RESEARCH PROPOSAL PROJECT
-Forests, Fall, 2018
This is a multi-stage project, and is the central assignment for this class. The end-product will be a paper, but it's not the usual sort of 'term-paper' where you summarize what you can learn about a topic from existing literature. Rather, it's a proposal and design for a piece of primary research addressing a question of your own formulation through original observation, measurement, experimentation. You will get there in several stages -- the same steps that might be followed by a research scientist at any stage of their career. You'll spend the most time developing a viable research question/hypothesis; that is, in fact, the hardest (but most interesting) part of science, but you'll also develop conceptual context and background (a literature review), a design for gathering data, and a discussion of how you'd interpret results.
The
product of each step should be submitted as a shared google doc (or, if
you prefer, a shared document in some other word-processor format).
Some steps might involve graphical
elements -- sketches of curves or diagrams of methods or graphical
models of relationships. This is good. If you have trouble
figuring out how to incorporate these in a file for digital submission,
it's fine to submit a paper version. FOR ALL ASSIGNMENTS, include your name in the filename(s) of the submitted work (e.g. john smith - proposal step one)
STEP ONE: Five Questions: DUE 17 SEPTEMBER.
The first task is to develop some interesting and workable questions. This is not as easy as it seems. Here are some guidelines:
Frame five possible research questions based on your observations in the field (it is fine to use things we’ve seen or discussed in labs, on or off campus, or in your own independent observations).
WHAT YOU SHOULD HAND IN for each
question is
a) A sentence or two about the
observational context that led to the question, and
b) A concise statement of a question springing from these observations
(one or two sentences).
You do NOT need to explain how you'd address these questions
(measurements, sampling scheme, etc.); that will come later.
BUT
you should be able to at
least imagine that the question is answerable through
well-designed experiments and observations. Can you
generate potential answers to these questions (alternative hypotheses)?
STEP TWO: Three
Questions Refined: DUE 11 OCTOBER.
Refine your research question
possibilities to THREE questions, each with at least one or two briefly stated hypotheses/predictions
(i.e., plausible answers). Use the same guidelines
as above to help think
about what makes a good question. You can
refine/modify questions from your first set,
or add new ones or both.
Your possible answers/hypotheses might be
folded directly into your questions (“Do maple seedlings do
better at higher soil pH?”; the possibilities are 'yes' or 'no' -- BUT,
you should probably say something about WHY you think they might!), or
they might be stated separately
(“What environmental factors influence maple seedling growth
and survival under the canopy? H1: they do better at high soil pH;
H2: decaying cigarette butts enhance seedling growth
conditions...” Note that these hypotheses don't fully explain why
-- the mechanism behind your expectation. That's okay; take
things a step at a time!). Even though you may start with a specific
'guess' about what’s going on, it is always important to think
about plausible alternative answers/hypotheses. Add to the criteria in Step One for what
makes a
good (i.e., interesting) question/hypothesis:
a) A good hypothesis is consistent with the
data/observations you already have
b) A good hypothesis is testable -- you can think
of
observations/experiments that would produce one kind of result if the
hypothesis were true and a different result if it
were not
true.
c) A good
hypothesis is
generalizable -- it leads to expectations of what
you should
see/find in addition to the initial pattern that
caused you to
think of it...
For example, “There are around 20
woodpecker nests on campus" is not a very
interesting hypothesis, because, even though it could meet the first
two criteria, it misses on the third. But if you changed
it
to, "Is the density of nesting woodpeckers on campus related to noise
levels? [or some other
factor...]" you could imagine a range of
implications and follow-up questions.
WHAT TO HAND IN: For each of the three questions, a paragraph or two, including objectives of step one (refined) PLUS laying out of hypotheses and predictions. A page or two total, probably.
STEP THREE: Two Questions with basic Research Design. DUE 1 NOVEMBER
Choose two of the questions from the previous step, and FRAME A BASIC RESEARCH DESIGN FOR EACH. Develop a paragraph or two about how you would address your question (test your hypotheses); Focus on what predictions emerge from your hypothesis, and the kinds of data/information you'd need to test your predictions. It might look something like, 'If my hypothesis is correct, I would expect seedlings surrounded by cigarette butts to grow faster or be less likely to die. I could either observe seedlings near doors where there are a lot of butts and compare them to seedlings that aren't surrounded by butts, or I could experimentally place butts around some seedlings. If I'm right, I'd expect....' (Expanded a bit, of course.) The next stage will focus on developing this part of the proposal and doing some background research, so don’t worry too much about getting it all ‘right’ or in full detail yet.
WHAT TO HAND IN: A paragraph or two for each of the questions, in addition to material from Step Two (refined) should be enough. You might want to start doing some literature research as you are thinking about this stage; it will be called for in the next anyway.
STEP FOUR: Background Research, Review, and Annotated Bibliography DUE 19 NOVEMBER .
Choose ONE
of your (now) TWO questions, and do some background research in the
primary research literature (It's possible to design and execute
interesting research without having any familiarity with what's already
been done -- but this isn't the way good science usually gets
done). We will talk about how to do this,
but you can start any time.
Three things to think about (we'll address each in class):
A. Finding relevant papers: Useful
papers may
not be about the exact, specific question you're interested in but
bear
on similar situations with different species, or similar processes in
different circumstances, or on methodological approaches applied in
other scenarios. It won't always be possible to find papers
that are precisely and generally parallel
to what
you're proposing. If you wanted to study the effect of
bird-dispersed seed on distribution of wild apples, you might look at
papers on bird behavior, on apple seed germination, on measurement
of seed dispersal in general, etc. Depending on your project, you might
end up with very few closely relevant papers, or you might have lots and end up picking out
only the few most relevant/helpful.
B. How
you read research papers: You don't read this stuff like a
novel! You will not be able to follow
many of these
papers in full detail, but it's usually not necessary to do so. What
is important is: first, understanding the basic
research
question and overall approach to it; second, following the logic of
the study as it concerns your project; and,
finally, thinking
about the assumptions, unanswered questions, follow-up needs (ALL
research papers have these).
C. How your reading integrates into your research plans: Your
research design is likely to evolve as you read, either because you get
new insights into questions/hypotheses, OR because you realize your
question is (partly?) asnwered, and you need to revise it to
address some 'next' question or facet. This is fine.
WHAT TO HAND IN: An annotated bibliography that includes, for each paper you've found useful: 1) full citation (use format like those in the papers you're reading), 2) a brief statement of the primary research question, approach, or findings, as they bear on your proposal, and 3) a brief explanation of how it bears on/contributes to your study.
Some entries might be very brief (e.g.,
'explained a method of following seed
movement by coating seeds with fluorescent powder...'); others a
paragraph or two. There's no 'required' number, but shoot for
somwhere between 6 and infinity. FINALLY, note that this is a 'working' bibliography; you'll continue reading and exploring
the literature in preparing the final product.
FINAL PRODUCT: A Research
Proposal
DUE 10 DECEMBER.
The
final product of this project (and
the 'biggest' piece of work for this class) will be a fully developed
research proposal -- a paper that lays out the background and design and expectations for a study
that would address your research question, test
your hypotheses... In structure, the proposal will look very much like the
research reports you have read in your literature research and
reviews and for class. It should have:
- an Introduction
that lays out conceptual background and defines your
question/hypothesis. Where
did the idea come from, and what are the most important/interesting
connections to larger body of understanding and concept? You
might subdivide this section and have an expllicit 'Literature Review'
sub-section. You should wind up this section with a clear,
succinct statement of the hypotheses and predictions shaping your
research design.
- a Methods section
that explains exactly how
you would address your question, test your hypotheses/predictions through further
observation, measurement, comparison, experimentation. It is
particularly important that your logical development in these two
sections make clear how the Methods you propose are
connected
to the questions/hypotheses. Explain how
you'd
digest/summarize your results.
- a Discussion
section that considers how you would interpret possible results of
your Methods. "If my results look this
way, it
would mean .... If they look that way it would, on the other
hand, mean...." You might wish to use graphics here (or
elsewhere) to show patterns that you would be expecting or not
expecting; these might even take the form of 'mock-up'
results.
If you use graphics, refer to them clearly in the text. You
should also consider, here, what further research problems/questions
might
be suggested should you see particular results.
- a References Cited section:
Throughout the proposal,
cite published information as appropriate to build background and
context, recognize prior work, support methods, etc.. The
publications cited must then be listed fully in this section.
Use a format for citation and reference that you've seen in one of
the primary research literatures sources you've used.