Quantitative Research Mini-Proposal

Write will use previous work, which will be sent under separate cover, to complete the assignment. The proposal will use the descriptive qualitative research design

Quantitative Research Mini-Proposal

This course has examined the major quantitative research design methods used in educational leadership and policy research, including descriptive, correlational, quasi-experimental, and experimental designs. This midterm assignment requires you to apply those concepts by developing a concise, defensible quantitative research proposal grounded in an authentic educational administration problem.

The purpose of this assignment is to assess your ability to:

• Identify an appropriate quantitative research design
• Align research questions, variables, and methods
• Demonstrate methodological rigor expected at the doctoral level
• Articulate validity considerations and limitations
• Write in clear, scholarly, APA-style language

This assignment is designed to support future work on a dissertation, capstone, or applied research project.

You will develop a quantitative research mini-proposal focused on a leadership, policy, or organizational issue in education (e.g., leadership practices, program effectiveness, staffing, accountability, student outcomes). Your proposal should clearly justify the selection of a quantitative design and demonstrate a strong understanding of quantitative research principles.

Requirements

• 68 pages, not including title page or references
• APA 7th edition formatting
• Minimum of 6 scholarly sources (peer-reviewed journals preferred)
• Use of professional, doctoral-level academic writing

Required Sections

1. Problem Statement (11.5 pages)

• Clearly describe a specific, researchable problem in educational administration
• Establish the significance of the problem using scholarly literature
• Explain why the problem warrants quantitative investigation
• Identify the leadership or policy implications of the problem

1. Purpose Statement and Research Question(s) (1 page)

• Provide a concise purpose statement aligned to quantitative inquiry
• Include 13 clearly stated research questions
• Ensure questions are:
• Measurable
• Non-causal unless using an experimental or quasi-experimental design
• Aligned with the selected design

1. Quantitative Research Design (11.5 pages)

• Identify the specific quantitative design:
• Descriptive
• Correlational
• Quasi-experimental
• Experimental
• Justify why this design is most appropriate
• Briefly explain why alternative designs are less suitable
• Demonstrate understanding of the designs strengths and limitations

1. Variables and Measurement (11.5 pages)

• Identify:
• Independent variable(s) (if applicable)
• Dependent variable(s)
• Provide clear operational definitions
• Describe how variables will be measured
• Address reliability and validity of instruments or data sources

1. Sampling and Data Collection (1 page)

• Describe the target population
• Explain the sampling strategy
• Identify data sources (e.g., surveys, administrative data, assessments)
• Discuss feasibility and ethical considerations

1. Data Analysis Plan (1 page)

• Identify appropriate statistical analyses
• Justify why these analyses align with:
• Research questions
• Variable types
• Design selection
• Mention software (e.g., Excel, JASP, etc.) if appropriate

1. Validity, Limitations, and Ethical Considerations (1 page)

• Discuss threats to:
• Internal validity
• External validity
• Identify study limitations
• Address ethical considerations, including:
• Use of human subjects
• Data confidentiality
• IRB considerations

Rubric

EDA 732 Midterm

EDA 732 Midterm

CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Problem Statement

15 pts

Excellent

Clear, focused, well-supported problem with strong scholarly justification

10 pts

Proficient

Problem is clear but lacks depth or strong justification

5 pts

Developing

Problem is vague or poorly supported

0 pts

Did Not Address

Did not address the problem.

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Purpose & Research Questions

15 pts

Excellent

Purpose and questions are precise, aligned, and appropriate for quantitative design

10 pts

Proficient

Mostly aligned; minor clarity or scope issues

5 pts

Developing

Poor alignment or inappropriate questions

0 pts

Did not address

Did not have questions

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Research Design Selection & Justification

15 pts

Excellent

Design is clearly identified, expertly justified, and alternatives thoughtfully addressed

10 pts

Proficient

Design identified with adequate justification

5 pts

Developing

Design unclear or poorly justified

0 pts

Did not address

Did not have a research design identified

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Variables & Measurement

15 pts

Excellent

Variables clearly defined, operationalized, and well-measured

10 pts

Proficient

Variables identified but operational detail limited

5 pts

Developing

Variables unclear or inappropriate

0 pts

Does not address

Does not address variables or measurements

15 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Sampling & Data Collection

10 pts

Excellent

Sampling strategy and data sources are appropriate and feasible

7 pts

Proficient

Adequate but lacks detail or feasibility discussion

3 pts

Developing

Weak or inappropriate sampling plan

0 pts

Does not address

Does not address sampling and/or data collection

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Data Analysis Plan

10 pts

Excellent

Statistical analyses are appropriate and well-justified

7 pts

Proficient

Analyses identified with limited justification

3 pts

Developing

Analyses inappropriate or missing

0 pts

Does not address

Does not address data analysis

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Validity, Limitations & Ethics

10 pts

Excellent

Thoughtful discussion of validity threats, limitations, and ethics

7 pts

Proficient

Some discussion but lacks depth

3 pts

Developing

Minimal or missing discussion

0 pts

Does not address

Does not address validity, limitations and/or ethics

10 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Scholarly Writing & APA

10 pts

Excellent

Clear, professional, doctoral-level writing; correct APA formatting with 1-2 errors

7 pts

Proficient

Doctoral-level writing; correct APA formatting with 3-5 errors

3 pts

Developing

Doctoral-level writing; correct APA formatting with more than 5 errors

0 pts

Does not address

Paper is either not in APA format or not written on a Doctoral Level

10 pts

Total Points: 100