Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 3

Prospectus Description

A research prospectus (2 – 3 pages) is a plan or research design (for your pre-approved topic) that covers:
1. Your research question
2. The methods and data you plan to employ to answer your research question
3. A brief evaluation of the existing scholarly literature on your proposed research question
4. Limitations of the project
5. What you hope to achieve with this research (implications for your field)
6. An initial reference list or bibliography of scholarly sources you plan to use to conduct your research

PROSPECTUS RUBRIC

Score
Title Page
Evaluation of Literature
Statement of the Problem
Operational Definitions
Subject Description
Procedures
Limitations
Study Significance
References
TOTAL POINTS

Description of Rating Scale


Title Page
5: Is appropriate in tone and structure to education journals, contain necessary descriptors (subjects,
independent (IV) and dependent variables (DV)), and allows readers to anticipate design
4: Is appropriate in tone and structure to education journal, most descriptors present; identifies problem
and experimentation, suggests design but lacks all descriptors
3: Identifies problem but does not allow the reader to anticipate the design
2: Identifies one descriptor, lacks design information or is misleading
1: Is not relevant to the intended study or is missing

Review of Literature
5: The review of literature is appropriate, provides background information and a critique of previous
research that points out weaknesses, conflicts and areas of needed study
4: The review of literature is appropriate, most background information provided, critique points out
some but not all of the areas of needed study.
3: The review of literature provides most of the background information
2: The review of literature provides some of the background information
1: The review of literature is provides little of the background information

1
Statement of the Problem
5: The problem statement is concise, includes descriptor variables and informs the reader of the exact
purpose of the study
4: The statement of the problem includes most of the descriptor variables and informs the reader of the
exact purpose of the study
3: The statement of the problem includes 1 descriptor variable and informs the reader of the purpose of
the study
2: The statement of the problem is unclear and does not include any descriptor variables
1: The statement of the problem is missing or is unclear and unable to be interpreted

Operational Definitions
5: Basic assumptions are stated and specify certain conditions that must exist for the study to proceed,
limitations or possible shortcomings are acknowledged by the researcher
4: Most basic assumptions are state and the shortcoming of the study are acknowledged by the
researcher
3: A few basic assumptions are stated and the researcher does not mention the potential shortcomings of
the study.
2: The operational definitions are not clearly specified in the introduction
1: The operational definitions are missing from the introduction

Subject Description
5: The Method specifies who the subjects will be, how they will be chosen, how many will participate
and any special characteristics of importance; a description of how the subject’s rights will be
protected is included.
4: The Method specifies most of the descriptors regarding subjects and how subject rights will be
protected
3: The Method specifies most of the descriptors regarding subjects
2: The Method section specifies a few of the descriptors regarding subject
1: The Method section does not identify subject characteristics

Procedures
5: Contains effectively, quantifiably, concisely organized information that allows the experiment to be
replicated, it is written so that all information inherent to the paper can be related back to this section,
identifies the techniques used in data collection in the appropriate chronology, does not contain
unnecessary wordy descriptions of procedures
4: As above, but contains unnecessary information and or wordy descriptions within the section
3: Presents an experiment that is replicable, all information in document is related, however, fails to
identify some sources of data and/or represents information that is disorganized.
2: Presents an experiment that is marginally replicable; parts of the basic design must be inferred by the
reader; procedures not quantitatively or clearly described.
1: Describes the experiment poorly in a non-scientific way such that it cannot be replicated

2
Limitations
5: Major limitations recognized; response is provided to how study addresses each one.
4: Major limitations are recognized; response is provided for how the study will address most of them.
3: Most major limitations are recognized; response is provided to how study will address most of them.
2: Some limitations are recognized; attempt to respond to how the study addresses them.
1: Limitations are not adequately addressed; response is limited or void.

Study significance
5: The introduction emphasizes contradictory findings and limitations of previous research and the ways
in which the paper will contribute to further knowledge about the research topic
4: The introduction emphasizes most contradictory findings and limitation of previous research and how
the paper will contribute to further knowledge about the research topic
3: The introduction emphasizes some contradictory findings and limitations but makes no predictions
how the paper will contribute to further knowledge
2: The introduction provides a few contradictory findings and limitations
1: The study significance is missing

References
5: Reference list is relevant, complete and broad enough to support the Introduction and is in correct
APA format.
4: Reference list is limited and is in correct APA format
3: Reference list includes non-relevant articles and is not in APA format
2: Reference list is incomplete and format is incorrect
1: No Reference list is included