research范文

research范文篇一

怎么写篇漂亮的research_proposal

文章作者Paul T. P. Wong, Ph.D., C.Psych. (Research Director, Graduate Program in Counselling Psychology. Trinity Western University Langley, BC, Canada).

题为：How to Write a Research Proposal. 全文转载如下：

Most students and beginning researchers do not fully understand what a research proposal means, nor do they understand its importance. To put it bluntly, one’s research is only as a good as one’s proposal. An ill-conceived proposal dooms the project even if it somehow gets through the Thesis Supervisory Committee. A high quality proposal, on the other hand,

A research proposal is intended to convince others that you have a worthwhile research project and that you have the competence and the work-plan to complete it. Generally, a research proposal should contain all the key elements involved in the research process and include sufficient information for the readers to evaluate the proposed study.

Regardless of your research area and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions: What you plan to accomplish, why you want to do it and how you are going to do it.

The proposal should have sufficient information to convince your readers that you have an important research idea, that you have a good grasp of the relevant literature and the major issues, and that your methodology is sound.

The quality of your research proposal depends not only on the quality of your proposed project, but also on the quality of your proposal writing. A good research project may run the risk of rejection simply because the proposal is poorly written. Therefore, it pays if your writing is coherent, clear and compelling.

This paper focuses on proposal writing rather than on the development of research ideas.

Title:

It should be . For example, the phrase, “An investigation of . . .” could be omitted. Often titles are stated in terms of a functional relationship,

because such titles clearly indicate the independent and dependent variables. However, if possible, think of an informative but catchy title. An effective title not only pricks the reader’s interest, but also predisposes him/her favourably towards the proposal.

Abstract:

It is a brief summary of approximately 300 words. It should include the Descriptions of the method may include the design, procedures, the sample and any instruments that will be used.

Introduction:

The main purpose of the introduction is to provide the necessary background or context for your research problem. How to frame the research problem is perhaps the biggest problem in proposal writing.

significance will become evident.

Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules on how to frame your research question just as there is no prescription on how to write an interesting and informative opening paragraph. A lot depends on your creativity, your ability to .

However, try to place your research question in the context of either a current “hot” . Thirdly, provide the contemporary context in which your proposed research question occupies the central stage. Finally, research question in broad brushes and at the same time bring out its significance.

The introduction typically begins with a general statement of the problem area, with

a focus on a specific research problem, to be followed by the rational or justification for

to show its necessity and importance.

research.

Alternatively, specify the phenomenon you want to study.

research, you may not have any hypotheses. (Please do not confuse the hypothesis with the statistical null hypothesis.)

7. Set the delimitation or boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a

Literature Review:

Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introduction section. However, most professors prefer a separate section, which allows a more thorough review of the literature.

The literature review serves several important functions:

1. Ensures that you are not “reinventing the wheel”.

2. Gives credits to those who have laid the groundwork for your research.

to your research question.

5. Shows your ability to critically evaluate relevant literature information.

6. Indicates your ability to integrate and synthesize the existing literature.

framework for your research.

8. Convinces your reader that your proposed research will make a significant and substantial contribution to the literature (i.e., resolving an important theoretical issue or

filling a major gap in the literature).

Most students’ literature reviews suffer from the following problems:

* Lacking organization and structure

* Lacking focus, unity and coherence

* Being repetitive and verbose

* Failing to cite influential papers

* Failing to keep up with recent developments

* Failing to critically evaluate cited papers

* Citing irrelevant or trivial references

* Depending too much on secondary sources

Your scholarship and research competence will be questioned if any of the above applies to your proposal.

established the importance of your research area and its current state of development, you may devote several subsections on related issues as: theoretical models, measuring instruments, cross-cultural and gender differences, etc.

It is also helpful to keep in mind that you are telling a story to an audience. Try to rejection of your worthy proposal. (Remember: Professors and scientists are human beings too.)

Methods:

The Method section is very important because it tells your Research Committee how you plan to tackle your research problem. It will provide your work plan and describe the activities necessary for the completion of your project.

The guiding principle for writing the Method section is that it should contain

sufficient information for the reader to determine whether methodology is sound. Some

question.

Please note that your research question may be best answered by qualitative research. However, since most mainstream psychologists are still biased against

qualitative research, especially the phenomenological variety, you may need to justify your qualitative method.

Furthermore, since there are no well-established and widely accepted canons in qualitative analysis, your method section needs to be more elaborate than what is required for traditional quantitative research. More importantly, the data collection process in qualitative research has a far greater impact on the results as compared to quantitative research. That is another reason for greater care in describing how you will collect and analyze your data. (How to write the Method section for qualitative research is a topic for another paper.)

sections:

1. Design -Is it a questionnaire study or a laboratory experiment? What kind of design do you choose?

2. Subjects or participants - Who will take part in your study ? What kind of sampling procedure do you use?

3. Instruments - What kind of measuring instruments or questionnaires do you use? Why do you choose them? Are they valid and reliable?

4. Procedure - How do you plan to carry out your study? What activities are involved? How long does it take?

Results:

will be used in order to answer your research question or test you hypothesis.

Discussion:

It is important to convince your reader of the of your proposed

research范文篇二

research_plan_范本

AA大学“国家建设高水平大学公派研究生项目”研修计划

Research Plan for CSC Scholarship Program, AA

research范文篇三

怎么写篇漂亮的research proposal

怎么写篇漂亮的research proposal，流传很广的写作指南。言简意赅，很实用~~ 来源： 张阳阳的日志

文章作者Paul T. P. Wong, Ph.D., C.Psych. (Research Director, Graduate Program in Counselling Psychology. Trinity Western University Langley, BC, Canada).

题为：How to Write a Research Proposal. 全文转载如下：

Most students and beginning researchers do not fully understand what a research proposal means, nor do they understand its importance. To put it bluntly, one’s research is only as a good as one’s proposal. An ill-conceived proposal dooms the project even if it somehow gets through the Thesis Supervisory Committee. A high quality proposal, on the other hand,

A research proposal is intended to convince others that you have a worthwhile research project and that you have the competence and the work-plan to complete it. Generally, a research proposal should contain all the key elements involved in the research process and include sufficient information for the readers to evaluate the proposed study.

Regardless of your research area and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions: What you plan to accomplish, why you want to do it and how you are going to do it.{research范文}.

The proposal should have sufficient information to convince your readers that you have an important research idea, that you have a good grasp of the relevant literature and the major issues, and that your methodology is sound.

The quality of your research proposal depends not only on the quality of your proposed project, but also on the quality of your proposal writing. A good research project may run the risk of rejection simply because the proposal is poorly written. Therefore, it pays if your writing is coherent, clear and compelling.

This paper focuses on proposal writing rather than on the development of research ideas.

Title:

It should be . For example, the phrase, “An investigation of . . .” could be omitted. Often titles are stated in terms of a functional relationship, because such titles clearly indicate the independent and dependent variables. However, if possible, think of an informative but catchy title. An effective title not only pricks the reader’s interest, but also predisposes him/her favourably towards the

proposal.

Abstract:

It is a brief summary of approximately 300 words. It should include the resear. Descriptions of the method may include the design, procedures, the sample and any instruments that will be used.

Introduction:

The main purpose of the introduction is to provide the necessary background or context for your research problem. How to frame the research problem is perhaps the biggest problem in proposal writing.

If the research problem is framed in the context of a general, rambling literaturHowever, if the same question is placed in the context of its significance will become evident.

Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules on how to frame your research question just as there is no prescription on how to write an interesting and informative opening paragraph. A lot depends on your creativity, your ability to .

However, try to place your research question in the context of either Secondly, you need to provide a. Thirdly, provide the contemporary context in which your proposed research question occupies the central stage. Finally, In short, try to paint your research question in broad brushes and at the same time bring out its significance.

The introduction typically begins with a general statement of the problem area, with a focus on a specific research problem, to be followed by the rational or justification for the proposed study. The introduction generally covers

1. State the which is often referred to as the purpose of the study.

2. Provide the for your research question in such a way as to show its necessity and importance.

3. Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is w

4. Briefly describe the major issues and sub-problems to be addressed by your research.

5. Identify the of your experiment. Alternatively, specify the phenomenon you want to study.

6. State if any. For exploratory or phenomenological research, you may not have any hypotheses. (Please do not confuse the hypothesis with the statistical null hypothesis.)

7. Set the delimitation or boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a

8. Provide definitions (This is optional.)

Literature Review:

Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introduction section. However, most professors prefer a separate section, which allows a more thorough review of the literature.

The literature review serves several important functions:

1. Ensures that you are not “reinventing the wheel”.

2. Gives credits to those who have laid the groundwork for your research.

3. Demonstrates of the research problem.

4. Demonstrates your understanding of the theoretical and research issues related to your research question.

5. Shows your ability to critically evaluate relevant literature information.

6. Indicates your ability to integrate and synthesize the existing literature.

7. Provides as the conceptual framework for your research.

8. Convinces your reader that your proposed research will make a significant and substantial contribution to the literature (i.e., resolving an important theoretical issue or filling a major gap in the literature).

Most students’ literature reviews suffer from the following problems:

* Lacking organization and structure

* Lacking focus, unity and coherence

* Being repetitive and verbose

* Failing to cite influential papers

* Failing to keep up with recent developments

* Failing to critically evaluate cited papers

* Citing irrelevant or trivial references

* Depending too much on secondary sources

Your scholarship and research competence will be questioned if any of the above applies to your proposal.

There are different ways to organize your literature review. For example, having established the importance of your research area and its current state of development, you may devote several subsections on related issues as: theoretical models, measuring instruments, cross-cultural and gender differences, etc.

It is also helpful to keep in mind that you are telling a story to an audience. Try to tell it in a Do not bore them, because it may lead to rejection of your worthy proposal. (Remember: Professors and scientists are human beings too.)

Methods:

The Method section is very important because it tells your Research Committee how you plan to tackle your research problem. It will provide your work plan and describe the activities necessary for the completion of your project.

The guiding principle for writing the Method section is that it should contain sufficient information for the reader to determine whether methodology is sound. Some even argue that a good proposal should

You need to demonstrate your knowledge of alternative methods and that your approach is the most way to address your research question.

Please note that your research question may be best answered by qualitative research. However, since most mainstream psychologists are still biased against qualitative research, especially the phenomenological variety, you may need to justify your qualitative method.

Furthermore, since there are no well-established and widely accepted canons in qualitative analysis, your method section needs to be more elaborate than what is required for traditional quantitative research. More importantly, the data collection process in qualitative research has a far greater impact on the results as compared to quantitative research. That is another reason for greater care in describing how you will collect and analyze your data. (How to write the Method section for qualitative research is a topic for another paper.)

For the method section typically consists of the following sections:

1. Design -Is it a questionnaire study or a laboratory experiment? What kind of design do you choose?

2. Subjects or participants - Who will take part in your study ? What kind of sampling procedure do you use?

3. Instruments - What kind of measuring instruments or questionnaires do you use? Why do you choose them? Are they valid and reliable?

4. Procedure - How do you plan to carry out your study? What activities are involved? How long does it take?

Results:

Obviously you do not have results at the proposal stage. However, you need to and will be used in order to answer your research question or test you hypothesis.

Discussion:

It is important to convince your reader of the potential impact of your proposed research. You need to communicate a sense of enthusiasm and confidence without exaggerating the merits of your proposal. That is why you also need to mention of the proposed research, which may be justified by time and financial constraints as well as by the early developmental stage of your research area.

Common Mistakes in Proposal Writing

1. Failure to provide the proper context to frame the research question.

2. Failure to delimit the boundary conditions for your research.

3. Failure to cite landmark studies.

4. Failure to accurately present the theoretical and empirical contributions by other researchers.{research范文}.

5. Failure to stay focused on the research question.

6. Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research.

7. Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues.

8. Too much rambling — going “all over the map” without a clear sense of direction. (The best proposals move forward with ease and grace like a seamless river.)

9. Too many citation lapses and incorrect references.

10. Too long or too short.

11. Failing to follow the APA style.

12. Slopping writing.

research范文篇四

research proposal

Developing Research Proposals Handout

Prepared by Ted Zorn, University of Waikato

This is a handout I often give to students when I expect them to provide a research proposal for a course project. That is, it’s intended for fairly brief proposals, not a prospectus for a masters or doctoral thesis.

It gives students an example of the sort of thing I want, plus some commentary (in italics) about what I’m expecting in each section. I sometimes change the particular example given, in order to encourage them to think about particular kinds of projects. For instance, the example provided here was used in a Leadership Communication course. I’ve used the same format, but a different research project example, for a course on Organisational Communication Technology.

Feel free to adapt it to your purposes.

Research Proposal (Example)

(Note: This is single spaced to save paper; yours should be double-spaced)

To: Ted Zorn

From: Chris Student

Date: 1 April 2003

Subject: Research proposal

Proposed Research Topic: A situational analysis of shared leadership in a self-managing team

[provide a brief description or a descriptive title or a research question]

Purposes: Alvesson (1996) claims that a situational approach enables leadership to be viewed and studied as “a practical accomplishment” (p. 476) rather than starting with a conceptualisation of leadership as whatever the appointed leader does. This approach seems particularly well suited to self-managing teams (SMTs), in which leadership is presumably shared. In this project, I will explore how members of a self-managing team enact leadership in their regular team meetings. In particular, I will focus on how SMT members influence the direction of the team as well as the relationships and identities of individual members and the identity of the team as a unit, and how their interaction is enabled and constrained by social and cultural influences (eg, organisational culture, national/ethnic culture, and gender). Such a study should give insights into the workings of SMTs, an organisational form that is rapidly gaining in popularity and acceptance. Also, the study will test the usefulness of a perspective (the situational approach) that is underdeveloped in the leadership literature.

[Expand on the topic/question by describing what you hope to accomplish, and the desired outcomes (especially the practical or theoretical benefits to be gained)]

Background: I will conduct my study in a team that is within the Roadworks Division within the Hamilton City Council. Roadworks has 12 SMTs, each of which is responsible for maintenance of roads within one geographical section of Hamilton. This particular team includes four men and a woman. Three of the men are in their thirties and one in his early 50s; the woman is in her thirties. They are assigned to an area around Chartwell. They start each day with a brief (15-45 minute meeting) on an agreed upon site, often just gathering around the back of a truck for their meeting. I will attend these three mornings a week for four weeks, and will stay on to observe their work for approximately 20 hours during the four week period. My primary focus will be on their interaction in meetings, although I will also observe (and perhaps enquires about) interactions during their other work.

[Describe the context of the proposed research, making it clear how this context will allow you to accomplish your stated purposes]

Scope: I will engage in participant-observation over a six-week period, from 8 April to 22 May for approximately four hours per week. I will typically observe the morning meetings and stay for an hour or so to observe their other work. On some days I may come at other times of the day for comparison. I will not schedule structured interviews, but will interview team members

informally, as needed to clarify and provide insight into specific conversations. [Describe such things as the time you will invest, when the field work will take place, the number of participants, and the number of interviews you will conduct]

Theoretical framework: I will be guided most generally by the interpretive perspective, and more specifically by Alvesson’s (1996) situational approach. The interpretive perspective places the focus on interpreting the meanings and perspectives of cultural members, and how these meanings are negotiated (Trujillo, 1992). I am exploring the meanings the sales staff and

customers have for themselves as individuals and for their relationships, as well as the meanings sales staff have for the organisation, group, and profession of which they are members. The situational approach directs me to choose one or a few specific interactions to explore in depth. Thus, an appropriate means of investigating the topic from this perspective is observation of conversation, plus interviewing the interactants to understand the meanings they have for their symbolic interactions. [Briefly identify and explain the theoretical framework you will use to guide your investigation, how it fits your purpose and its implications for the research methods]

Method:

1. Conduct a literature review on leadership and communication in SMTs.

2. Observe the group four hours per week for six weeks, focusing mostly on conversations at team meetings, especially those conversations in which the group addresses changes to their work processes and issues of team relationships and identity(ies).

3. Interview team members to clarify and provide insight into conversations. I will attempt to conduct these interviews shortly after conversations of interest. While the interviews will not be formal or structured, the kinds of questions I will ask include the following. The general strategy for the interviews is to start off with broad questions and follow up on the{research范文}.

interviewee’s responses, to capture her or his meanings and to avoid imposing my meanings on the interviewee.

a. Tell me about the conversation you just had with X.

b. What were you thinking during the conversation?

c. What do you think she/he was thinking?

d. What do you think she/he was trying to do (or accomplish) in the conversation?{research范文}.

e. What did you mean when you said, “......”?

f. What were you thinking when you said that?

g. What do you think she meant when she said “......”?

h. When you think about what you did and said in that conversation, how would you describe yourself?

4. Undertake a situational analysis of the field notes and interview notes, guided by Alvesson’s theory.

5. Write a research report that combines my understanding of the relevant theory and previous research with the results of my empirical research.

[Describe in detail the steps you will take in attempting to answer your research question]

Timetable:

Prepare proposal by 1 April

Complete literature review by 15 April

Complete fieldwork by 22 May

Complete analysis by 29 May

Give presentation on 3 June

Complete final report by 16 June

Limitations: Time constraints of the semester require less time than may be ideal for an

ethnographic study. By being in the organisation for only four hours a week for five weeks, there are bound to be aspects of leadership practice, organisational culture and team communication that will not be revealed during my observations. Being an outsider may also limit what is

revealed to me. The team members may be guarded in their conversations around me, especially in my initial observations. [Describe conditions beyond your control that place restrictions on what you can do and the conclusions you may be able to draw]

Delimitations: I am choosing not to observe multiple teams, even though such comparisons might be valuable, in order to allow more depth of understanding regarding the group on which I

will focus. Additionally, I will not use structured interviews in order to minimise my{research范文}.

obtrusiveness and my influence on the team members. [Describe the boundaries of the study that you determine]

References

[List all references cited that are not on the course reading list]

research范文篇五

怎样写好research proposal(中文)

大多数学生和刚起步的研究者都不了解什么是研究计划，也不知道其重要性。简单的说，一个人研究计划的好坏决定了其研究的好坏。一个构思欠佳的研究计划会毁了整个项目，即使它勉强通过了论文答辩委员会。另一方面，一个高质量的研究计划，不仅确保了研究项目的成功，你作为一个研究者的潜力也会给论文委员会留下一个好印象。

一个研究计划是为了说服别人你有一个有价值的研究计划，同时你有这个能力和相应的工作计划来完成它。总之，一个研究计划应包含所有研究过程中的关键步骤，同时也会给读者足够的信息来评估这个拟定的研究。

不论你的研究领域是什么，你选择了什么样的方法，所有的研究计划必须解决以下问题：你打算完成什么，为什么你要做这件事，以及你打算怎样去完成它。 研究计划应该有足够的信息来向你的读者证明你有一个重要的研究想法，你对相关文献和主要问题有很好的把握，同时你的方法是切实可行的。 研究计划的质量不仅取决于研究项目本身，同时也取决于你的计划书写作。一个好的研究项目也可能会有仅仅因为不好的写作而被否决的风险。因此，非常值得你去写得连贯，清晰并且令人信服。

这篇文章强调的是计划书的写作，而非研究思路的开展。

标题：

标题应该简明扼要。比如，“一个关于…的研究”，这样的句子就应该避免。通常，标题是表达功能关系，因为这样的标题清晰的表达了独立和相关的变量。然而，应尽可能，想一个内容翔实又吸引人的标题。一个有效的标题不仅会激发读者的兴趣，也预示了他们会喜欢这个计划。

摘要：

摘要是一个300字左右的简要归纳。它应该包括研究问题，研究的理论基础，假说（如有的话），方法以及主要发现。对方法的描述可能包括试验设计，步骤，样本，还有任何将被用到的手段。

引言：

引言的主要目的是为你的研究问题提供必要的背景。如何设定研究问题可能是计划书写作最难的部分。 如果研究问题被限定在一个概括的，不着边际的文献回顾里，研究问题就会显得琐碎和无趣。然而，如果同样的问题被设定在一个当前非常被关注的研究领域里，它的重要性就变得不言而喻了。 不幸的是，对如何设定你的研究问题并没有任何硬性规定，正如没有对如何写出有趣和翔实的开头段的规定一样。很大程度上要靠你自己的创造力，要取决于你清晰思维的能力和你对问题领域理解的深度。 首先，尝试着把你的研究问题放到当前的热门领域，或是一个陈旧但依然可行的领域；其次，你需要提供一个简要而适当的历史背景；再者，提供该问题的当下背景，在这里，你提出的研究问题应该是关注的焦点。最后，确定“关键角色”（key players），参考最相关和最有代表性的论文。总之，把你的研究问题放到

一个大的背景下，但同时体现出他的重要性。

引言一般以对该领域的简单描述开始，同时关注某一特定的研究问题，接下来是拟定研究的基本原理。

引言部分通常包含以下内容：

1. 描述该研究问题，一般也叫研究目的；

2. 为你的研究问题提供背景，设定其范围，以体现出它的必要性和重要性；

3. 说明你研究问题的理论依据，要清楚的指出为什么该研究是值得去做的；

4. 简要描述该研究要解决的主要及次要问题；

5. 确定你试验中关键的独立或相关变量。或者，明确说明你想要研究的现象；

6. 阐述你的假说或理论，如有的话。对于探索性或现象解释型的研究，你可能不会有任何假说。（请不要混淆假说和统计学上的零假设）；

7.设定你研究计划的局限或边界，以提供一个清晰的研究重点；

8. 给关键概念下定义（此项为可选）；

文献综述： 文献综述有时也包括到简介部分。然而，大多数教授更喜欢一个单独的部分，这样可以更全面地回顾相关文献。

文献综述有以下一些重要功能：

1. 确保你不是“重新发明车轮”（意即不是重复前人已有的成果）；

2. 向奠定该研究基础的前人致谢；

3. 说明你对该研究问题的了解；

4. 阐述你对该问题相关的理论和研究的理解；

5. 展现你对相关文献资料的批判评价能力；

6 显示你整合现有文献的能力；

7. 提供新的理论见解或发展一种新的模式，作为你研究的概念框架；

8. 向你的读者证明该研究计划会对现有文献做出重要的和实质性的贡献。（比如，解决一个重要的理论问题或者填补一个主要空白）；

大多数学生的文献综述都有以下问题：

* 缺乏组织结构

* 缺乏重点，整体性和连贯性

* 冗长重复

* 没有引用重要文献

* 没有跟上最新进展

* 没有对所引文献进行批判分析

* 引用了不相关或不重要的文献

* 过多依赖二手资料

如果你的研究计划里有任何上述问题，你的学术和研究能力就会受到质疑。 有多种方式来组织文献综述。利用副标题来使你的综述有序和连贯。比如，在展示了你研究领域的重要性和最新研究进展之后，你可能会用几个小节来探讨相关问题，如理论模型，测定手段，跨文化和性别差异，等等。 同时也要牢记你是在向听众讲一个故事。要试着以一种具有启发性的方式讲述，而不要使他们感到厌烦，因为这可能导致你的计划被否决。（记住，教授和科学家们也是人。）

方法：方法部分非常重要，因为它会告诉研究委员会你准备如何来解决该研究问题。该部分要提出你的工作计划，并说明完成你项目所需的必要活动。攥写方法部分的指导原则就是，应包含足够的信息，以便读者判断该方法是否有效可行。

你也应该说明对其他可行方法的看法，以证明你的方法是解决该研究问题最适当和最有效的途径。 表明你的研究问题能被定性的研究所回答。然而，大多数主流的心理学家仍然对定性研究抱有偏见，尤其是针对各种现象，因此你可能需要证明你的定性方法。 而且在定性分析时，并没有一个好的而又被广泛接受的经典方法，所以你的方法部分就需要阐述得比传统定量研究所要求的更为详尽。更重要的是，相比定量研究，数据的收集过程对定性研究的结果有更重大的影响。这是你需要更加小心地描述你将如何收集和分析数据的另一个原因。（如何攥写定性分析的方法部分需要另文讨论）

对定量研究来说，方法部分通常包括以下内容：

1. 研究设计-是问卷调查研究还是一个实验室的试验？你将选择什么样的设计？

2. 研究对象或参与者――谁将会参与你的研究？你将采用什么样的抽样程序？

3. 研究手段――你将采用什么样的测量手段或问卷？你为什么要选择这些方法？他们是否有效可靠？

4. 研究步骤――你打算如何开展研究？有哪些过程将被包括？需要多长时间？

结果： 很显然，在研究计划准备阶段你并没有研究结果。不过，你将收集哪些数据，什么样的统计方法将会用于解答你的研究问题或验证你的假设，关于这些你应该有一些想法。

讨论： 向读者说明你研究的潜在影响很重要。在交流时你应该热情而自信，但又不能夸大该研究的价值。这就是为什么你还需要说明该研究的局限和不足，可能是因为时间和经济上的限制，也可能是因为你研究领域还是在发展初期。

研究计划攥写时常犯的错误：

1. 拟定研究问题时没有提供合适的背景；

2. 没有给研究设定边界条件；

3. 没有引用标志性的研究；

4. 未准确指出其他研究者在理论和实践上做出的贡献；

5. 未能持续关注所研究的问题；

6. 未能给该研究提出一个条理分明和有说服力的论据；

7. 在次要问题上太多细节，在主要问题上却细节不足；

8. 过于松散，都是泛泛而谈，没有明确的方向。（好的研究建议方向明确，展开论述从容不迫，就像一条连续的河流）；

9. 过多的引用笔误和错误引用；

10.太过冗长或过于简短；

11. 没有遵循美国心理学会写作格式规范（APA style）；

12. Slopping writing.？？

research范文篇六

Model Research Essay

COURSE UNIT OF STUDY SITE: GROUP

Instructions

Diploma of Business & Enterprise (3113C0207)

Management (3113C0207U07) Shandong JianZhu University HC4

ASSESSMENT TITLE Research Essay

 Weighting This assessment is worth 30% of your final result for this unit of study  Due Date Week 12

 If you do not pass this assignment (i.e. if you do not achieve a mark of 15) you will be able to do it again and resubmit it, but you will only be able to achieve a mark of 15 or a pass for this second attempt  If your assignment is late it will be marked as a resubmission.

Resources required

 Student Manual

 At least four (4) other sources

Description of Task

 1500-2000 word essay based on one of the topics using theory, models, concepts relevant to the topic and at

least four references (texts; journal articles; management articles) in addition to the student manual.  The Harvard referencing system must be used for both in-text citations and reference list  The essay must have:

- An introduction

- A well organised body with in-text referencing

- A conclusion that brings together all the main points in the body of the essay

- A case study or organisation that you can refer to provide examples for your discussion of the management concepts, terms and models in your answer. essay as this would mean that you have not applied the theory, concept and terms for the topic in the body of the essay.

Mark breakdown-Research Essay

Your assessment will be graded according to the following breakdown. Please enter your name, VU student number, Group number and signature in the spaces provided and return the sheet below with your submission.

Example:

Describe the group development process. Explain how managers who understand the roles team members play in teams use this understanding to create effective and productive teams? a. Describe the five stages group development process b. Explain the three role categories c. Analyse the facilitating role managers play in creating effective and productive teams d. Use an organisation to provide examples for your discussion.

Introduction

Organisations are made up of teams, at every level, who work on specific projects to accomplish company goals……. To accomplish these tasks team members go through five distinct stages forming, storming, norming, performing and adjourning……. This essay will look at the group development process, the three types of roles that team members perform and the role that managers play in creating effective and productive teams to achieve company objectives. Reference will be made throughout the essay to a case study of Motorola’s development of its RAZR mobile phone in 2006 using a product development team . (先写摘要introduction，200字左右，格式参考上文)

A team is a group of people striving to create a common goal and develop an efficient and effective organisational structure in which to achieve those goals (Mackenzie, 2010, pg 438)…….

(接下来是正文，正文中引用的参考文献格式参考上文（作者的姓，文章年代，页码），格式为Times New Roman,小四，斜体

Conclusion

Most experts in team development agree that teams will go through five different stages. ……Motorolas’ RAZR team were led through the five stages ……

(接下来是conclusion，结论，100字左右)

References:

Mackenzie. R. 2010, Team Developmen,, Management WDB1007, Victoria University, viewed 20th June 2012.

（接下来是References，参考文献，格式参见上文，注意所列参考一定要与正文中的参考文献对应起来，该“.”的“.” 该“，”的“，”，该斜体的斜体）

密码 student