QUALITATIVE RESEARCH PROPOSAL WRITING ... in mind,… that qualitative research is uniquely suited...

Keep in mind,… that qualitative research is uniquely suited to discovery and

exploration. If you think of inquiry as a journey, the proposal is your itinerary. You

know the general destination, but the precise route you take may change.

Retaining flexibility (Rossman & Ralis, 2003:117)

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH PROPOSAL WRITING

TRAINING MODULE

FOR

DRTP PROGRAMME FOR 2009

PRESENTED

BY

PROF WILLEM SCHURINK

University of Stellenbosch Business School 8-12 September 2008

How do I transition from conceptualizing to proposing a study? How do I

convey to others that my study is worthwhile and that I am capable of

conducting it? How do I use features of my conceptualization to inform

and shape the structure of my proposal? What actually goes into my

research proposal? (Glassner, 2006: 150).

© This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No

Derivative Works 2.5 South Africa License. To view a copy of this license, visit

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/za/ or send a letter to Creative

Commons, 171 Second Street, Suite 300, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

Page 1

INTRODUCTION

The aim of a proposal is to explain and justify your proposed study. This chapter

aims to outline the major considerations when one prepares a qualitative research

proposal to enable a faculty committee, a funding agency, and/or other reviewers,

to judge whether your envisaged study is a worthwhile, valid and a coherent

one. In doing so, I will also show and explain the relationship between the

research design and the proposal. However, before discussing the nature of a

qualitative research proposal, we first need to look at what a proposal is.

The research proposal first and foremost, should highlight your decisions to

determine and justify the what, why, and how of your study (Marshall &

Rossman 1999). According to Marshall and Rossman (1999) it needs to point out

(i) why anybody should be interested in one’s proposed study, (ii) whether the

particular study’s research design is credible, achievable, and carefully planned,

and (iii) whether one is capable of doing the study. In Silverman’s view (2000)

these requirements can be met by (i) being practical, (ii) being persuasive, (iii)

making broader links, (iv) aiming for crystal clarity, and (v) planning before

writing.

Schram (2006: 150-151) writes that a well-conceived proposal needs to address

the following questions:

What is the focus of your inquiry?

What are the aims of your inquiry?





Page 2

How and why is your inquiry worthwhile and important?

Does the way you plan to proceed with your inquiry make sense?

Is it clear that you know what you‟re up to in conducting the inquiry?

Is there an overall coherence to the reasoning that underlies your inquiry?

Maxwell (2005), Piantanida and Garman (1999), and Schram (2006) correctly

point out that in stead of merely providing a descriptive specification of what one

anticipates doing, your qualitative research proposal should reflect a clear,

contestable argument explaining and justifying the logic of your study. One’s task

here is getting down to essentials: how each choice you made flows

logically into others, and how all fit together as a coherent whole (Schram,

2006: 151).

The following is excellent advice:

Your proposal should be about your study, not the literature, your research

topic, or research methods in general. You should ruthlessly edit out

anything in the proposal that does not directly contribute to the explanation

and justification of your study (Emphasis in original) (Maxwell, 2005: 119).

Schram (2006) advices that one needs to embrace the following:

Ownership. The proposal is a matter of your envisaged research; ensure

that the concepts upon which you draw are serving your purpose and not the

other way around.

Focus. You need to stay engaged with your problem and purpose. Use

relevant and supplementary information on a ―this-helps-me-make-my-case‖

basis rather than on a ―see-how-much-I-know‖ basis.





Page 3

Purposefulness. You must take care not to confuse clarity in your proposal

with ―the deceptive ease of a neat, tidy, and potentially self-fulfilling

explanation or defence of some anticipated conclusions. While one need not

avoid all the complexity with which you have come to terms you need to ―be

purposeful, particularly in terms of building your argument towards a

meaningful, well-defined, and clearly justified research question‖ (Schram,

2006, 151).

In constructing your research proposal one needs to keep those who will be

reading the proposal in mind. A research proposal is primarily written for the

evaluation of reviewers i.e. researchers explain the details of their plan for a

particular study for someone else’s review and/or approval. The warning of

Maxwell (2005) should therefore be heeded that proposals should be set out

clearly what the researcher plans to do and how she/he is planning doing it, since

advisors and reviewers more often turn down proposals because they don’t

understand it than being in disagreement with what is proposed. Since reviewers

are often not knowledgeable in the proposed study field, and therefore it is

essential that researchers make sure that the proposal is written in such a manner

that it would be clear to non-specialists (Maxwell 2005).

It is important to be crystal clear in writing one’s proposal and to be

persuasive; arguing convincingly that the envisaged study is important. It is

essential to resist displaying technical jargon, e.g., abstract concepts, one

acquired in studying the literature. Strive to assume nothing and explain everything

(Morse, 1994). Explaining everything also implies that one demonstrates the ability

to think clearly, which is “the best indicator that your research itself will be

organized in a clear and logical way ― (Silverman, 2000: 115).





Page 4

Following from the preceding, a proposal needs to (i) cohere, i.e. flow logically

from one point/argument to the next; form a logical structure, and (ii) be coherent,

i.e. makes sense to colleagues and reviewers.

You need to put yourself in your readers‟ shoes, and think about how what

you say will be understood by them. This requires avoiding jargon,

unnecessarily complex style, and what Becker (1986) called “classy writing”.

A failure to achieve these two aspects of coherence is the source of the

most common problems with proposals: Either they have inconsistencies or

gaps in their reasoning, or they don‟t adequately communicate to the

reviewers what the author wants to do and why, or both (Maxwell, 2005:

120).

The work of Piantanida and Garman (1999) further illustrates the importance of the

logic of justification in proposal writing.

Secondly, as Schram (2006: 150) and Maxwell (2005:120) suggest there is a

close relationship between research design and proposing the study (See

Schematic Representation 1). The relationships among your research design’s

components constitute a crucial part of arguing your proposal.

These relationships provide the coherence that your argument depends on.

Above all else, your proposal must convey to the readers what these

connections are (Maxwell, 2005: 121)





Page 5

SCHEMATIC REPRESENTATION 1: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE RESEARCH DESIGN AND THE PROPOSAL

Validity

DESIGN PROPOSAL

(Abstract) Title Introduction (orientate reader to purpose) Conceptual context and theoretical orientation Research questions (description of setting) Research procedures (rationalize methodology and methods of data collection and analysis) (Ethical issues) Validity/quality Significance and implications(address so what questions Timetable to research

Conceptual

framework

Methods

Research

questions

Goals





Page 6

Thirdly, a qualitative research proposal also serves as a plan to guide oneself

when executing the project and should be seen as flexible. If the researcher is not

getting the type of data needed …the problems encountered must be documented

and the proposal (and research design) altered to fit the research conditions

(Morse 2004: 493). More specifically, besides the qualitative research proposal

entailing a plan presenting and justifying the envisaged study, it is a plan to

preserve the design flexibility, which is so important in conducting qualitative

research.

Fourthly, a proposal forms the basis for the working relationship between you and

your supervisor/promoter. In this sense, the proposal is not unlike a contract or

agreement. You are effectively telling your supervisor/promoter what you wish to

study and how. Once he or she has accepted your proposal and has given his

or her approval for you to continue, an agreement has been reached and a

kind of contract has been drawn up between the two of you. You agree to

undertake the proposed study along the lines discussed and outlined in the

proposal. Your supervisor, in turn, agrees to provide you with the necessary

guidance and supervision to achieve this goal. Although not legally binding, a

strong moral commitment is presupposed on the part of both parties.

STRUCTURING THE PROPOSAL

While there are obviously various ways of structuring research proposals with

basically every university department and funding source having its own

preferences, the ideas of Rossman and Rallis (2003), Maxwell (2005) and Schram

(2006) are particularly useful. Therefore I borrow quite extensively from them in

this discussion.





Page 7

It is particularly useful to follow Rossman and Rallis’ (2003: 118) opening remark:

Imagine the conceptual framework as a funnel; the large end describes the

general phenomenon—the topic—and articulates the theoretical

perspective; the smaller end describes the specific project proposed. The

design and methods section, then, stipulates how the study will be

implemented: where and what you will do, and how you will do it.

While one’s particular needs and style may lead one to variations in proposing

one’s research, the following specific issues represent what is generally regarded

important when one drafts one’s research proposal. Differently phrased: What

should go into a qualitative research proposal? Let us now consider these

components more closely.

Title

The title should convey the conceptual points of reference for one’s study; it

should reflect what you want to research and should indicate the

perspective orienting your approach. Additionally, it is advisable that the title

conveys sufficient information to attract the attention of possible readers and

enable your work to be catalogued in an appropriate reference category (see

Wolcott 2001). While the title needs to be imaginative it needs not to reflect every

key aspect of the qualitative research process, like the purpose of the study

(explorative, descriptive and/or explanatory), the type of design, or methods

employed (grounded theory, case study, phenomenological, autobiographical,

etc.), and/or the geographical area where the study is to be conducted.

Introduction





Page 8

A captivating introduction is important so as to convince the reviewer of the

importance of the research proposal must first be personalised by introducing the

problem in a personal, enthusiastic manner, convincing the reviewer of the

importance of the study and your interest and ability to do it. The introductory

section of the proposal presents a framework for your proposed study.

The purpose of the introductory section of the proposal is six fold. Firstly, the

problem is introduced in such a way that it will attract and retain the attention and

interest of the reader. Secondly, the background or setting of the problem is

provided that will sketch the context and the dynamics of the problem. Thirdly,

the research area or topic is demarcated by identifying a target group and

highlighting the impact of the problem on them. Fourthly a motivation for the

study is offered by discussing the deficiencies in the literature regarding the

problem. This explains the rationale for the study. Fifthly, a general statement of

the purpose of the research is stated that could lead into general and specific

research questions. Lastly, the expected value of the research contribution is

described.

Key focus of the study

The most important aspects of this section are to present the purpose of the

study and to give a preview of the main research question(s). In this section of

the proposal you should thus begin to As Piantanida and Garman (1999) point out,

providing contextual background from a personal perspective is an effective way

you may frame your study: stating what brought you to this study, and why do

you find the research fascinating? You should also indicate the structure and

organization of the proposal in this section. In the excerpts of proposals that follow

I will borrow from the proposals of some of my students in order to provide a

practical illustration of proposal writing.





Page 9

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Key focus of the study

As a professional career woman having worked in a financial Institution for the past 19 years I had to overcome multiple obstacles in my drive towards reaching my full potential as professional. In facing these barriers I experienced emotions of frustration, anger and helplessness. It has come to my attention, through my day-to-day profession, as well as through women who have confided in me, that I’m not alone in this but that other women in leadership positions shared these experiences. I therefore have a burning desire to establish how other professional women, in similar situations, experienced achieving their current positions in the financial institution where I was employed. This document is the map for the journey I foresee that I need to take to find the real me. In my conquest to gain insight into myself, and analyzing my struggle to reach my full potential, I also aim to help other women in leadership positions to obtain an understanding of their own strengths and weaknesses and of how they could become the best they possibly can be. In this research proposal I will outline who I am and who I want to be, what my aims for this research are and how I am going to go about doing the research.

Checklist: - What is my research area? - What is my topic and how does it fit into the research area? - Do I reflect my personal interest and enthusiasm for the topic without

being bias? - Is the study relevant and topical?





Page 10

Background or setting of the problem

The context or setting of the problem provides the décor against which the

problem unfolds (Roodt & Fouche, 2004). The background of the phenomenon

under study should be presented within a specific context. In qualitative research

this context could include a lived experience (the effect the phenomenon had on

you), The focus should be on the dynamics of the problem. It is therefore not

necessary to present an entire literature study as background to the problem.

Remember that the introduction should only set the stage for the research.

In sum, the introduction should draw readers into your inquiry while orientating

them in general terms to its nature and purpose…It is sufficient that your audience

members have a sense of what might appear on that stage, not to be required to

read the entire script, assured that details and dialogue will follow (Schram

2006:157).

Context of the problem

Next your perceived justification for studying the phenomenon and the belief that

it is important to undertake the study should be outlined. The introduction of the

topic should convey the relevancy of the study within a particular context, e.g. a

theoretical problem, a specific target group or area or a lived experience. It

should therefore be clear why it is important to study this particular phenomenon.

Motivation (rationale) for the study

Firstly, the relevance and significance of your study should be clarified. Here

previous research on your research topic is very important. This ensures that you

do not rediscover already existent knowledge or reinvent the wheel. The more one

discovers what already exists, the easier it becomes for you to demarcate the gaps

and to focus your research questions.





Page 11

It is important to discuss the relevant literature. For both quantitative and

qualitative research proposals you need to indicate the relationship of the

proposed study to the relevant literature and indicate how the literature will be

dealt with in your study.

In contrast to quantitative research some qualitative researchers argue that the

literature should not be extensively reviewed at the proposal stage since it may

contaminate the inductive, open-ended nature of qualitative inquiry. In this regard

Rossman and Rallis (2003: 123) provide sound advice:

Discussing the literature helps to articulate your perspective and to

establish your credibility as a researcher, indicating that you are familiar

with the conversation in your topic area. Although extensive reviews are

not necessary, some discussion is crucial for framing the study. Try for

creative, inductive use of previous research and theory to build a case for

your study. Use that literature throughout the conception portion of the

proposal

In proposal writing it is therefore important that the literature should not be used

as a restaurant chef that would demonstrate a command of cooking simply by

dumping recipes, unmixed ingredients, and cooking utensils on your table. But as

a chef who will come to your tableside to concoct a meal providing lively and

precise narration about the selection and contribution of this or that ingredient

and spice, since he is the one that will whet your appetite for what’s being offered

and instil confidence in what he can do (Schram, 2006: 161).

A sound motivation for the study should be presented. The problem should be

substantial/comprehensive in nature and a pressing need must exist to address





Page 12

the problem. Evidence should be presented on the extent and actuality of the

problem (e.g. in monetary terms) and what impact it would have on, for example,

society, organisations, teams, individuals, etc. if it would persist. The motivation

for the study is set out in such a way that it elucidates the rationale for the

research and the purpose of the study.

It is clear from the above he study should be introduced in such a way that that

the reader is convinced that the proposed research is relevant and topical.

Evidence should be focused and specific, yet sufficiently extensive on a

theoretical level to convince the reviewers that it warrants further research. Care

should be taken not to create straw dolls (pseudo-problems) that come apart at a

later stage (Roodt and Fouché, 2004: 4).

The purpose of the research and research questions

The problem statement should be presented either as a research question, a

problem statement or a research goal. Mason (1996:15-16) provides the

following description of a research question:

Checklist:

- For what reasons must the problem be addressed?

- What impact does the problem have?

- Is the problem substantial/comprehensive in nature?

- What evidence verifies that the problem actually exists?

- Has the current level of knowledge regarding the phenomenon clearly

been indicated?

- What gap exists in the existing knowledge to address this

phenomenon in its specific context?

- How does your intended research fit into existing knowledge

- Will the intended research fill this gap?





Page 13

A research question is a question which the research is designed to address…

and, taken together, your research questions should express the essence of your

enquiry.

The aim of this section of your proposal is to identify the questions the research is

trying to answer or in a qualitative study, what questions will initiate the research?

In this regard Punch (2006) differentiates between pre-structured (quantitative)

research and unfolding (qualitative) research where the structure will only emerge

during the execution of the research. Such type of research will typically not have

specific research questions. A general approach is described rather than a tightly

prefigured design, and data are not pre-structured. These things will emerge or

unfold as the study progresses (Punch, 2006:13).

According to Mouton (2001) the research question is an idea or a notion about

what to investigate. However, he emphasises the importance of posing the

research question in such a way that data is needed to answer it. In other words

one should be able to move from research questions to research method (Punch

2006, p24).

When introducing the study to the reader it should be done in such a way that the

relevancy of the research question is clearly stated but not as a question to be

answered, but as one to be explored. This is true of both modernistic and post-

modernistic proposal writing (Josselson & Lieblich, 2003, p. 265). The research

question should therefore be focused and specific, yet sufficiently extensive on a

theoretical level to warrant further research.

The purpose of the study also needs to be explained in such a way that the

reviewer can understand what results the research study are likely to achieve.





Page 14

Qualitative research methodologies have the following major research purposes

namely: to explore, describe or understand the phenomenon of interest.

Differently stated, this research style aim to understand: the processes by which

events or actions take place; the context or the meaning of research participants’

situations, their experiences and actions or to develop causal explanations and

models needed for action research. In contrast quantitative research aims to

verify, explain and predict.

Qualitative research typically entails formulating questions to be explored and

developed in the course of the research process rather to test hypotheses by or

against empirical research. Thus in qualitative research it is important to note that

while posing research questions focuses the study you need to re-emphasize that

these need to be flexible. A well-known virtue of qualitative studies is their ability to

uncover the unexpected and to explore new avenues. From this it follows that in

qualitative research the proposal needs to be flexible in order to allow for data

collection to increasingly refined research questions.

Herein lies a dilemma, however. The proposal should be sufficiently clear both in

research questions and design that the reader can evaluate its do-ability. On the

other hand, the proposal should reserve the flexibility that is the hallmark of

qualitative methods. This suggests that the research questions should be general

enough to permit exploration but focused enough to delimit the study… Not an

easy task (Marshall & Rossman, 1995: 26).

It is helpful for students to concentrate on formulating the research questions first

before attempting to write the proposal. Doing this will clarify the purpose of the





Page 15

research and give an indication of the type of data needed to answer the

question (Punch, 2006).

Mason (2005, p.18) emphasises that the research question should be

ontologically meaningful and epistemologically explainable or workable and

therefore consistent with your positions. Therefore researchers will have to

modify their research questions when linking them to a methodological approach

and research methods.

Research questions forms the heart of one’s research proposal. It is thus

important that the research question clarifies the focus and logic of the study

(Schram 2006: 161). When introducing the study to the reader it should be done in

such a way that the relevancy of the research question is clearly stated, not as a

question to be answered, but as one to be explored. This is true of both

modernistic and postmodernistic research (Josselson & Lieblich, 2003: 265).

When constructing a research question it is also important to address the

intellectual and theoretical contributions of the study.

Research questions should be clearly formulated (whether or not you intend to

modify them or add to them later), intellectually worthwhile, and researchable

(both in terms of your epistemological position, and in practical terms), because it

is through them that you will be connecting what it is you wish to research with

how you are going to go about researching it (Mason: 19-20).

Particularly important here is to clarify two points:

How your questions relate to prior research and theory, to your own





Page 16

experience and exploratory research, and to your goals.

How these questions form a coherent whole, rather than being a random

collection of queries about your topic. Generally, a small number of clearly

focused questions is far better than a large number of questions that

attempt to “cover the waterfront” on your topic. If you have more than two

or three questions, you need to think about whether some of these are

best seen as sub-questions of a broader question, or if your study is fact,

attempting to do too much (Maxwell, 2005: 124).

Research questions explain concerns the researcher has with his or her study.

They form the backbone of your research design (Mason, 2005:19). In answering

these questions you should be addressing the intellectual and theoretical

contributions of your study. Research questions should be clearly formulated

(whether or not you intend to modify them or add to them later), intellectually

worthwhile, and researchable (both in terms of your epistemological position, and

in practical terms), because it is through them that you will be connecting what it

is you wish to research with how you are going to go about researching it

(Mason, 2005:19-20).

There are different levels of research questions; they vary from very general

ones to focused ones. It is worthwhile for researchers to get themselves into the

habit of constructing research questions. However, researchers will have to

modify their research questions when linking them with a methodological

approach and research methods, and when they encounter practical, ethical and

political issues.





Page 17

Finally Maxwell, (2005) provides the following type of questions researchers may

use in formulating research questions:

What specifically would you like to understand by doing this

study?”

“What do you want to learn?”

“What questions will your research attempt to answer and how are

these questions related to one another?”

“How do your questions relate to prior research and theory?”

“Do these questions form a coherent whole, or is it a random

collection of queries about your topic?

Anticipated contributions of the proposed research

The final decision researchers need to undertake at this juncture is to begin to

develop their thinking on how, that is, according to what principles and logic, they

will formulate and substantiate their claims and analysis. Differently put, they

should consider how they are going to ensure that they do quality research. It is

crucial that these measures of quality are considered during the research design

phase. They need to guide researchers in selecting appropriate methods,

sources and combinations of these, as well as other decisions that need to be

Checklist:

- What is my general research question?

- What are my specific research questions?

- Is it clear that data is needed to answer my research question(s)?

- Are there any ethical dilemmas that have not been dealt with?





Page 18

taken. Since they form part of the decision-making process they cannot be

reserved for a later phase of the research process. It is of crucial importance that

they are addressed in the research design phase.

If they are not, the researcher risks assembling an untidy bag of

methods with little logic, and with little hope of sensibly integrating

the products into a coherent analysis (Mason, 1996, p 26).

The purpose of this section is thus firstly, to address the possible ―So What‖

questions and to spell out clearly what the significance and the implications of

your study would be and what difference it would make. Secondly to reaffirm the

purposes of the inquiry and thirdly to provide an understanding to the reader that

the significance of the study does not rest in the data per se but also in the way

that you will be able to make sense of it. In this section you should also stress

the practical aims of your study (Schram 2006:176).

In addressing the so-what questions you should stress the significance and

implications of your study for the broader field of ideas, research and/or practice

in which it is situated (Schram 2006:176).

The following represent the type of questions you can expect:

So What?

What will we learn that we did not know before?

Why is it worth knowing?

How will it solve the problem?

How will it benefit the participants?





Page 19

How can your study be generalised?

The key issue is whether the research has any potential uses or benefits. Will your

research make a contribution, either to individuals or to a larger group or our

general knowledge base? Does it have the capacity to harm anyone—either

yourself or the research participants? Before you begin any research project, you

need to consider the potential benefits and risks (Esterberg, 2002: 32).

This part of the proposal address the very important question asked by

reviewers, namely: ―Why is the study worth doing?‖ The last part of the

introduction deals with the expected value-add of the study. The resolution of the

problem should yield some benefits. This is your opportunity to convince the

reader that your study is a worthwhile one. By anticipating the contribution of

your research you should thus be able to place the final piece of the puzzle

showing the whole picture to your audience. All that is left now is to sell the

picture to them.

In order to convince the reader of the worthiness of the study and why it should

be undertaken, you should be able to build an argument that your work will

contribute to one or more of the following domains, suggested by Rossman and

Rallis (2003):

Scholarly research and literature;

Policy issues;

Problems experienced in practice; and

The interests of the participants





Page 20

By now the reviewer should have a clear understanding of how what the

proposed research is about, what you are trying to achieve, how your proposed

research will fit into existing research and what contribution it will make to our

understanding of the topic.

In conclusion, whether doing a modernistic or post-modernistic study, the

purpose of the background section is neatly tied up by Josselson and Lieblich

(2003:263):

The aim of the background section, is to hold the tension between personal and

theoretical knowledge, to straddle the line between a necessary openness to

phenomena that are as-yet-unknown and theoretical sophistication that, loosely

held but firmly integrated intellectually, stands in the wings to illuminate the

interviewees‟ words, readings of the texts, and understanding of the narratives

that will emerge.

If one has addressed all the components in the introductory section of one’s

proposal, one’s introduction should provide an inviting, informative and analytical

review of the problem as well as a critical and balanced review of the existing

literature. You should also indicate the structure and organization of the

proposal in this section.

The first part of your proposal should be seen as a closely integrated unit. Your

research questions should have a clear relationship to the goals of your study,

and should be informed about what is already known about the phenomena you

are studying and the theoretical concepts and models that can be applied to

these phenomena. In addition, the goals of your study should be informed by

current theory and knowledge, while your decisions about what theory and





Page 21

knowledge are relevant depend on your goals and questions (Maxwell, 2005,

p.5).

Similarly, the second part of your proposal should also form an integrated unit.

The methods you use enable you to answer your research questions, and also to

deal with the plausible validity threats to these answers (Maxwell, 2005: 5).

Research design

The purpose of the next two sections is to describe how one would go about in

addressing the research question by developing the appropriate research design.

Research approach

Conceptualizing one’s study is arguably the single most important step in your

proposed research process; it directs the kind of data you need, where you need

to gather it, how you must gather it, and how it will guide your analysis.

Without a clear and detailed conceptual framework, you—and the audience for

your study—will have trouble making sense of the data you gather…In essence,

the conceptual framework presents your theory of the world you will be

studying. (Emphasis in the original). (Rossman & Rallis: 120).

Checklist:

- What is the theoretical contribution of the study?

- What is the practical contribution of the study?

- What knowledge will be gained?

- Will the defined problem be solved or can it be solved?

-





Page 22

As Rossman and Rallis (2003) explain one’s conceptual framework explains the

way you think about your topic and that it reveals your perspective or the angle at

which you are approaching it. It is grounded in one’s own experience, in existing

research, and typically in a theoretical perspective. Such orientation informs our

experiences by enabling the meanings you attach to your experiences. However, it

also re-informs our theories; we adjust and reject them if they do not apply to what

we observe of reality. More particularly practice, research, and theory inform to a

lesser or greater extend one’s worldview.

The function of the theoretical framework is to inform the rest of the design to

help you to assess and refine your goals, develop realistic and relevant research

questions and to guide your methodological approach. In this section the specific

research paradigm must be stated and your specific approach within your

philosophical position or paradigm must be provided, briefly explained and

motivated. Examples of paradigms within qualitative research are positivism,

post-positivism, post-modernism.

In this section the specific research paradigm must be stated and your specific

approach within your philosophical position or paradigm must be provided, briefly

explained and motivated. Examples of paradigms within qualitative research are

positivism, post-positivism, post-modernism. This approach should be explicated

in terms of the ontological and the epistemological perspectives on the study.

Put simply the way you look at the world influence the way you think about your

topic and the perspective or the angle of your approach or assumptions about the

social world (ontology) and how it should be studied (epistemology) (Punch,

2006: 31). This approach is grounded in one’s own experience, in existing





Page 23

research, and in your philosophical perspective or set of assumptions about the

social world and about what constitute proper techniques for inquiring into the

social world.

More particularly practice, research, and theory inform to a lesser or greater

extent the way one sees social reality (ontology) and how truthful knowledge

about the social world should be gained (epistemology). Different ontological

and epistemological positions influence how one goes about studying

phenomena, what assumptions are made, where your focus will be, what

questions you will ask and what data gathering methods will be used (Punch

2006). Therefore it is essential to carefully examine the answers to these

foundational questions and to determine where you stand in relation to them.

your ontological and epistemological position need to be clarified to the best of

your ability. It should be clear from your ontological and epistemological position

why you chose a particular qualitative research methodology. This should be

done by providing an overview of qualitative research, to place it in its context

within the social science research arena (abroad and locally) as well as to

explicate the applicable approaches and methods, e.g. a modernistic, analytical

paradigm (using grounded theory and/or analytical induction) or post-modernistic

(constructivistic) using for example, autoethnography. You also need to outline

the research designs that could be followed when conducting qualitative

research. Even more important you should explain why you chose a specific

qualitative research approach and research design and how your own ontology,

epistemology and methodology relates to your intended study and research

design.





Page 24

In this regard it is important to note the remarks of Rossman & Rallis (2003, p.

120):

(Q)ualitative research is systematic inquiry, that is, a process of making explicit

decisions about data—their gathering, their analysis, and their reporting.

Systematic inquiry requires clarity of documentation and explication of the process

so that others may see and understand the research decisions and assess their

adequacy and trustworthiness. All your decisions are grounded in the conceptual

framework, so it must be clear. If your framework is clear and the design decisions

flow logically, the audience for your study will understand the process and see how

you reached conclusions. Your audience may disagree with your choice of

conceptual framework, but cannot disagree that what you discovered emerges

from the data, given your perspective and process.

In addition to deciding which paradigm and research design to adopt, you must

decide what role theory will play in your research. As Bailey (2007: 59) clearly

states:

Theories are important for selecting a topic, creating goals, developing research

questions and collecting and analysing data.Finally, your conceptual framework

represents as Rossman and Rallis (2003) aptly point out, the keystone of your

study’s trustworthiness.

However, it should be noted that there still is a huge disagreement about the role

of theory in qualitative research, especially narrative research. In this regard the

words of Josselson and Lieblich (2003: 263) could be taken as a guideline for

both modernistic and post-modernistic research:





Page 25

The theoretical part of the .. proposal must open up the inquiry, not narrow and

focus it. … In the final narrative of their study, students will have to return to a

conversation with the theoretical literature in order to place their findings and

understandings. The theoretical overview section of the proposal, therefore,

outlines the possibilities of ongoing discussions that the student‟s work might join

while not foreclosing the possibility that other conceptual frame-works will, in the

end, prove to be useful.

Research methodology

This section is necessary to evaluate whether the research design is appropriate

for addressing the stated problem.

When considering the research methodology, at least three aspects, namely the

location of the data, the method of gathering the data, the research procedure,

and the method of data analysis (treatment of the data) play a profound role in

deciding on the appropriate research methodology to be followed

Research setting

This section deals with the issue where or with whom the data is located.

Consequently, this section also deals with the problem of what/who the 'unit of

analysis' in the study is. Is it an individual, a group, a work team or an

organisational unit? Or is the data archival by nature, located somewhere in the

organisation's information system? The source of the data should be carefully

described.

Choosing the setting, population or phenomenon of interest is crucial to the design

of the project and shapes all subsequent decisions (Marshall & Rossman, 1995).





Page 26

Qualitative research could be site-specific such as a study of a particular

programme, process, organization, place, and region, or could be conducted in

various sites. In cases where a particular setting is decided upon information

needs to be provided outlining why this specific setting is more appropriate than

others to be studied. A site may be selected for its representativeness, interest,

and the range of examples of the phenomenon under study while sites where the

researcher gain access or one where s/he is very uncomfortable or endangered

should better be left alone. When the study focuses on a particular group of

people, the researcher should present a selection strategy for selection that group.

Once the initial decision has been taken to focus the study on a specific site, a

phenomenon, or social group, various subsequent selection decisions need to be

taken to insure the ―information richness‖ of one’s data.

A crucial step when preparing for collecting data about a particularly social

reality, i.e., fieldwork, is to identify and decide which boundaries/parameters

will be used for the data collection and the method of data analysis

envisaged—that is, decide how the sample is going to be framed and

developed, and design a first, tentative draft of the protocol for recording

information or action plan.

Quantitative sampling concerns itself with representativeness while qualitative

research requires that the data to be collected must be rich in description of

people and places (Patton, 1990: 169). For these reasons the qualitative

researcher will use purposive sampling methods by identifying access points

(settings where research participants could be more easily reached) and

selecting especially informative ones. At this early stage researchers need to

answer the following questions: ―Which data sources are information-rich?‖ ―How

will I get my information?‖ ―Whom should I talk to?‖ ―Where must I go?‖ ―What





Page 27

must I do next?‖ As the study proceeds the nature of the questions asked by the

researcher will change. Typical questions that will determine the sampling

process include: ―How can I enrich my understanding?‖ ―Which data sources may

confirm or challenge my understanding?‖ (Marshall & Rossman, 1995: 33)

As general guideline qualitative researchers typically seek out groups and

settings where the process to be studied will be most likely to occur (Marshal &

Rossman, 1995, p. 55). It is important to note that in qualitative research you are

not only sampling people but also settings, events and processes (Maxwell,

2005, p. 87). Selecting a site will to a large extent be influenced by the strategy

of enquiry used by the researcher. Because of the generally applied inductive

model of thinking used in trying to answer the research question, you will, as you

gain more insight and as a theory emerges, redefine your sample on an ongoing

basis. Data collection and sampling are dictated by and become directed entirely

toward the emergent model (Morse, 1994, p. 230).

Following the typology of qualitative sampling developed by Patton (1990) the

following categories of purposeful selection could be used:

Snowball or chain reference sampling;

Theoretical Sampling;

Extreme or deviant case sampling;

Maximum variation sampling; and

Confirming and disconfirming cases.

Bryman (1988) stresses that Qualitative sampling follows a theoretical rather

than a statistical logic. In this regard Mason (1996: 93-94) states:





Page 28

Theoretical sampling means selecting groups or categories to study on the

basis of the relevance to your research questions, your theoretical

position... and…the explanation or account which you are developing.

In this way a theoretically meaningful samples are built to develop and test the

theory you have developed Silverman (2006) distinguishes three features of

theoretical sampling namely:

Choosing cases in terms of your theory where the researcher deliberately choose

to gather data from pertinent sources to develop the emerging theory.

Choosing deviant cases where the researcher deliberately seeks for negative

instances as defined by the developing theory

Changing the size of your sample during research for example in a study on the

impact of downsizing on managers a researcher may start off interviewing

employers but by realising the negative impact of downsizing on employees may

extend the study to include them.

Checklist:

- Has the data location been specified?

- Has the unit of analysis been identified?

- What influence will it have on data gathering method(s)?

- Are your data sources information rich?

- What sampling strategy will you follow and why?

- What is the basis for your sample selection?





Page 29

To realise the logical connection between your research questions and your data

source selection, data collection and data analysis decisions In this regard.

Maxwell (2005, pp.102-103) emphasises the importance of assessing the

compatibility of your research questions and methods of data gathering and

analysis by asking yourself: ―Why you want to collect and analyse the data in the

way you propose—what will you learn from this?‖ Then examine these

connections between your research questions and your methods, and work on

displaying these connections in separate columns (a matrix) consisting of the

following questions: ―What do I need to Know?‖ ―Why do I need to know this?‖

―What kind of data will answer the questions?‖ ―Where can I find the

data?‖ ―Whom do I contact for access and information?‖ ―What is the timeline for

acquisition?‖ (For example, see Morse 1994, pp. 209-219 and Maxwell 2005, pp.

102-103.)

This section is necessary to evaluate whether the research design is appropriate

for addressing the stated research problem (Roodt & Fouche, 2004).

Data gathering methods

In qualitative research the researcher is regarded as the instrument: his or her

presence in the lives of the subjects invited to partake in the research is crucial to

Checklist:

- Is my epistemological and ontological approach clear?

- Does the methodology support the design/approach that has been decided

on?

- Are research methodology aspects coherent and not contradictory?





Page 30

the paradigm. The researcher’s role may vary depending on the focus of the

study. Instances where research questions are well developed beforehand and

the data appropriate to address those questions have been identified; the

researcher’s role will be managed quite efficiently and carefully ensuring good

use of his or her time as well as that of his or her research participants. In cases

where research questions are more diffuse and exploratory, the plan for

deploying the self should ensure access to various events, people and

perspectives on the phenomenon under study.

Marshall and Rossman (1995) stress the fact that whether that presence is

sustained and intensive, as in long-term ethnographies, or whether relatively brief

but personal, as in in-depth interview studies, the researcher becomes part of

lives of the participants. It is important to remember that being part of their lives

involves varying degrees of participation which is not always as easy as it

sounds. The researcher’s role will also depend on the decision to reveal or hide

the fact that s/he is conducting a study. Thus, if the study would be done overtly

or covertly.

Successful qualitative projects depend to a very large extent on the interpersonal

skills of the researcher, that is: the ability to build trust, the skill to maintain good

relations, showing respect for other’s perspectives and views and norms of

reciprocity, the skill of easily conversing with others, the ability of being an active

and thoughtful listener, and the ability to show sensitivity concerning ethical

issues. It is important that some consideration be given in the research proposal

as to these important skills as well as some indication of how you anticipate

fitting in to the setting under investigation.





Page 31

You need to indicate and motivate which of these method(s) you are going to

utilise. In addition, you should indicate the secondary methods you are

anticipating. These methods are methods in their own right with extensive

literature and include narratives. Qualitative researchers rely on the following

primary methods to gather information: (i) participation in the setting under

study/the research participants’ activities, (ii) direct observation, (iii) in-depth

interviewing, (iv) using documents (solicited and/or unsolicited and visual), and (v)

auto-ethnographies. (Marshall & Rossman, 1995, p. 86).

Finally, it is important that the researcher determine the most practical, efficient,

feasible, and ethically appropriate methods for gathering the data as the project

progresses.

In drafting the proposal, the researcher should consider whether the method will

provide adequate information, be cost effective, and be feasible in terms of the

sensitivities in the setting and the resources available for the study. The relative

emphasis on participation in many qualitative studies, for example, suggests

certain methods over others. These choices should be logically linked to the

conceptual framework and research questions, the overall strategy of the study,

and early decisions about role (Marshall and Rossman (1995, p.105).

Researchers often embark upon a project with a better knowledge of and

expertise in some data-collection methods and data sources than others, or with

implicit or explicit preferences.





Page 32

Whilst these preferences may be appropriate to the research being

designed, they may equally be less to do with this than with

idiosyncratic factors in the biography of the researcher (for

example, that you happen to have been trained in some techniques

and not others). Whilst practical issues to do with training and skill

are of course relevant in your choice of method …, they should not

govern your choice at this stage (Mason, 1996, p 19).

It is advisable that, regardless of what they believe their practical constraints are,

qualitative researchers should try to broaden their horizons through thinking as

widely and creatively as possible about possible sources of data and methods to

select and use them within the framework of their ontological and epistemological

perspectives. Mason (1996) proposes that qualitative researchers generate a list

or chart of possible options, which could be altered as the study proceeds. Such

a list provides a good way for qualitative researchers to discipline themselves to

see which options are ontologically and epistemologically inappropriate and

appropriate for their studies. In addition, such a list could be used to talk through

with a colleague or study leader/promoter and could assist qualitative

researchers to broaden their horizons and to become aware of other possibilities

even if they are inappropriate for the study at hand. In short, creative thinking

and/or using a list will help researchers to spot and eradicate inconsistencies

between their perception of what particular methods can yield and what kinds of

information are required to address the research questions of their studies.

For various reasons qualitative researchers often utilise different methods in their

research. Whatever the reason, researchers need to think through the

implications of this strategy for the overall research design of their studies. As





Page 33

Mason (1996) points out that the integration of different methods is far from

straightforward, and that, at the very least researchers need to decide from the

outset what steps they need to take in designing their studies in order to ensure

that the particular kind of integration they seek is possible.

Data gathering methods/instruments The main concern in this section is to deal with method(s) of data gathering. In

qualitative research there generally is no fixed recipe for the researcher to learn

the ropes or how data should be gathered. The only specification is that the data

should be gathered systematically over a period of time. In addition, preferably

more than one method should be used to collect data since the different methods

(participant observation, individual interviewing, focus-group interviewing, human

documents, etc.) provide …different facets of the same symbolic reality (Berg

1995, p. 4), deepening the researcher’s understanding and ensuring that more

trustworthy results can be obtained.

In qualitative research the researcher is regarded as the instrument: his or her

presence in the lives of the research participants is crucial to the paradigm. This

brings a range of strategic, ethical, and personal issues to the fore. These are:

(a) technical issues, i.e. issues addressing entry and efficiency in terms of

researcher roles, and (b) interpersonal concerns—issues capturing the ethical

and personal dilemmas that normally arise during the execution of a study.

Successful fieldwork is usually determined by the accessibility of the setting and

the researcher's ability to build up and maintain relationships and agreements

with gatekeepers and participants. Negotiating access is therefore an important

part of the researcher’s role. In this regard to the following needs to be indicated:

(a) will access take place through formal or informal gatekeepers? (b) how will





Page 34

access be negotiated in various sub-settings? (c) how will participants’ reluctance

to participate be handled?

According to Mason (1996) the key tasks qualitative researchers need to perform

during the research design stage related to method are not only to decide upon

appropriate methods and data sources, but also to reach some understanding of

the methodological implications of their choices. Particularly important here is

establishing the links between the conceptual framework, research questions and

research methods. You need to be clear about and explain how and why a

particular method and data source will help you to address research questions

rather than just assuming that the use of a particular method will provide the

answers to your questions.

It is advisable that you, within the framework of your ontological and

epistemological perspectives try to broaden your horizons through thinking as

widely and creatively about possible sources of data and methods to select and

collect them. Mason (1996) proposes that qualitative researchers generate a list or

chart of possible options, which could be altered as the study proceeds. Such a list

provides a good way for them to discipline themselves to see which options are

ontologically and epistemologically inappropriate and appropriate for their

studies. It is important to bear in mind that qualitative studies typically combine

several data collection methods during the course of the study. Furthermore,

because the research question may change as the research progresses, the

methods may change and therefore the research design must be flexible

Finally, it is important that the researcher determine the most practical, efficient,

feasible, and ethically appropriate methods for gathering the data as the project





Page 35

progresses. The following are the most important issues that need to be

addressed in this section:

It is important to bear in mind that qualitative studies typically combine several

data collection methods during the course of the study.

Marshall and Rossman (1995:105) summarize:

In drafting the proposal, the researcher should consider whether the method

will provide adequate information, be cost effective, and be feasible in terms

of the sensitivities in the setting and the resources available for the study.

The relative emphasis on participation in many qualitative studies, for

example, suggests certain methods over others. These choices should be

logically linked to the conceptual framework and research questions, the

overall strategy of the study, and early decisions about role (Marshall and

Rossman (1995, p.105).

(The researcher) might start with participation observation as he seeks to

identify questions, patterns, and domains. This strategy may change as the

research becomes more focused and progresses toward more specific

questions and clearer concepts that suggest the use of representative

samples. Then the researcher could develop surveys and enumerate the

findings…The proposal should demonstrate that the researcher is capable

of designing and selecting data collection methods that are appropriate,

well thought out, and through. Because the research question may change

as the research progresses, the methods may change and the researcher

must ensure this flexibility





Page 36

Researcher as instrument Successful data gathering is usually determined by the accessibility of the setting

and the researcher's ability to build up and maintain relationships and

agreements with gatekeepers and participants. Once the researcher has located

and established contact with gatekeepers, s/he must gain the person's co-

operation. Taylor and Bogdan (1984: 20) rightly point out that one of the most

sensitive issues facing qualitative research is to explain one's research

procedures and interests to both subjects and gatekeepers. Identifying

particulars proving the researcher's credentials are vitally important in order to

reassure a subject that s/he is dealing with a bona fide researcher. Honesty and

warmth are therefore important qualities for a researcher. The researcher should

be able to convince gatekeepers of the sincerity of his or her intention to collect

data in an objective manner. The aim and object of the proposed investigation,

how it will be undertaken and the envisaged purpose of the results should be set

our clearly. Practical aspects of the research such as data collection methods

and recording of data should be discussed in detail.

Maxwell (2005) emphasises that negotiating of research relationships is not

merely a practical issue but forms an integral part of the research design. To

assist the novice researcher in his/her reflection of research relationships

Maxwell (2005) suggests an exercise where researcher answers the following

questions:

―What kind of relationships do you plan to establish with the people in the

research setting?‖ ―How did you negotiate these relationships or how do you plan

to initiate and negotiate them?‖ ―Why have you planned to do this?‖ ―How will

these relationships impact on your study?‖ ―What alternatives do you have and

what are the disadvantages and advantages of these?‖ ―How do you think you





Page 37

will be seen by people you interact with in the study?‖ ―Will this affect your

relationships with these people?‖ ―What can you do to better understand and

modify these perceptions?‖ ―What explicit agreements do you plan to negotiate

with participants about how the study will be conducted and how the results will

be reported?‖ ―What implicit understandings about these issues do you think the

research participants and you will have?‖ ―How will the implicit and explicit terms

of the study affect your relationships and your research?‖ ―Do any of these need

to be discussed or changed?‖ ―What ethical issues or problems do these

considerations raise?‖ ―How do you plan to deal with it?‖

One of the most successful ways of gaining entry into a setting is to make use of

indigenous people who are part of the setting to be studied (Schurink & Schurink,

1990). Thus the best ticket into the setting, and sometimes the only ticket, is

introduction by a guide or an informant.

Once the inexperienced researcher has gained access to a setting the most

pressing question is what s/he should now do to ...comprehend and to illuminate

the subject's view and to interpret the world „as it appears to him (or her)„ (Matza

1969: 25). Put differently: ―What should s/he listen and watch out for?‖ Gaining

an understanding of an insider world is by no means an easy task for an outsider

(the researcher). The researcher is confronted by …behaviours he finds

bewildering and inexplicable: the actors are oriented to a world of meanings that

the observer does not grasp (Wax, 1967). In order to understand the interactive

process qualitative researchers thus need to undergo a learning process

whereby they require an understanding of the interactive process that shapes

human behaviour (Shaffir & Stebbins, 1991). It is widely believed that in order to

understand people's life worlds the researcher needs to think in their symbols





Page 38

and that the data must therefore be collected in the subjects' own language and

within their meaning systems i.e. values and norms (Shaffir & Stebbins, 1991).

Data collection specifically in the beginning involves participation in the daily life

of the people being studied by observing things that happen and by listening

attentively to what is said without saying too much (Shaffir & Stebbins, 1991). As

gaining entrance or getting into the process of learning proceeds the ropes is

shaped by the characteristics of the setting, so the personality of the researcher,

and the subjects' feelings and responses to the researcher influence the project.

4.2.3 Data management

One should indicate how you anticipate recording, managing and analysing the

voluminous data typically gathered during the course of qualitative research. It is

important to illustrate how the selected recording techniques will be utilised with

the minimum degree of intrusiveness. More particularly you need to indicate

Checklist:

- Did I clearly explain how my research participants will be recruited and how

the study will be explained to them?

- Are my methods for gathering data practical, efficient and ethically

appropriate?

- How will I ensure trustworthiness?

- Is the study feasible?

- Will I be able to get information rich data and will my reviewers be

convinced of my ability to do so?

- Does the methodology support the design/approach that I decided on?

- Did I indicate clearly how I will deploy my available resources to optimise

data collection within the available time?





Page 39

whether tape recorders, cameras and other mechanical devices will be used, the

particular field-notes you will be compiling, and how you anticipate to ease data

retrieval for analysis. It will be helpful if plans regarding colour-coding notes to

keep track of dates, names, titles, attendance at events, chronologies (e.g.

compiling a natural history, research story), descriptions of settings, maps, socio-

grams, and so on to facilitate putting patterns, defining categories for data

analysis, planning further data collection, and writing the research report could be

described. Finally, you need to stipulate your anticipated application of software

packages to manage the data.

Care should be taken not to deal with the data management section

mechanically by merely explaining how you anticipate recording your data.

Today, more than ever it is essential that you explain how continuous critical

reflection on your data will help you to be self-aware of the inter-subjective

dynamics between yourself as researcher and the research you are conducting.

Unfortunately, in the literature too little attention is paid to data management and

data recording, in proposal writing. Most scholars fail to explore the impact that

poor data recording could have on the trustworthiness of a study. This is

especially true in the case of narrative analysis. You should thus be aware that

just as research questions forms the backbone of your proposal, data recording

of the methods you use, your values, biases, decisions, and mere presence in

the very situations you study, will form the backbone of your study.





Page 40

4.2.4 Research procedure

Research procedure refers to the actual process of data collection and must

therefore clearly show how the data collection methods will be used. For both

qualitative and quantitative research your proposal needs to indicate how the

data will be collected and how the proposed procedures could be structured to

maximize the quality of the data (Punch 2006).

This part of the research proposal is devoted to an exposition of the design, which

serves three purposes: Firstly, it presents a plan according to which the study can

be conducted. Secondly, it demonstrates to the research proposal committee that

the researcher is capable of executing the envisaged research. Finally, it ensures

that the design flexibility of qualitative research is maintained.

Researchers need to think through the implications of their research strategy for

the overall research design of their studies. In this regard Maxwell (2005:102)

states: To design a workable and productive study, and to communicate this

design to others, you need to create a coherent design, one in which the different

methods fit together compatibly, and in which they are integrated with the other

components of your design. The most critical connection is with your research

Checklist

- What data management procedures will I use?

- Will my procedures maximise the quality of my data?

- Will I be able to keep my data safe and well organized?

- Is it clear what data recording techniques ("field-notes", audio-taping,

video-taping, and filming) will I use?

- Did I explore all the avenues of data recording (e.g. systematic

reflection and writing a natural history of the research process) that

could help me to do a more trustworthy study?





Page 41

questions … If your methods won‟t provide you with the data you need to answer

your questions, you need to change either your questions or your methods.

4.2.5 Data analysis

In this section you should describe your initial decisions regarding data analysis

and should convince the reader that you are sufficiently knowledgeable about this

creative part of the study. Data analysis aims to unravel the meanings inherent in

the material/data and present them in relation to the research questions

(Josselson & Lieblich, 2003). Mention should be made in this section of the

proposal of how data organisation and theme development are anticipated. More

particularly, it should be clear from the proposal that you are aware of the fact that

data collection and analysis go hand in hand, that you are guided by initial

concepts and research questions, and that theory with related concepts could be

emerging from the analysis (Marshall & Rossman, 1995, p. 112).

The difficult, complex, ambiguous, creative, and fun phase of the research, namely

its theme generation phase, needs to be described. The fact that data analysis,

especially of narrative material involves multiple readings and re-readings should

be acknowledged. You should also explain how you anticipate searching for

emerging themes and how you plan to deal with these.

Checklist:

- How will I collect the data

- What data gathering procedures will be used?

- How will these procedures maximize the quality of my data?





Page 42

There are various ways of making sense of soft data. While it is not the aim of

this section to discuss these methods, it is important to realise the logical

connection between your research questions and your selection, data collection

and data analysis decisions In this regard. Maxwell (2005:102-103) emphasises

the importance of assessing the compatibility of your research questions and

methods of data gathering and analysis by asking yourself: ―Why you want to

collect and analyse the data in the way you propose—what will you learn from

this?‖ Then examine these connections between your research questions and

your methods, and work on displaying these connections in separate columns (a

matrix) consisting of the following questions: ―What do I need to Know?‖ ―Why do

I need to know this?‖ ―What kind of data will answer the questions?‖ ―Where can I

find the data?‖ ―Whom do I contact for access and information?‖ ―What is the

timeline for acquisition?‖ (For example see Morse 1994:209-219 and Maxwell

2005, pp. 102-103.)

Creswell (2003, p. 55) highlights the importance of a reflexive writing process

during research design and throughout the research: The actual writing of words

on a page is only part of a more extended process of thinking, collecting

information and reviewing that goes into manuscript production.

Writing-up researchers’ reflections on their actions and observations in the field,

(field notes) not only becomes data in their own right, but forms part of data

analysis (Flick 2006). Constructing a research design should thus be seen as a

process involving reflection about your ontology, epistemology, research

questions, practical and ethical considerations, your theoretical framework, data

gathering and – analysis, thus, asking and writing down analytic questions and

ideas that could assist in the development of a research proposal. Continuous





Page 43

reflection on all these aspects represents a refinement process whereby

meaningful knowledge is extracted.

5 Ethical issues to be considered This section should deal with possible ethical dilemmas that the researcher may

encounter during his/her research and how these dilemmas will be dealt with.

Issues that come to mind are aspects such as voluntary participation,

confidentiality, consent, anonymity and being fully informed about the research

objective. These issues have to be carefully addressed in the research design.

There is a growing concern regarding ethical issues in research (Punch, 2006).

When conducting qualitative research, researchers face many ethical dilemmas

and must constantly decide on the proper conduct. Of course, ethical issues are

the concerns and dilemmas that arise over the proper way to execute research,

more specifically not to create harmful conditions for the subjects of inquiry,

humans, in the research process. Mason (1996) correctly points out that

qualitative researchers should be as concerned to construct an ethical research

design as they are to construct an intellectually coherent and compelling one.

Thus your proposal should reflect your overall integrity and the quality and

worthiness of the research.

Checklist:

- Will the data sets of variables be appropriately analysed and described?

- Will relationships / differences between data sets be tested by the correct

techniques?

- Did you get expert advice in selecting the appropriate statistical techniques?





Page 44

Since research ethics is a complex issue, and since it is very unlikely that there

will ever be one clear solution, it is particularly appropriate to follow a practical

approach in which you ask questions and push yourself hard to answer them

truthfully. Mason (1996) suggests that researchers ask a number of questions to

themselves like: (i) Which parties, bodies, practices, or whatever, are potentially

interested or involved in or affected by a particular study? (ii) What are the

implications for these parties, bodies, practices, and so on, of framing particular

research questions in a study?

Naturally your answers to questions like these will not inform you whether your

research questions are ethical or not, but they will guide you towards identifying

the potentially complex range of interests touched upon by your study.

Procedural ethics captured in ethical codes as well as the practices and

requirements of your university department should also be used as a guideline to

do ethical research. These usually focus on the following:

Respect the rights and interests of the individual;

Does good by contributing to new knowledge in the field of study and

towards problem solving;

Does no harm when intruding into a research participant’s life; and

Justifying the relevance of the research

However, it should be noted that the preceding will not always solve the ethical

problems to be encountered in the field nor could it address the type of ethical

problem that Ellis (2007) calls relational ethics which deals with the relationship

between researcher and researched, and how the ―other‖ is represented1.





Page 45

6 Trustworthiness

You need to pay particular attention to demonstrate the soundness of your

proposed study since qualitative research does as yet not enjoy the same

acceptance that quantitative, positivistic research has in social science

communities. According to Marshall and Rossman (1995, p. 142) we particularly

need to pay attention to two domains: responding to criteria for the soundness of

our projects, and demonstrating the usefulness of our proposed studies.

6.1.1 Criteria of soundness

The conventional criteria for good research are: (i) internal validity, (ii) external

validity or representativeness, (iii) reliability, and (iv) objectivity. Qualitative

researchers generally regard these constructs as inappropriate in establishing

the ―truth value‖ of a qualitative research project. Two prominent qualitative

researchers, Lincoln and Guba (1985), propose the following four alternative

constructs they believe reflect the assumptions of the qualitative paradigm more

accurately:

Credibility/authenticity Is there a match between research participants’ views and researchers’

reconstruction and representation of it?

Transferability

1 See lecture on proposal writing

Checklist:

- Will participation in the study be voluntary?

- Will participants be fully informed about the research objectives?

- Can respondents be identified?

- Will individual information be kept confidential?





Page 46

Can the findings of the research be transferred from a specific situation or

case to another?

Dependability

Is the research process logical, well documented and audited?

Confirmability Does the researcher provide evidence that corroborates the findings and

interpretations by means of auditing?

The first of these criteria namely credibility is considered as the most important

one. Lincoln and Guba (1985) outline various strategies to increase the credibility

of qualitative research:

Prolonged engagement and persistent observation in the field;

Triangulation of different methods;

Peer debriefing;

Member checks; and

Formalized qualitative methods such as grounded theory and analytic

induction.

However, qualitative researchers became to an increasing extent more

uncomfortable with existing criteria and challenged with renewed intensity the

use of the Lincoln and Guba (1985) criteria to evaluate qualitative studies. They

argued that these criteria are incompatible with the features of qualitative

research and that it is unfair to use criteria based on positivism to evaluate

qualitative (interperative and constructivistic) research. Therefore a separate set

of evaluation criteria is needed (Bryman, 2007).

The epistemology of logical positivism has proven to be untenable.

The firm conviction that the socio-political world was simply “out

there” waiting to be discovered and described has been exposed as a

convenient fiction (Schwandt 2007, p.40).





Page 47

The belief that qualitative research would achieve paradigm takeoff by imitating

the methods of natural sciences is thus to a greater extent discarded by

qualitative researchers and in particular by postmodernists (Schwandt 2007,

p40). In the process qualitative researchers came up with more and more

checklists and frameworks for the development of alternative criteria based on

qualitative research principles (Flick, 2007).

However these criteria for trustworthy, credible research could hardly meet the

approval of all qualitative researchers with their different approaches, theoretical

backgrounds, methodological principles, research issues and aims. The notion of

developing criteria of soundness to meet the approval of all qualitative

researchers has today to a large extent been discarded or as Schwand (2007)

states qualitative researchers have gone beyond it. This does however not mean

that qualitative research has become unscientific and that anything now goes. As

Flick (2007, p.64) states, qualitative research, including research with a post-

modernistic paradigm should be developed and produced in the tensional field of

(theoretical, conceptual, practical and methodological) creativity and

(methodological) rigour in studying phenomena. Therefore quality should be

located in the tensional field -- between being rigorous and being flexible.

Since a clear and universal solution to the quality question on the level of criteria

for good qualitative research was to date not attainable, researchers started to

move to an increasing extent, to the use of strategies to promote quality in the

research process. Thus the notion of management of the research process and

transparency with specific reference to the auditing trail or research story and

reflexivity has become an important strategy to ensure quality research. The

auditing trail is a systematically maintained documentation process of the





Page 48

researcher’s continuous critical analysis of all decisions and actions taken during

the entire research process

The auditing trail displays the interaction between us and our subject(s) in such a

way that the research can be understood not only in terms of what was

discovered but also how it was discovered. The advantage of this is that our

interpretations can be better understood and validated by readers who are

informed about the position we adopt in relation to the study and by our explicit

questioning of our own involvement

For qualitative researchers engaging themselves with difficult questions and

issues in the reasoning process through which they arrive at their answers, it is

today not only important to properly plan their studies, but also to provide a

reflexive account of how it was done, e.g. constructing natural histories, research

stories, or internal audits, and/or defending the logic of their decisions. Therefore

in order to be able to refer to particular issues you were confronted with during

various phases of the development of your research proposal as well as the

decisions you took and the reasons for particular steps taken, you will be well

advised to from the onset keep a research diary.

It is important to note that the post-modern trend in qualitative research

encourages researchers to undertake and record a continuous critical analysis

This means interpreting our own interpretations, looking at one‟s own

perspectives, and turning a self-critical eye into one‟s own authority as

interpreter and author … this enhances the trustworthiness of the

findings and outcomes of research (Etherington, 2006 p.32).





Page 49

of their thinking and feelings concerning: their conceptual framework, research

questions; methods; values and biases; and awareness of their presence in the

very situations they want to study as well as of the inter-subjective dynamics

between themselves as researchers and the research they are conducting. Such

a writing style forms an important tool that could be used to enhance the quality

of your research.

7 Proposed chapter outline and deadline dates

The purpose of this section is to design a project schedule against which the

outcomes of the project can be managed. First of all, an outline of the structure of

the dissertation should be provided. Secondly, deadlines for each of the chapters

should be provided. One should ensure that these deadlines are realistic and that

one would be able to adhere to these deadlines, (given one’s time constraints).

8 List of References

The list of references should contain a strictly alphabetical list of authors of all the

sources (articles, books, website addresses) that you have consulted and listed

Checklist:

- Do you have a chapter outline?

- Do you have a deadline date for each chapter?

- Are your deadlines realistic?

- Would you be able to stick to these deadlines?

Checklist:

Will the reviewers see my study as a trustworthy one?





Page 50

in your proposal. The dates of all the publications should also be listed directly

after the names of the authors. In cases where different sources of the same

authors have been used, they should appear in strict chronological order,

ordered from the latest (e.g. 2001) to the earliest (e.g. 1995). In the case where

more than one source of the same authors dated in the same year were used,

these sources should be listed in strict alphabetical order as e.g. 2001a, 2001b,

2001c.

Checklist:

- Does your Reference List comply with the stated requirements?

- Have you only included references listed in your proposal?





Page 51

REFERENCES Bryman, A. (2007). Qualitative Research 2. (Volume II). London, Sage. Ellis, C. (2007) Telling secrets revealing lives: Relational ethics in research with intimate others Qualitative Inquiry 13:((3) Esterberg, K.G. (2002).Qualitative methods in social research. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education Etherington, K. (2006) Becoming a reflexive researcher. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers Flick, U (2006) An introduction to qualitative research. London, Sage. Glassner, B. & Hertz, R. (Eds). (1999). Qualitative sociology as everyday life. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Josselson, R. & Lieblich, A (2003) A framework for narrative research proposals in psychology. in Up close and personal: the teaching and learning of narrative research. Josselson, R., Lieblich, A & McAdams, D.P.(Eds). Washington, DC: APA Books Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Mason, J. (1996). Qualitative researching. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Morse, J.M. 1994. Critical issues in qualitative research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Marshall, C. & Rossman, G.B. (1999). Designing Qualitative Research. (3rd eds.). Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications. Maxwell, J.A. (2005). Qualitative research design: an interactive approach. (2 ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Patton, M.O.(1990) Qualitative evaluation and research methods, 2nd ed. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Punch, K.F. (2006). Developing effective research proposals. (2nd ed). London: Sage.





Page 52

Roodt, G. & Fouche, C. (2004) Guidelines for writing a research proposal. (Unpublished document), Johannesburg: University of Johannesburg. Rossman, G.B., & Rallis, S.F. (2003). Learning in the field. An introduction to qualitative research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Schram, T.H. (2002). Conceptualizing and proposing qualitative research. (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education , Inc. Schwand, T.A. (2007) The SAGE dictionary of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Silverman, D. (2000) Doing Qualitative Research: A practical handbook. London: Sage Publications. Wolcott, H.F. (2001). Writing up qualitative research. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH PROPOSAL WRITING ... in mind,… that qualitative research is uniquely suited...

Documents

Transcript of QUALITATIVE RESEARCH PROPOSAL WRITING ... in mind,… that qualitative research is uniquely suited...