phd research proposal timeline example

phd research proposal timeline example

Developing a PhD Research Proposal: A Comprehensive Guide

1. Introduction to PhD Research Proposals

Writing a PhD research proposal can be a daunting task and, for many, is often perceived as one of the most intimidating aspects of the doctoral research application process. However, a good proposal is not only an essential prerequisite for acceptance of a thesis project, it is also an opportunity to advocate your research ambitions and strengths to the academic community. Despite the common misconception that a research proposal is only a necessary requirement for PhD students, creating a proposal during your Master’s or undergraduate degree is an increasingly valuable experience that can advance your academic or professional career. This guide will take you through the process of developing an effective research proposal for a few different contexts, with a focus on the thesis proposal for entry to a research degree.

An academic research proposal will have many components, but an outline of the structure commonly requested will typically include an introduction, literature review, methodological approach, provisional results, a suggested word limit and academic timeline. A comprehensive research proposal should be structured in a manner that logically flows from background research to the significance and future directions of the potential work. A well-designed proposal, showing a high level of scholarship in the review of existing studies and the careful generation of a thesis idea, will often compensate for the limitations of the remaining eligibility application.

The proposal should thus bring together existing work on the theme, and in doing so show the place of the proposed work in this field. A good research proposal or thesis proposal can move worthiness from B to C, or C to A, or add scholarship to work experience. With a well-packed proposal, messy interviews regarding the future or content of your research proposal will become far easier, comprehensive approaches to supervision will be welcome, and the trajectory of your research degree enrollment will become safer.

2. Key Components of a PhD Research Proposal

When creating a research proposal, it is highly essential that you take into account all aspects that will ensure your proposal is not just acceptable but also outstanding. The idea is for the members of the research committee to read your proposal and be convinced that not only have you met all that is required of you, but that you are presenting genuinely innovative research, ambitious yet accessible, above all a research proposal that they would be proud to support.

There is no one-size-fits-all guide for writing a funding proposal due to the conflicting requirements of funders. However, many funding proposals, particularly for PhD funding, contain several key components: a research question, a provisional review of relevant literature, the rationale for the research question (i.e., how the research contributes to the current state of knowledge in the field and filled any gaps in the literature) and a description of how the research question will be answered. Larger project-based funding proposals will also contain additional components that are not necessarily specific to PhD research proposals. For example, such funding proposals are likely to contain a detailed project plan that outlines the methodology to be employed. A larger project-based funding proposal may also contain a section detailing governance or administration issues, public engagement plans, or potential policy or societal implications. Your funding body will provide you with guidance on the specific requirements of the funding scheme.

3. Creating a Realistic Timeline for Your PhD Research Proposal

The multimodal research development timeline should inform us that on average, students enrolled in doctoral programs take approximately 18 months (1.5 years) in the social sciences, approximately 15 months (1.25 years) in the humanities, and approximately 6 months in the UIC Business School to develop a draft of the doctoral research proposal. However, it is important to keep in mind that averages provide us with a general idea, but every project is unique. The timeline will need to be flexible to account for fieldwork, data collection, travel, and so on. Deciding upon a realistic timeline, while there are multiple ways to do so, will help you gauge your readiness to begin your draft. From ordinary to extraordinary, there are many ways to undertake the writing process; consequently, the timeline is quite subjective. But generally speaking, one of the best ways to manage this process is to “glitch” your overall timeline into segments, a week, a month, by semester, including specifications as to what you hope to accomplish by the end of that period.

For instance, if you have 18 months to develop a draft, one plan might look like this: Week 1: decide upon topic Week 2-6: focus on reading Month 3: narrow the topic Month 5: formulate problem/study proposal Month 6: draft a working bibliography … and so on. Again, though, the timeline is subjective, and individuals adjust it according to the abstract development of their proposal. It is further suggested to inform your advisor of your intentions and to ask them what they might recommend for you personally. One other panelist suggested that “The best advice that I can offer is to maintain monthly and weekly writing goals and to meet them. If you miss them, reschedule them (don’t, at any rate, skip them), and set up monthly and weekly appointments with yourself or your advisor and keep them as you would any other appointments.”

4. Case Studies and Examples of PhD Research Proposal Timelines

4. Case studies on PhD research proposal timelines

The development of a research proposal takes time. Typically, a research proposal approximates the first 3 chapters of a PhD thesis, and another 2-3 chapters are expected to follow the study once the proposal is complete. This section looks at how three real-life doctoral researchers prepared and described their timelines for PhD research proposal development.

4.1. Case study 1: Full-time, three-year, university-based PhD study

Maria’s (full-time, three-year, university-based) study is a take on Doing Critical Management Research at Work studies in which Participatory Action Research (PAR) is led by practitioners. The envisaged participants are Italian seniors, considering becoming SEPAs, that is, Social Entrepreneurs in Later life, engaged in qualifying processes provided by a foundation. There are two dimensions to the multi-stage qualitative PAR question research: 1. How do you make sense of theorizing by older people, and intergenerational learning and practice in a research project undertaken by them and you? 2. In what ways/ with what results does this way of working embody some of the requirements of a critique of knowledge about ‘older people’, and facilitate learning and knowledge production in late-life entrepreneurship? Both lay (participatory action research) experts and college of professionals (transformative learning) will contribute to shaping the theories, practices, and products resulting from the mixed-method research venture. The participants will be 50 people over sixty who have an idea for a small business they would like to make happen once they retire from full-time employment, and a similar number for whom it is feasible to participate in the research activities. Daniel felt it important to clarify in the research proposal itself that there would be no products beyond the project publications!

4.2. Case study 2: Part-time, practice-based, funded PhD study

Peter is pursuing a part-time, practice-based PhD. The working title at present “is about the importance of leadership culture as the foundation for creativity and innovation strategies in the working environments of public sector organizations. Using Denison’s new leadership model that focuses on the foundation of beliefs, values and assumptions that guide the behaviors of managers, the PhD will examine the potential impact of a committed culture on innovation strategies in the working environments.” His Research Plan sets out a staged development process culminating in targeting Chartered Project Professional certification in April 2014. The timeline for the proposal development is appended in full in Figure A2, but it begins with some general training, reading journal articles and attending a “Methodology Session at the Graduate School” set for 7th December 2010. In January 2011, Peter planned to develop an “Initial proposal structure based around questions and sub questions” taking into account the outcomes of previous relevant experience. He planned to develop a bibliography, and read journal articles in a series of monthly steps throughout 2011 into the beginning of 2012, while at the same time refining his “Initial proposal structure”. By July 2011, Peter planned to have “a refined proposal title and structured sub-titles and sub-questions with a draft contents page ready.” From here, Peter feels that the steps in development are going to be quite rapid.

5. Conclusion and Next Steps

In this guide, you have broadly developed the PhD proposal through progressively building up with more detailed exploratory writing, mapping, and pilot studies. After outlines of different approaches as to what should be looked for with these stages, and what might be done with what is found, the guide concentrates on “the stages”. Thus, you have outlined in Section 2, thinking about starting a PhD, a schedule based on different kinds of work to be undertaken in what stage of this exploration. Your first task at this stage should be to establish your PhD proposal timeline.

After that is the first post-Stage 1 task: an integrated guided ten-minute writing bout response and accompanied questionnaire developed for this task by a research student writer/researcher. Do that and then you will be helped to decide what to do next, on the basis of the “results”. Feedback must be sought and acted upon, developing the writing that explains what you want to do, how and why, and what you will be talking about in your meetings with committees and supervisors. Finally, the content of this earlier part of the guide must be considered in relation to the rest of the proposal by continuously moving back, revising the layers and building up your proposal—as the final Section 5 states, all exploratory writing is for revision. That is also what a PhD is. Finance and time given it, let alone a deadline of 11th May, requires that a decision must be made now, based on Stage 1, about whether to develop a full-blown proposal or to go and talk to other people before further refining and revising the desire.