PhD Prospectus Checklist: The Following Checklist Like The P

Phd Prospectus Checklistthe Following Checklist Like Thephd Prospectu

The following checklist, like the PhD Prospectus Guide, provides guidance to support prospectus development. Included are the basic expectations for the content of the prospectus from the annotated outline in the Guide. Please refer to the Guide for additional information on how the prospectus will be submitted and evaluated. The PhD Prospectus Rubric standards and a Site-Naming Self-Check are included at the end of this checklist. Not all checklist items may be relevant to your particular study; please consult with your chair for guidance.

Instructions for students: Indicate on the checklist the page number where each heading is located. Respond to comments from the committee in each comment history box. Do not delete previous comments—just add your response in the appropriate space. Upload this checklist into Taskstream with your prospectus document for each prospectus review.

Instructions for the chair, second committee member, and Program Director Designee: Provide specific feedback in the comment history column. Do not delete previous comments—just add your response in the appropriate space. If detailed comments are included on the prospectus draft (using track changes and comments), you can refer to the draft rather than restate comments in the checklist; upload both documents into Taskstream during rubric completion. Committee chairs should indicate their acceptance of each item by checking the appropriate checkbox by each checklist item.

Basic Prospectus Information: Date, Student’s Name, Student ID, School, Committee Chairperson, Second Committee Member, PhD Program Director/Designee.

Checklist Items

Title Page

Present your title—12 words or fewer; include topic, variables and their relationship, and most critical keywords. Include your name, program of study (specialization if applicable), and Student ID. Chair, second member, and student to comment and indicate acceptance.

Problem Statement

State the problem by presenting a logical argument for the need to address a gap in the research literature relevant to your discipline. Provide evidence from scholarly sources that the problem is current, relevant, and significant (3-5 key citations).

Purpose

Present a concise statement that connects the problem to the focus of your study in one paragraph. Clarify the methodology—whether quantitative (variables and associations), qualitative (concept/phenomenon understanding), or mixed-methods (how approaches complement each other).

Significance

Identify how your study will fill the gap (original contribution), support professional practice or practical application (the So What? question), and potentially lead to social change (1-2 paragraphs).

Background

Provide keywords or phrases searched and databases used; include 5-10 recent scholarly articles supporting and clarifying your problem statement, highlighting their relationship to your research.

Framework (Conceptual or Theoretical)

Describe and cite the theoretical/conceptual framework grounding your study, explaining how each theory/concept relates to your approach and research questions. Ensure alignment with your problem and background.

Research Question(s) and Hypotheses

List research questions aligning with your study purpose, including variables or concepts and their examination method. Questions should inform your research design—generating hypotheses, building design structure, or integrating methods in mixed studies.

Nature of the Study

Describe the research approach—quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-methods—and how it aligns with your problem statement and purpose.

Possible Types and Sources of Data

List potential data types and sources (tests, surveys, interviews, documents, secondary data), noting any sensitive topics or vulnerable populations requiring IRB consultation.

Limitations, Challenges, and/or Barriers

Discuss potential limitations, challenges, or barriers, such as participant access, data access, role separation, or instrumentation costs.

References

List references formatted in APA style on a new page.

Dissertation Prospectus Rubric Quality Indicators

  • Complete: All required elements included?
  • Meaningful: Identified significant research gap?
  • Justified: Evidence showing problem relevance to discipline?
  • Grounded: Framed to build upon or counter existing findings?
  • Original: Potential for original contribution?
  • Impact: Potential for social change?
  • Feasible: Methodologically sound and considerate of participant risks?
  • Aligned: Overall coherence among sections?
  • Objective: Unbiased approach?

Partner Site Masking Self-Check

Confirm masking of partner organization identity in published capstone, per guidance and IRB review; indicate if exception requested and approved.

Paper For Above instruction

The development of a comprehensive PhD prospectus is a critical step in the doctoral research process, serving as a detailed blueprint that guides the entire study. This prospectus ensures that the research topic is well-defined, the rationale is compelling, and the methodology is suitable for addressing the identified problem. The provided checklist acts as a structured framework for students and faculty to ensure all essential components are systematically developed, reviewed, and approved.

The title page is the first impression and must succinctly encapsulate the research focus—highlighting variables, relationships, and keywords—in under twelve words. Precise titling facilitates indexing and retrieval, setting the stage for the clarity needed throughout the prospectus.

The problem statement must convincingly present a research gap grounded in current literature, demonstrating why the investigation is timely and relevant. Supporting citations (3-5) substantiate the urgency and significance of the problem within the discipline.

The purpose statement bridges the identified problem with the research focus, explicitly stating what the study aims to accomplish. It must clarify the methodological approach—whether quantitative, qualitative, or mixed—and describe how each approach will be employed. This alignment ensures the study's design is logical and feasible.

The significance section elaborates on the study’s contribution—filling knowledge gaps, supporting practice, and fostering social change—by describing the potential impacts of the research findings. This section underscores why the study matters beyond academic circles, emphasizing real-world applications.

The background component involves a literature review that searches specific keywords across relevant databases, identifying recent scholarly articles that substantiate the problem statement. Annotated references clarify the context and support the rationale for the research.

The framework, whether conceptual or theoretical, provides the foundation for the study. Detailing and citing appropriate models or theories, this section shows how the study’s approach and questions are grounded in existing scholarly work, ensuring coherence and academic rigor.

Research questions and hypotheses form the core of the study, guiding data collection and analysis. They must align with the purpose and problem statement, specifying variables and methods of examination to direct the research design effectively.

The nature of the study describes the overall approach, clarifying whether the research is experimental, case study, ethnography, or involves other methodologies, and discusses how this approach aligns with the research objectives.

Potential data sources—such as surveys, interviews, documents, or secondary data—are enumerated, with emphasis on considerations like sensitive topics requiring IRB approval, ensuring ethical compliance.

Limitations, challenges, and barriers are acknowledged, demonstrating preparedness to address issues like access, cost, and role conflicts, which could affect the study’s execution.

References are compiled in APA style, providing scholarly support to the proposed research.

The rubric criteria serve as quality indicators, assessing completeness, significance, relevance, innovation, social impact, feasibility, alignment, and objectivity of the prospectus.

Finally, the masking of partner organizations is addressed, aligning with ethical standards to protect identities unless exceptions are approved through IRB review, ensuring compliance in all dissemination stages.

Overall, this comprehensive approach to the prospectus guarantees a systematic, rigorous, and ethically sound foundation for doctoral research, fostering scholarly contribution and socio-economic relevance.

References

  • Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications.
  • Yin, R. K. (2018). Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. Sage Publications.
  • Patton, M. Q. (2015). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  • Schindler, P. S., & Duma, R. (2022). Research Methods in Education (7th ed.). Pearson.
  • Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., & Williams, J. M. (2008). The Craft of Research (3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
  • Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. SAGE Publications.
  • Leedy, P. D., & Ormrod, J. E. (2014). Practical Research: Planning and Design. Pearson.
  • Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. SAGE Publications.
  • Silverman, D. (2016). Qualitative Research. SAGE Publications.
  • Bryman, A. (2016). Social Research Methods. Oxford University Press.

Related Assignments