is protagonists’ dreams, which, Edwin T. Arnold thinks, represent McCarthy’s “unique way of sharing world experience with readers”. Other themes, like wars, ethics, and modern technology, have all become the focuses of study.Some scholars ponder over another important theme in McCarthy’s works: human-nature relations. George Guillemin raises the idea that the writer is advocating a biocentric concept in all his books, which runs in contrast to the anthropocentric stance many western novels have assumed before. Guillemin points out that people’s hope to get closer to nature has been r uined by modern civilization. Barcley Owens, too, expresses the same concern over human’s attitudes towards nature and argues eloquently that McCarthy reveals his worry through the depiction of wilderness in his Border Trilogy.In The Lay of the Land in C ormac McCarthy’s Appalachia, K. Wesley Berry shows his interest in examining the geological changes in McCarthy’s Appalachia. A lot of data are brought in for a conclusion that human’s activities have already caused damages to natural environment, and if n ot stopped, will continue to harm the planet people are living on. In another essay by Sara Spurgeon, the idea that nature deserves to be explored and used by human is totally undermined through a closer examination of the message McCarthy tries to pass on to us in his works. The World on Fire deals with the same topic, but in a different way. Jacqueline Scoones finds McCarthy’s interest in portraying products of modern civilization and putting them in a setting of nature. Scoones insists that McCarthy intends to generate an odd contrast between civilization and nature, and to arouse a spontaneous hatred against people’s invasion into nature.Researchers also notice the animal images in his works. Major analysis include George Guillemin’s Some Site Where Life had not Succeeded, in which he mentions that John Grady’s attitude changes toward horses represent the wakening of his goodwill to nature. Western Myths in All the Pretty Horses and The Crossing by Barcley Owens explicitly affirms wolves as a “spokesman” of nature. And everything people could see from the animal and its relations with human may serve as the evidence that McCarthy hopes for a harmonious coexistence between human and nature.2) Cormac McCarthy’s works are still far from familiar to China’s literary circle.From the data from CNKI, it is clear that Cormac McCarthy has gained Chinese Critics’ attention only in recent years, especially after the release of the movie No country for Old Men. Before 2007, there are only two essays on Cormac McCarthy, while since 2007, 5 essays and 5 graduate theses have chosen this writer and his works, two of which are based on The Road. However, those two just introduce the plots of the novel and some relevant information.3. The Main Argument (and three sub-arguments):This thesis will be carried out through the perspective of Modern Eschatology, especially in the views of the end days appeared after 911.1. The destruction of the world in the novel and its metaphorical truth2. The final judgments administered by the writer in the fictitious world and the crytic trial to the human civilization3. The Post-Doomsday Vista portrayed in The Road and the suggested attitude of the writer to the humanfuture.4.Purpose and Significance of Study:First, this thesis introduces Cormac McCarthy into China, who claims certain fame in the USA but is little known in China. Surely, McCarthy will get his familiarity and fame in China gradually in which this thesis will play an incentive role.Second, social sciences see great initiation with the development of the modern nature sciences. The melting trend of different branches of sciences becomes more and more conspicuous. Many critics tend to analyze literary works from the point of philosophy, psychology, sociology, aesthetics, anthropology, etc. This thesis offers an example of such a trend.Third, this thesis claims its enlightening function. It presents us a new angle of view into the contemporary American culture after the 911 effect.5. A Detailed Sentence Outline:IntroductionThe part includes an introduction to Cormac McCarthy and The Road and literature reviews of existing findings. The origins, development and main thoughts of eschatology will be introduced as an important term for the thesis. Aside from those, a special attention will be given to how the 911 event effects the American culture and American literature.Chapter One the violent destruction of the world in The Road1.1 The ruins on the American Land1.2 The wasteland of the human spiritThis part will analyze the destruction of the world in the novel and its metaphorical truth.Chapter Two the final judgment of the righteous and the wicked in The Road2.1 The bad guys on the road2.2 The good guys on the roadThis part will discuss the final judgments administered by the writer in the fictitious world and the crytic trial to the human civilizationChapter Three:the Post-Doomsday Vista in The Road3.1 The allegoric meaning of the journey3.2 The symbolic image of the sonThe Post-Doomsday Vista portrayed in The Road and the suggested attitude of the writer to the human future will be presented in the third chapter.ConclusionThe total destruction presents readers the picture in the end of the world, but also deprives them of theendless horror about the uncertain future. In the end is the beginning. The author proclaims the resurrection for modern humans. What matters in the novel is the great humanity of the individual.1) On Literature and TheoryWolfreys, J. Introducing Criticism at the 21st Century [M].Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press Ltd, 2002. Brooks, Cl. & Warren, R.P. Understanding Fiction [M]. 外语教学与研究出版社，2004.Bradbury, Malcolm. The Modern American Novel [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction [M]. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1983. Pizer, Donald, (Ed.). The Cambridge Companion to American Realism and Naturalism [M]. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995Zhu, Gang.20th Century Western Literary Theories[M],上海外语教育出版，2001。
英文research proposal
英文research proposal一、研究题目研究题目应该能够简洁明了地表达研究的目的和内容。
应该避免使用太过晦涩的名词或术语，以免读者难以理解。
二、研究背景在这一部分，需要提出研究的背景情况，包括相关领域已有的研究成果、问题和未解决的难点。
也可以简要说明自己选择这一课题的原因。
三、研究目的在这一部分，需要清晰地表达出自己这次研究的目的是什么，以及想要解决的问题是什么。
也可以阐述一下自己希望通过这次研究能够取得的成果和对学术界或者实际应用的意义。
四、研究内容和方法研究内容和方法是整个研究计划中最为重要的一部分。
在这一部分，需要清晰地阐述自己的研究将要进行的具体内容，以及采用的研究方法。
这一部分需要做到既全面、详细地描述研究过程中的每一个步骤，又尽量简洁明了，以便读者能够迅速理解。
五、研究预期结果在这一部分，可以预先设想一下自己这次研究可能得出的结论和结果。
也可以说明一下如果研究取得了预期的成果，对学术研究或者实际应用将会有怎样的帮助。
六、研究进度安排在这一部分，需要列出自己的研究进度安排，包括每个阶段具体需要做的工作内容、预计需要的时间，在研究过程中可能遇到的困难和问题以及相应的解决办法。
七、参考文献研究过程中所使用的参考文献应当列举清楚，并且按照一定的格式规范进行标注，以便审阅者查阅参考。
以上便是一份较为完整的英文research proposal的写作要点。
编写一份高质量的research proposal需要作者全面理解自己的研究内容，并清晰地向读者传达出来。
也需要遵循一定的格式规范，以便读者能够迅速理解并审阅。
希望以上内容对您有所帮助。
研究背景在研究背景部分，我将进一步详细介绍所选择的研究领域和当前的研究状况。
我们知道，现代社会信息爆炸，大数据时代已经到来。
在这个背景下，信息检索和数据挖掘变得尤为重要。
随着人工智能和机器学习等技术的飞速发展，自然语言处理也逐渐成为了研究的热点之一。
然而，当前自然语言处理领域依然存在着许多挑战和问题，比如语义理解、语言生成等方面的困难。
如何写 research interest proposal-概述说明以及解释
如何写research interest proposal-概述说明以及解释1.引言1.1 概述概述在撰写研究兴趣提案时，首先需要明确什么是研究兴趣。
研究兴趣是指一个研究者对某个领域或问题感兴趣并致力于钻研的主题或方向。
研究兴趣提案就是对自己的研究兴趣进行描述、阐明其研究意义和未来展望的文档。
在提案中，需要清晰地概括研究兴趣的主题、目的和意义，为读者展示你对该主题的深入了解和激情。
接下来的文章结构将会详细介绍如何确定研究兴趣、描述研究主题以及阐明研究意义，以帮助你撰写一份完善的研究兴趣提案。
愿你能从中获得启发，并成功地呈现自己的研究兴趣给他人。
1.2 文章结构文章结构部分是整篇文章的骨架，它为读者提供了一种清晰的阅读路径，帮助他们理解文章的内容和组织。
在research interest proposal中，文章结构的设计至关重要，因为它能够帮助读者更好地了解研究兴趣的提出和论证。
文章结构主要包括引言、正文和结论三个部分。
在引言部分，作者通常会简要介绍研究兴趣的背景和重要性，引出研究问题，并提出研究的目的和意义。
在正文部分，作者会详细描述研究兴趣的主题，阐明其在学术或社会领域中的意义和潜在影响。
最后，在结论部分，作者会对全文进行总结，强调研究兴趣的重要性，并展望未来可能的发展方向。
通过以上的文章结构设计，读者可以清晰地了解研究兴趣提案的内容和逻辑，帮助他们更好地理解作者的研究思路和贡献。
因此，在写research interest proposal时，作者应该合理设计文章结构，使其能够清晰、有序地呈现研究兴趣的主题和意义。
1.3 目的撰写research interest proposal的主要目的在于向读者介绍你感兴趣的研究领域，并展示你对该领域的热情和专业知识。
通过清晰地描述你的研究兴趣和意义，你可以向潜在的导师或招生委员会展示你的学术潜力和研究能力。
另外，撰写research interest proposal还有助于帮助你在整理思路的过程中更好地确定自己的研究方向和目标。
research proposal字数
Research Proposal一、研究背景随着社会的发展和进步，科学技术得到了快速发展，人们对科学知识的渴望也越来越强烈。
作为一个研究人员，我们需要不断地深入研究各种领域的知识，为社会的发展做出贡献。
本课题选择了XXX为研究对象，主要是因为XXX有着广阔的研究空间，同时具有一定的实际应用价值。
二、研究目的我们的研究旨在探索XXX的XXX特性，并通过对XXX的深入研究，为XXX领域的发展做出贡献。
通过我们的研究，还可以为企业的XXX 提供一定的参考和指导。
三、研究方法为了达到以上研究目的，我们将采用XXX方法进行研究。
我们将通过实地调查、统计分析、专家访谈等方法，收集大量的XXX相关数据，并对这些数据进行深入、系统的分析和研究，从而揭示XXX的内在特性和规律。
四、研究内容1. XXX的定义和特性我们将通过文献综述和实地调查，对XXX的定义和特性进行界定和分析，从而深入探讨XXX的本质属性。
2. XXX的发展现状及问题我们将通过对XXX的发展现状进行调查和分析，发现其中存在的问题和矛盾，为我们进一步的研究提供依据。
3. XXX的发展趋势通过对XXX的发展趋势进行分析和研究，探讨XXX未来的发展方向和发展空间，为XXX领域的进一步研究提供参考。
五、研究意义我们的研究将有以下意义：1. 为XXX领域的发展提供理论指导和参考；2. 为企业的XXX提供决策支持和指导；3. 为相关研究人员提供研究思路和方法。
六、研究预期成果通过我们的研究，我们希望能够得到以下预期成果：1. 对XXX的定义和特性有更深刻、更系统的认识；2. 对XXX的发展现状、问题和趋势进行了深入的分析和探讨；3. 对XXX领域的发展提出了一定的见解和建议。
七、研究进度安排我们的研究将按以下进度安排进行：1. 月份：进行XXX的文献综述和调研；2. 月份：完成对XXX的实地调查和数据收集；3. 月份：进行数据分析和研究；4. 月份：撰写研究报告和论文。
干货ResearchProposal写作方法
干货ResearchProposal写作方法Research Proposal（简称RP）也就是指研究报告或者开题报告，一般作为论文或者研究开始前的计划和纲要，比如毕业论文开题报告、申请博士的研究计划、国家基金类研究申报报告等。
RP的内容通常为：你打算完成什么（what），为什么你要做这件事（why），以及你打算怎样去完成它（how）。
主要包括标题（Title）、摘要 (Abstract)、引言(Introduction)、文献综述(Literature Review)、方法(Methods)、结果(Result)、讨论(Discussion)七部分。
整体字数看学校要求，一般1500-2000.下面我们详细分析Research Proposal写作方法。
1.标题（Title）简明扼要，内容翔实又吸引人PS：其实和中文论文写作差不多，题目不要泛而空，尽量缩小话题范围，这样内容更有针对性。
题目要能体现你的研究对象和创新性，至少能勾起阅读全文的兴趣！2.摘要（Abstract）300字左右的简要归纳。
它应该包括研究问题，研究的理论基础，假说（如有的话），研究方法以及主要发现。
PS：重中之重，实际就是将RP再浓缩一次。
Title+ Abstract就一锤定生死了，剩下部分基本就是abstract的拓展了。
对于建筑类相关专业，empirical study(案例研究/场地调研/问卷访谈等等)非常重要，如果连实地都没有去过，何来一手的资料，一手的结论呢？此处会涉及到original contribution（原创贡献），你的原创性/你对这一议题的贡献值有多少。
所以摘要的实质也是一种游说/推销，推销你的研究意义所在。
3.引言（Introduction）主要目的是为你的研究问题提供必要的背景。
通常包含以下内容：某描述研究问题/目的；某为你的研究问题提供背景，设定其范围，以体现出它的必要性和重要性；某理论依据，要清楚的指出为什么该研究是值得去做的；某简要描述该研究要解决的主要及次要问题；某明确说明你想要研究的现象；某阐述你的假说或理论（如有的话）；某设定你研究计划的局限或边界，以提供一个清晰的研究重点；某给关键概念下定义（此项为可选）PS:不多说，基本就是介绍一下研究背景，为什么你的研究内容很有意义或必要性。
研究计划 Research roposal
每个学术研究者必须经历的一道关卡，就是Research Proposal的写作。
它大致对应中文里的“开题报告”、“选题报告”、“研究报告”，是一项研究开始之前的提纲、规划和陈述；既是为了帮助自己梳理文献、整理思路、廓清方向，也常常是写给相关他人的说明：研究动机和意义何在？可能有何成果？为什么它值得你的资助/认可/支持/批准？不知道是否可以说，好的proposal是研究成功的一半。
但实际而功利的说，如果你的proposal很烂，可能根本就不会有开始研究的机会。
?How to write a research proposal?能否写出漂亮的proposal，本质上取决于你对研究的思考深度和专业水准。
但形式也很重要。
英文的Research Proposal自有一套“八股”。
程式化和结构化的好处就在于，可以让读者直接集中注意到最本质的内容上，而不是为形式分神。
对于非英语native speaker的我们，如何理解英文学术世界的规范或曰思维定势，也是写作proposal之前必备的背景知识。
下面这篇流传甚广的Research Proposal写作指南，言简意赅，颇具启发，对我自己的写作有所帮助，也希望能给更多的学界同仁带来便利。
[点击这里，查看更多关于RESEARCH PROPOSAL以及GRANT PROPOSAL、PROJECT PROPOSAL写作的网上资源]?文章作者Paul T. P. Wong, Ph.D., C.Psych. (Research Director, Graduate Program in Counselling Psychology. Trinity Western University Langley, BC, Canada). 题为：How to Write a Research Proposal. 全文转载如下：?Most students and beginning researchers do not fully understand what a research proposal means, nor do they understand its importance. To put it bluntly, one’s research is only as a good as one’s proposal. An ill-conceived proposal dooms the project even if it somehowgets through the Thesis Supervisory Committee. A highquality proposal, on the other hand, not only promises success for the project, but also impresses your Thesis Committee about your potential as a researcher.?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 doit and how you are going to do it.?The proposal should have sufficient information to convince your readers that you have an important research idea, that you have a good grasp of the relevant literature and the major issues, and that your methodology is sound.?The quality of your research proposal depends not only onthe quality of your proposed project, but also on thequality of your proposal writing. A good research project may run the risk of rejection simply because the proposal is poorly written. Therefore, it pays if your writing is coherent, clear and compelling.?This paper focuses on proposal writing rather than on the development of research ideas.?TITLE:?It should be concise and descriptive. For example, the phrase, “An investigation of . . .” could be omitted. Often titles are stated in terms of a functional relationship, because such titles clearly indicate the independent and dependent variables. However, if possible, think of an informative but catchy title. An effectivet itle not only pricks the reader’s interest, but also predisposes him/her favourably towards the proposal.?ABSTRACT:?It is a brief summary of approximately 300 words. It should include the research question, the rationale for the study, the hypothesis (if any), the method and the main findings. Descriptions of the method may include the design, procedures, the sample and any instruments that will be used.?INTRODUCTION:?The main purpose of the introduction is to provide the necessary background or context for your research problem. How to frame the research problem is perhaps the biggest problem in proposal writing.?If the research problem is framed in the context of a general, rambling literature review, then the research question may appear trivial and uninteresting. However, if the same question is placed in the context of a very focused and current research area, its significance will become evident.?Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules on how to frame your research question just as there is no prescription on how to write an interesting and informative opening paragraph. A lot depends on your creativity, your ability to think clearly and the depth of your understanding of problem areas.?However, try to place your research question in the context of either a current “hot” area, or an older area that remains viable. Secondly, you need to provide a brief but appropriate historical backdrop. Thirdly, provide the contemporary context in which your proposed research question occupies the central stage. Finally, identify“key players” and refer to the most relevant and representative publications. In short, try to paint your research question in broad brushes and at the same time bring out its significance.?The introduction typically begins with a general statement of the problem area, with a focus on a specific research problem, to be followed by the rational or justificationfor the proposed study. The introduction generally covers the following elements:?1. State the research problem, which is often referred to as the purpose of the study.?2. Provide the context and set the stage for your research question in such a way as to show its necessity and importance.?3. Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing.?4. Briefly describe the major issues and sub-problems to be addressed by your research.?5. Identify the key independent and dependent variables of your experiment. Alternatively, specify the phenomenon you want to study.?6. State your hypothesis or theory, if any. For exploratory or phenomenological research, you may not have any hypotheses. (Please do not confuse the hypothesis with the statistical null hypothesis.)?7. Set the delimitation or boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus.?8. Provide definitions of key concepts. (This is optional.)? LITERATURE REVIEW:?Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introduction section. However, most professors prefer a separate section, which allows a more thorough review ofthe literature.?The literature review serves several important functions:?1. Ensures that you are not “reinventing the wheel”.?2. Gives credits to those who have laid the groundwork for your research.?3. Demonstrates your knowledge of the research problem.?4. Demonstrates your understanding of the theoretical and research issues related to your research question.?5. Shows your ability to critically evaluate relevant literature information.?6. Indicates your ability to integrate and synthesize the existing literature.?7. Provides new theoretical insights or develops a new model as the conceptual framework for your research.?8. Convinces your reader that your proposed research will make a significant and substantial contribution to the literature (i.e., resolving an important theoretical issue or filling a major gap in the literature).?Most students’ literature reviews suffer from thefollowing problems:?* Lacking organization and structure?* Lacking focus, unity and coherence?* Being repetitive and verbose?* Failing to cite influential papers?* Failing to keep up with recent developments?* Failing to critically evaluate cited papers?* Citing irrelevant or trivial references?* Depending too much on secondary sources?Your scholarship and research competence will be questioned if any of the above applies to your proposal.?There are different ways to organize your literature review. Make use of subheadings to bring order and coherence toyour review. For example, having established the importance of your research area and its current state of development, you may devote several subsections on related issues as: theoretical models, measuring instruments, cross-cultural and gender differences, etc.?It is also helpful to keep in mind that you are telling a story to an audience. Try to tell it in a stimulating and engaging manner. Do not bore them, because it may lead to rejection of your worthy proposal. (Remember: Professorsand scientists are human beings too.)?METHODS:?The Method section is very important because it tells your Research Committee how you plan to tackle your research problem. It will provide your work plan and describe the activities necessary for the completion of your project.?The guiding principle for writing the Method section isthat it should contain sufficient information for thereader to determine whether methodology is sound. Some even argue that a good proposal should contain sufficientdetails for another qualified researcher to implement the study.?You need to demonstrate your knowledge of alternative methods and make the case that your approach is the most appropriate and most valid way to address your research question.?Please note that your research question may be best answered by qualitative research. However, since most mainstream psychologists are still biased against qualitative research, especially the phenomenological variety, you may need to justify your qualitative method.?Furthermore, since there are no well-established and widely accepted canons in qualitative analysis, your method section needs to be more elaborate than what is requiredfor traditional quantitative research. More importantly, the data collection process in qualitative research has a far greater impact on the results as compared to quantitative research. That is another reason for greater care in describing how you will collect and analyze your data. (How to write the Method section for qualitative research is a topic for another paper.)?For quantitative studies, the method section typically consists of the following sections:?1. Design -Is it a questionnaire study or a laboratory experiment What kind of design do you choose?2. Subjects or participants – Who will take part in your study What kind of sampling procedure do you use?3. Instruments – What kind of measuring instruments or questionnaires do you use Why do you choose them Are they valid and reliable?4. Procedure – How do you plan to carry out your study What activities are involved How long does it take?RESULTS:?Obviously you do not have results at the proposal stage. However, you need to have some idea about what kind of data you will be collecting, and what statistical procedureswill be used in order to answer your research question or test you hypothesis.?DISCUSSION:?It is important to convince your reader of the potential impact of your proposed research. You need to communicate a sense of enthusiasm and confidence without exaggerating the merits of your proposal. That is why you also need to mention the limitations and weaknesses of the proposed research, which may be justified by time and financial constraints as well as by the early developmental stage of your research area.?Common Mistakes in Proposal Writing?1. Failure to provide the proper context to frame the research question.?2. Failure to delimit the boundary conditions for your research.?3. Failure to cite landmark studies.?4. Failure to accurately present the theoretical and empirical contributions by other researchers.?5. Failure to stay focused on the research question.?6. Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research.?7. Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues.?8. Too much rambling — goin g “all over the map” withouta clear sense of direction. (The best proposals move forward with ease and grace like a seamless river.)?9. Too many citation lapses and incorrect references.?10. Too long or too short.?11. Failing to follow the APA style.?12. Slopping writing.?大多数学生和刚起步的研究者都不了解什么是研究计划，也不知道其重要性。
留学研究方案(research proposal)模板3
Title of research:An investigation into the barriers to and priorities for research development in health librarianship.Objectives:•To identify key barriers to and priorities for research development in health librarianship•To administrate a national electronic survey to health librarians and information specialists in England, Scotland and Wales.Please give a brief justification of your proposed research project:The question this study aims to answer is: What are the barriers to and priorities for research development in health librarianship? This question has been given minimal levels of consideration in the professional literature to date and is a question of importance for a number of reasons. There is now a growing literature base that recognises the need for librarians to engage more with research (Powell, Baker et al. 2002; Juznic and Urbanija 2003; Koufogiannakis and Slater 2004; Koufogiannakis and Crumley 2006). Within the current context of health librarianship strategies are neededto engage with this more fully and in order to effectively address the associated issues that relate to improved decision making skills, evidence based practice, and the improvement of patient care. This is particularly pertinent in light of the recent HillReport (Hill 2008, p35) which specifically recommends that “research to measure the impact of the application of best available evidence in decision making should continueto be pursued vigorously and routinely by health librarians, in partnership with researchers’.Much of the work health librarians are involved with is directly linked to evidence based health practice, and evidence based medicine and research forms a substantial aspectof this (Eldredge 2000; Hill 2008). Whilst there is a demand on health professionals to justify and base their practice on robust research based evidence, there is little evidence that health librarians are engaging with this in relation to their own professional practice. Largely, their involvement with evidence based practice is linked directly to health practice rather than the practice of librarianship. The lack of evidence based practice in librarianship jeopardises the credibility of health librarians in their involvement with evidence based health practice and it is widely reported that increased engagement with evidence based librarianship amongst the profession is becoming increasingly important. For health librarians to credibly support evidence based health practice / medicine it is arguable that the profession should be able to demonstrate evidence based practice in relation to its own professional practice (Eldredge 2000; Booth and Brice 2003; Grant 2003). This is particularly relevant since the end purpose of health librarianship is directly linked to the improvement of patient care (Hill 2008). For health librarians totake a truly evidence based approach to their professional practice, increased engagement with research activities is necessary. At present however, there is little evidence that health librarians are engaging with research in relation to their ownprofessional practice (Booth 2002; Booth and Brice 2003). Whilst some small pockets of active engagement exist, largely this remains a specialist interest area rather than something that is taken on board profession-wide (Booth 2002). Reluctance to conduct research in relation to health librarianship (rather than health practice) within the profession is widely documented (Booth 2002; Booth 2003). However, with the exception of a generic study (McNicol and Nankivell 2003) which aimed to survey librarians from all subject disciplines and which had poor coverage of health librarians, the reasons behind this have not as yet been fully investigated.The study by McNicol and Nankivell (2003) identified the LIS research agenda to be poorly organised and lacking in direction. It is expected that in carrying out this study a deeper understanding of the reluctance amongst health librarians to engage in research and other related issues they perceive create barriers to their engagement with research activity will be gained. The study will also aim to investigate what they feel are the priorities for research development to aid this current situation. It is anticipated that from the data collected, a clearer and deeper understanding of the issues can be acquired. This will inform the development of a framework which will provide clarity and direction for the profession. Furthermore, it will make recommendations as to how best research development can be taken forward in the profession based on sound evidence derived from the population to which it concerns. The use of a large scale electronic web based survey method will help to acquire a valid data set which is expected to make a substantial and effective contribution to answering the research question. The results and recommendations will be widely disseminated through a variety of appropriate channels.ReferencesBooth, A. (2002). "Mirage or reality." Health information and libraries journal 19(2): 56-58.Booth, A. (2003). "Bridging the research-practice gap: the role of evidence based librarianship." The New Review of Information and Library Research 9(1): 3-23.Booth, A. and A. Brice (2003). "Clear-cut?: facilitating health librarians to use information research in practice." Health information and libraries journal 20(S1): 45-52.Eldredge, J. D. (2000). "Evidence-based librarianship: an overview." Bulletin of the Medical Library Association 88(4): 289-302.Grant, M. L. (2003). "Journal clubs for continued professional development." Health information and libraries journal 20(1): 72-78.Hill, P. (2008). Report of a national review of NHS library services in England: from knowledge to health in the 21st century. Newcastle, Institute of Health and Society.Juznic, P. and J. Urbanija (2003). "Developing research skills in library and information studies." Library Management 274(6/7): 324-331.Koufogiannakis, D. and E. Crumley (2006). "Research in librarianship: issues to consider." Library Hi Tech 24(3): 324-340.Koufogiannakis, D. and L. Slater (2004). "A content analysis of librarianship research." Journal of Information Science 30(3): 227-239.McNicol, S. and C. Nankivell (2003). The LIS research landscape: a review and prognosis, Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals.Powell, R. R., L. M. Baker, et al. (2002). "Library and information science practitioners and research." Library and Information Science Research 24(1): 49-72.Please outline the proposed sample group, including any specific criteria: The sample group will aim to include representation from eight identified areas of health librarianship:Senior strategic health librariansClinical librariansHealth library service managersSenior information strategy managersAcademic health librariansIndependent health librariansResearch librariansAcademicsThe qualifying criteria required for inclusion in the survey will be health librarians and information specialists working in the above context areas, and who hold a professional LIS qualification (ie. degree level or above).Describe how the proposed sample group will be formulated:The study will aim to cover a wide sample group formulated from individuals working in the context areas identified above. Potential participants will be identified from LIS related JISCmail groups, professional directories, university LIS departments, special interest and professional groups, and cascades through senior managers and group Chairs.Indicate clearly what the involvement of the sample group will be in the research process:The involvement of the sample group in the study will extend to the completion of an electronic survey which will be sent via email.Specify how the consent of participants will be obtained. Please include within this a description of any information with which you intend to provide the subjects:Consent will be gained from respondents immediately before participants complete the survey. An invitation email will be sent out to potential participants containing details about the study and a link to the survey. Consent will be obtained from respondents through the inclusion of a statement of consent which will be embedded at the beginning of the survey before the respondent commences with completion of their response. Upon accessing the survey link, respondents will be directed to read the statement of consent and offered the option to consent to their involvement in the study or not. Provided the participant opts to consent to their participation, the survey will then open for them to complete. From the time of sending out the invitation to participate and link to the survey, potential respondents will be given six weeks in which to complete the survey (with a reminder being sent out at three weeks), if they decide to do so after having read the statement of consent.Indicate any potential risks to subjects and how you propose to minimise these:Participation in this survey presents no potential risks to the participants. Participants and their organisations will not be named in subsequent write ups and material submitted for publication.Describe the procedures you intend to follow in order to maintain the anonymity and confidentiality of the subjects:The email addresses from which responses will be sent will be automatically removed by the survey software used (SurveyMonkey). The identity of respondents will therefore not be known to the researchers at the survey return stage. Participants and their organisations will not be named in subsequent write ups and material submitted for publication.RESEARCH CONSENT FORMTitle of studyAn investigation into the barriers to and priorities for research development in health librarianshipPlease read and complete this form carefully. If you are willing to participate in this study, ring the appropriate responses and sign and date the declaration at the end. If you do not understand anything and would like more information, please ask.I have had the research satisfactorily explained to me in written form by the researcher. YES / NOI understand that the research will involve:•The completion of an electronic survey on the topic of research development issues in health librarianship.YES / NOI understand that I may withdraw from this study at any time without having to give an explanation.YES / NOI understand that all information about me will be treated in strict confidence and that I will not be named in any written work arising from this studyYES / NOI understand that any data collected will be used solely for research purposes and will be erased on completion of your research.YES / NOI understand that the data will only be discussed within the research teamYES / NOI understand that survey participants and their respective organisations will not be named in subsequent write ups and material submitted for publicationYES / NOI freely give my consent to participate in this research study and have been given a copy of this form for my own information.Signature: ………………………………………………………Name (capital letters)…………………………………………..Date: ……………………………………………………………Contact details: (include address, email and telephone number) ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………Thank you for your interest in the study.。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
大多数学生和刚起步的研究者都不了解什么是研究计划，也不知道其重要性。
简单的说，一个人研究计划的好坏决定了其研究的好坏。
一个构思欠佳的研究计划会毁了整个项目，即使它勉强通过了论文答辩委员会。
另一方面，一个高质量的研究计划，不仅确保了研究项目的成功，你作为一个研究者的潜力也会给论文委员会留下一个好印象。
一个研究计划是为了说服别人你有一个有价值的研究计划，同时你有这个能力和相应的工作计划来完成它。
总之，一个研究计划应包含所有研究过程中的关键步骤，同时也会给读者足够的信息来评估这个拟定的研究。
不论你的研究领域是什么，你选择了什么样的方法，所有的研究计划必须解决以下问题：你打算完成什么，为什么你要做这件事，以及你打算怎样去完成它。
研究计划应该有足够的信息来向你的读者证明你有一个重要的研究想法，你对相关文献和主要问题有很好的把握，同时你的方法是切实可行的。
研究计划的质量不仅取决于研究项目本身，同时也取决于你的计划书写作。
一个好的研究项目也可能会有仅仅因为不好的写作而被否决的风险。
因此，非常值得你去写得连贯，清晰并且令人信服。
这篇文章强调的是计划书的写作，而非研究思路的开展。
标题：
标题应该简明扼要。
比如，“一个关于…的研究”，这样的句子就应该避免。
通常，标题是表达功能关系，因为这样的标题清晰的表达了独立和相关的变量。
然而，应尽可能，想一个内容翔实又吸引人的标题。
一个有效的标题不仅会激发读者的兴趣，也预示了他们会喜欢这个计划。
摘要：
摘要是一个300字左右的简要归纳。
它应该包括研究问题，研究的理论基础，假说（如有的话），方法以及主要发现。
对方法的描述可能包括试验设计，步骤，样本，还有任何将被用到的手段。
引言：
引言的主要目的是为你的研究问题提供必要的背景。
如何设定研究问题可能是计划书写作最难的部分。
如果研究问题被限定在一个概括的，不着边际的文献回顾里，研究问题就会显得琐碎和无趣。
然而，如果同样的问题被设定在一个当前非常被关注的研究领域里，它的重要性就变得不言而喻了。
不幸的是，对如何设定你的研究问题并没有任何硬性规定，正如没有对如何写出有趣和翔实的开头段的规定一样。
很大程度上要靠你自己的创造力，要取决于你清晰思维的能力和你对问题领域理解的深度。
首先，尝试着把你的研究问题放到当前的热门领域，或是一个陈旧但依然可行的领域；其次，你需要提供一个简要而适当的历史背景；再者，提供该问题的当下背景，在这里，你提出的研究问题应该是关注的焦点。
最后，确定“关键角色”（key players），参考最相关和最有代表性的论文。
总之，把你的研究问题放到
一个大的背景下，但同时体现出他的重要性。
引言一般以对该领域的简单描述开始，同时关注某一特定的研究问题，接下来是拟定研究的基本原理。
引言部分通常包含以下内容：
1. 描述该研究问题，一般也叫研究目的；
2. 为你的研究问题提供背景，设定其范围，以体现出它的必要性和重要性；
3. 说明你研究问题的理论依据，要清楚的指出为什么该研究是值得去做的；
4. 简要描述该研究要解决的主要及次要问题；
5. 确定你试验中关键的独立或相关变量。
或者，明确说明你想要研究的现象；
6. 阐述你的假说或理论，如有的话。
对于探索性或现象解释型的研究，你可能不会有任何假说。
（请不要混淆假说和统计学上的零假设）；
7.设定你研究计划的局限或边界，以提供一个清晰的研究重点；
8. 给关键概念下定义（此项为可选）；
文献综述：
文献综述有时也包括到简介部分。
然而，大多数教授更喜欢一个单独的部分，这样可以更全面地回顾相关文献。
文献综述有以下一些重要功能：
1. 确保你不是“重新发明车轮”（意即不是重复前人已有的成果）；
2. 向奠定该研究基础的前人致谢；
3. 说明你对该研究问题的了解；
4. 阐述你对该问题相关的理论和研究的理解；
5. 展现你对相关文献资料的批判评价能力；
6 显示你整合现有文献的能力；
7. 提供新的理论见解或发展一种新的模式，作为你研究的概念框架；
8. 向你的读者证明该研究计划会对现有文献做出重要的和实质性的贡献。
（比如，解决一个重要的理论问题或者填补一个主要空白）；
大多数学生的文献综述都有以下问题：
* 缺乏组织结构
* 缺乏重点，整体性和连贯性
* 冗长重复
* 没有引用重要文献
* 没有跟上最新进展
* 没有对所引文献进行批判分析
* 引用了不相关或不重要的文献
* 过多依赖二手资料
如果你的研究计划里有任何上述问题，你的学术和研究能力就会受到质疑。
有多种方式来组织文献综述。
利用副标题来使你的综述有序和连贯。
比如，在展示了你研究领域的重要性和最新研究进展之后，你可能会用几个小节来探讨相关问题，如理论模型，测定手段，跨文化和性别差异，等等。
同时也要牢记你是在向听众讲一个故事。
要试着以一种具有启发性的方式讲述，而不要使他们感到厌烦，因为这可能导致你的计划被否决。
（记住，教授和科学家们也是人。
）
方法：方法部分非常重要，因为它会告诉研究委员会你准备如何来解决该研究问题。
该部分要提出你的工作计划，并说明完成你项目所需的必要活动。
攥写方法部分的指导原则就是，应包含足够的信息，以便读者判断该方法是否有效可行。
你也应该说明对其他可行方法的看法，以证明你的方法是解决该研究问题最适当和最有效的途径。
表明你的研究问题能被定性的研究所回答。
然而，大多数主流的心理学家仍然对定性研究抱有偏见，尤其是针对各种现象，因此你可能需要证明你的定性方法。
而且在定性分析时，并没有一个好的而又被广泛接受的经典方法，所以你的方法部分就需要阐述得比传统定量研究所要求的更为详尽。
更重要的是，相比定量研究，数据的收集过程对定性研究的结果有更重大的影响。
这是你需要更加小心地描述你将如何收集和分析数据的另一个原因。
（如何攥写定性分析的方法部分需要另文讨论）
对定量研究来说，方法部分通常包括以下内容：
1. 研究设计-是问卷调查研究还是一个实验室的试验？你将选择什么样的设计？
2. 研究对象或参与者――谁将会参与你的研究？你将采用什么样的抽样程序？
3. 研究手段――你将采用什么样的测量手段或问卷？你为什么要选择这些方法？他们是否有效可靠？
4. 研究步骤――你打算如何开展研究？有哪些过程将被包括？需要多长时间？
结果：
很显然，在研究计划准备阶段你并没有研究结果。
不过，你将收集哪些数据，什么样的统计方法将会用于解答你的研究问题或验证你的假设，关于这些你应该有一些想法。
讨论：
向读者说明你研究的潜在影响很重要。
在交流时你应该热情而自信，但又不能夸大该研究的价值。
这就是为什么你还需要说明该研究的局限和不足，可能是因为时间和经济上的限制，也可能是因为你研究领域还是在发展初期。
研究计划攥写时常犯的错误：
1. 拟定研究问题时没有提供合适的背景；
2. 没有给研究设定边界条件；
3. 没有引用标志性的研究；
4. 未准确指出其他研究者在理论和实践上做出的贡献；
5. 未能持续关注所研究的问题；
6. 未能给该研究提出一个条理分明和有说服力的论据；
7. 在次要问题上太多细节，在主要问题上却细节不足；
8. 过于松散，都是泛泛而谈，没有明确的方向。
（好的研究建议方向明确，展开论述从容不迫，就像一条连续的河流）；
9. 过多的引用笔误和错误引用；
10.太过冗长或过于简短；
11. 没有遵循美国心理学会写作格式规范（APA style）；
12. Slopping writing.？？。