Prospectus for PHD dissertation
You and your colleagues have simulated the type of reviews and feedback as you developed a preliminary prospectus that you will come to expect from your committee. Now that you have received and incorporated the feedback from your group's members, you will submit your preliminary prospectus to your Instructor.
For this Application, think of your Instructor as the University Research Reviewer (URR) assigned to your committee. Although your Chair is responsible for ensuring that your finished dissertation meets the graduate-level expectations of Walden University, the URR will serve as a source of independent feedback on your proposal and dissertation. Because the URR is not involved in all the earlier stages of the drafts of proposals/dissertations, the URR gives the committee an independent quality assessment on your dissertation proposal and final draft. In actual practice, the URR usually communicates questions and comments only to your committee, who will then forward them on to you. This week, your Instructor will simulate the role of the URR, providing you with a source of independent feedback on your preliminary prospectus. Because this is only a simulation, the Instructor will give feedback to you directly.
Your preliminary prospectus should include a self-assessment using the ProspectusThe key indicators in the Dissertation Prospectus Rubric are used to assure the overall quality of the dissertation project, at this point in the development process. Students should use this rubric to guide development of their Dissertation Prospectus. Committee members should use the rubric to give on-going feedback, and to document their final acceptance of the prospectus.
Faculty Instructions
For each item, choose "met" or "not met" if the Dissertation Prospectus meets that quality indicator. For items marked "not met", please indicate ways in which the prospectus can be improved to meet the standard and forward the rubric to the student
Does the prospectus contain all the required elements? Refer to the annotated outline to see the required parts of the Dissertation Prospectus document.
Has a meaningful problem or gap in the research literature been identified? In other words, is addressing this problem the logical next step, given the previous exploratory and confirmatory research (or lack thereof) on this topic? It is not acceptable to simply replicate previous research for a Ph.D. degree.
Is evidence presented that this problem is significant to the discipline and/or professional field? The prospectus should provide relevant statistics and evidence, documentable discrepancies, and other scholarly facts that point to the significance and urgency of the problem.
Is the problem framed to enable the researcher to either build upon or counter the previously published findings on the topic? For most fields, grounding involves articulating the problem within the context of a theoretical base or conceptual framework. Although many approaches can ground a study in the scientific literature, the essential requirement is that the problem is framed such that the new findings will have implications for the previous findings.
Does this project have potential to make an original contribution? The problem must be an authentic "puzzle" that needs solving, not merely a topic that the researcher finds interesting. Addressing the problem should result in an original contribution to the field or discipline.
Does this project have potential to affect positive social change? As described in the Significance section, the anticipated findings have potential to support the mission of Walden University to promote positive social change.
Can a systematic method of inquiry be used to address the problem? The tentative methodology demonstrates that the researcher has considered the options for inquiry and has selected an approach that has potential to address the problem.
Do the various aspects of the prospectus align overall? The nature of the study should align with the problem, research questions, and tentative approaches to inquiry.
Is the topic approached in an objective manner?
The framing of the problem should not reveal bias or present a foregone conclusion. Even if the researcher has a strong opinion on the expected findings, the researcher must maximize scholarly objectivity by framing the problem in the context of a systematic inquiry that permits multiple possible conclusions.
Attachment:- Template.rar