QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK
I understand that Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01) holds learners
accountable for the integrity of work they submit, which includes, but is not limited to,
discussion postings, assignments, comprehensive exams, and the dissertation. Learners are
expected to understand the Policy and know that it is their responsibility to learn about instructor
and general academic expectations with regard to proper citation of sources in written work as
specified in the APA Publication Manual, 6th Ed. Serious sanctions can result from violations of
any type of the Academic Honesty Policy including dismissal from the university.
I attest that this document represents my own work. Where I have used the ideas of others, I have
paraphrased and given credit according to the guidelines of the APA Publication Manual, 6th Ed.
Where I have used the words of others, (i.e. direct quotes), I have followed the guidelines for
using direct quotes prescribed by the APA Publication Manual, 6th Ed.
I have read, understood, and abided by Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01).
I further understand that Capella University takes plagiarism seriously; regardless of intention,
the result is the same.
LEARNER NAME:
LEARNER ID:
Capella email
address:
MENTOR NAME:
Date:
1
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Research Plan template – Track 3
Department of Counseling - Research Plan
QUANTitative Methods Version
You and your mentor should use this research plan template in a step by step way to plan your
design and to submit for scientific merit review. Expect that this process will require revisions
and reviews so please allocate your time and resources appropriately. Here are the steps to follow
in completing this research plan form:
1. Complete the Sections 1 & 2 with collaboration from your mentor and your committee
(working towards Milestone 2).
2. Once Sections 1 and 2 are approved by the mentor and committee, your mentor will
submit it to [email protected] for program chair topic approval (Milestone 2).
3. Once you complete Milestone 2, you will complete the remaining sections of the
Research Plan and obtain approval from your mentor (Milestone 3) and approval from
your Committee (Milestone 4).
4. After Mentor and Committee approval you will submit the Research Plan to
[email protected] for School Scientific Merit (SMR) review (Milestone 5).
Quantitative Research Plan Sections - Table of Contents
Section 1: Researcher and Topic Information
1.1 Researcher, Mentor, and Committee Information
1.2 Research Question
1.3 Proposed Dissertation Title
1.4 Research Topic
1.5 Need for the Study
Section 2: Methodology
2.0 Methodology
Section 3: Advancing the Scientific Knowledge Base
3.1 Advancing Scientific Knowledge
3.2 Theoretical Implications
3.3 Practical Implications
Section 4: Contributions to Research Theory
4.1 Theoretical Foundations
4.2 Contributions to Research Theory
Section 5: Methodology Details
5.1 Purpose of the Study
5.2 Research Design
5.3 Population and Sample
5.4 Sampling Procedure
2
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
5.5 Instruments
5.6 Data Collection Procedure
5.7 Proposed Data Analysis
5.8 Expected Findings
5.9 References
Researchers, please insert your answers to the empty text boxes under each
section heading and details. The boxes will expand as you type.
Section 1: Researcher and Topic Information
1.1 Researcher, Mentor and Committee Information
Learner Name:
Learner Email:
Learner Phone number:
Mentor Name:
Mentor Email:
Mentor Phone Number:
Program:
Program Chair:
Committee member #1:
Email:
Committee member #2:
Email:
1.2 Research Question
List the research questions and any sub questions. The research question(s) should:
 Identify the specific variables to be explored.
 Use language consistent with the research design or approach.
 Clearly identify the population being studied
This research plan will be guided by your research question.
NOTE: All non-experimental research must examine a minimum of three variables.
1.3 Proposed Dissertation Title
-The title should be almost or exactly the same as the research question.
-The language in the title should be consistent with the language in the research question.
3
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
1.4 Research Topic
-This section should provide an overview of the literature on the topic.
-Please provide 1-2 complete and concise paragraphs
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature.
1.5 Need for the Study
-This section should be a minimum of two paragraphs.
- In the first paragraph introduce the problem that is informing the research.
- In the second paragraph clearly identify the gap and describe the professional (clinical and/or
nonclinical) and scholarly need for the study.
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature.
Section 2: Methodology
2.0 Methodology
-This section should be a minimum of three paragraphs.
-The first paragraph will introduce the research methodology and the design.
-The second paragraph will introduce the sample and recruitment methods.
-The third paragraph will introduce the data collection method(s) and data analysis.
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature.
NOTE: Please review the “Acceptable Quantitative Research Designs for Counseling
Programs” document on the iGuide for more details on the acceptable designs and requirements
for quantitative research.
4
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Topic Approval
MENTOR TOPIC APPROVAL
Your submission of the research plan topic section to the Program Chair indicates your approval
of the mentee’s work. This indicates that you have consulted with the mentee and that you
approve of the topic and basic methodology. Be sure to work with your mentee to fully polish
Sections 1 & 2 before submitting it to [email protected] for your specialization chair
topic approval. Then provide your electronic signature and date and submit it to
[email protected] for specialization chair topic approval.
Mentors: Please review Sections 1 and 2 of the research plan against the criteria listed below,
Then mark as completed. This is your attestation that you have reviewed the research plan in
detail and are confident in its quality and appropriateness. This should be done prior to
submitting it for Milestone 2 Topic Approval. If any of the responses are “no” then you will
need to complete it prior to submitting the research plan for topic approval (milestone 2).
Submitting an incomplete research plan may cause an unnecessary delay the topic approval
process for the researcher.
1. The proper Counseling Department and most up-to-date quantitative research plan form found
on the Research page of iGuide is used.
Yes
No
2. Formatting on the form has not been altered and researcher responses to each section are in
the border area provided.
Yes
No
3. SMR reviewer comments and check boxes areas are clear for SMR reviewer use.
Yes
No
4. Sections 1 and 2 are written in doctoral level scholarly language.
Yes
No
5. Current scholarly references are provided to support assertions and conclusions in sections 1
5
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
and 2. The majority of references should be within 5-7 years, although some seminal or
noteworthy references that are older may be used.
Yes
No
6. The mentee has completed a thorough and exhaustive review of the literature as evidenced by
a solid synthesis of previous research presented in sections 1 and 2.
Yes
No
7. The proposed methodological design/approach aligns with the research question(s).
Yes
No
8. Is the proposed population or research topic greater than minimal risk?
Yes
No
If yes, has the researcher had a consultation with the IRB office? (If ‘no’ and the research is
more than minimal risk, please require your mentee to have an IRB consultation PRIOR to
submitting the research plan for Milestone 2 Topic Approval)
Yes
No
If yes, please paste the IRB’s e-mail response or a summary of the response below so the
Program Chair can consider the feedback in the topic approval review process.
IRB response (if applicable):
Mentor
Signature:
Date Approved:
PROGRAM CHAIR TOPIC APPROVAL: Please review sections 1 and 2 of this research
plan and make a determination as to whether or not this topic is appropriate for the Department
of Counseling and the specific program area. If the topic is not approved, please check no and
provide comments. If the topic is approved, please check yes, then insert your electronic
signature and date the form below.
Are the dissertation title, topic and basic methodology appropriate for the Counseling
Department and the program area? Please comment if not approved.
Yes
No
6
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Program Chair Comments:
Signature:
Date Approved:
Researchers - Complete the remaining sections of the research plan after you
have obtained Topic Approval (Milestone 2).
Section 3: Advancing the Scientific Knowledge Base
3.1 Advancing Scientific Knowledge
-This section should be a minimum of four paragraphs and should clearly explain the general
problem of interest which will contribute to the background of this study. This section should
address the following in regard to the problem:




Describe the setting(s) and population the problem affects.
Describe the negative effects of the problem.
Describe what the current literature discusses about the problem
Describe what issues still need to be explored and understood about the problem.
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature. It should be clear that there has been an exhaustive and thorough review of the
literature.
3.2 Theoretical Implications
- This section should be a minimum of two paragraphs.
- The first paragraph will introduce the theoretical foundation(s). You will provide more detail
about the theoretical foundation(s) in section 4.2.
- The second paragraph will describe how this research will contribute to the theoretical
foundation identified in paragraph one. The contribution to the theory may be one or more of the
following:
 Using this theoretical lens to examine an understudied population
 Using this theoretical lens to examine an understudied issue
 To further explain or predict phenomenon through the lens of this theory
7
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature. You may use seminal works that are older than 5-7 years to support this discussion.
NOTE: The theoretical foundation should be a social science or psychological theory that
supports your topic. It is not a clinical theory or clinical intervention (e. g., Cognitive Behavioral
or Person Centered theory). For example, in a study investigating the impact of child abuse on
adolescents’ risk for depression, one might use attachment theory as the theoretical foundation.
In doing so, certain constructs (explanatory ideas) from attachment theory (such as secure vs.
insecure attachment, attachment disruptions and repair, and emotional dysregulation) would be
used to support the research focus.
3.3 Practical Implications
-This section should be a minimum of two paragraphs.
-The two paragraphs should describe the specific practical implications that may result from this
research that can be used by any or all of the following stakeholders: the population being
studied, practitioners, clinicians, medical practitioners, community based service providers or the
wider community itself.
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature.
NOTE: Be cognizant of the limitations and scope of the proposed research. Do not promise
practical implications that are beyond the scope of the research.
Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3: SMR Reviewer Comments
Does the study advance scientific knowledge in the field and the program area by meeting one or
more of these four criteria?
1.
2.
3.
4.
Does the study address something that is not known or has not been studied before?
Is this study new or different from other studies in some way?
Does the study extend prior research on the topic in some way?
Does the study fill a gap in the existing literature?
Yes
No
8
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Reviewer Comments:
Section 4: Contributions of the Proposed Study to the Field
4.1 Theoretical Foundations
-This section will be two to three paragraphs.
-It will further detail the theoretical foundation that provides the framework for this study.
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature. You may use seminal works that are older than 5-7 years to support the theoretical
foundation.
-If more than one theoretical foundation is selected, then you will need to provide a clear
explanation of how the theories can be integrated and will support the topic being researched.
NOTE: In section 3.2 the theoretical foundation was introduced in the first paragraph of that
section. In this section you will provide more specific detail about the theoretical foundation and
how it supports the proposed research. Section 4.2 will address how your research will
contribute to the theory.
4.2 Contributions to Research Theory
-This section should be a minimum of two to three paragraphs.
-It should explain in further detail how this proposed study will contribute to the research
theoretical foundation(s) you identified in section 3.2 and 4.1. It should address one or more of
the following:




The study should generate new theory.
The study should refine or add to an existing theory.
The study should test to confirm or refute a theory.
The study should expand a theory by discovering something new about its application or
processes.
9
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature. You may use seminal works that are older than 5-7 years to support the
methodological/design contribution discussion.
Section 4: SMR Reviewer Comments
Does the Research make a contribution to research theory in one or more of these four ways?
Does the research generate a new theory?
Does the research refine or add to a new theory?
Does the research test to confirm or refute theory?
Does the research expand theory by telling us something new about application or processes?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments:
Section 5: Methodology Details
5.1 Purpose of the study
-This section should be a minimum of one to two paragraphs and should address the following:






A statement of the general purpose of your study
A statement of the research problem
A statement of how this research will contribute to the general understanding of the wider
problem
Address how your research will contribute to a solution to the problem
Ensure all of the above relates back to your research question
Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature.
10
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Section 5.1: SMR Reviewer Comments
Is the purpose of the study clearly stated?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments
5.2 Research Design
Part 1
-This section should be three to four paragraphs.
-The paragraphs should provide rationale for the research methodology and research design,
explain how the particular design is best suited to answer the research question, and provide an
explanation of the epistemological, ontological, and axiological philosophical assumptions that
support the methodology and design.
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature. You may use seminal works that are older than 5-7 years to support the theoretical
foundation.
Part 2
-Provide a brief statement about the following:




Population and Sample (Section 5.3)
Sampling Procedure (Section 5.4)
Data Collection Procedure (Section 5.6)
Proposed Data Analysis (Section 5.7)
You will provide more detail about each of these in later sections.
11
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Section 5.2: SMR Reviewer Comments
Does the research design proposed seem appropriate for the research question? Is the research
design clearly and accurately described? Can the design answer the research question?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments
5.3 Population and Sample
-This section should be two to three paragraphs.
-It should include specific data/statistics on the population in which you are planning to recruit
the participants.
-It should also describe the sample that will participate in the study by specifying the inclusion
and exclusion criteria for participation in the study.
-You will need to calculate the sample size using a reliable power analysis formula. Please
provide the name of the power analysis used and the link if it was accessed online.
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature. Any data/statistics you report on the population should be no more than three to
four years old.
Section 5.3: SMR Reviewer Comments
Are the population and the sample adequately and accurately described? Is the sample size
appropriate?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments
12
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
5.4 Sampling Procedures
1. This section should specifically state the sampling strategy and procedures you will use in
the study.
2. Describe in detail each step that you will take from the beginning of recruitment to consent
from the participants to participate. You must provide specific details and present the details
in the order in which they will occur. You must include all of the following (if applicable):





The recruitment site(s), acknowledgement of any permissions needed from the
sites, and if there is an IRB at any of the sites.
All of the means by which recruitment will occur (i.e., flyers, e-mails, social
media)
How potential participants will contact you.
How the potential participants will be screened and how you will proceed if
they do qualify and if they do not qualify for the study.
Provide a general overview of the steps on how the data will be collected. You
will provide more specific detail in section 5.6.
Section 5.4: SMR Reviewer Comments
Is participant involvement and participant selection fully described and appropriate for the
study?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments
5.5 Instruments
-In this section you will describe in detail all data collection instruments and measures (tests,
13
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
questionnaires, scales, interview protocols, and so forth).
-This section should include a description of each instrument or measure, any demographic
information you plan to collect, its normative data, validity and reliability statistics.
-Include citations for published measures, data type(s) generated by each measure, and
available psychometric information (including validity & reliability coefficients) for each scale
or instrument.
-Attach a copy of each instrument you plan to use as an appendix to your Research Plan. If
permission is required to use the instrument, please attach a copy of documentation showing
that you have obtained permission.
Section 5.5: SMR Reviewer Comments
Are any instrument(s), measures, scales, to be used, appropriate for this study? Do the
reliability and validity measures of all measurement instruments or scales justify using the
instrument?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments
5.6 Data Collection Procedures
-This is a step-by-step description of exactly how the data collection process will be done. Be
sure to include all the necessary details so that someone else will be able to clearly understand
how you will obtain your data.
-Data collection begins at the time of informed consent and continues until the data is
collected. Provide specific details of each step and in the order it will occur.
In the description of the process make sure to include the following:
-how informed consent be obtained and how you will ensure that the participants understand
the informed consent.
-how the data will be collected
14
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Section 5.5: SMR Reviewer Comments
Does the researcher describe in detail the procedure to be followed in a step-by- step way so
that it is completely clear how the research will be conducted? Is the data collection
appropriate for the proposed study?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments
5.7 Proposed Data Analysis
-This section should be a very specific step-by-step description of the data analysis process to
be used in this study.
-The data analysis process must be consistent with the design/approach of the study and must
be appropriate to answer the research question.
-List the research question and sub-questions, followed by the null and alternative hypotheses
for each.
-Then describe all methods and all procedures for data analysis including the following:





Types of data to be analyzed.
How you will organize the raw data.
How you will manage and process the data.
You will describe the actual data analyses to be conducted to answer each of the
research questions and/or to test each hypothesis, including descriptive statistics, any
hypothesis tests and any post-hoc analyses.
You will describe how you will store and protect the data.
-Support all of the assertions and statements about the data analysis process with current
scholarly literature.
15
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Section 5.7: SMR Reviewer Comments
Is the data analysis that is proposed appropriate? Is there alignment between the research
questions, proposed methodology, type or types of data to be collected and proposed data
analysis? Is the language used to describe the type of design and data analysis plans consistent
throughout?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments
5.8 Expected Findings
-This section will be a minimum of one paragraph per hypothesis and will describe the
expected results of the data analysis.
-Discuss the expected outcome of each of the hypotheses and discuss whether or not your
expectations are consistent with the research literature on the topic.
-Support all of your assertions and conclusions with current (within 5-7 years) scholarly
literature.
Section 5.8: SMR Reviewer Comments
Does the researcher clearly describe the expected findings? Does the researcher discuss the
expected findings in the context of the current literature on the topic?
Yes
No
16
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Reviewer Comments
Section 5.9: References
5.9 References
-You should have between 50-75 references to support your research plan.
-All references should be cited within this research plan.
-All references must be written in APA formatting style.
Section 5.9: SMR Reviewer Comments
Has the researcher presented appropriate citations and references in APA style?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments
Scholarly Writing - Does the Researcher communicate in a scholarly, professional manner that is
consistent with the expectations of academia?
Yes
No
Reviewer Comments:
Mentor Research Plan Approval:
-Mentors, please sign and date below to indicate that you have approved this research plan,
reviewed each section of the research plan for scientific merit and that you have approved the
17
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
details of the methodology. Submit Milestone 3 as complete in the dissertation courseroom
assignment area.
-Then submit this Research Plan to the Dissertation Committee members to review, provide
feedback and approve the Research Plan. After committee approval submit Milestone 4 as
complete in the dissertation courseroom assignment area.
-Finally, submit the mentor and committee approved Research Plan to
[email protected] for official scientific merit review. Once scientific merit approval is
granted, you will submit milestone 5 as complete in the dissertation courseroom assignment
area.
Mentors: Please review each section of the research plan against the criteria listed below,
Then mark as completed. This is your attestation that you have reviewed the research plan in
detail and are confident in its quality and appropriateness. This should be done prior to
submitting it for Milestone’s 4 and 5. If any of the responses are “no” then you will need to
complete it prior to submitting the research plan for scientific merit review. Submitting an
incomplete research plan may cause an unnecessary delay the SMR review process for the
researcher.
1. The proper Counseling Department and most up-to-date qualitative research plan form
found on the Research page of iGuide is used.
Yes
No
2. Formatting on the form has not been altered and researcher responses to each section are in
the border area provided.
Yes
No
3. SMR reviewer comments and check boxes areas are clear for SMR reviewer comments.
Yes
No
4. The entire research plan is written in doctoral level scholarly language.
Yes
No
5. Current scholarly references are provided to support assertions and conclusions throughout
the document. The majority of references should be within 5-7 years, although some seminal
or noteworthy references that are older may be used.
Yes
No
18
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
6. The researcher has completed a thorough and exhaustive review of the literature as
evidenced by a solid synthesis of previous research presented throughout the research plan.
There is a minimum of 50 references.
Yes
No
7. The researchers (mentee’s) response for each section addresses all of the criteria specified
in each of the sections.
Yes
No
8. Topic approval has been obtained by the Program Chair and the approval signature and
date are on this research plan.
Yes
No
9. The committee member’s feedback has been integrated into the research plan and the final
version of the research plan has been approved by both committee members.
Yes
No
10. Is the proposed population or research topic greater than minimal risk?
Yes
No
If yes, has the researcher had a consultation with the IRB office? (If ‘no’ and the research is
more than minimal risk, please require your mentee to have an IRB consultation PRIOR to
submitting the research plan for Milestone 2 Topic Approval)
Yes
No
If yes, please paste the IRB’s e-mail response or a summary of the response below so the
Program Chair can consider the feedback in the topic approval review process.
IRB response (if applicable):
Mentor Research Plan Approval
Mentor Signature:
Date Approved:
19
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Scientific Merit Evaluation
Mentors & Researchers: The Reviewer determines if the research plan is approved, deferred
for minor or major revisions or disapproved. A research plan is approved if the reviewer has
been able to answer “YES” to all of the evaluation questions.
-If any of the items have been checked as “NO”, then the reviewer is asked to comment
specifically and provide recommendations. Most of the time recommendations will lead to the
reviewer requesting minor or major revisions.
-Minor revisions are things like needing to include more detail or issues related to APA style.
-Major revisions are issues where there are major design flaws, potential ethical concerns or a
clear inconsistency in terms of the research questions, the design and the proposed data
analysis.
-Disapproval occurs if the researcher fails to pass the scientific merit review on the third
attempt or it could occur earlier in the process if it is clear that the study does not have any
potential for scientific merit or the study has major ethical or methodological flaws that can’t
be corrected.
-If a researcher does not pass the scientific merit review on the 3rd attempt, then the case will
be referred back to the Mentor, the Scientific Merit Research Lead and the Program Chair or
the Research Chair for the School of Social and Behavioral Sciences for review, evaluation
and intervention. Interventions might include the requirement that the learner take a writing
course, take an additional research course, attend the dissertation writer’s retreat or attend a
Track 4 colloquia event. The purpose of any intervention would be to help the researcher
develop research or writing skills that could help them succeed.
ATTENTION MENTORS AND RESEARCHERS
After an SMR review is done please understand and do the following:



Mentors – You will be notified by the Dissertation Support Center of the results of
the SMR review. This e-mail DOES NOT go to the mentee (researcher). You will
review the SMR reviewer feedback then discuss then discuss the feedback with
the researcher.
Make the corrections on the original document (the one that was returned from
the reviewer with their comments present - DO NOT DELETE the comments).
Also, please highlight any changes made in the original document using a
different color if necessary. If these two key pieces are missing from the updated
research plan, it will be returned to the mentor.
20
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
First SMR Review
Approved
Disapproved
Deferred for Minor Revisions
Deferred for Major Revisions
Conference call needed with mentor and researcher
Reviewer Name:
Reviewer signature:
Date:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ATTENTION MENTORS AND RESEARCHERS
After EACH SMR review is done please understand and do the following:



Mentors – You will be notified by the Dissertation Support Center of the results of
the SMR review. This e-mail DOES NOT go to the mentee (researcher). You will
review the SMR reviewer feedback then discuss then discuss the feedback with
the researcher.
Make the corrections on the original document (the one that was returned from
the reviewer with their comments present - DO NOT DELETE the comments).
Also, please highlight any changes made in the original document using a
different color if necessary. If these two key pieces are missing from the updated
research plan, it will be returned to the mentor.
Second SMR review
Approved
Disapproved
Deferred for Minor Revisions
21
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
Deferred for Major Revisions
Conference call needed with mentor and researcher
Reviewer Name:
Reviewer signature:
Date:
Third SMR review
Approved
Referred to Research Lead, Research Chair and/or Program Chair for intervention.
Interventions might include the recommendation or the requirement that the learner take a
writing course, an additional research course, attend the dissertation writer’s retreat or attend a
Track 4 colloquia event. The purpose of any intervention would be to help the researcher
develop research or writing skills that could help them succeed.
Reviewer Name:
Reviewer Signature:
Date:
Final Scientific Merit Status
Approved
Disapproved
Reviewer Signature:
Date:
*This has been a scientific merit review of the research plan. Obtaining this approval does not
guarantee that you will obtain IRB approval.
22
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH PLAN – COUNSELING DEPT
REVISED FEBRUARY 2014
*If a researcher does not pass the scientific merit review on the 3rd attempt, then the case will
be referred to the Research Lead, the Research Chair and/or the Program Chair for review,
evaluation and intervention. Researchers, mentors and reviewers should make every attempt
possible to resolve issues before the SMR is failed on a 3rd attempt.
Optional SMR Reviewer Comments
This section is not part of determining scientific merit approval of this research plan. This is
an optional space for the scientific merit reviewer to make note of any practical or ethical
concerns. Reviewers are not expected to comment on these issues but they can make
comments or recommendations if they believe these may be helpful. It is recommended that
mentors and researchers carefully consider any comments made here as it may help flag issues
or problems that need to be addressed before the researcher moves forward or before the study
is submitted for ethical review which will be conducted by the IRB.
Optional Reviewer Comments:
23
Doc. Reference: phd_t3_coun_u01a2_f07_planquan