Unit Details

Name

Leveraging IT for Business Advantage

Code

HI6032

Year, Trimester

2023, Trimester 3

Assessment Details

Name

Research Proposal

Due Date and Week

1. Outline of the paper (10%): Week 5 Friday 5pm

2. Final version of the paper (40%): Week 12 Friday 5pm

Individual Student Details

Student Number

First Name

Family Name

Submission Declaration

Integrity Declaration

I have read and understand academic integrity policies

and practices and my assessment does not violate these.

Full Name

Submission Date

Objectives

This assessment item relates to the unit learning outcomes as in the unit descriptor. This assessment is designed to improve student learning skills and to give students experience in researching the literature on a topic relevant to the Unit of Study subject matter, critically analysing current academic papers then presenting idea or question and expected outcomes with clarity and definition in a referenced written

report.

Instructions

For this component you will write a research proposal on a particular topic. The topic you select must be directly relevant to IT in Business. Your topic must include a specific information technology and a specific business application, e.g., AI For fraud detection.

All students must have a different topic. Students can choose to write about the same technology, but the approach and the thrust of each paper must be different. For instance, you could look at cloud computing from a security viewpoint, or from an environment impact viewpoint, or from the perspective of a manager trying to reduce their hardware costs. There will be many perspectives to look at each technology and its relation to Business IT.

To ensure this uniqueness, each student must email their topic and title to their tutor within the first two weeks. Your tutor will respond with an approval or with a message that you will either need to choose a different technology or to change the thrust of your paper. Once it has been approved you should begin by working towards the first deliverable.

Note: It is important to realize, that you must have prior approval for a topic before you can submit. If you submit something for assessment without approval for the specific topic, it will not be graded. Once you have a topic approved, you cannot change it without consent from your subject lecturer.

The Key elements of the research proposal

The following elements must be included in your research proposal:

1. Introduction or background to the research problem or issue, including an

identification of the gap in the current research

2. Research question and, if possible, a thesis statement answering the question

3. Justification for the proposal research, i.e., why the research is needed

4. Preliminary literature review covering what others have already done in the area

5. Theoretical framework to be used in the proposed research

6. Statement of the contribution of the research to the general area

7. Proposed research methodology

8. Research plan and outline

9. Timetable of proposed research

10. List of references used in preparing the proposal

Guidelines for Writing

1. Introduction

· The introduction should be as brief as possible (a paragraph or two). Whatever you do, don’t ramble on for pages; you need to make this part of the proposal clear and crisp. In the introduction, you need to give a sense of the general field of research of which your area is a part. You then need to narrow to the specific area of your concern. This should lead logically to the gap in the research that you intend to fill. When the gap is identified, a research question can then be raised. The answer to this question is called the thesis statement.

2. The research questions

· The research question may not be a question as such, but rather a statement of a problem to be investigated.

3. Justification for the proposed research

· one page is usually sufficient for this. You need to tell the reader that the research can justified along four main criteria: (1) The size of the industry/area involved; (2) The gaps in the literature that demand attention; (3) The unusual or improved methodology being used; (4) The benefits in terms of policy and practice

4. Preliminary literature review

· This is where you provide more detail about what others have done in the area, and what you propose to do. You need to write around 2-3 pages in which you cover the following: (1) The major issues or schools of thought

(2) Gaps in the literature (in more detail than is provided in the introduction) (3) Research questions and/or hypotheses which are connected carefully to the literature being reviewed (4) Definitions of key terms, provided either when you introduce each idea, or in a definition sub- section (5) Questions arising from the gaps that can be the focus of data collection or analysis.

5. Theoretical framework

· The theoretical framework usually forms the final part of the literature review section. It describes the concept/theory/model that you are using in the thesis to demonstrate your point.

6. Contribution of the research

· In this section, you outline how your research will make a change to an area of study. This is different from the justification of your research. The justification explains why the research should be done. The contribution section explains how what you will do will lead to certain outcomes. You need to outline: (1) The importance of the research outcome(s); (2) The practical or theoretical nature of the outcome(s).

7. Proposed research methodology

· You do not have to describe the methodology to be used in great detail, but you should justify its use over other methodologies. For example, you could explain the reasons for using: (1) a certain paradigm or theory (2) qualitative or quantitative research (3) a case study of a specific kind (4) surveys, correlational experiments, field studies, specific statistical measurements, etc. (5) certain dependent or independent or moderating variables (6) a particular sampling frame and the size of a sample.

8. Research plan

· The research plan or outline can be discussed in conjunction with a research timetable. However, be aware that they have a different function. A research plan helps you as well as the reader as: (1) it gives you a framework for the direction your research will take (2) it shows the reader the project is well-organized and achievable in the time available (3) it shows your detailed research activities.

9. Research timetable

· The timetable should indicate the weighting of each part of the proposed thesis in percentage terms, the topics covered, approximate word limit and, importantly, the approximate length of time it will take to complete them. You might consider providing a graph for convenience.

10. List of references

· This must be provided in the usual scholarly fashion. It helps to convince your reader that your proposal is worth pursuing if you can identify literature in the field and demonstrate that you understand it. It makes a very strong impact if you can identify where there is a research gap in the literature that your proposal hopes to fill. This is your contribution to the scholarly conversation. You should use academic references (peer reviewed

articles), rather than web articles.

Submissions

The outline will include the title and a description of the sections in your paper and the key topics in each, along with at least five preliminary references and a note as to in which section they will be included. You can avoid trying to write perfect sentences and paragraphs (polishing). Additionally, you can include bullet points, sentence fragments, and temporary section headings

· You are required to address Elements 1,2,3,4,10 in your outline.

· You are required to provide at least 5 references.

· Word limit: 500

The final version of your paper is the polished version, the approach should follow the same plan as your outline, but obviously some change may have occurred from the outline. You should not use a lot of small sections and bullet points in the final version. Your research proposal should be presenting the state of current knowledge in a specific area and as such, should have a narrative that flows from one paragraph to another. You cannot achieve this with bullet points and small disjoint sections. All references included with your paper must be cited within the paper and be appropriate to the context of the citation.

· You are required to address Elements 1-10 in your final proposal.

· You are required to provide at least 10 references.

· Word limit: 2500

Academic Integrity Information

Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding academic integrity. All assessment must comply with academic integrity guidelines. Important academic integrity breaches include plagiarism, collusion, copying, impersonation, contract cheating, data fabrication and falsification. Please learn about academic integrity and consult your teachers with any questions. Violating academic integrity is

serious and punishable by penalties that range from deduction of marks, failure of

the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or

cancellation of course enrolment.

Format

Instructions

· Most assessments must be in MS Word format with no spacing, 11-pt Calibri font and at least 2cm margins on all four sides with appropriate section

headings and page numbers.

· You must name your file with the Unit Code and Student ID (e.g. “HI5003- GWA1995”).

· Check that you submit the correct document as special consideration is not granted if you make a mistake.

· Student ID needs to be indicated on the cover page.

Penalties

· All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date and time along with a completed Assessment Cover Page. Late penalties apply.

· Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately at the end in a reference list using Holmes Institute Adapted Harvard Referencing. Penalties are associated with incorrect citation and

referencing.

Criterion

Missing or Unacceptable (0-39)

Developing (40-49)

Accomplished (50-74)

Exemplary (75-100)

Introduction: Research question, and background (25%)

Research question(s), definitions,

assumptions and limitations were omitted or inappropriate given the context,

purpose or methods of the study.

Elements are poorly formed, ambiguous, or not logically connected to the description of

the problem, purpose or research methods.

Research questions are stated clearly and are connected to the research topic.

Articulates clear, reasonable, and succinct research questions, and questions are fresh, interesting and significant.

Literature review (25%)

Little or no evidence of a systematic approach, incomplete review; Little or no evidence of having read completely papers cited.

Incomplete and not systematic, but adequate to identify part of

the literature, very little evidence of critical evaluation of papers cited

Evidence of reviewing, possibly incomplete but using appropriate approaches, Some evidence of

critical appraisal or partial critical appraisal

The literature review addresses a relevant

question. The planned method and procedure for the structured/systematic literature review is clearly presented, in sufficient detail, and appropriate for the question to be addressed.

Organization and neatness of the proposal (25%)

The length of the narrative exceeds the suggested limit as indicated in the solicitation. The ideas are presented in a random manner with no focus.

The content and length of the proposal are inadequate (i.e. there is some logic in the narrative part, but the ideas lack of clear focus and structural argumentation).

Proposal format has been followed mostly. The narrative presents the ideas in an almost structural and logical manner.

The narrative has the appropriate length and the ideas are presented in a clear structural and logic manner identifying reasonable well the reasons and means to achieve the goal of the proposal.

Harvard Reference style

(25%)

Clear styles with excellent source of references.

Generally good referencing style

Sometimes

clear referencing style

Lacks consistency with many errors