RESEARCH PROPOSAL Assessment brief

RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Assessment brief

Overview
The ability to conduct good research has become a key attribute of successful firms today. Research ensures that firms are able to effectively respond and deal with the ever-changing business environment, both internally and externally.
Assessment brief
• Find a business problem (in accounting field) that requires research to better understand and solve.
• Analyse the problem and develop propositions/hypotheses that need to be examined to address the problem
• Evaluate a range of research methods and choose the approach that is best suited to the situation and justify your rationale
• Outline your research process and how this will enable you to answer your propositions/hypotheses
• Your report should demonstrate the importance of rigorous research and its application to industry
Structure
1. Introduction
• Define the problem and its scope. You should also include its relevance to industry
• Describe your research question/s and objectives
2. Literature review
• Summarize the key themes relevant to the research problem and scope
3. Hypotheses/Propositions development
• Describe and justify the relationships between the different variables/constructs that need to be examined to solve the research problem
• Apply/incorporate theories to support your hypotheses/propositions.
4. Research methodology
• Justify clearly your overall research strategy to the problem you have identified
• Describe and justify your sampling frame, procedure, and overall research strategy
• Describe and justify your data collection methods
• Propose and justify a reasonable timeline for the research
5. Contributions
• Discuss the potential significance of your research. You will need to discuss it from two perspectives. They are as follows:
 Industry perspective – What is real-world significance of your research? i.e. How it will benefit business managers, policy makers etc.?
 Academic perspective – How does your research add to or enhance the current body of knowledge of your chosen topic area?

Mandatory
• Word Count: 2500 +/- 10% (excluding appendices and references)
• References: Chicago referencing (http://libguides.library.curtin.edu.au/referencing/chicago) and using a minimum of 10 academic references. If you are unsure what an academic reference is, please check with your tutor. (for the reference use between 2013-2019, the most updated information)
Submission
• Assessment to be submitted via the TURNITIN link on Blackboard that can be found in the respective assessment folder
• Please refer to Blackboard and the unit outline for specific date & time for submission

RESEARCH PROPOSAL
Marking rubric

Below Expectations (Fail)
0-49 Meets Expectations (Pass)
50-59 Meets Expectations (Credit)
60-69 Exceeds Expectations
(Distinction)
70-79 Exceeds Expectations (High Distinction)
80-100
Background to the problem

10% • Background to problem is vague and not clearly articulated • Minimal information provided about the background of the problem • Some information provided about the background of the problem
• Information demonstrates importance of the understanding the problem statement • Background information provided was described well
• Information provided good justification to the problem statement
• Background information is highly detailed
• Information provided strong justification to the problem statement.

Literature review

10% • Literature review is poorly summarized and discussed.
• Lack of any clear connection with the proposed research • Literature review is sufficiently summarized and discussed.
• Minimal connection with the proposed research • Literature review is adequately summarized and discussed.
• Some connection is shown with proposed research • Literature review is summarized well
• Themes identified and discussed
• Clear relevance and connection between proposed research • Literature review is clearly summarized
• Themes clearly identified and discussed
• Relevance and connection between proposed research is clearly described, concise and well stated.
Research purpose and problem definition

10% • Research question and purpose is unclear and not identifiable
• Research objectives were vague, and/or too broad and not specific enough • Research question and purpose is discussed but needs to be stated more clearly
• Research objectives are defined but lack any specificity and relevance towards solving the research problem • Research question and purpose is sufficiently described and stated.
• Research objectives are adequately defined but more clarity is needed around how they will lead to solving the research problem • Research question and purpose is described and stated well.
• Research objectives are well-defined and discussed. Is clear in how they will lead to solving the research problem • Research question and purpose is clearly described, concise and well stated.
• Research objectives are clearly defined and are highly relevant to solving the research problem.

Hypotheses/research proposition development

15% • Little to no attempt is made to explain the interrelationships between the different variables/constructs identified used to solve the research problem. • Some effort is made to explain the interrelationships between the different variables/constructs identified used to solve the research problem.
• A reasonable amount of effort is made to explain and justify the interrelationships between the different variables/constructs identified used to solve the research problem.
• Provided good justification to explain the interrelationships between the different variables/constructs identified used to solve the research problem. • Provided strong justification to explain the interrelationships between the different variables/constructs identified used to solve the research problem.
Application of theory

10% • Little to no effort was made to incorporate theories or conceptual frameworks to provide justification for the relationships discussed • Some effort was made to incorporate theories or conceptual frameworks to provide justification for the relationships discussed • A reasonable amount of effort was made to incorporate theories or conceptual frameworks to provide justification for the relationships discussed • Provided good theoretical justification for most of the relationships discussed • Provided strong theoretical justification for most of the relationships discussed
Research Methodology

25% • No methods section included or was poorly described and stated.
• A methods section was included but numerous components/elements were absent or insufficiently described.
• Lacked any real relevance with achieving the research objectives, answering the research question/s as well as testing the hypotheses/propositions developed
• A methods section outlining the various research processes and steps involved is adequately described
• Some justification provided on how it relates to achieving the research objectives, answering the research question/s as well as testing the hypotheses/propositions developed • A methods section outlining the various research processes and steps involved is described in a logical and coherent manner.
• Provided good justification around the choice of methods used, as well as how it relates to achieving the research objectives, answering the research question/s as well as testing the hypotheses/propositions developed • A methods section outlining the various research processes and steps is described in a logical and coherent manner.
Provided strong justification around the choice of methods used, as well as how it relates to achieving the research objectives, answering the research question/s as well as testing the hypotheses/propositions developed

Conclusion, limitations and significance of study
10% • The conclusions are vague and cumbersome to understand.
• Lacks any conceptual or real-world significance. • The conclusions are sufficiently described but still lack some clarity
• Few conclusions were supported and justified based on the overall discussion within the document
• Conceptual or real-world significance was somewhat evident.
• The conclusions are adequately described and stated
• Some conclusions were supported and justified based on the overall discussion within the document
• Conceptual and real-world significance was evident • The conclusions are well described and stated
• Most conclusions were supported and justified adequately based on the overall discussion within the document
• Research was justified adequately from a conceptual and real world significance perspective • The conclusions are well described and stated
• Most conclusions were supported and well justified based on the overall discussion within the document
• Research was justified well from a conceptual and real world significance perspective
Sources and Evidence
5% • Inconsistent use of credible, relevant sources and/or data to support ideas that are situated within the discipline and genre of the writing.
• Did not meet the minimum of 10 academic references • Demonstrates some use of credible, relevant sources and/or data to support ideas that are situated within the discipline and genre of the writing.
• Met the minimum of 10 academic references • Demonstrates consistent use of credible, relevant sources and/or data to support ideas that are situated within the discipline and genre of the writing.
• Met the minimum of 10 academic references • Demonstrates consistent use of a range of credible, relevant sources and/or data to support key ideas that are pertinent to the discipline and genre of the writing.
• Exceeded the minimum of 10 academic references • Demonstrates skilful use of high-quality, credible, relevant sources and/or data to develop in depth ideas that are appropriate for the discipline and genre of the writing.
• Exceeded the minimum of 10 academic references

Formatting and language

5% • Did not use language that conveys meaning to readers with sufficient clarity and includes some errors.
• Document has numerous formatting errors relating to spacing, fonts etc.
• Does not follow formatting of prescribed referencing style • Uses language sufficiently well to convey basic meaning although errors reduce effectiveness of communication.
• Document has multiple formatting errors relating to spacing, fonts etc.
• Follows formatting of prescribed referencing style but contains some errors • Uses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with clarity and writing is virtually error free.
• Document has some formatting errors relating to spacing, fonts etc.
• Follows formatting of prescribed referencing style with minimal errors • Uses language that effectively conveys meaning to readers with clarity. Any errors which occur do not reduce effectiveness of communication.
• Document has little to no formatting errors relating to spacing, fonts etc.
• Follows formatting of prescribed referencing style with little to no errors • Uses language that skilfully communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency, and is error-free
• Document is virtually error free around formatting issues relating to spacing, fonts etc.
• Follows formatting of prescribed referencing style no errors

The post RESEARCH PROPOSAL Assessment brief appeared first on Essaycola.

Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Coupon Code "Newclient"