Research Plan - For Discount Tutor Only

SMART: Learner Form

PSL Scientific Merit Action Research Template (SMART) Form (Research Plan)

Scientific Merit Process

Learners who are doing action research for their dissertation will use this form to go through the process of scientific merit review. The goals of this process are: (1) to facilitate the planning of the details of your action research project, (2) to ensure that the proposed project has rigor and allows for scientific merit review, and (3) to facilitate your progress through the dissertation. This is not an addition to your dissertation but a step to assist you in obtaining mentor, committee, school, and IRB approval more efficiently. You must obtain mentor, committee, and school approval of your research plan before submitting your IRB application.

Scientific Merit Criteria

The following criteria will be used to establish scientific merit. The purpose of the review will determine if the proposed project:

1. Contributes to society by improving a practice.

2. Documents need for change by utilizing evidence-based needs assessment.

3. Meets certain “hallmarks” of a good action research project including:

· Action research design:

· Practical.

· Participatory.

· Defined action plan.

Scientific Merit Approval

Your completed SMART form will be approved, not approved, or deferred for major or minor revisions. Your committee will use a checklist to determine if the study meets the criteria for scientific merit and the committee will provide specific feedback designed to identify any issues related to the scientific merit that must be resolved. You will have up to three opportunities to submit this form for committee approval.

Obtaining scientific merit approval does not guarantee you will obtain IRB approval. The IRB review will focus on ethical issues. A detailed ethical review will be conducted during the process of IRB approval.

Recommendations for How to Use This Form

The SMART form is intended to help you and your mentor plan the design and details of your dissertation. Once your mentor approves your SMART form, your entire committee will review the form for scientific merit. After the entire committee approves your SMART form, it will be submitted for school approval. It is recommended that you use this form in a step-by-step way to help plan your design. Expect that you will go through a few revisions before your mentor and committee approve this form.

Tips for filling out the SMART form:

· Prepare your answers in a separate Word document for ease of editing and revision.

· Copy and paste items into the right-hand fields when they are ready.

· Retain the descriptions in the left column.

· Keep the form unlocked for ongoing editing and revision.

· Leave no blank spaces in the form. If an item does not apply to your study, type “NA” in its field.

· Read the item descriptions carefully. Items request very specific information. Be sure you understand what is asked (Good practice for your IRB application!).

· Use primary sources to the greatest extent possible as references. Textbooks (Patton, Leedy and Ormrod, and so on) are not acceptable as the only references supporting methodological and design choices. Use them to locate the primary sources.

Upcoming Milestone Steps:

Milestone Group 1 · Milestone 1: Learner Completed CITI Modules · Milestone 2: School approved topic (Sections 1 & 2 of SMART form) · Milestone 3: Mentor Approved Research Plan (complete SMART form)

Milestone Group 2 · Milestone 4: Committee Approved Research Plan · Milestone 5: School Approved Research Plan · Milestone 6: University Approved IRB · Milestone 7: Committee Conference Call

SMART Learner Form

SECTION #1	To be completed by learner
1.1 Learner Name
1.2 Learner Program
1.3 Learner Email
1.4 Learner Phone
1.5 Mentor Name and Email
1.6 Committee Member #1 Name and Email
1.7 Committee Member #2 Name and Email
1.8 Dissertation Title
1.9 Site Selected
1.10 Contact Info for Site Approver and Expected Approval Date
SECTION #2	To be completed by learner
2.1 Project Write one paragraph that describes the action research project and the basis for it being addressed.

2.2 Contribution to Society: Using citations, answer the following questions in the order provided:
1. How does your project improve a current practice?
2. If your action research project is successful, how could your project impact your field of interest?
3. What are the practical implications of your project? For example, what will be the impact of this project on your sample, your site location, or your workplace?
2.3 Need and Evidence to Make Change Provide current information on your needs assessment or analysis for change. Include the cost-benefit analysis if indicated by design.
2.4 Theoretical Foundation Describe the theory or theories that serve as the backbone of your project. Provide references for each theory.
2.5 Researcher Positionality · Insider · Insider with collaboration · Reciprocal collaboration · Outsider, collaboration with insiders Define your role, position, and how positionality will affect your research study.
2.6 Research Questions and Project Objectives List the research questions or project goals. These should align with the need for organizational structure or project activities and outcomes.
TOPIC APPROVAL	1.

SECTION #3	To be completed by learner
3.1 Action Plan Provide detailed steps to implement your research plan. This should read like a recipe for conducting your project. Be sure to include all the necessary details so someone else would be able to follow this and replicate the project exactly.	What is the specific methodology? Generic Qualitative? Case study? This needs to be clear in this section and this section needs to reflect this approach. In this section, it needs to reflect an action research approach. The iterative nature and intended ‘action’ of an action research project need to be described. Refer to Stringer’s Look, Think, Act framework as well as Capella’s action research materials.
3.2 Results Describe your program evaluation and dissemination of results plan.	Results need to go beyond awareness. Describe this in the context of action research.
3.3. Measures and Instruments List and describe each data collection instrument or measurement tool you will use, such as questionnaires, formal interview protocols, and forms. Include: · Data type(s) generated by each measure. · Available psychometric information (including validity and reliability coefficients). · How this data will be used. Attach a copy of each instrument you plan to use as an appendix to your SMART form.	Discuss these in the context of qualitative research for each data type. See for example Leung L. (2015). Validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative research. Journal of family medicine and primary care, 4(3), 324–327. doi:10.4103/2249-4863.161306 Describe the data type in more detail. Demonstrate the alignment between each data type and the project’s research questions/objectives.
3.4 If Modifying an Instrument: Describe any pilot test or field test that may be required for any instruments. Type NA if not applicable. Field tests must be done: · For new instruments or questions developed by the learner. · With expert panelists. Field tests require no IRB review. A pilot test requires IRB review.	Name, describe and provide the rationale for at least 3 expert reviewers.
3.5 Assumptions Identify the key assumptions of the project; use citations to support their adoption.	Discuss topical, theoretical and methodological assumptions and limitations.
3.6 Limitations Identify the current weaknesses of your project. Indicate areas to be improved before starting your project and areas that cannot be improved. Give reasons for not redesigning to address any of the limitations identified.
3.7 Population and Sampling Describe the key stakeholders or population of your project. Briefly describe the characteristics of this sample, including: · Demographics · Inclusion criteria, if any · Exclusion criteria, if any Describe how you plan to select the sample. Include the steps you will take to include participants.
3.8 Sample Size What is the expected sample size? Provide citations to support the sample size decision.	Check this source for help with sample size: Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L., (2006). How Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. DOI: 10.1177/1525822X05279903 Also check: Frels, R. & Onwuegbuzie, A. (2013). Administering quantitative instruments with qualitative interviews: a mixed research approach. Journal of Counseling & Development, 91(2), 184-194.
3.9 Expected Site Describe the organization, site, or sites from which you expect to draw your sample.
3.10 Site Permission Who is authorized to provide permission to use this organization or site? Does the site have an IRB? What must you do to obtain permission to access the stakeholders, population, or data source?
3.11 Participant Contact How will potential participants be contacted initially? How will participants be contacted following the study?
3.12 Data Analysis Describe analysis procedures for each data type such as audiotapes, transcripts, videotape, field notes, photos, descriptive analysis, and other quantitative analysis. Describe all methods and procedures for data analysis including: · Types of data to be analyzed. · Organization of raw data. · Data management and processing. · Preparation of data for analysis. · Data storage and protection.	What type of thematic analysis will be conducted? Check QDA Miner Qualitative Text Analysis Software at https://provalisresearch.com/products/qualitative-data-analysis-software/freeware/
3.13 Ethical Considerations · Describe any ethical considerations given the sample population and/or topic. Please explain as fully as possible. · Describe any ethical concerns about defined researcher positionality. Address any potential for coercion.	When discussing the ethical issues related to your proposed research include a discussion of the following: expert review, pilot studies, test runs, recruitment, informed consent, site permission, risk assessment (including whether the study includes vulnerable subjects), tests and measurement instruments, conflict of interest and data security & destruction. See https://campus.capella.edu/web/doctoral-programs/research-scholarship/institutional-review-board .
3.14 Risk Assessment Is your study more than minimal risk? Refer to your CITI course for more information about minimal risk. Please explain.	When assessing risk, consider inconvenience, physical harm, economic/financial harm, psychological harm, legal harm, social harm, loss of privacy and confidentiality and group harms. For additional information on these see Capella’s ‘Assessing Risk in Research’ (http://assets.capella.edu/campus/doctoral-programs/UnderstandingResearchRisks.pdf). Address these in your discussion of risk.
To be completed by mentor
	Mentor Name	Member #1 Name	Member #2 Name	Date and reason for deferral if needed
Topic Approval
SMART Approval
First Review
Second Review (if needed)
Third Review (if needed)
Faculty Chair consult (if needed)
Notes:

Please attach the formal letter requesting permission and letter of approval (on letterhead) to the end of this SMART form prior to submission for School approval.

Mentors: Once you submit Milestone #4 – Committee Approved SMART form – please send this completed SMART form to: [email protected] for school approval.

References:

Al-Soud, A.,R., Al-Yaseen, H., & Al-Jaghoub, S.H., (2014). Jordan's e-government at the crossroads. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 8(4), 597-619. Retrieved from http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F1633967814%3Facc

Alomari, M. K. (2014). Discovering citizens reaction toward e-government: Factors in e-government adoption. Journal of Information Systems and Technology Management: JISTEM, 11(1), 5-20. Retrieved from http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F1530083692%3Facc

Bélanger, F., & Carter, L. (2012). Digitizing government interactions with constituents: An historical review of E-government research in information systems. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 13(5), 363-394. Retrieved from http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F1021178240%3Faccountid%3D27965

Bwalya, K. J., Plessis, T. D., & Rensleigh, C. (2014). E-government implementation in Zambia - prospects. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 8(1), 101-130. doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1108/TG-01-2013-0002

Campillo-Alhama, C., & Martínez-Sala, A. (2017). Integrated communication 2.0 in municipal administration. El Profesional De La Información, 26(3), 507-515. doi:10.3145/epi.2017.may.17

Chalhoub, M. S. (2010). Public attitudes towards government restructuring of IT public services: Application to e-government in the middle east. International Journal of Management, 27(3), 541-561,580. Retrieved from http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F763161359%3Faccount

Chapman, S. J. (2017). What’s in a website? E-government scores and municipal characteristics. Public Administration Quarterly, 41(2), 360-385. Retrieved from http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F1930764145%3Faccountid%3D27965

Chan, C. M. L., Hackney, R., Pan, S. L., & Chou, T. (2011). Managing e-government system implementation: A resource enactment perspective. European Journal of Information Systems, 20(5), 529-541. doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1057/ejis.2011.19

Cook, M., Harrison, T. M., Zhang, J., Puron-Cid, G., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2015). Using public value thinking for government IT planning and decision making: A case study. Information Polity: The International Journal Of Government & Democracy In The Information Age, 20(2/3), 183-197. doi:10.3233/IP-150359

Davison, R. M., Wagner, C., & Ma, L. C. K. (2005). From government to e-government: A transition model. Information Technology & People, 18(3), 280-299. Retrieved from http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F222405367%3Faccountid%3D27965

Demographics. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://fairfieldtownshipnj.org/about-fairfield/demographics/

DeLone, W.H., McLean, E.R. (1992) Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research 3, 60–95. Google Scholar, Crossref, ISIOpenURL Capella University

Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L., (2006). How Many Interviews Are Enough? An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59-82. DOI: 10.1177/1525822X05279903

Hariguna, T., Hung, C., & Sukmana, H. T. (2019). The antecedent of citizen intention use of e-government service. Telkomnika, 17(1), 202-209. doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.12928/TELKOMNIKA.v17i1.11588

Huffmman, S. (2018). The digital divide revisited: What is next. Education, 138(3), 239-246.

Hwang, Y., Al-Arabiat, M., & Shin, D. (2016). Understanding technology acceptance in a mandatory environment. Information Development, 32(4), 1266-1283. doi:10.1177/0266666915593621

Léveillé, V., & Timms, K. (2015). Through a Records Management Lens: Creating a Framework for Trust in Open Government and Open Government Information. Canadian Journal Of Information & Library Sciences, 39(2), 154-190.

Marangunić, N., & Granić, A. (2015). Technology acceptance model: a literature review from 1986 to 2013. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(1), 81-95.

Michelucci, F. V., De Marco, A., & Tanda, A. (2016). Defining the Role of the Smart-City Manager: An Analysis of Responsibilities and Skills. Journal Of Urban Technology, 23(3), 23-42. doi:10.1080/10630732.2016.1164439

Munyoka, W., & Maharaj, M. S. (2019). Privacy, security, trust, risk and optimism bias in e-government use: The case of two southern African development community countries. South African Journal of Information Management, 21(1) doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.4102/sajim.v21i1.983

Nurdin, N., Stockdale, R., & Scheepers, H. (2011). Understanding organizational barriers influencing local electronic government adoption and implementation: The electronic government implementation framework. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 6(3), 13-27. Retrieved from http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F915869300%3Faccounti

Pettigrew, R. N., & Duncan, K. A. (2017). Poking a sleeping bear: the challenge of organizational recruitment for controversial topics. Community, Work & Family, 20(1), 35-49. doi:10.1080/13668803.2016.1270259

Rana, N. P., Dwivedi, Y. K., & Williams, M. D. (2013). Analysing challenges, barriers and CSF of egov adoption. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 7(2), 177-198. doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1108/17506161311325350

Rose, J., Persson, J. S., & Heeager, L. T. (2015). How e-Government managers prioritise rival value positions: The efficiency imperative. Information Polity: The International Journal Of Government & Democracy In The Information Age, 20(1), 35-59. doi:10.3233/IP-150349

Rule, P., & John, V. M. (2015). A Necessary Dialogue: Theory in Case Study Research. International Journal Of Qualitative Methods, 14(4), 1-11. doi:10.1177/1609406915611575

Svendsen, G. B., Johnsen, J. K., Almås-Sørensen, L., & Vittersø, J. (2013). Personality and technology acceptance: the influence of personality factors on the core constructs of the Technology Acceptance Model. Behavior & Information Technology, 32(4), 323-334. doi:10.1080/0144929X.2011.553740

Southam-Gerow, M. A., & Dorsey, S. (2014). Qualitative and Mixed Methods Research in Dissemination and Implementation Science: Introduction to the Special Issue. Journal Of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 43(6), 845-850. doi:10.1080/15374416.2014.930690

Tolbert, C. J., & Mossberger, K. (2006). The effects of E-government on trust and confidence in government. Public Administration Review, 66(3), 354. doi:http://dx.doi.org.library.capella.edu/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00594.x

Valerio, M. A., Rodriguez, N., Winkler, P., Lopez, J., Dennison, M., Liang, Y., & Turner, B. J. (2016). Comparing two sampling methods to engage hard-to-reach communities in research priority setting. BMC medical research methodology, 16(1), 146.

Valle-Cruza, D., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Gil-Garcia, J. R. (2016). Citizens’ perceptions of the impact of information technology use on transparency, efficiency and corruption in local governments. Information Polity: The International Journal of Government & Democracy in the Information Age, 21(3), 321–334. https://doi-org.library.capella.edu/10.3233/IP-160393

van Rijnsoever, F. J. (2017). (I Can’t Get No) Saturation: A simulation and guidelines for sample sizes in qualitative research. Plos ONE, 12(7), 1-17. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0181689

Waller, L., & Genius, A. (2015). Barriers to transforming government in jamaica. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 9(4), 480-497. Retrieved from http://library.capella.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fsearch.proquest.com%2Fdocview%2F1758618708%3Faccountid%3D27965

Whittington, J., Calo, R., Simon, M., Jesse, W., Meg, Y., & Schmiedeskamp, P. (2015). Push Pull, and Spill: Atransdisciplinary case study in municipal open government. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 30(3), 1899-1966. doi:10.15779/Z38PZ61

Xiangjun, F., & Weimei, P. (2016). Determinants of User Acceptance of Electronic Recordkeeping Systems: A User-Focused Empirical Study of System Characteristics. Canadian Journal Of Information & Library Sciences, 40(2), 124-151.

Appendix A: Survey Instruments

Survey Instrument: Residents

Background: E-government is the ability for a person to interact with their government online. This may mean paying bills, submitting forms or asking a question online. This survey was made to find out how you feel as about these services. The information gathered will only be used to help the township decide if this is something that the residents are interested in.

1. Based on the background above, how would you feel if Fairfield Township decided to create an online system?

2. Please list what you currently use the internet for:

3. The Township currently offers the following services that you must travel to the township to receive. Please mark which services that you would like to use online?

Service	Mark the services that you would use online
Pay your tax bill
Complete forms for Birth Certificates and paying for it
Complete forms for Death Certificates and paying for it
Submit a complaint
Register for a dump permit
Ask a question
Pay for a dog license
Submit and pay for a Business Registration License
Register and pay for a home inspection (rental/sales)
Submit and pay for a Zoning Permit

4. Are there other services that you would want to use online?

5. What are the reasons why you do not want these services online?

6. What would be the primary reason for you to use an online system?

7. If the online system was hard to learn, would that prevent you from using it?

8. If the online system was hard to navigate, would that prevent you from using it?

9. Are there any other reasons that would that prevent you from using the online system?

Age	Number of people in your household in this age group
Less than 14 years of age
15-18 years old
19-35 years old
36-50 years old
51-64 years old
65 and over

If you would like to participate in an interview regarding using the internet for services in Fairfield Township, please complete the information below. This interview will be audio recorded. This interview is not to assess your satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the township. Information provided will only be used to gauge whether the Township should pursue online services.

Name

Address

Phone

Email

Interview Questions: Residents:

How long have you lived in Fairfield Township?

If Fairfield Township offered an e-government system, would you use it?

How do you currently pay your property taxes (mail, is paid with mortgage, come in to the administration building)?

If an online system was in place for you to pay your taxes, would you use it?

If there was a fee to use the system would you still use it?

If yes how much of a fee would be too much and cause you to not use it?

If the system was hard for you to use, would you still use it?

Other services the Township offers are making a complaint, vital statistics, and waste permits; describe how you would feel if the Township offered these services online.

Are there other things you would want the system to have/do for you?

Guiding/Probing questions

Would you like the ability to?	Yes	No
Pay your taxes online
Submit a complaint to the township online
Pay for birth and marriage certificates online and then have them mailed to you
Other:

If you answered no to any of the questions above, is it because of:	Yes	No
I do not have a computer
I do not have the internet
I do not use the internet well
I do not trust online pay services
I would rather go to the township to do these activities
Other reasons:

Interview Questions: Similar Township Administrators

Does your town utilize e-government _Yes _No

For yes responses

How did you determine to transition to an e-government system?

What services do you currently offer online?

Are there any services that are not offered online?

Why

How did residents feel about your township considering e-government?

Describe how the steps the committee took to implement e-government.

Were there any unforeseen problems with the implementation of the system?

Regarding cost was a there a tax increase to residents?

Does a resident have to pay a fee, when making a transaction on your site?

If yes, how was this fee determined?

From what you have gathered have there been any issues with resident acceptance/user ease of use?

What action do you believe Fairfield should take next?

For no responses

Why is your town not utilizing e-government, what are the reasons?

Have any residents brought up the notion to your knowledge?

Has any research been done by your administration regarding cost or implementation?

What action do you believe Fairfield should take next?

Guiding/Probing questions

What services do you currently have online?	Yes	No
Paying tax bills
Submitting complaints
Other Services:

If you do not offer any services online, why?	Yes	No
Cost of implementing these types of services
Committee not interested in providing these types of services
Administration/employees not interested in these types of services
Residents are not interested in these types of services
Has any resident raised questions/interest in these types of services
Other:

If you do offer any of these services online, did any of the following cause problems when implementing the system:	Yes	No	If yes, please note what may be helpful to prevent another township from the same issues
Cost
Server/host implementation issues
Resident acceptance issues
Township employee acceptance issues
Other issues:

Interview Questions: Fairfield Township Employees/Committee Members

What department do you work in? ________________________

What services would you like to see online and why?

Do you feel that having services online would increase or decrease your current work load?

Is ease of use of the system a primary reason to make transition easier?

Are there services that you feel are just not feasible to be conducted online and why?

What action do you believe Fairfield should take next?

Guiding/Probing questions

Are there services that you would like to see conducted online:	Yes	No
The ability for residents to pay their taxes online
The ability for residents to submit complaints online
The ability to pay for a marriage or birth certificate online and have it mailed
Other:

Are there services that would be more streamlined/effective if conducted online:	Yes	No
The ability for residents to pay their taxes online
The ability for residents to submit complaints online
The ability to pay for a marriage or birth certificate online and have it mailed
Other:

If you answered no to either question why:	Yes	No
Fear of change
Cost of implementing this change
Do not want to learn a new process
Do not think it will make the process more streamlined/effective
Residents would not use the online system
Other:

Version 1.1 effective Jan 2017 1

10