PPD

Submit your draft proposal Discussion this week (1-2 pages). Criteria and explanation follow:

RATIONALE  (1PT)

PREDICTED OUTCOME (1PT)

SUPPORTING STUDIES (1PT)

STUDIES THAT REFUTE (1PT)

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS (1PT)

WEAKNESSES (1PT)

STRENGTHS (1PT)

BENEFITS (1PT)

INSTRUCTOR’S OVERALL IMPRESSION (2 PTS)

Begin with indentation and summarize the rationale for your proposal, and the predicted outcome. –Summarize your expected results in support of your prediction.

–Explain what the results would mean, given the discussion you would have established in your review of the literature. In other words, if your results should support your hypothesis, which of the studies reviewed would your findings support and why?; and the studies your expected results would refute and also explain why.

–What would your predicted findings mean for those studies you reviewed that drew different conclusions?

–What would be the practical implications of your predicted results? In other words, how would the anticipated results benefit the scientific community, the society, and humanity at large?

–Specify any anticipated weaknesses critics would point out about your proposed design and research methodology. Would others find your sample size adequate; sampling procedures adequate; your design appropriate for addressing your stated research question; your procedures adequate and clear, your choice of statistical procedures appropriate for analyzing your research data, etc? You are to be your own critic and point out all the weaknesses you anticipate others would point out. It is acceptable for studies to have weaknesses as no study is perfect.

–Identify the strengths in your design that would enable you to find the answers you seek for your research question(s).

–End with a summary of benefits that your research proposal hopes to achieve for the scientific community and everyday readers.