DOC690-1

profileJustice06
DOC690DoctoralStudyProposalSPR2021-1-452021-639AM.zip

Modules/Module1/Mod1Home.html

Module 1 - Home

Compiling the DSP Research prospectus (Revise Chapter 2)

Modular Learning Outcomes

Upon successful completion of this module, the student will be able to satisfy the following outcomes:

  • Case
    • Conduct synthesis of literature on the selected research progress.
  • SLP
    • Demonstrate fluency with the body of knowledge and demonstrate the ability to apply relevant knowledge to the chosen field, supplemented by a broad, integrative understanding of complementary disciplines that is facilitated by the establishment of the following: a draft of a Review of the Literature (required).
  • Discussion
    • Demonstrate a full awareness of the challenges and opportunities represented regarding the development of the DSP prospectus.

Module Overview

  • Welcome to your third year of the DBA doctoral program! The items in the list below must be completed during this course (DOC690). The milestone for this course (the required deliverable for this course in order to pass it) is the submission of a Prospectus (initial draft of Chapters 1, 2, and 3) for your DSP for review and to achieve a passing grade. Students will also be scheduled for the Prospectus Presentation during Module 5 of this course. Students must receive a passing score on the presentation to pass this course.
  • During DOC660 you produced Chapter 2 (The Literature Review). This is a major accomplishment, and widely regarded as the most difficult aspect of the development of a research proposal. As it is, you worked on your literature review for almost two terms, which included your mastery of the literature, identification of a gap in the body of knowledge, and the development of a clear conceptual framework as part of the outcomes.
  • During this term you will finalize Chapter 2 (The Literature Review) and move on to the next tasks:
    • The development of a feasible, credible, robust research design (Chapter 3 - Methods)
    • The development of Chapter 1 - Overview (based on the many notes you already have)
    • Compilation of a Prospectus (initial draft of Chapters 1, 2, and 3) for your DSP
  • Important Note: You are encouraged to move beyond the deliverables of this course, as you are able. Your instructor / Chair will support you, and if you (or your faculty) desire advisement, Faculty are available. To advance beyond this course's milestone will give you additional time to collect data. The collection of data is the signature time when progress on your research is most unpredictable due to the vagaries of: sampling, scheduling time with participants, getting enough surveys returned, etc. It is in your best interests to carve out as much time as possible for these tasks.
  • An important consideration for you as you strategize your approach to this and the following courses is to understand that, as scheduled, you have roughly eleven weeks to collect data. From this vantage point, eleven weeks may seem like plenty of time (and it is, if all ducks are lined up and stay lined up). From observation of many who have come before you, eleven weeks does not afford a leisurely approach to the upcoming tasks.
Privacy Policy | Contact

Modules/Module1/Mod1Background.html

Module 1 - Background

Compiling the DSP Research prospectus (Revise Chapter 2)

Required Reading

None

Optional Reading

Creswell, J. W. (1999). Chapter 18: Introduction and application. In Mixed-method research (pp. 455-472). Academic Press.

Chapter 5.2 Qualitative or quantitative? Some specific considerations. In Principles of sociological inquiry: Qualitative and quantitative methods (v.10). Retrieved from https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_principles-of-sociological-inquiry-qualitative-and-quantitative-methods/s08-02-qualitative-or-quantitative-so.html

Bhattacherjee, A. (2012). Introduction to research, social science research: Principles, methods, and practices (pp. 1-7). USF Tampa Bay Open Access Textbooks Collection. Book 3. Retrieved from http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/oa_textbooks/3.

Mohrman, S. A., Gibson, C. B., & Mohrman, A. M., Jr. (2001). Doing research that is useful to practice: A model and empirical exploration. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 357-375. Retrieved from ProQuest in the Trident Online Library.

Privacy Policy | Contact

Modules/Module1/Mod1Case.html

Module 1 - Case

Compiling the DSP Research prospectus (Revise Chapter 2)

Case Assignment

The Annotated Bibliography

Prepare a draft annotated bibliography. Select a topic, preferably one of your established topic areas you may pursue for your DSP. Select 10 articles for the bibliography. The bibliography must have 10 entries critically analyzed, to include the following:

  • Author's abstract
  • Your version of an abstract
  • Strengths and weaknesses of each article

Assignment Expectations

Students should demonstrate their understanding of an annotated bibliography and the important role it plays in their DSP. They also should have at least 10 articles correctly formatted and analyzed with the author's abstract, their version of the abstract, and strengths and weaknesses of each article.

Privacy Policy | Contact

Modules/Module1/Mod1SLP.html

Module 1 - SLP

Compiling the DSP Research prospectus (Revise Chapter 2)

Please revise and submit your Literature Review - Chapter 2. If you have not already done so, insert it into the current version of the DSP template available in MyTLC, under My Resources.

Remember, you Literature Review should demonstrate your mastery of the literature:

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE (IMPORTANT ELEMENTS *DRAFT*)

Scholarly research is always a leap from the known to the unknown. The literature review and conceptual framework are used to construct a platform of the known from which you jump. Constructed carefully, the literature review and conceptual framework can maximize the chances of your spanning the abyss and reaching something substantive when you land. Constructed carelessly, they can undermine your research.

The literature review should carefully examine prior research and thought relevant to key aspects of your anticipated research. It should be used to inform:

  1. The problem to be addressed and its significance
  2. The conceptual framework (for DSP)
  3. The research questions, foreshadowed problems, or conjectures
  4. The research paradigm and the methodology

The subsections indicated below are of the process and components of a literature review and not necessarily subheadings of Chapter 2.

2-A. Introduction: Topic(s), Purposes, and Methods of the Literature Review:

A literature review usually begins with an indication of the topic(s) to be covered and the purposes of the review.

The methods of the review should be briefly described. Indicate the indices and other methods used to search for applicable literature, the terms searched with each, and the years searched (usually the last ten or twenty years, plus key literature from earlier years). A review should address each topic highly applicable to the problem. For problems that are not well researched, the literature review may also address other topics that are tangentially related and might help inform the study. If the literature on a topic is voluminous—it is not uncommon to find more than 100 studies—you should be selective, covering the literature most applicable to the focus of your proposed research, as indicated by the research questions, foreshadowed problems, or conjectures. Consult with your advisor before beginning the literature search to make sure you are covering the topics and years of research that he or she thinks are appropriate.

2-B. Description and Critique of Scholarly Literature:

Each major theoretical discourse conceptual discussion, and empirical study should be described and critiqued briefly. Both the strengths and weaknesses should be identified. For theoretical discourses, indicate the source of the theory, overlaps and disparities with other applicable theories, and whether and how well the theory has been empirically verified. For conceptual discussions, indicate the sources of the concepts, overlaps and disparities with other applicable concepts, and whether and how well the concepts have been empirically verified. For empirical studies (including qualitative ones) indicate the research questions, methodological strengths and weaknesses, results (both their magnitude as well as their statistical significance and extent of cross-verification), conclusions, and implications. It is important to note that a scholarly review of the literature should focus on primary sources such as refereed journal articles rather than secondary sources such as course textbooks.

Organizing the written review can be a challenge because the review has several simultaneous purposes. Often the best strategy is to organize the studies under major topics, theories, constructs research questions, or methodologies. When a given study addresses more than one organizational category, you might critique it under the first applicable category, and then briefly refer to it under each subsequent applicable category. Alternatively, in the subsequent organizational categories, you might extend the critique as appropriate for that category. When considerable literature falls within one organizational category, it might be organized within second level categories. Otherwise the description and critique of literature might be presented chronologically. Lesser literature sometimes can be described and critiqued jointly, for instance, by indicating, “Several other smaller studies found ...... (Anderson, 1995; Baxter, 1992, Castro; 1999).”

You should avoid creating a biased review that only covers prior literature that supports your predispositions and disregards other literature. Similarly you should consistently critique the literature. Do not ignore weaknesses in studies supporting your predispositions and do not be hypercritical of studies that contradict your predispositions. Failure to conduct a fair-minded review is likely to compromise your research.

2-C. Inferences for Forthcoming Study:

Once you have described and critiqued the individual sources, you should analyze and synthesize across them to draw inferences applicable to your anticipated research. The inferences generally should be about:

  1. The problem to be addressed in your research and its significance,
  2. Possible research questions, foreshadowed problems, or conjectures,
  3. Possible theoretical or conceptual framework to be used
  4. Possible research paradigms and methodologies to be used.

The inferences might be stated at the end of each major topic of your review or after all the relevant topics have been discussed. The following questions may generate useful inferences: What does the literature state about the extent of the problem, its underlying causes, where it is most and least severe, and its consequences for theory, knowledge, practice, policy and/or research? How have results of empirical studies varied according to the questions/conjectures that have been addressed? What conceptual frameworks have been applied and with what insights? How might the conceptual frameworks be modified or synthesized to provide new insights to this problem? Which research paradigms and methods have yielded the strongest results and which the weakest results, and why?

2-D. Conceptual Framework for Forthcoming Study (May appear in chapter 3).

The problem and research questions, foreshadowed problems, or conjectures were explained above under Chapter 1, but the “conceptual framework” has not yet been explained. These are a theory or set of interrelated constructs that provide perspective or “lens” through which the research problem is viewed and through which the choices about the research will be made. They help narrow down and focus the research. Note that a theoretical or conceptual framework works like a telescope or microscope, and thus it both enhances what you can see and also restricts your breadth of vision. For that reason, a conceptual framework should be used judiciously to help inform your study rather than to dictate all aspects of it. Sometimes important breakthroughs occur when a researcher abandons the commonly-used conceptual framework and applies one never before used with a given problem.

SLP Assignment Expectations

  • 30 40 pages in length
  • 50+ references
  • narrative and graphic Conceptual Framework
  • Conforms to all structural, grammatical, and APA 7th conventions.
Privacy Policy | Contact

Modules/Module1/Mod1Objectives.html

Module 1 - Outcomes

Compiling the DSP Research prospectus (Revise Chapter 2)

  • Module
    • Synthesize a draft of separate chapters to a coherent research DSP prospectus.
  • Case
    • Conduct synthesis of literature on the selected research progress.
  • SLP
    • Demonstrate fluency with the body of knowledge and demonstrate the ability to apply relevant knowledge to the chosen field, supplemented by a broad, integrative understanding of complementary disciplines that is facilitated by the establishment of the following: a draft of a Review of the Literature (required).
  • Discussion
    • Demonstrate a full awareness of the challenges and opportunities represented regarding the development of the DSP prospectus.
Privacy Policy | Contact

Table of Contents.html

 
DOC690 Doctoral Study Proposal (SPR2021-1) - Module 1: Compiling the DSP Prospectus (Revise Chapter 2)

1. Home

2. Background

3. Case

4. SLP

5. Learning Outcomes