SOC 322 Methods of Social Research II: Qualitative Research

  

Research Proposal

Your final paper should be between 8 and 16 pages long. (This is double-spaced and does not include title page or references).

The paper should begin with a revised copy of your Lit Review, incorporating your instructor’s feedback for a new and improved version. If the original paper appears in its exact same version as the first part of your paper, you will be committing an Honor Code Violation, so make sure to avoid this grave mistake.

Next, there should be a transition paragraph that summarizes the preceding Lit Review, and points out the gaps in the previous literature that your proposed project aims to fill and/or outlines how your proposed project will relate to/pick up on theories/unresolved questions found in the literature.

The next section is your proposed Methodology. In this section, discuss how you will operationalize your concept(s), what your population of interest will be, how you plan to find your interviewees, what kind of questions you will ask (or patterns you plan to observe, if observing). Please do not include an entire list of interview questions, just summarize them, as your instructor has already graded the guide separately, Also here cover any challenges you may anticipate.

The following section will be your proposed Analysis Strategy. Discuss the type(s) of coding you plan to use (see Chapter 11), and preliminary coding schemes you expect to apply (of course, when the actual project happens in 499, you will need to add additional codes as unexpected patterns emerge as well).

Before closing, briefly mention the expected timeline that the project will follow. Conclude with the contribution you hope to make with your research project.

Make sure there is exact symmetry between the sources cited within the body of the paper, and the references listed at the end. (Everything cited is referenced, and everything referenced is cited.) Both should be in proper ASA format. You may view your own Turnitin report before submitting the final copy.

*Plagiarism will result in a lower grade, and may lead to a 0 for the whole paper.

A rubric for this assignment can be found under the Progress drop down menu under Rubrics.

 CriteriaOutstanding (100-90)14.3 pointsVery Good (89-80)14.2 pointsSatisfactory (79-70)14.2 pointsInsufficent (69-60)14.2 pointsUnacceptable (59-0)14.2 pointsOrganization of the paper according to the instructions given in the course

Followed all instructions.

Followed most instructions.

Followed instructions somewhat.

Did not follow instructions nearly enough.

Did not follow any instructions.

/ 14.3Sociological relevance of the research topic

Highly relevant sociologically.

Good sociological relevance that could have been emphasized even more.

Topic is generally sociologically relevant.

Does not have a topic that is sociological and/or did not make a case for its relevance.

Not sociologically relevant whatsoever & no way to make a case for it.

/ 14.3Critical review of the relevant body of sociological literature

Excellent number of sources, breadth and depth of coverage of the research topic, thematic organization of the literature review, comparison/contrast of various sources, assessment of their strengths, limitations, and relevance for the research topic.

Good number of sources, breadth and depth of coverage of the research topic, thematic organization of the literature review, comparison/contrast of various sources, assessment of their strengths, limitations, and relevance for the research topic.

Adequate number of sources, breadth and depth of coverage of the research topic, thematic organization of the literature review, comparison/contrast of various sources, assessment of their strengths, limitations, and relevance for the research topic.

Insufficient number of sources, breadth and depth of coverage of the research topic, thematic organization of the literature review, comparison/contrast of various sources, assessment of their strengths, limitations, and relevance for the research topic.

Nothing resembling a literature review in the paper.

/ 14.3Proposed methodology section

Excellent explanation of all various components of the methodology as stated in the instructions given in the course.

Good explanation of all various components of the methodology as stated in the instructions given in the course, missing few/minor info.

Satisfactory explanation of some components of the methodology as stated in the instructions given in the course; not all.

Insufficient explanation of various components of the methodology as stated in the instructions given in the course.

Nothing resembling a methodology section in the paper.

/ 14.3Proposed analysis and timeline section

Excellent, detailed timeline provided with realistic parameters; Coding strategy well-grounded in sociological methods, with excellent citations.

Good timeline provided with realistic parameters; Coding strategy is grounded in sociological methods, with appropriate citations.

Satisfactory timeline provided, may need more realistic parameters; Coding strategy mentioned but needs appropriate citations.

Insufficient timeline provided and/or unrealistic parameters; Coding strategy is not or barely mentioned, and without appropriate citations.

No proposed analysis and/or no timeline discussed.

/ 14.3Effective writing

Excellent grammar, spelling, punctuation, length and structure of paragraphs.

Good grammar, spelling, punctuation, length and structure of paragraphs; minor errors.

Satisfactory grammar, spelling, punctuation, length and structure of paragraphs; but could benefit from better proofreading.

Insufficient attention to grammar, spelling, punctuation, length and structure of paragraphs.

Extremely poor grammar, spelling, punctuation, length and structure of paragraphs.

/ 14.3ASA format

Proper citation in ASA format, in the text and in the reference list.

Proper citation in ASA format, in the text and in the reference list, with minor proofreading errors.

Citation in ASA format, in the text and/or in the reference list, has basic idea but has repeated errors.

Insufficient conformity to citation in ASA format, in the text and in the reference list.

No referencing and/or no citations.

/ 14.3