Research Proposal *step by step guide

you submit your research proposal two weeks later unfortunately it was rejected no explanation here is what winning proposals have that rejected ones don't have and how to write one that makes your reviewer or your supervisor say yes this is the honest truth most proposals get rejected not because the research is bad but because the proposal is not convincing enough you have not convinced the reviewer that the problem is real or that you understand the field or even that your approach will work a proposal is a document of persuasion not just a description of what you plan to do and here is how to make it persuasive a research proposal answers these five questions what's the problem that is you are asking why does this research matter in the first place No. 2 what do we already know you are asking what has been done before No. 3 what's missing you are asking what gap are you filling No. 4 how will you find that answer this is talking about your methodology No. 5 why should we trust you now you're talking about your qualification and your experience every section of your proposal answers one of these the structure that winning proposals have is this section 1 title a strong title states your key variables insert your methodology signals the gap or contrast and tells reviewers exactly what they are getting what they are getting the second part of a winning proposal is the abstract this is the most important section because reviewers read this first and sometimes many only read this they don't read the whole thing in an abstract you state the problem explain the gap state your research question describe your methodology and preview expected contribution every word in your abstract should earn its place the third section is your introduction and problem statement start with impact not definition so instead of defining teacher burnout is defined as that's a wrong approach rural schools across the UK cannot keep their teachers you are starting with impact then you narrow from broad issues to specific issues and build to the knowledge gap show why that gap matters and end with your research question it's an inverted pyramid or a funnel structure the fourth section is the literature review section this is not like a full chapter 2 it demonstrates three things that you know the field that you have read the key papers you have identified the gap because you know what is missing and your study is positioned correctly building on existing works the fifth section is your aim and objective sixth section is your methodology this section must do two things it must describe what you will do and justify why it is the right approach in this section you may have timeline reviewers want to know that your plan is realistic 7th section significance and contribution this section answers so what there are three types of contribution the theoretical contribution practical contribution policy contribution make your reviewers feel like this research needs to happen because society will benefit from it and the last section is your references winning proposals are not just good research they are good arguments for good research I'll see you in the next one