Preparing High Quality Research Proposals For ACEI

1
Preparing High Quality Research Proposals For
ACEI

• Dr. Michael F. Kelley
• Arizona State University West
• Dr. Linda Bennett
• University of Missouri-Columbia
• Dr. Lin Moore
• Texas Womans University
• Presented at the ACEI Annual Study Conference,
  San Diego, CA. April 5, 2002.

2
Presentation Outline

• Review the proposal submission process.
• Discuss the proposal evaluation process.
• Review the proposal evaluation criteria.
• Highlight the proposal decision factors.

• Discuss important factors to include in your
  proposal.
• Highlight important presentation features once
  your proposal has been accepted.
• Audience questions.

3
Proposal Submission Process

• Review the call for proposals and the submission
  deadline. The deadline is usually June 1, prior
  to the year of presentation. So, if you want to
  present in April of 2006, the proposal must be
  submitted by June, 2005.
• Highlight how your proposal addresses the
  conference theme/sub-topics, and emphasis areas
  as outlined in the call for proposals.
• Follow all items listed in the submission
  requirements (paper copy, disk copy, 3
  single-spaced, type-written pages that address
  the 7 proposal elements, and your desired
  presentation format).

4
Proposal Evaluation Process

• Each proposal is submitted to ACEI headquarters
  (HQ) and must be postmarked by the due date.
• ACEI HQ compiles all proposals and forwards them
  to the research chair (currently Dr. Ernest).
• Research chair contacts committee members and
  prepares proposals for blind review by 3 separate
  readers (end of June).
• Proposals are reviewed by committee members using
  the proposal evaluation criteria (usually around
  Aug. 15th).
• Proposal decisions forwarded to ACEI HQ (Sept.
  30th).

5
Proposal Evaluation CriteriaSee the last page of
the handout for the proposal evaluation form.

• How well does the Title introduce the study?
  This criterion is not formally rated, but it is
  considered in the overall evaluation process.
• How well does the Abstract describe the research
  study?
• Are the Research Questions adequately defined?
• Does the Rationale justify the purpose for the
  study and/or place it within the context of
  current theory and practice?

6
Evaluation Criteria cont.

• Is the Methodology clearly described and well
  matched to the research questions?
• Is the Analysis of Data adequately described, or
  a plan of analysis is presented, if the study is
  in progress.
• Are the Findings clearly identified?
• Are the Implications for future research,
  classroom practices, or policy discussed?

7
Proposal Decision Factors

• Each proposal is evaluated on 7 elements (the
  Title is not rated) using a 5-point Likert scale.
  Thus a total of 35 points is available for each
  review.
• The vast majority of proposals accepted score at
  least 20 or higher.
• Reviewers recommend the appropriate presentation
  format when the author fails to do so.
• Reviewer comments are forwarded to the primary
  author of the proposal prior to the ACEI
  conference.

8
Proposal Decision Factors cont.

• The number of papers accepted is determined by
  the size of the conference.
• The proposals originality, relationship to the
  conference theme, and quality also impact
  decisions.
• Finally, we seek to achieve appropriate
  distribution of age levels addressed,
  professional and geographic distribution of
  participants, and involvement of minorities.

9
Important Factors to Consider

• Prepare the abstract carefully. Rejected
  proposals often have confusing abstracts that
  dont match the body of the paper.
• Provide some context for your research. Clearly
  state your research questions and indicate why
  they are of importance. A direct link to
  previous research is helpful.
• Make sure that the methodology you use is
  appropriate for the research questions youve
  identified. Inappropriate methodology often
  results in the rejection of the proposal.

10
Factors to Consider cont.

• In the methodology section, carefully describe
  the sample characteristics, the measures employed
  in the study, and the relevant procedures.
  Remember, the proposal must make sense to the
  reviewers.
• If your research is in progress make sure that
  you state this and provide a brief timeline for
  completion.
• The next few slides were developed from J.
  Fraenkel N. Wallen (1996), How to design and
  evaluate research in education (3rd Ed.). New
  York McGraw-Hill, Inc., p. 442.

11
Quantitative and Qualitative Methods

• Quantitative Methods
• Preferences for precise hypotheses and
  definitions stated at the outset.
• Data reduced to numerical scores.
• Major focus on assessing and improving
  reliability of scores obtained from instruments.
• Assessment of validity with reliance on
  statistical indices.

• Qualitative Methods
• Preference for hypotheses and definitions that
  emerge as study develops.
• Data are typically narrative descriptions.
• Reliability of inferences is often assumed to be
  adequate.
• Validity is assessed through cross-checking
  sources of information (triangulation).

12
Quantitative and Qualitative Methods

• Quantitative Methods
• Preference for random techniques for obtaining
  meaningful samples.
• Preference for precise descriptions of
  procedures.
• Preference for design or statistical control of
  extraneous variables.
• Preference for specific design control for
  procedural bias (procedural and measurement
  integrity checks).

• Qualitative Methods
• Preference for expert informant (purposive)
  sample.
• Preference for narrative/literary descriptions of
  procedures.
• Preference for logical analysis in controlling or
  accounting for extraneous variables.
• Primary reliance on researcher to deal with
  procedural bias (yet, integrity checks are still
  critical).

13
Quantitative and Qualitative Methods

• Quantitative Methods
• Preference for statistical summary of results.
• Preference for breaking down of complex phenomena
  into specific parts for analysis.
• Willingness to manipulate aspects, situations, or
  conditions in studying complex phenomena.

• Qualitative Methods
• Preference for narrative summary of results.
• Preference for holistic description of complex
  phenomena.
• Unwillingness to tamper with naturally occurring
  phenomena.

14
Presentation Features

• If accepted for a Research Forum Session, then
  you will have approximately 15 minutes to
  present.
• Use visuals to accentuate the main components of
  the paper and consider the following timeframe
• In 2 minutes highlight the purpose and the
  research questions.
• In 1-2 minutes establish the context and purpose
  of the research.
• In 2 minutes highlight the methodology used,
  including the key measures and data collection
  procedures.

15
Presentation Features cont.

• In roughly 2 minutes report the statistical
  procedures or qualitative processes used to
  identify significant patterns or findings.
• Within 2-3 minutes discuss the findings and
  implications of the research.
• This will allow for roughly 5 minutes or so for
  questions from the audience. Bring at least 25
  copies of your completed paper for distribution.
  
• Remember, whenever using visuals, increase the
  font size so that participants in the back of the
  room can read the material.
• Finally, practice your presentation ahead of time.

16
Presentation Features cont.

• If selected for the Highlighted session, there
  will be 30 minutes for each presentation. This
  expanded format will allow for a more in-depth
  presentation and review of the findings, and an
  increase in audience questions and comments.
• Roundtables and Poster sessions are designed to
  be very interactive with considerable audience
  participation. They usually run 90 minutes in
  length.
• Poster session research papers are presented
  through the use of visual displays. Large
  tabletop tri-fold posters are available for
  presenters to mount large-print titles,
  descriptions, tables and graphs.
• Roundtable sessions allow for rich discussion and
  participation between authors and audience.
  Often papers are grouped by themes to facilitate
  the exchange of ideas and suggestions.

17
Questions

• What questions do you have of the panel or each
  other?