LET’S GET IT ON!!!

 Enumerate the parts of the Topic Proposal

Form/Research Plan
 Differentiate the following:
 Statement of the Problem, Research Objectives and
Engineering Goals
 Delimitations and Limitations of the Study
 Appreciate the value of literature survey in
looking for a prospective research topic
 Determine the appropriate procedure for a given
study
 WRITE A RESEARCH PROPOSAL
 The purpose of your proposal is to sell your
research. It should show that “you have
thought it through very carefully” and you
already have an idea or “devised a good
strategy to address the question(s) of the
study”. – Dr. Solomon Derese
 What…
 …is the fundamental problem?
 …is your idea?
 …is its relationship to the field?
 …is its novelty?
 Why…
 …is it important?
 …is it likely to succeed?
 …will anyone care?
 How…
 …are you planning to attack the problem?
 …are you planning to disseminate the results?
 Organizations for Science Investigatory
Projects (SIP) today uses the journal-type
IMRaDC (Introduction, Methodology, Results
And Discussion, and Conclusion) format.
 In citing literature used in the study, the
Chicago Manual of Style is the standard
instead of the MLA/APA format.
 For ISEF bound studies, RISK ASSESSMENT
is also included
 Title  Conceptual Framework
 Rationale and  Literature Review
background  Materials and Prices
 SOP/Objectives/Goals  Procedure
 Hypothesis  Research Design
 Significance of the  Data Gathering
Study  Risk Assessment
 Scope and Limitation  Data Analysis
 Theoretical Framework  Key Terms/Words used
The Introduction
 The title of a research proposal must be brief,
concise, researchable, novel, indicates the
possibility of further research, and time for
completing the study is possible – SMART
 Note that phrases like “Study of…”, “Analysis
of…”, “A Preliminary Study of…” are to be
avoided. They are vague (e.g. “Study of…”
means you haven’t yet studied it and seems
like redundant-you are already studying it),
not pleasing (too long), and not acceptable.
 MCBEN I and V 2.0 – Modified Cane for
Blind’s Efficient Navigation (versions I and II)
 Proponent: Salcedo, John Patrick T., et.al (2015,
2016)
 TMAPS (Thermoelectric Module as a Power
Source) USB Charger
 Proponent: Magalonga, Rizialen A. et.al (2016)
 Piezoelectric Material Made from Janitor Fish
(Hypostomus plecostomus) Bones
 Proponent: PALENTINOS, Anne Gwyneth (2017)
 Copper Sulfate Enhanced with Graphene
Solution as an Electrolyte
 Proponent: Moreno, Abigail S. (2015)
 Dye-Sensitized Solar Cell (DSSC) with
Graphene as the Counter Electrode (CE)
 Proponent: Moreno, Abigail S. (2016)
 Obstructed Life Detection Robot (O-Life) for
Search and Rescue Operations
 Proponent: Moreno, Abigail S. et.al (2017)
 Why should you write it?
 It provides an overall picture of your study’s place
in the body of knowledge
 It explains why other people should be interested
in it
 It shows what you intend to do and what you plan
to achieve
 Note that you should restrict info that is
directly related to your study.
 The problem statement provides the focus
and direction of the study
 A good statement clearly defines the problem and
states the concepts to be related in the study and
identifies a probable solution
 By clearly stating the concepts to be related, a
well-written problem statement helps to identify
the variables to be investigated in the study
 Some of the commonly used terms to
indicate the problems are:
 This study will compare, contrast, investigate,
describe, determine, examine, develop, clarify or
evaluate the…
 The problem should be clear, focused and
arguable.
 General Problem – the title of the study just
written in statement form. For example,
Ramos’ (2016) SIP Statement of the Problem
is:
“The main problem of this study is to improve the
physical properties of the synthesied biolubricant
from corn oil by adding ZDDP (Zinc
Dialkyldithiophosphate) additive.”
 Specific Problems:
 This is where the researcher explores the problem
to be solved, the variables and their relationship to
each other. For inquiry-based research, the
specific problem should be stated in interrogative
form.
 There should be a statistical tool that could be
used analyze the results
 “Will there be an increase in the voltage
exhibited at 25%, 50%, and 75% concentration
by volume of Graphene solution in Copper
sulfate solution when they are mixed
together?” - Moreno’s (2015)
 Note that ‘increase’ can be analyzed
statistically
 ‘Concentration by volume’ are variables that
can be measured physically
 More samples taken from the same SIP:
“In the UV-VIS spectrometry, will the three
graphene sample exhibit a peak around the
wavelength of 270 nm?”
“Will there be a significant difference between the
voltage stored using zinc and copper as the
cathodes and anodes, but with two different
electrolytes: (1) Copper sulfate solution and (2)
Copper sulfate-Graphene solution?”
 The researcher’s tentative answer to the
specific questions.
 For example in Moreno’s SIP, the hypothesis
to the 3rd specific question is:
Null: “There will be no significant difference
between the copper sulfate solution and copper
sulfate – Graphene solution in terms of their
voltage stored”
 Outlines the specific goals the study plans to
achieve when completed
 Like the Statement of the Problem, (SOP) it is
divided into the General Objectives and Specific
Objectives
 General Objective: is a goal that the project hopes to
achieve
 Specific Objective: a result that the project aims to
achieve
 But unlike the SOP, all of its parts is stated in
declarative form.
 For example, the General Objective of a study by
De Leon & Pajalla (2017):
 The main aim of the study is to make a product that
can alarm people about an occurring landslide in a
particular area.
 One of the specifics of the study are:
 To measure the moisture content of a saturated soil
by installing the soil hygrometer 37 mm under the
ground.
 To send an alarm through SMS if the moisture
content of the soil is: 70%, 75%, and 80%.
 The SOP is used when the nature of research is
inquiry based (i.e., pure research that wants to
know whether a phytochemical could be used
for a specific purpose)
 The objectives, on the other hand, should be
used if the research aims to accomplish
something (i.e., engineering projects that wants
to come up with a new device/prototype)
 Note that the SOP and objectives could be used
simultaneously for research projects that aims to
come up with something and in the same manner
aims to answer a fundamental question.
 Of course, readers must be explicitly
enlightened about the benefits of the study.
 The researcher must explain WHO will benefit
from the study, HOW they will benefit from
it, and WHY they need it.
 There are two forms in writing the purpose of
the study:
 Deductive – starts from the largest group of
people up to the specific ones (the researcher)
  Inductive – starts from the specific people to the
general public
 For example in Chan (2015) SIP entitled
“Manihot esculenta (Cassava) Leaves Crude
Extract as Leptocorisa acuta (Thunberg)
Killer” used the inductive approach starting
from the farmers to the specific countries
who will benefit from it
 Scope of the study discusses the depth or
coverage of the study. This discusses the specific
variables that will be manipulated/touched
(independent) and its effects on other variables
(dependent). Its importance is to clarify the
things that can be covered by the conclusion of
the study
 On the other hand, the delimitation of the study
discusses the limits of the study as imposed by
the researcher. This includes the variables
controlled by the researcher; be it positive or
negative controls
 This discusses the boundaries inherent in the
study. These limits are beyond the control of the
researcher, and is not touched in the study. The
discussion about external (intervening) variables
in nature is discussed here. These variables are
said to be of high risk, meaning to say, are to
risky for the researcher to consider.
 Note that the study quoted earlier used the
Scope and Limitation. This is because the study
have inherent limits.
For example, Cogal’s (2015) paper include this
in its Scope and Limitation:
 “This study focuses on combining Peace lily
and Red edged dracaena leaves as an
automotive exhaust. The leaves are used in
the construction of a paper-like material filter
medium as an exhaust filter…This study is
limited only to the combined plants not on
individual or separated study of each plant as
an automotive exhaust filtering device.”
 A theoretical framework is a collection of
interrelated concepts, like a theory but not
necessarily so well worked-out. It provides
the readers where your study came from and
how it shaped the problems you are to solve
 A theoretical framework guides your research,
determining variables you will measure, and
what statistical relationships you will look for.
 Theoretical frameworks are obviously critical
in deductive, theory-testing sorts of studies.
In those kinds of studies, the theoretical
framework must be very specific and well-
thought out.
 Surprisingly, theoretical frameworks are also
important in exploratory studies, where you
really don't know much about what is going
on, and are trying to learn more.
 First, we need to identify the cases and the
variables.
 Cases - are objects whose behavior or
characteristics we study. Usually, the cases are
persons. But they can also be groups,
departments, organizations, etc. They can also be
more esoteric things like events (e.g., meetings),
utterances, pairs of people, etc.
  Variables are characteristics of cases. They are
attributes. Qualities of the cases that we measure
or record. For example, if the cases are persons,
the variables could be sex, age, height, weight,
feeling of empowerment, math ability, etc.
Variables are called what they are because it is
assumed that the cases will vary in their scores on
these attributes.
 We then relate these two important
components with each other to make the TF
 Here is Moreno’s (2016) TF:
 A conceptual framework is the researcher’s
own idea on how the research problem will
have to be explored. This is founded on the
theoretical framework, which lies on a much
broader scale of resolution. The theoretical
framework dwells on time tested theories that
embody the findings of numerous
investigations on how phenomena occur.
 The theoretical framework describes a
broader relationship between things. When
stimulus is applied, response is expected. The
conceptual framework is much more specific
in defining this relationship. The conceptual
framework specifies how the variables will be
explored in the investigation.
 Review literature pertaining to their chosen
research topic.
 Find out what has been studied so far in the fields
and come up with own synthesis of the literature.
 Look for gaps in knowledge and identify what
questions need to be answered or what problems
need to be given solutions
 Formulate own conceptual framework to serve as
guide in the research venture.
 Diagrammatic relationship between variables
and cases, gaps, and research plan (or thrust)
that the researcher aims to follow. This is a
visual representation of the conceptual
framework. Hence, it could be used by the
researcher while explaining the conceptual
framework
 This means that the paradigm should
supplement the CF
 From the same study as the TF (Moreno,
2016)
 It provides the reader with a comprehensive
review of the literature related to the
problem. This should greatly expand the
background info already incorporated in the
rationale
 Should be selective and critical; should only
include relevant items and provide a fair
evaluation of it
 If no studies of the topic exists, look for
parallel or broader ones
 The key objective of the literature review is to
determine that your research will fill an
important gap in the current trend of the topic
 This part aims to answer these questions:
 What research has already been done in your field?
What is your understanding of the findings?
 What do you think is missing?
 How has previous research not explained the
questions that your study seeks to address?
 The literature survey should be accompanied
by comprehensive references, which you list
at the end of the proposal (bibliography)
 Should follow very strictly the appropriate
referencing conventions and make sure that
no document referred to in the body is
missing in the final list of references
 This conventions, however, depend on your
field. For us, we will use the Chicago Manual
of Style
 Since the basis from a study may be coming
from a previous study, references should be
made from these reliable source. This part
explains how these literature was used by the
researcher. It basically has three (3) parts:
 Related Legal Basis
 Related Literature
 Related Studies
 This is where the researcher explains the legal
foundation of the study. For example,
Belinario, et.al (2016) used Guinea Pigs in
their study entitled “Investigative Study on
the Atherogenicity of Coconut Oil and Olive
Oil on Guinea Pigs”. As you may expect, there
are legal parameters that the researcher
needs to address before proceeding with the
experiment. So what law comes into your
mind on this study? Check your notes…
 This is where the researcher explains the
literatures used in the study as maybe the
stimulant or attention directors of the study.
Literature in research pertains to any written
material other than the laws (readings) and
studies. However, since the advent of the
computer and media age, videos and/or
recordings could be cited too as a link or
included in the cd. A more convenient way is
to use a qr code (if you know how to do it)
 This part includes an earlier study that helped
you in your research topic. This does not
necessarily mean every study that you
bumped into. But every idea in your research
that is crucial (i.e., Methodology, SOP) and
helped in finally building the idea should be
included in this discussion
 Always give credit to where it is due
 DO NOT PLAGIARIZE!
 Plagiarizing is failing to indicate the source in
scholarly writing
 This is a form of academic misconduct
 You are obliged, as an ethical obligation to
other writers and as a defense for yourself, to
acknowledge borrowing you take from other
sources, even if you do not copy the exact
words from the original
 Quoting material without acknowledging the
source
 BTW, the majority of this lecture came from two
main sources: Calmorin’s “Methods of Research
and Thesis Writing” and Dr. Derese’s lecture
entitled “Introduction to PhD Research Proposal
Writing”…just so you know
 Borrowing someone else’s idea, concepts,
results and conclusions and passing as your
own without acknowledgement
 Summarizing and paraphrasing another’s
work without acknowledging the source

Note that these rules apply to both textual and

visual info
The Methodology
 This explain how you as a researcher plans to
attack the problem thereby verifying or
nullifying a research hypothesis
 It should contain sufficient information so
that it could be replicated (if desired) by other
researchers. (Note that one of the
characteristics of a good research is empirical
– which basically means anyone can observe
it. If no one can observe it other than you,
who are you trying to fool?)
 Your methodology should spell out specific steps
and procedures how the research will be
undertaken (no matter however dummy you
treat your readers)
 The methods section will be the longest of the
technical narrative and will present a description
of the work to be done in accomplishing the
project objectives
 Link each of the specific objectives to the
methods so as to account for all activities of the
project
 An outline of the apparatus, instruments, and
procedures to be used in answering the
research question
 The methods should be detailed enough so
that the readers (SRC in your case) could
decide whether the methods you intend to
use is feasible
 It should go beyond mere listing of tasks.
Should incorporate explanation why you
think it is the best method for your project
 Just like what is said earlier, outlines the
materials, apparatus, and equipment used in
the study together with an actual image of it
(it is best to have the actual image so that the
panelists will believe that the materials are
readily available)
 It should also include the prices so as to
provide a fair evaluation of its economical
feasibility.
 This explains how you plan to meet the
objectives based on the available materials. If
your project is an engineering thing, should
include a flowchart, a circuit diagram, or a blue
print. And be sure to be familiar with the parts of
the diagram!
 Note however, that this shouldn’t sound like a
cookbook – no explanation, just simple
instructions. Do not cut the cloves into half.
Pound it using the blunt end of your knife. Set
aside. Boil the…
 This is where you choose your appropriate
research design. The justification for
choosing the design should also be discussed
here. BTW, do you know the experimental
research design?
 Experimental research – a kind of research were
a certain variable is manipulated (independent)
and its effects are tested (to the dependent
variable)
 These are typically (as used in the SIP)
 Single group design
 Two-group design
 Parallel group design
 Two-pair group design
 Pretest-posttest Design
 In this design, there is only one experimental
group. The experimental group is given
different levels. This design is typically used in
studies where an earlier prototype is non-
existent and hence, the source of comparison
is the experiment itself.
 Magalonga, et.al (2016) T.M.A.P.S
(Thermoelectric Module As Power Source)
used the single group design. This design is
based from their null hypothesis “There is no
significant difference on voltage output
produced by TMAPS USB Charger if (as)
exposed to the following temperature
gradients: 400C, 500C, 600C”…
 …Since the TMAPS is a prototype, and there
is no control group, the study used the said
design. The table below shows the gathered
data:
Temperature Replications
Gradients 1 2 3
600C 2.71 V 2.17 V 2.60 V
500C 1.84 V 1.17 V 1.60 V
400C 1.20 V 1.01 V 1.12 V
 In this design, there is only one control and one
experimental group. This design is typically used
when a control group is present (i.e., a branded
product, commercial device) and is compared to
the experimental group (your work). This is also
used when the experimental substance is tested
to two different species.
 Note that this is rarely done since if one of the
species are already tested, as to a previous
study, data is already available and no need to
repeat the procedure on the animal
 The study by Ramos, et.al (2016) used the
two group design. This is to test the null
hypothesis “There is no significant difference
between the fresh bio-lubricant (control) and
the bio-lubricant enhanced with ZDDP
(experimental) additive in terms of (a)
Viscosity at 1000C, (b) Viscosity at 400C, and
(c) Flash point”. Note that the control group is
actually the earlier study of the same person
who authored this one.
 The table below shows the test analysis
result:
Test Fresh bio lubricant (0% Modified bio lubricant
Concentration of (2% Concentration of
Analysis ZDDP) ZDDP)
Viscosity 155.9 cSt 182.2 cSt
at 400C
Viscosity 23.7 cSt 20.80 cSt
at 1000C
Flash Point 2100C 2320C
 This is a design in which two or more groups
are used at the same time with only a single
variable (control group) manipulated or
changed. The experimental group varies
while the parallel group serves as control for
comparative purposes.
 Though Moreno’s (2015) SIP entitled “Copper
Sulfate Enhanced with Graphene Solution as an
Electrolyte” stated that the study used the two
group design, it should rightfully be the parallel
design. This is because there are four (4)
treatments in the study: (1) Untouched Copper
Sulfate Solution as Control Group; (2) Copper
Sulfate infused with 25% Graphene; (3) Copper
Sulfate infused with 50% Graphene; and (4)
Copper Sulfate infused with 75% Graphene…
…This is evidenced by the fact that the data
table shown below that the study used the
said design
Trials Copper Copper Sulfate with different
Graphene Solution Concentrations
Sulfate
25% 50% 75%
1 0.035 0.069 0.109 0.151
2 0.039 0.043 0.099 0.081
3 0.028 0.068 0.084 0.10
 An elaboration of the two-group design
wherein there are two control groups and two
experimental groups
 This is usually done when there are two
controls: a positive and negative one.
 The study made by Belinario, Gene Carlo F.,
et.al (2016) entitled “Investigative Study on
the Atherogenicity of Coconut Oil and Olive
Oils on Guinea Pigs” explicitly stated that the
proponents used a two-group design. The
first group is the control group (no treatment
received) and the experimental (received
coconut and olive oil) since the reference for
obtaining blood is in its ground (normal state)
 However, based on our discussion earlier,
their procedure will perfectly fit on the
parallel group design. There would be two
experimental groups (one receiving olive oil
and one receiving coconut oil).
 But what if the researcher made the study
more comprehensive? Using positive and
negative controls? Look how the data table
would look like…
 The table shows the supposed result of LDL
(in mg/mL) test after the experiment had the
researcher used a positive and negative
control:
No Positiv Negati Oilve Oil Coconut Oil
Treatm e ve (Guinea Pig 1) (Guinea Pig 2)
ent Control Control
Positive Negati Positive Negati
(Norm (Initial (Initial
ve ve
al LDL) Test) Test)

9 13 2 -13 5 -15 6
 Notice that the result for the difference for
the LDL prior and after treatment could bring
more comprehensive report
Sample Positive Negative
Guinea Pig 1 Initial > Final Initial<Final
(Olive) 13>-13 2<5
Diff.=-26 Diff.=+3
Guinea Pig 2 Initial>Final Initial<Final
(Coconut) 13>-15 2<6
Diff.=-28 Diff.=+4
 This design involves the experimental group
and control group tested prior to the
procedure and tested again after the
treatment.
 Usually done to assess whether the
treatment yielded significant change in the
group tested in the study
 For example, the study discussed earlier can
also be considered as a Pretest and Posttest
design
  The pretest – the LDL level prior to feeding
 The posttest – the LDL level after feeding
 This design is also commonly used for
behavioral and social science studies where
respondents are given experimental
situations
 This design is also used to test reliability of
research instrument (more on that when you
reached Grade 10…)
 This design is used when the study deals with
how two dependent variable changes as the
experimental independent variable is
changed
 For example, a researcher aims to determine
how the length (variable 1) and weight
(variable 2) of the experimental fish changes
as it grows (independent, since it is a time-
dependent variable)
 Also known as “rotational design”. It involves
an exchange of two or more treatments
taken by the subjects during the experiment.
 Limitedly used since there are a lot of
variables that is to be considered which are
technically considered as all experimental
 Good example is the design used by the
protagonist on the movie “I Am Legend” on
the experimental mice
 This is a design in which a group of test
subjects is studied only once but subsequent
treatment is applied to determine the cause
of change
 This is a bit tedious since every change must
be recorded and taken into account
 May be considered as a trial-and-error
method
 Same with the earlier design. The only
difference is that there is a control set-up to
be the reference

We now go back to the Methodology…

 This is where the researcher explains the
specific procedure on how to test the
experiment. This could include the measuring
procedure, the specific procedure on how to
get biological samples, etc.
 Like the “Procedure”, should enumerate the
steps in gathering data (i.e. obtaining blood
sample from mouse) and justifying the choice
of the procedure (like why use the retro-
orbital procedure or the submandibular vein)
 This is where the researcher chooses the
appropriate treatment to test the data to be
gathered in the study
 This is based in the study’s hypothesis. For
example, Magalonga et.al (2016) hypothesis is
“There is no significant difference on the
amount of voltage transformed by the
piezoelectric transducer of the following length
of time: (a) 20 minutes, (b) 30 minutes, and (c) 40
minutes”. The appropriate treatment is the F-
test
 What is F-test???
 Mean, Median, Mode – measure of central
tendency. This is used to assess the most
central (or on the curve, the most normal)
 Weighted Arithmetic Mean – a statistical tool that
gives more varied dimension on the interpretation
of data.
 Used in respondent-based studies
 This is done by counting the number of responses
per criteria (i.e. 5(3)-15; 4(4)-16; 3(3)-9; 2(4)-8;
1(1)-1; with n=15) and the total by n ( =3.27)
X
 Bivariate – matrix where there are two set of
values are tested for variances.
 T-test – used to test the ‘significant
difference between two values’. This could be
used in the following designs:
 Two group design where there are two set of
values
 Parallel group design where each of the levels of
the experimental set-up is compared to the
control group
 Two-pair group design where each experimental
group is compared with each other and as well as
the controls. Then, the control is compared to the
experimental counterpart
 Pretest-Posttest design where the initial result
(pretest) is compared to the final findings
(posttest) for a significant difference. Note that the
pretest-posttest design could be processed by
linear correlation if the problem asked for
relationship.
 Pearson r (Pearson Product Moment
Coefficient of Correlation) – used in studies
where the relationship between two variables
are needed. It is used in Correlational design
where the relationship between the two
groups (having the same dependent
variables) are assessed.
 Multivariate statistical treatment (F-Test)
– matrix where three or more set of values
are test for variance. It is used to test the
significant difference between these values.
 It is used in the following designs:
 Single group design with different levels where
the significant difference between the
experimental set-ups are tested
 Parallel group design where the whole set of
values is compared with each other
 Schedule of Activities (Work Plan)
 The work plan presents the timelines of various
activities the researcher plans to do (i.e.
literature to explore in depth – 10 days;
experiments to carry out – 15 days; tests to
accomplish – 14 days) and the specific
milestones of the project
 The plan should also anticipate the conferences,
meetings, and journals to which the work in
progress is expected to be submitted along the
way
 The sample below shows a probable work
plan for YOUR SIP:
Publication Time Details Location
Date Frame
Nov. 28, Three (3) First Draft CMSHS
2016 days
Jan. 17-19, Three (3) Prelim CMSHS
2017 days Defense Gr. Room
 So that the readers will be informed about
the cost of executing your study.
 Should look for reasonable prices of materials
and processes so that it will be approved.
 However, do not down-cost each item just to
have a ‘thrifty’ study. Be honest as much as
possible.
Item Description Status Qty. Cost
Name (Used/
Unused)
STM Microscope for New 1 Php 2 M
atoms
Particle Subatomic New 1 Php 120 M
Accelerator particle study
Weather Atmospheric New 3 Php 150 M(3)
satellite condition = Php 450 M
LET’S GET IT ON!