Dissertation Proposal: [Working title]

Research proposal template for a doctoral or master's dissertation, for a confirmation review, qualifying examination or admission application. It covers the rationale, research questions, literature, conceptual framework, methods, analysis plan, ethics, timeline, budget and expected contribution. Based on common academic practice; follow your programme's proposal guidelines where they differ. Replace every [bracketed] value and every row marked Example.

Document control

Approvals

Revision history

Contents

1. Title and abstract
2. Background and rationale
3. Problem statement and purpose
4. Research questions and hypotheses
5. Literature review summary
6. Conceptual framework
7. Methodology
8. Data analysis plan
9. Ethical considerations
10. Timeline
11. Resources and budget
12. Expected contributions
13. Limitations and risks
14. References
15. Appendices

1. Title and abstract

Working title: [Specific title. Example: "Teacher feedback literacy and student uptake of written feedback in upper-secondary science: a mixed-methods study."]

Abstract: [Problem in one or two sentences. The gap. The aim and research questions. The design, setting, participants and analysis. The expected contribution to theory and practice.]

Keywords: [4-6 terms]

2. Background and rationale

[Describe the context and the practical or theoretical problem. Show its scale or consequences with evidence. Example: "National inspection reports for 2022-2024 found that written feedback was rarely acted on by students in 62% of observed science lessons, yet feedback remains the most common form of teacher assessment practice."]

[Explain the personal or professional motivation briefly if your discipline expects it, and state why you are positioned to do the work.]

3. Problem statement and purpose

Problem statement. [What is not known or not working, for whom, and the consequence of not knowing.]

Purpose statement. [Example: "The purpose of this study is to explain how teachers' feedback literacy relates to students' uptake of written feedback in upper-secondary science classrooms in [region]."]

4. Research questions and hypotheses

5. Literature review summary

5.1 Search approach

[Databases (for example ERIC, Scopus, Web of Science), main search terms, years covered and inclusion criteria, in two or three sentences.]

5.2 Key themes

5.3 Gap addressed by this study

[One paragraph stating precisely what the literature has not done and how the research questions address it.]

6. Conceptual framework

The framework below shows the concepts examined and the relationships the study expects to find. Arrows indicate proposed influence, not proven causation.

7. Methodology

7.1 Research design and paradigm

[Name the design (for example explanatory sequential mixed methods, multiple case study, longitudinal cohort) and explain why it fits the questions.]

7.2 Setting and participants

7.3 Instruments and data collection

[Describe each instrument, whether it is existing (with validity evidence) or new (with a development and piloting plan), and the procedure and timing of data collection.]

7.4 Access and recruitment

[How you will reach participants, gatekeeper permissions already obtained or requested, and fallback options if access is refused.]

7.5 Pilot study

[Scope, sample and what the pilot will test: instrument clarity, timing, coding reliability or recruitment rate.] Example: "Two teachers and one class each from a non-participating school will complete the full procedure. Success criteria: survey completed in under 20 minutes; inter-coder agreement on uptake of at least 0.70; no question flagged as unclear by more than one participant. Instruments will be revised before main data collection."

8. Data analysis plan

Example model for RQ2, with uptake $Y_{ij}$ for student $i$ of teacher $j$:

where $\text{FL}_j$ is the teacher's feedback-literacy score and $u_{0j}$ the teacher-level random effect.

9. Ethical considerations

Ethics application to: [Committee name], planned submission YYYY-MM-DD.

10. Timeline

The plan below shows a sample three-year schedule. Replace dates and durations with your own.

11. Resources and budget

Other resources: [supervision hours, training courses, statistical consulting, equipment or archives you need access to].

12. Expected contributions

Planned outputs: [journal articles, conference presentations, a practitioner summary, open data and code].

13. Limitations and risks

Limitations of the design. [Example: The correlational design cannot establish that feedback literacy causes uptake; self-report measures may be affected by social desirability.]

14. References

[List references in the required style.]

• Example (APA 7): [Author, A. A.] ([2022]). [Title of article]. [Journal], [47]([3]), [321-338]. https://doi.org/[10.xxxx/xxxxx]
• [Reference]

15. Appendices

Self-review before submission

Ask your supervisor, or a peer, to check the proposal against these questions, which review panels commonly use.

• Is the problem important and the gap clearly stated with evidence?
• Are the research questions specific, answerable and few?
• Does every research question map to a data source and an analysis?
• Is the sample justified, and is access to it credible?
• Are the instruments valid for this population, or is there a plan to test them?
• Are ethical risks identified with concrete mitigations?
• Is the timeline realistic, with buffers for approval and recruitment?
• Is the expected contribution stated modestly and precisely?
• Is the proposal within the word limit and consistently referenced?

Standard and licence note

Based on common academic practice for dissertation and thesis proposals in the social and health sciences. Programme and institutional requirements take precedence over this template. Original text written for this collection; example content is illustrative. Template licence: MIT.