importance of research proposal defense

Higher Ed Professor

Demystifying higher education.

• Productivity
• Issue Discussion
• Current Events

Defending your dissertation proposal

T he dissertation proposal and defense represent key milestones in the journey to the degree (Bowen, 2005). Each section of the proposal meets goals critical not just to a successful proposal defense but to the success of the entire dissertation research endeavor. When you and your faculty advisor agree that the dissertation proposal is complete, you will schedule a proposal defense. Ideally, your academic program will inform you in advance of the expected timeline. Within this timeline, you will then work with your advisor and committee members to determine a day and time for the defense. Institutional norms and policies likely require that the finished proposal be provided to the committee a specific number of days or weeks in advance of the defense. Typically, you should expect to provide at least two weeks lead time prior to the proposal defense (Butin, 2010). In today’s post, I will share some details on what to expect and how to prepare for defending your dissertation proposal.

The proposal defense serves two functions. First, the defense allows you to demonstrate your knowledge of the topic and the research process. Second, the defense ensures that you move forward with the dissertation in the strongest possible position. Your chair and committee should make sure you are prepared to complete the study, and that the study is feasible in terms of research design and timeline (Lei, 2009). In effect, a successful proposal defense (and the resulting faculty signatures of approval) constitutes an agreement between the student, the chair, and the committee. For the committee, the agreement codifies that you have done the proper due diligence and can produce a quality dissertation; for you, the approval provides the security of knowing that the committee supports the intended research design and direction.

After setting the defense date and providing a copy of the proposal to the committee, you should prepare for the defense. In most cases, you should not make edits or changes to the proposal after sending it to the committee, even if you notice typographical errors or other small issues. The committee takes care and time to read and prepare questions based on the document they receive; making changes after the document is sent defeats this purpose. While you should not change the document itself, you do need spend time preparing your oral remarks for the proposal defense. Of course, the expectations for this element of the dissertation process vary according to institution and/or dissertation chair preferences; nevertheless, all students can expect to engage in at least a short oral presentation of the proposed study. The committee will have read your proposal at this point, so prepare a talk that summarizes just the main ideas of your dissertation. Let’s say you are asked to present for no more than 15-30 minutes (this practice is a common one). You may want to divide this time into thirds and spend 5-10 minutes on each chapter of your proposal. Additionally, check with your chair to determine if technology is available in the room, if you are expected to use technology, or if handouts or other written materials are expected or preferred.

In addition to preparing for the proposal defense, you may also spend the time between the proposal submission and defense by preparing documents for eventual submission for human subjects research review. Often called the Institutional Review Board or IRB, this department on campus oversees human subject research. Approval from this university office, in addition to the dissertation committee, must be received before moving to data collection. These documents should not  be submitted prior to the proposal defense, since changes to the research design commonly occur at the proposal defense and would need to be incorporated into the final human subjects review proposal submission.

You should enter a proposal defense with the expectation of edits. A student rarely if ever leaves a defense without edits. The amount and extent of edits may vary, but feedback that clarifies and strengthens the dissertation serves as the primary outcome of a proposal defense. Edits do not necessarily mean that the original dissertation design was weak; rather, you should think of the defense and feedback from the committee as a collaborative process resulting in an even stronger study (Lei, 2009). After you present an oral summary of the proposal at the defense, committee members often take turns asking questions, sometimes in round-robin style, but other times in conversation with you and each other. You may be asked why you made specific choices as opposed to alternative options in the research design or to explain the logic that led to a specific design feature. The conversation can last for over an hour depending on the topic and the committee members. When the defense reaches a stopping point, you may be asked to leave the room for the committee to deliberate about next steps.

While what happens inside the room once you leave may seem mysterious, it is actually straightforward. The committee primarily discusses what edits, and in what form, they will require you to complete. Once everyone is satisfied, you will be called back into the room and informed of next steps. Three possible outcomes exist from a proposal defense.

• Pass without edits. The committee approves your dissertation proposal with no additional changes requested. Note: This is quite rare.
• Pass with edits. The committee approves your dissertation proposal pending edits. The requested revisions may be small or major, but do not require you to re-defend your dissertation proposal.
• The committee does not approve you moving forward, which means major changes or even a complete overhaul of your entire proposal is necessary. Unless you have pushed for a defense without your chair’s approval or failed to do what was requested during the proposal writing process, this outcome should not happen.

When edits are required, they will be shared with you after the proposal defense or perhaps in a subsequent meeting with the chair, depending on your chair’s preferences. Your committee may have raised a number of potential revisions during the proposal defense, but not all of these will be required. Working with your chair, you will create a to-do list of all issues to be addressed in response to the critiques and suggestions of the committee. Timelines can vary, but two actions generally must be taken at this point: 1) The submission of your human subjects review materials and 2) edits to the proposal. While IRB documents are usually submitted before  students turn back to the proposal to make the needed edits, the order of these actions may vary between institutions.

A useful way to tackle the committee’s edits is to take the notes from the proposal defense and place them in one column of a two-column table. In the other column, outline the specific edit you made in response to the committee’s suggestion—you should undertake this tracking process while making edits to the proposal. Make sure to include the edits as well as their respective page numbers in your proposal. This format helps keep you accountable to all the committee’s requested changes and facilitates a later review by the chair and/or committee. You can include the list of revisions when submitting the revised proposal to the chair and, if requested, the committee.

Some committee members may want to see the revised proposal, while others are comfortable delegating that responsibility to the dissertation chair. Confirm with the committee and chair about their preference for overseeing this process at the proposal defense. In addition, you should know if and when the committee members are willing to sign the institutional documents accompanying a successful proposal defense. Ask your advisor, program administrator, or other faculty which documents are necessary for the defense and if you need to bring those with you. These documents signify that you have officially advanced to doctoral candidacy, a key step of the doctoral process.

Want to Get your Dissertation Accepted?

Discover how we've helped doctoral students complete their dissertations and advance their academic careers!

Join 200+ Graduated Students

Get Your Dissertation Accepted On Your Next Submission

Get customized coaching for:.

• Crafting your proposal,
• Collecting and analyzing your data, or
• Preparing your defense.

Trapped in dissertation revisions?

Dissertation proposal defense: 12 tips for effective preparation, published by steve tippins on may 11, 2020 may 11, 2020.

Last Updated on: 2nd February 2024, 02:59 am

The dissertation proposal defense is a nerve-wracking time for even the most hardened of doctoral students.

Even a pirate (writing his dissertation on effective cutlass techniques), will quake a bit in his boots before delivering his dissertation proposal defense.

However, it doesn’t need to be a stressful time. 

As a longtime Dissertation Committee Chair and committee member, I’ve overseen more dissertation proposal defenses than I can count. I’ve also helped students through the process as a coach . 

If you follow these tips for preparing and delivering your presentation, you shouldn’t have any problem passing your proposal defense.

Dissertation Proposal Defense Tips

Preparing for your Dissertation Proposal Defense

1. anticipate questions.  .

In your presentation, try to answer all of the questions you expect your committee to ask. That way, you control the material. Your committee will be more satisfied with your preparation and understanding and it will be less likely that you have to answer questions that you aren’t prepared for.

2. Look for Weaknesses.  

If there are potential weaknesses (in your study, proposal, or presentation), address them ahead of time. Ask peers or mentors to review your proposal or presentation for weaknesses. Look at it yourself with a critical eye. Even if you’re not able to eliminate a weakness, take steps to address it as best you can so that your committee can be confident that you’re aware of it and able to handle it.

3. Practice.  

Ideally, you would practice with someone who has been a committee member before. They’ll point out the types of questions they would see your committee asking, so you can prepare for those. I can’t understate the value of having this kind of feedback beforehand so that you can properly prepare. I offer this service as part of my dissertation coaching package .

4. Avoid Wordiness on PowerPoint Slides . 

Most dissertation proposal defenses have PowerPoints. Don’t put too many words on the slides! People will start reading the slides instead of paying attention to you. Then they’re off somewhere else which will produce questions that you’ve already answered when they weren’t paying attention.

5. Be Able to Pronounce the Words Correctly. 

This might sound obvious, but as a dissertation committee member , I’ve heard far too many students struggle through pronunciations of important terminology. This is probably because, up until this point, they’ve only read them and not spoken them out loud. 

However, it gives the committee the impression that they don’t know what they’re talking about. Make sure you can properly pronounce all the words you plan on using (like “phenomenological” and “anthropomorphism,”). 

6. Watch Recordings of Previous Defenses.  

Some schools have recordings of previous defenses. Listen to one or two. See how the procedure goes. Even if it’s not anything in your discipline, it will still help you get familiar with the procedure itself, which will help you be more comfortable when the time comes.

During your Dissertation Proposal Defense:

7. breathe . .

I’ve seen way too many people try to do their dissertation proposal defense seemingly in one breath. Give your committee time to hear and understand what you’re saying. Remember to leave some moments of silence to allow your audience to digest what you say. Also remember that one second of actual time feels like about thirty minutes to someone who’s giving an important presentation. Breathe. 

8. Remember: They Want to Pass You.  

If you’ve gotten to the point where your committee has scheduled a dissertation proposal defense for you, that means they believe that you can pass it. They want to pass you. Remember that. 

They’re not out to screw you, they’re not out for “gotchas.” They’re saying, “we believe you’re ready, show us that’s true.” While they will be rigorous in their evaluation because they have a responsibility to make sure that they don’t allow you to move forward until you are ready to, it’s helpful to remember that they believe you can pass. 

9. Answer the Question, No More.  

When committee members ask questions, answer only the question–don’t give them anything more than that. Imagine that you’re a witness in a courtroom (or don’t if that makes you more nervous). Committee members value direct, relevant answers and often find tangents irrelevant and frustrating.

10. Dialogue With Your Committee.  

If the committee disagrees with something you said, it can be a discussion. You don’t need to just roll over and say “Yes, you’re right. I made a mistake and I’m very bad.” That’s not what your committee wants to hear, either. 

A much better response would be, “I hear what you’re saying, however, this is the reason I’m going in this other direction. What do you think about that?” So you’re beginning to engage in discussions as a scholar. Your committee will be impressed by your ability to think critically and your willingness to engage in dialogue.

However, do not make it adversarial. It’s incredibly important to be respectful in these conversations. After all, your committee members have significant control over your life for as long as you’re writing your dissertation.

11. Make Life Easy for Your Committee.  

It’s always good to send your committee members a copy of your PowerPoint presentation and the most recent copy of your proposal the day before the defense. They likely already have a copy, but when in doubt, make their lives easier. It doesn’t cost you anything. Someone might accidentally have an old copy, or might take them some time to find the copy they have. You want their life to be as easy as possible so they can focus on moving you forward.

12. Pay Attention to Time. 

Ask your Chair (in the preparation stage) how long you have to make your presentation. It’s extraordinarily important to stay within this timeframe. If you’re told 25 minutes but you take 50 minutes, committee members are predisposed to say “why isn’t this person better prepared, and why are they wasting my time?”

Likewise, if you run through a 30-minute presentation in ten minutes (nervousness can sometimes lead to very fast talking–that’s why it’s important to practice beforehand), your committee will be wondering why you didn’t use the whole time that was allotted to you. And you’ll likely have to field a lot of questions you weren’t prepared for.

Dissertation Proposal Defense Summary

As long as you prepare properly, your dissertation proposal defense should be nothing to worry about. Your committee thinks you’re ready: all you have to do is show them you’re right.

If you’d like help preparing for your defense, or if you’d like to reduce the amount of time it takes to finish your dissertation, take a look at my Dissertation Coaching Services .

Steve Tippins

Steve Tippins, PhD, has thrived in academia for over thirty years. He continues to love teaching in addition to coaching recent PhD graduates as well as students writing their dissertations. Learn more about his dissertation coaching and career coaching services. Book a Free Consultation with Steve Tippins

Related Posts

Dissertation

Qualitative research questions.

If you’re writing a proposal for a qualitative dissertation, you will need to create qualitative research questions. Getting these right the first time means you’ll save time revising and going back and forth with your Read more…

What Makes a Good Research Question?

Creating a good research question is vital to successfully completing your dissertation. Here are some tips that will help you formulate a good research question.  What Makes a Good Research Question? These are the three Read more…

Dissertation Structure

When it comes to writing a dissertation, one of the most fraught questions asked by graduate students is about dissertation structure. A dissertation is the lengthiest writing project that many graduate students ever undertake, and Read more…

Make This Your Last Round of Dissertation Revision.

Learn How to Get Your Dissertation Accepted .

Discover the 5-Step Process in this Free Webinar .

Almost there!

Please verify your email address by clicking the link in the email message we just sent to your address.

If you don't see the message within the next five minutes, be sure to check your spam folder :).

Defending Your Dissertation: A Guide

Written by Luke Wink-Moran | Photo by insta_photos

Dissertation defenses are daunting, and no wonder; it’s not a “dissertation discussion,” or a “dissertation dialogue.” The name alone implies that the dissertation you’ve spent the last x number of years working on is subject to attack. And if you don’t feel trepidation for semantic reasons, you might be nervous because you don’t know what to expect. Our imaginations are great at making The Unknown scarier than reality. The good news is that you’ll find in this newsletter article experts who can shed light on what dissertations defenses are really like, and what you can do to prepare for them.

The first thing you should know is that your defense has already begun. It started the minute you began working on your dissertation— maybe even in some of the classes you took beforehand that helped you formulate your ideas. This, according to Dr. Celeste Atkins, is why it’s so important to identify a good mentor early in graduate school.

“To me,” noted Dr. Atkins, who wrote her dissertation on how sociology faculty from traditionally marginalized backgrounds teach about privilege and inequality, “the most important part of the doctoral journey was finding an advisor who understood and supported what I wanted from my education and who was willing to challenge me and push me, while not delaying me.  I would encourage future PhDs to really take the time to get to know the faculty before choosing an advisor and to make sure that the members of their committee work well together.”

Your advisor will be the one who helps you refine arguments and strengthen your work so that by the time it reaches your dissertation committee, it’s ready. Next comes the writing process, which many students have said was the hardest part of their PhD. I’ve included this section on the writing process because this is where you’ll create all the material you’ll present during your defense, so it’s important to navigate it successfully. The writing process is intellectually grueling, it eats time and energy, and it’s where many students find themselves paddling frantically to avoid languishing in the “All-But-Dissertation” doldrums. The writing process is also likely to encroach on other parts of your life. For instance, Dr. Cynthia Trejo wrote her dissertation on college preparation for Latin American students while caring for a twelve-year-old, two adult children, and her aging parents—in the middle of a pandemic. When I asked Dr. Trejo how she did this, she replied:

“I don’t take the privilege of education for granted. My son knew I got up at 4:00 a.m. every morning, even on weekends, even on holidays; and it’s a blessing that he’s seen that work ethic and that dedication and the end result.”

Importantly, Dr. Trejo also exercised regularly and joined several online writing groups at UArizona. She mobilized her support network— her partner, parents, and even friends from high school to help care for her son.

The challenges you face during the writing process can vary by discipline. Jessika Iwanski is an MD/PhD student who in 2022 defended her dissertation on genetic mutations in sarcomeric proteins that lead to severe, neonatal dilated cardiomyopathy. She described her writing experience as “an intricate process of balancing many things at once with a deadline (defense day) that seems to be creeping up faster and faster— finishing up experiments, drafting the dissertation, preparing your presentation, filling out all the necessary documents for your defense and also, for MD/PhD students, beginning to reintegrate into the clinical world (reviewing your clinical knowledge and skill sets)!”

But no matter what your unique challenges are, writing a dissertation can take a toll on your mental health. Almost every student I spoke with said they saw a therapist and found their sessions enormously helpful. They also looked to the people in their lives for support. Dr. Betsy Labiner, who wrote her dissertation on Interiority, Truth, and Violence in Early Modern Drama, recommended, “Keep your loved ones close! This is so hard – the dissertation lends itself to isolation, especially in the final stages. Plus, a huge number of your family and friends simply won’t understand what you’re going through. But they love you and want to help and are great for getting you out of your head and into a space where you can enjoy life even when you feel like your dissertation is a flaming heap of trash.”

While you might sometimes feel like your dissertation is a flaming heap of trash, remember: a) no it’s not, you brilliant scholar, and b) the best dissertations aren’t necessarily perfect dissertations. According to Dr. Trejo, “The best dissertation is a done dissertation.” So don’t get hung up on perfecting every detail of your work. Think of your dissertation as a long-form assignment that you need to finish in order to move onto the next stage of your career. Many students continue revising after graduation and submit their work for publication or other professional objectives.

When you do finish writing your dissertation, it’s time to schedule your defense and invite friends and family to the part of the exam that’s open to the public. When that moment comes, how do you prepare to present your work and field questions about it?

“I reread my dissertation in full in one sitting,” said Dr. Labiner. “During all my time writing it, I’d never read more than one complete chapter at a time! It was a huge confidence boost to read my work in full and realize that I had produced a compelling, engaging, original argument.”

There are many other ways to prepare: create presentation slides and practice presenting them to friends or alone; think of questions you might be asked and answer them; think about what you want to wear or where you might want to sit (if you’re presenting on Zoom) that might give you a confidence boost. Iwanksi practiced presenting with her mentor and reviewed current papers to anticipate what questions her committee might ask.  If you want to really get in the zone, you can emulate Dr. Labiner and do a full dress rehearsal on Zoom the day before your defense.

But no matter what you do, you’ll still be nervous:

“I had a sense of the logistics, the timing, and so on, but I didn’t really have clear expectations outside of the structure. It was a sort of nebulous three hours in which I expected to be nauseatingly terrified,” recalled Dr. Labiner.

“I expected it to be terrifying, with lots of difficult questions and constructive criticism/comments given,” agreed Iwanski.

“I expected it to be very scary,” said Dr. Trejo.

“I expected it to be like I was on trial, and I’d have to defend myself and prove I deserved a PhD,” said Dr Atkins.

And, eventually, inexorably, it will be time to present.  

“It was actually very enjoyable” said Iwanski. “It was more of a celebration of years of work put into this project—not only by me but by my mentor, colleagues, lab members and collaborators! I felt very supported by all my committee members and, rather than it being a rapid fire of questions, it was more of a scientific discussion amongst colleagues who are passionate about heart disease and muscle biology.”

“I was anxious right when I logged on to the Zoom call for it,” said Dr. Labiner, “but I was blown away by the number of family and friends that showed up to support me. I had invited a lot of people who I didn’t at all think would come, but every single person I invited was there! Having about 40 guests – many of them joining from different states and several from different countries! – made me feel so loved and celebrated that my nerves were steadied very quickly. It also helped me go into ‘teaching mode’ about my work, so it felt like getting to lead a seminar on my most favorite literature.”

“In reality, my dissertation defense was similar to presenting at an academic conference,” said Dr. Atkins. “I went over my research in a practiced and organized way, and I fielded questions from the audience.

“It was a celebration and an important benchmark for me,” said Dr. Trejo. “It was a pretty happy day. Like the punctuation at the end of your sentence: this sentence is done; this journey is done. You can start the next sentence.”

If you want to learn more about dissertations in your own discipline, don’t hesitate to reach out to graduates from your program and ask them about their experiences. If you’d like to avail yourself of some of the resources that helped students in this article while they wrote and defended their dissertations, check out these links:

The Graduate Writing Lab

https://thinktank.arizona.edu/writing-center/graduate-writing-lab

The Writing Skills Improvement Program

https://wsip.arizona.edu

Campus Health Counseling and Psych Services

https://caps.arizona.edu

https://www.scribbr.com/

University of Washington Information School

Doctorate in information science.

• Advising & Support
• Capstone Projects
• Upcoming Info Sessions
• Videos: Alumni at Work
• Request more information

Proposal Defense Policy & Procedure

The proposal and its purpose.

The Information School encourages and supports the wide range of dissertation topics and methodologies generated from the study of information science. The dissertation proposal represents a formal understanding between the Supervisory Committee and the doctoral Candidate. This agreement outlines the work to be done and the intellectual rigor the Committee expects from the Candidate. The proposal functions as a map guiding the Candidate towards the effective completion of the dissertation project.

The dissertation proposal should substantially advance the doctoral candidate toward completion of the dissertation.  It may take the form of the preliminary chapters of the dissertation.

The Elements

The doctoral Candidate works closely with the Chair of the Supervisory Committee and other voting members of the Supervisory Committee in determining the composition of the dissertation proposal and in writing the proposal.

The proposal should contain detail sufficient to describe the significance, background and rationale for the dissertation and the work the Candidate will perform for the dissertation.

The following list of elements is typical for a dissertation proposal in the information field.  However, the School recognizes that this list may not fit all dissertation proposals and thus should be considered as illustrative only. 

• Statement of the Problem – includes the background, context in the information field and in the broader scheme of academic pursuits, key questions, significance of the problem, and description of chosen methodology.
• Grounding and Rationale – provides a discussion of need in the area of study which may include a comprehensive review of theoretical, conceptual, technological or methodological precedents which directly relate to the dissertation topic. This section may also include a detailed analysis of the precedents that justify the need for the research, or review the literature that relates to the research.
• Research Plan – details the methods that will be used or the processes that will be followed during the course of investigation. This section describes how the questions posed by the dissertation will be addressed.

The Defense

The Candidate, assisted by the Chair as necessary, schedules a date, a time, and a room for the defense.  The Candidate submits details regarding the proposal defense, including date, time and location of the defense, members of the Supervisory Committee, proposal defense title, as well as an abstract, to the iSchool web calendar, the Chair of the Ph.D. Program, and Student Services Office.

At least two weeks before the scheduled proposal defense date, the final written proposal must be submitted to all members of the Supervisory Committee.  At this time or earlier, the voting members of the Committee, in consultation with the Candidate, determine the length and outline the structure of the defense. 

The defense is a scheduled and announced public event.  Any person may attend.  However, the deliberations of the Supervisory Committee are private.

The Process

Students presents their dissertation proposal orally, with visual accompaniment as desired by the candidate, to the supervisory committee and the public.

The dissertation proposal defense proceeds as outlined below. 

Prior to the start of the examination :

• The Candidate must be physically present at the exam.
• The Chair (or at least one Co-Chair), the GSR, and one general committee member must be physically present at the exam.
• If the Chair is not physically present, then the exam must be rescheduled. 
• If the GSR is not physically present at the time of the exam, a substitute GSR may be secured subject to Graduate School rules.  If no GSR can be found, then the exam must be rescheduled.
• If a general member is not physically present then, the exam should be adjourned and rescheduled to a later time/date.
• A majority of the Supervisory Committee must be physically present at the exam.  E.g. a Supervisory Committee with the minimum 4 required members (Chair, GSR, and 2 general members) must have the Chair, the GSR, and at least one general member physically present at the exam. A Supervisory Committee with 5 members (Chair, GSR, and 3 general members) must have the Chair, the GSR, and at least one general member physically present at the exam.

Once the Exam Starts"

• The Supervisory Committee may meet initially in private, with or without the Candidate present.
• The Chair announces when the Candidate and the public may join the Committee for the defense.
• The Candidate presents the key elements of the dissertation proposal.
• The Supervisory Committee and/or the public questions the Candidate.
• The public may question the Candidate as time permits.
• Finally, the Supervisory Committee reconvenes in private for deliberations.  The voting members vote for one of the following:
• a.  Accept —a PDF version of the proposal will be submitted to Student Services. The proposal will be available to the public for reading.
• b.  Accept with minor revisions —the Committee requests minor revisions, which are approved by a process that is established by the Chair. A PDF version of the proposal will be submitted to Student Services. The proposal will be available to the public for reading.
• c.  Accept with revisions —revisions require approval by the Chair and selected members or the supervisory Committee.  See Process** below.
• d.  Reject —the Supervisory Committee may recommend either 1) that a second defense is permitted after a period of additional preparation, or 2) that the student is dropped from the Ph.D. program in Information Science at the University of Washington.

A simple majority vote is required. In the event that a simple majority vote does not occur, the deliberations of the Supervisory Committee are continued and a decision is made within ten days of the proposal defense date.

If after ten days the Supervisory Committee cannot make a decision, then the candidate may reconstitute the Committee, and schedule a new defense.

*Process for 'Accept with Revisions'

The revision process proceeds as follows:

• The committee informs the candidate verbally of the revisions required and the date by which revisions are to be completed.
• The chair, in consultation with the committee prepares a written description of the required revisions. A copy of the letter is provided to Student Services to place in the student's permanent academic file.
• The chair and the candidate determine the date by which the revisions must be completed, normally within 3 months.
• The chair distributes the written description to the candidate and the committee.
• Two weeks after the revisions are submitted by the candidate, the committee informs the candidate whether the revisions are accepted or rejected.
• If accepted, a paper copy and PDF version of the proposal are submitted to Student Services; at least one copy is available to the public for reading.
• If rejected, the committee recommends, as outlined above, to either permit a second defense or to drop the student from the program.
• If the revisions are not completed successfully within the specified time period, the chair may extend the time for revision to up to one year from the date of the proposal defense. After one year, the chair may petition the Ph.D. committee for an extension.
• If the revisions are not completed successfully in the time frame designated, and if the supervisory committee and the Ph.D. committee concur, the proposal is rejected and the student is dropped from the Ph.D. program in Information Science at UW.

Full Results

Customize your experience.

• Directories
• Degrees & Programs
• Admission & Aid
• Academic & Career Advising
• Student Life
• Ph.D. in Engineering
• Program Home
• Focus Areas
• Program of Study
• Candidacy Examination

Research Proposal Defense

• Dissertation
• General Policies
• Faculty Directory
• Alumni and Dissertation Titles (Off-site resource)
• Faculty Information (Login required)

The purpose of the Research Proposal Defense is to test the validity of the dissertation proposal and the candidate's fitness to carry out the research work proposed.

Eligibility

The examination may be taken no earlier than the semester in which the candidate completes the eight credits of coursework as required by the focus area . The candidate must have finished the candidacy examination requirements .

Required Actions

The candidate is required to do the following:

• The candidate must complete and submit a Research Proposal Examination Request Form (PDF) to the Ph.D. in Engineering mailbox (207 Russ) no later than 30 days before the scheduled defense. The dissertation advisor and Program Director must sign this form.
• The format of the proposal must conform to the regulations outlined by the Graduate School in the Graduate Policy and Procedures Manual . The substance of this proposal forms a major part of the oral portion of the exam. As such, it must be a complete document with a thoughtful, in-depth treatment of the dissertation topic. It should be substantial enough to form the basis of a meaningful oral examination, establishing a worthy research problem and developing an effective research plan. It should only be written after the student has done enough work on the problem to speak meaningfully about it, including discussion of the preliminary investigations. Above all, it should be a technically sound and scholarly document.
• At least two weeks prior to the scheduled defense, the Research Proposal must be submitted to the candidate's Dissertation Committee.

Examination Format

On the day of the defense, the examination begins with a short presentation by the candidate outlining the problem chosen, the procedures and methods to be used, the work already completed, and the additional work proposed to be completed for the Ph.D. degree. The Dissertation Committee then questions the candidate. The committee may also ask questions of a more general nature in order to test the adequacy of the candidate's preparation for the proposed research. At the conclusion of the examination, the dissertation advisor announces one of four decisions:

• The candidate passed the Research Proposal Defense and may proceed to independent study and research for the doctoral degree.
• The examination is temporarily adjourned. The candidate must revise the Research Proposal and be examined again within the next six months.
• The candidate failed, but may submit a new Research Proposal and submit to another Research Proposal Defense after completing additional coursework, independent study, or research.
• The candidate failed and will not be readmitted to another examination.

Members of the Dissertation Committee must sign a Record of Research Proposal Defense Form. A copy of the signed form will be given to the student and dissertation advisor.

Take the Next Step

Finding the right college means finding the right fit. See all that the College of Engineering and Computer Science has to offer by visiting campus.

Engineering and Computer Science, College of

[email protected]

Departments and Programs

• Biomedical, Industrial, and Human Factors Engineering
• Computer Science and Engineering
• Electrical Engineering
• Mechanical and Materials Engineering
• Success Stories

About Wright State

• Accreditation
• National Recognition
• Quick Facts
• Academic Calendar

Information For

• Counseling and Wellness
• Disability Services
• Human Resources
• Information Technology (CaTS)
• Parking and Transportation

• Make a Gift
• Wright State Cares

• X (formerly Twitter)
• Copyright © 2024
• Accessibility
• Emergency Preparedness
• Web Support

How Should I Shape and Defend My Proposal?

• First Online: 28 June 2019

Cite this chapter

• Ray Cooksey 3 &
• Gael McDonald 4  

1716 Accesses

This chapter discusses considerations surrounding the production of your research proposal. Your proposal will be required in the early stages of your candidature and is, essentially, a detailed plan of your anticipated postgraduate research journey in the context of the degree program you are enrolled in. In your proposal, you detail ‘ what ’ you intend to study in the form of the topic and research questions and ‘ why ’ (contextualisation and positioning, anticipated contribution(s), potential limitations), and ‘ how ’ (guiding assumptions, research frame, research configuration, sampling and data gathering and analysis strategies) you will obtain the answers to your questions. Your goal is to convince relevant stakeholders that your planned research has a high likelihood of achieving its goals, will add value as an original contribution, will demonstrate your capabilities as a competent researcher, and, most importantly, will likely lead to successful completion of the postgraduate program in which you are enrolled.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Cooksey, R. W. (2008). Paradigm-independent meta-criteria for social & behavioural research. Proceedings of the 2nd Annual Postgraduate Research Conference , University of New England, Armidale, NSW, pp. 4–17.

Google Scholar  

Dadich, A., & Fitzgerald, A. (2006). Qualitative research in the making: A practical guide to project design . Paper presented at the ACSPRI Social Science Methodology Conference, Sydney, Australia.

Finn, J. A. (2005). Getting a PhD: An action plan to help manage your research, your supervisor and your project . London: Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Hamper, R. J., & Baugh, L. (2010). Handbook for writing proposals (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Jay, R. (2000). How to write proposals and reports that get results: Master the skills of business writing (Rev. ed.). London: Prentice Hall.

Kilbourn, B. (2006). The qualitative doctoral dissertation proposal. Teachers College Record, 108 (4), 529–576.

Article   Google Scholar  

Krathwohl, D. R., & Smith, N. L. (2005). How to prepare a dissertation proposal . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.

Locke, L., Spirduso, W., & Silverman, S. (2014). Proposals that work: A guide for planning dissertations and grant proposals (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Lockhart, J. C., & Stablein, R. E. (2002). Spanning the academy-practice divide with doctoral education in business. Higher Education Research & Development, 21 (2), 191–202.

O’Leary, Z. (2017). Doing your research project (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Panda, A., & Gupta, R. K. (2014). Making academic research more relevant: A few suggestions. IIMB Management Review, 26 (3), 156–169.

Peters, R. (1997). Getting what you came for: The smart student’s guide to earning a Master’s or a Ph.D. (Rev. ed.). New York: Noonday Press.

Polonsky, J. M., & Waller, S. D. (2015). Designing and managing a research project: A business student’s guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Punch, K. F. (2016). Developing effective research proposals (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.

Sternberg, R. (2014). Writing successful grant proposals from the top down and the bottom up . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Stewart, A. L., & Stewart, R. D. (1993). Proposal preparation (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Wiley.

Stokes, P., & Wall, T. (2014). Research methods . London: Palgrave.

Tammemagi, H. (2010). Winning proposals: How to write them and get better results (3rd ed.). North Vancouver, CA: Self-Counsel Press Inc.

Walker, R. (2014). Writing a research proposal . Retrieved October 27, 2018, from http://transnationalteachingteams.org/documents/Toolbox%207/Writing_A_Research_Proposal.pdf .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

UNE Business School, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Australia

Ray Cooksey

RMIT University Vietnam, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

Gael McDonald

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ray Cooksey .

Appendix: Research Proposal Check List

To recap, the intention of your research proposal is to cover a number of key questions, including:

What are the purpose and aims of the research?

What is your broad research problem?

What are your specific research questions/hypotheses?

What prior research is relevant to the area of study?

What areas of theory inform those research questions?

What is the underlying epistemology and guiding assumptions?

How are you positioning your research?

What is the theoretical or conceptual framework (where appropriate to have one)?

What data gathering strategies are you are going to use (and do you have a Plan B)?

How will you pilot test or trial your research approach?

How will you go about addressing each research question?

How will you approach the sampling of data sources, including how you will negotiate access via relevant gatekeepers (and do you have a Plan B)?

How will you address any ethical concerns and expectations?

What form of analysis and data displays are you considering?

What do you think are the intended outcomes?

What are the potential strengths and weaknesses of the data sources and what does this mean for your research plan?

What might be the benefit or value of this research and for whom?

What do you anticipate might be the limitations of the research plan?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Cooksey, R., McDonald, G. (2019). How Should I Shape and Defend My Proposal?. In: Surviving and Thriving in Postgraduate Research. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7747-1_16

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-7747-1_16

Published : 28 June 2019

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-13-7746-4

Online ISBN : 978-981-13-7747-1

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Introduction for Types of Dissertations
• Overview of the Dissertation
• Self-Assessment Exercise
• What is a Dissertation Committee
• Different Types of Dissertations
• Introduction for Overview of the Dissertation Process
• Responsibilities: the Chair, the Team and You
• Sorting Exercise
• Stages of a Dissertation
• Managing Your Time
• Create Your Own Timeline
• Working with a Writing Partner
• Key Deadlines
• Self Assessment Exercise
• Additional Resources
• Purpose and Goals
• Read and Evaluate Chapter 1 Exemplars
• Draft an Introduction of the Study
• Outline the Background of the Problem
• Draft your Statement of the Problem
• Draft your Purpose of the Study
• Draft your Significance of the Study
• List the Possible Limitations and Delimitations
• Explicate the Definition of Terms
• Outline the Organization of the Study
• Recommended Resources and Readings
• Purpose of the Literature Review
• What is the Literature?
• Article Summary Table
• Writing a Short Literature Review
• Outline for Literature Review
• Synthesizing the Literature Review
• Purpose of the Methodology Chapter
• Topics to Include
• Preparing to Write the Methodology Chapter
• Confidentiality
• Building the Components for Chapter Three
• Preparing for Your Qualifying Exam (aka Proposal Defense)
• What is Needed for Your Proposal Defense?
• Submitting Your Best Draft
• Preparing Your Abstract for IRB
• Use of Self-Assessment
• Preparing Your PowerPoint
• During Your Proposal Defense
• After Your Proposal Defense
• Pre-observation – Issues to consider
• During Observations
• Wrapping Up
• Recommended Resources and Readings (Qualitative)
• Quantitative Data Collection
• Recommended Resources and Readings (Quantitative)
• Qualitative: Before you Start
• Qualitative: During Analysis
• Qualitative: After Analysis
• Qualitative: Recommended Resources and Readings
• Quantitative: Deciding on the Right Analysis
• Quantitative: Data Management and Cleaning
• Quantitative: Keep Track of your Analysis
• The Purpose of Chapter 4
• The Elements of Chapter 4
• Presenting Results (Quantitative)
• Presenting Findings (Qualitative)
• Chapter 4 Considerations
• The Purpose of Chapter 5
• Preparing Your Abstract for the Graduate School
• Draft the Introduction for Chapter 5
• Draft the Summary of Findings
• Draft Implications for Practice
• Draft your Recommendations for Research
• Draft your Conclusions
• What is Needed
• What Happens During the Final Defense?
• What Happens After the Final Defense?

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

The goal of a research proposal is twofold: to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. The design elements and procedures for conducting research are governed by standards of the predominant discipline in which the problem resides, therefore, the guidelines for research proposals are more exacting and less formal than a general project proposal. Research proposals contain extensive literature reviews. They must provide persuasive evidence that a need exists for the proposed study. In addition to providing a rationale, a proposal describes detailed methodology for conducting the research consistent with requirements of the professional or academic field and a statement on anticipated outcomes and benefits derived from the study's completion.

Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005.

How to Approach Writing a Research Proposal

Your professor may assign the task of writing a research proposal for the following reasons:

• Develop your skills in thinking about and designing a comprehensive research study;
• Learn how to conduct a comprehensive review of the literature to determine that the research problem has not been adequately addressed or has been answered ineffectively and, in so doing, become better at locating pertinent scholarship related to your topic;
• Improve your general research and writing skills;
• Practice identifying the logical steps that must be taken to accomplish one's research goals;
• Critically review, examine, and consider the use of different methods for gathering and analyzing data related to the research problem; and,
• Nurture a sense of inquisitiveness within yourself and to help see yourself as an active participant in the process of conducting scholarly research.

A proposal should contain all the key elements involved in designing a completed research study, with sufficient information that allows readers to assess the validity and usefulness of your proposed study. The only elements missing from a research proposal are the findings of the study and your analysis of those findings. Finally, an effective proposal is judged on the quality of your writing and, therefore, it is important that your proposal is coherent, clear, and compelling.

Regardless of the research problem you are investigating and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the following questions:

• What do you plan to accomplish? Be clear and succinct in defining the research problem and what it is you are proposing to investigate.
• Why do you want to do the research? In addition to detailing your research design, you also must conduct a thorough review of the literature and provide convincing evidence that it is a topic worthy of in-depth study. A successful research proposal must answer the "So What?" question.
• How are you going to conduct the research? Be sure that what you propose is doable. If you're having difficulty formulating a research problem to propose investigating, go here for strategies in developing a problem to study.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

• Failure to be concise . A research proposal must be focused and not be "all over the map" or diverge into unrelated tangents without a clear sense of purpose.
• Failure to cite landmark works in your literature review . Proposals should be grounded in foundational research that lays a foundation for understanding the development and scope of the the topic and its relevance.
• Failure to delimit the contextual scope of your research [e.g., time, place, people, etc.]. As with any research paper, your proposed study must inform the reader how and in what ways the study will frame the problem.
• Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research . This is critical. In many workplace settings, the research proposal is a formal document intended to argue for why a study should be funded.
• Sloppy or imprecise writing, or poor grammar . Although a research proposal does not represent a completed research study, there is still an expectation that it is well-written and follows the style and rules of good academic writing.
• Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues . Your proposal should focus on only a few key research questions in order to support the argument that the research needs to be conducted. Minor issues, even if valid, can be mentioned but they should not dominate the overall narrative.

Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal.  The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Sanford, Keith. Information for Students: Writing a Research Proposal. Baylor University; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences, Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Structure and Writing Style

Beginning the Proposal Process

As with writing most college-level academic papers, research proposals are generally organized the same way throughout most social science disciplines. The text of proposals generally vary in length between ten and thirty-five pages, followed by the list of references. However, before you begin, read the assignment carefully and, if anything seems unclear, ask your professor whether there are any specific requirements for organizing and writing the proposal.

A good place to begin is to ask yourself a series of questions:

• What do I want to study?
• Why is the topic important?
• How is it significant within the subject areas covered in my class?
• What problems will it help solve?
• How does it build upon [and hopefully go beyond] research already conducted on the topic?
• What exactly should I plan to do, and can I get it done in the time available?

In general, a compelling research proposal should document your knowledge of the topic and demonstrate your enthusiasm for conducting the study. Approach it with the intention of leaving your readers feeling like, "Wow, that's an exciting idea and I can’t wait to see how it turns out!"

Most proposals should include the following sections:

I.  Introduction

In the real world of higher education, a research proposal is most often written by scholars seeking grant funding for a research project or it's the first step in getting approval to write a doctoral dissertation. Even if this is just a course assignment, treat your introduction as the initial pitch of an idea based on a thorough examination of the significance of a research problem. After reading the introduction, your readers should not only have an understanding of what you want to do, but they should also be able to gain a sense of your passion for the topic and to be excited about the study's possible outcomes. Note that most proposals do not include an abstract [summary] before the introduction.

Think about your introduction as a narrative written in two to four paragraphs that succinctly answers the following four questions :

• What is the central research problem?
• What is the topic of study related to that research problem?
• What methods should be used to analyze the research problem?
• Answer the "So What?" question by explaining why this is important research, what is its significance, and why should someone reading the proposal care about the outcomes of the proposed study?

II.  Background and Significance

This is where you explain the scope and context of your proposal and describe in detail why it's important. It can be melded into your introduction or you can create a separate section to help with the organization and narrative flow of your proposal. Approach writing this section with the thought that you can’t assume your readers will know as much about the research problem as you do. Note that this section is not an essay going over everything you have learned about the topic; instead, you must choose what is most relevant in explaining the aims of your research.

To that end, while there are no prescribed rules for establishing the significance of your proposed study, you should attempt to address some or all of the following:

• State the research problem and give a more detailed explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction. This is particularly important if the problem is complex or multifaceted .
• Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing; be sure to answer the "So What? question [i.e., why should anyone care?].
• Describe the major issues or problems examined by your research. This can be in the form of questions to be addressed. Be sure to note how your proposed study builds on previous assumptions about the research problem.
• Explain the methods you plan to use for conducting your research. Clearly identify the key sources you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
• Describe the boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you plan to study, but what aspects of the research problem will be excluded from the study.
• If necessary, provide definitions of key concepts, theories, or terms.

III.  Literature Review

Connected to the background and significance of your study is a section of your proposal devoted to a more deliberate review and synthesis of prior studies related to the research problem under investigation . The purpose here is to place your project within the larger whole of what is currently being explored, while at the same time, demonstrating to your readers that your work is original and innovative. Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methodological approaches they have used, and what is your understanding of their findings and, when stated, their recommendations. Also pay attention to any suggestions for further research.

Since a literature review is information dense, it is crucial that this section is intelligently structured to enable a reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your proposed study in relation to the arguments put forth by other researchers. A good strategy is to break the literature into "conceptual categories" [themes] rather than systematically or chronologically describing groups of materials one at a time. Note that conceptual categories generally reveal themselves after you have read most of the pertinent literature on your topic so adding new categories is an on-going process of discovery as you review more studies. How do you know you've covered the key conceptual categories underlying the research literature? Generally, you can have confidence that all of the significant conceptual categories have been identified if you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations that are being made.

NOTE: Do not shy away from challenging the conclusions made in prior research as a basis for supporting the need for your proposal. Assess what you believe is missing and state how previous research has failed to adequately examine the issue that your study addresses. Highlighting the problematic conclusions strengthens your proposal. For more information on writing literature reviews, GO HERE .

To help frame your proposal's review of prior research, consider the "five C’s" of writing a literature review:

• Cite , so as to keep the primary focus on the literature pertinent to your research problem.
• Compare the various arguments, theories, methodologies, and findings expressed in the literature: what do the authors agree on? Who applies similar approaches to analyzing the research problem?
• Contrast the various arguments, themes, methodologies, approaches, and controversies expressed in the literature: describe what are the major areas of disagreement, controversy, or debate among scholars?
• Critique the literature: Which arguments are more persuasive, and why? Which approaches, findings, and methodologies seem most reliable, valid, or appropriate, and why? Pay attention to the verbs you use to describe what an author says/does [e.g., asserts, demonstrates, argues, etc.].
• Connect the literature to your own area of research and investigation: how does your own work draw upon, depart from, synthesize, or add a new perspective to what has been said in the literature?

IV.  Research Design and Methods

This section must be well-written and logically organized because you are not actually doing the research, yet, your reader must have confidence that you have a plan worth pursuing . The reader will never have a study outcome from which to evaluate whether your methodological choices were the correct ones. Thus, the objective here is to convince the reader that your overall research design and proposed methods of analysis will correctly address the problem and that the methods will provide the means to effectively interpret the potential results. Your design and methods should be unmistakably tied to the specific aims of your study.

Describe the overall research design by building upon and drawing examples from your review of the literature. Consider not only methods that other researchers have used, but methods of data gathering that have not been used but perhaps could be. Be specific about the methodological approaches you plan to undertake to obtain information, the techniques you would use to analyze the data, and the tests of external validity to which you commit yourself [i.e., the trustworthiness by which you can generalize from your study to other people, places, events, and/or periods of time].

When describing the methods you will use, be sure to cover the following:

• Specify the research process you will undertake and the way you will interpret the results obtained in relation to the research problem. Don't just describe what you intend to achieve from applying the methods you choose, but state how you will spend your time while applying these methods [e.g., coding text from interviews to find statements about the need to change school curriculum; running a regression to determine if there is a relationship between campaign advertising on social media sites and election outcomes in Europe ].
• Keep in mind that the methodology is not just a list of tasks; it is a deliberate argument as to why techniques for gathering information add up to the best way to investigate the research problem. This is an important point because the mere listing of tasks to be performed does not demonstrate that, collectively, they effectively address the research problem. Be sure you clearly explain this.
• Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers and pitfalls in carrying out your research design and explain how you plan to address them. No method applied to research in the social and behavioral sciences is perfect, so you need to describe where you believe challenges may exist in obtaining data or accessing information. It's always better to acknowledge this than to have it brought up by your professor!

V.  Preliminary Suppositions and Implications

Just because you don't have to actually conduct the study and analyze the results, doesn't mean you can skip talking about the analytical process and potential implications . The purpose of this section is to argue how and in what ways you believe your research will refine, revise, or extend existing knowledge in the subject area under investigation. Depending on the aims and objectives of your study, describe how the anticipated results will impact future scholarly research, theory, practice, forms of interventions, or policy making. Note that such discussions may have either substantive [a potential new policy], theoretical [a potential new understanding], or methodological [a potential new way of analyzing] significance.   When thinking about the potential implications of your study, ask the following questions:

• What might the results mean in regards to challenging the theoretical framework and underlying assumptions that support the study?
• What suggestions for subsequent research could arise from the potential outcomes of the study?
• What will the results mean to practitioners in the natural settings of their workplace, organization, or community?
• Will the results influence programs, methods, and/or forms of intervention?
• How might the results contribute to the solution of social, economic, or other types of problems?
• Will the results influence policy decisions?
• In what way do individuals or groups benefit should your study be pursued?
• What will be improved or changed as a result of the proposed research?
• How will the results of the study be implemented and what innovations or transformative insights could emerge from the process of implementation?

NOTE:   This section should not delve into idle speculation, opinion, or be formulated on the basis of unclear evidence . The purpose is to reflect upon gaps or understudied areas of the current literature and describe how your proposed research contributes to a new understanding of the research problem should the study be implemented as designed.

ANOTHER NOTE : This section is also where you describe any potential limitations to your proposed study. While it is impossible to highlight all potential limitations because the study has yet to be conducted, you still must tell the reader where and in what form impediments may arise and how you plan to address them.

VI.  Conclusion

The conclusion reiterates the importance or significance of your proposal and provides a brief summary of the entire study . This section should be only one or two paragraphs long, emphasizing why the research problem is worth investigating, why your research study is unique, and how it should advance existing knowledge.

Someone reading this section should come away with an understanding of:

• Why the study should be done;
• The specific purpose of the study and the research questions it attempts to answer;
• The decision for why the research design and methods used where chosen over other options;
• The potential implications emerging from your proposed study of the research problem; and
• A sense of how your study fits within the broader scholarship about the research problem.

VII.  Citations

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used . In a standard research proposal, this section can take two forms, so consult with your professor about which one is preferred.

• References -- a list of only the sources you actually used in creating your proposal.
• Bibliography -- a list of everything you used in creating your proposal, along with additional citations to any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.

In either case, this section should testify to the fact that you did enough preparatory work to ensure the project will complement and not just duplicate the efforts of other researchers. It demonstrates to the reader that you have a thorough understanding of prior research on the topic.

Most proposal formats have you start a new page and use the heading "References" or "Bibliography" centered at the top of the page. Cited works should always use a standard format that follows the writing style advised by the discipline of your course [e.g., education=APA; history=Chicago] or that is preferred by your professor. This section normally does not count towards the total page length of your research proposal.

Develop a Research Proposal: Writing the Proposal. Office of Library Information Services. Baltimore County Public Schools; Heath, M. Teresa Pereira and Caroline Tynan. “Crafting a Research Proposal.” The Marketing Review 10 (Summer 2010): 147-168; Jones, Mark. “Writing a Research Proposal.” In MasterClass in Geography Education: Transforming Teaching and Learning . Graham Butt, editor. (New York: Bloomsbury Academic, 2015), pp. 113-127; Juni, Muhamad Hanafiah. “Writing a Research Proposal.” International Journal of Public Health and Clinical Sciences 1 (September/October 2014): 229-240; Krathwohl, David R. How to Prepare a Dissertation Proposal: Suggestions for Students in Education and the Social and Behavioral Sciences . Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press, 2005; Procter, Margaret. The Academic Proposal. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Punch, Keith and Wayne McGowan. "Developing and Writing a Research Proposal." In From Postgraduate to Social Scientist: A Guide to Key Skills . Nigel Gilbert, ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2006), 59-81; Wong, Paul T. P. How to Write a Research Proposal. International Network on Personal Meaning. Trinity Western University; Writing Academic Proposals: Conferences , Articles, and Books. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing a Research Proposal. University Library. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

• << Previous: Writing a Reflective Paper
• Next: Generative AI and Writing >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:45 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

What (Exactly) Is A Research Proposal?

A simple explainer with examples + free template.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2020 (Updated April 2023)

Whether you’re nearing the end of your degree and your dissertation is on the horizon, or you’re planning to apply for a PhD program, chances are you’ll need to craft a convincing research proposal . If you’re on this page, you’re probably unsure exactly what the research proposal is all about. Well, you’ve come to the right place.

Overview: Research Proposal Basics

• What a research proposal is
• What a research proposal needs to cover
• How to structure your research proposal
• Example /sample proposals
• Proposal writing FAQs
• Key takeaways & additional resources

What is a research proposal?

Simply put, a research proposal is a structured, formal document that explains what you plan to research (your research topic), why it’s worth researching (your justification), and how  you plan to investigate it (your methodology). 

The purpose of the research proposal (its job, so to speak) is to convince  your research supervisor, committee or university that your research is  suitable  (for the requirements of the degree program) and  manageable  (given the time and resource constraints you will face). 

The most important word here is “ convince ” – in other words, your research proposal needs to  sell  your research idea (to whoever is going to approve it). If it doesn’t convince them (of its suitability and manageability), you’ll need to revise and resubmit . This will cost you valuable time, which will either delay the start of your research or eat into its time allowance (which is bad news). 

What goes into a research proposal?

A good dissertation or thesis proposal needs to cover the “ what “, “ why ” and” how ” of the proposed study. Let’s look at each of these attributes in a little more detail:

Your proposal needs to clearly articulate your research topic . This needs to be specific and unambiguous . Your research topic should make it clear exactly what you plan to research and in what context. Here’s an example of a well-articulated research topic:

An investigation into the factors which impact female Generation Y consumer’s likelihood to promote a specific makeup brand to their peers: a British context

As you can see, this topic is extremely clear. From this one line we can see exactly:

• What’s being investigated – factors that make people promote or advocate for a brand of a specific makeup brand
• Who it involves – female Gen-Y consumers
• In what context – the United Kingdom

So, make sure that your research proposal provides a detailed explanation of your research topic . If possible, also briefly outline your research aims and objectives , and perhaps even your research questions (although in some cases you’ll only develop these at a later stage). Needless to say, don’t start writing your proposal until you have a clear topic in mind , or you’ll end up waffling and your research proposal will suffer as a result of this.

Need a helping hand?

As we touched on earlier, it’s not good enough to simply propose a research topic – you need to justify why your topic is original . In other words, what makes it  unique ? What gap in the current literature does it fill? If it’s simply a rehash of the existing research, it’s probably not going to get approval – it needs to be fresh.

But,  originality  alone is not enough. Once you’ve ticked that box, you also need to justify why your proposed topic is  important . In other words, what value will it add to the world if you achieve your research aims?

As an example, let’s look at the sample research topic we mentioned earlier (factors impacting brand advocacy). In this case, if the research could uncover relevant factors, these findings would be very useful to marketers in the cosmetics industry, and would, therefore, have commercial value . That is a clear justification for the research.

So, when you’re crafting your research proposal, remember that it’s not enough for a topic to simply be unique. It needs to be useful and value-creating – and you need to convey that value in your proposal. If you’re struggling to find a research topic that makes the cut, watch  our video covering how to find a research topic .

It’s all good and well to have a great topic that’s original and valuable, but you’re not going to convince anyone to approve it without discussing the practicalities – in other words:

• How will you actually undertake your research (i.e., your methodology)?
• Is your research methodology appropriate given your research aims?
• Is your approach manageable given your constraints (time, money, etc.)?

While it’s generally not expected that you’ll have a fully fleshed-out methodology at the proposal stage, you’ll likely still need to provide a high-level overview of your research methodology . Here are some important questions you’ll need to address in your research proposal:

• Will you take a qualitative , quantitative or mixed -method approach?
• What sampling strategy will you adopt?
• How will you collect your data (e.g., interviews, surveys, etc)?
• How will you analyse your data (e.g., descriptive and inferential statistics , content analysis, discourse analysis, etc, .)?
• What potential limitations will your methodology carry?

So, be sure to give some thought to the practicalities of your research and have at least a basic methodological plan before you start writing up your proposal. If this all sounds rather intimidating, the video below provides a good introduction to research methodology and the key choices you’ll need to make.

How To Structure A Research Proposal

Now that we’ve covered the key points that need to be addressed in a proposal, you may be wondering, “ But how is a research proposal structured? “.

While the exact structure and format required for a research proposal differs from university to university, there are four “essential ingredients” that commonly make up the structure of a research proposal:

• A rich introduction and background to the proposed research
• An initial literature review covering the existing research
• An overview of the proposed research methodology
• A discussion regarding the practicalities (project plans, timelines, etc.)

In the video below, we unpack each of these four sections, step by step.

Research Proposal Examples/Samples

In the video below, we provide a detailed walkthrough of two successful research proposals (Master’s and PhD-level), as well as our popular free proposal template.

Proposal Writing FAQs

How long should a research proposal be.

This varies tremendously, depending on the university, the field of study (e.g., social sciences vs natural sciences), and the level of the degree (e.g. undergraduate, Masters or PhD) – so it’s always best to check with your university what their specific requirements are before you start planning your proposal.

As a rough guide, a formal research proposal at Masters-level often ranges between 2000-3000 words, while a PhD-level proposal can be far more detailed, ranging from 5000-8000 words. In some cases, a rough outline of the topic is all that’s needed, while in other cases, universities expect a very detailed proposal that essentially forms the first three chapters of the dissertation or thesis.

The takeaway – be sure to check with your institution before you start writing.

How do I choose a topic for my research proposal?

Finding a good research topic is a process that involves multiple steps. We cover the topic ideation process in this video post.

How do I write a literature review for my proposal?

While you typically won’t need a comprehensive literature review at the proposal stage, you still need to demonstrate that you’re familiar with the key literature and are able to synthesise it. We explain the literature review process here.

How do I create a timeline and budget for my proposal?

We explain how to craft a project plan/timeline and budget in Research Proposal Bootcamp .

Which referencing format should I use in my research proposal?

The expectations and requirements regarding formatting and referencing vary from institution to institution. Therefore, you’ll need to check this information with your university.

What common proposal writing mistakes do I need to look out for?

We’ve create a video post about some of the most common mistakes students make when writing a proposal – you can access that here . If you’re short on time, here’s a quick summary:

• The research topic is too broad (or just poorly articulated).
• The research aims, objectives and questions don’t align.
• The research topic is not well justified.
• The study has a weak theoretical foundation.
• The research design is not well articulated well enough.
• Poor writing and sloppy presentation.
• Poor project planning and risk management.
• Not following the university’s specific criteria.

Key Takeaways & Additional Resources

As you write up your research proposal, remember the all-important core purpose:  to convince . Your research proposal needs to sell your study in terms of suitability and viability. So, focus on crafting a convincing narrative to ensure a strong proposal.

At the same time, pay close attention to your university’s requirements. While we’ve covered the essentials here, every institution has its own set of expectations and it’s essential that you follow these to maximise your chances of approval.

By the way, we’ve got plenty more resources to help you fast-track your research proposal. Here are some of our most popular resources to get you started:

• Proposal Writing 101 : A Introductory Webinar
• Research Proposal Bootcamp : The Ultimate Online Course
• Template : A basic template to help you craft your proposal

If you’re looking for 1-on-1 support with your research proposal, be sure to check out our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through the proposal development process (and the entire research journey), step by step.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Research Proposal Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

51 Comments

I truly enjoyed this video, as it was eye-opening to what I have to do in the preparation of preparing a Research proposal.

I would be interested in getting some coaching.

I real appreciate on your elaboration on how to develop research proposal,the video explains each steps clearly.

Thank you for the video. It really assisted me and my niece. I am a PhD candidate and she is an undergraduate student. It is at times, very difficult to guide a family member but with this video, my job is done.

In view of the above, I welcome more coaching.

Wonderful guidelines, thanks

This is very helpful. Would love to continue even as I prepare for starting my masters next year.

Thanks for the work done, the text was helpful to me

Bundle of thanks to you for the research proposal guide it was really good and useful if it is possible please send me the sample of research proposal

You’re most welcome. We don’t have any research proposals that we can share (the students own the intellectual property), but you might find our research proposal template useful: https://gradcoach.com/research-proposal-template/

Cheruiyot Moses Kipyegon

Thanks alot. It was an eye opener that came timely enough before my imminent proposal defense. Thanks, again

thank you very much your lesson is very interested may God be with you

I am an undergraduate student (First Degree) preparing to write my project,this video and explanation had shed more light to me thanks for your efforts keep it up.

Very useful. I am grateful.

this is a very a good guidance on research proposal, for sure i have learnt something

Wonderful guidelines for writing a research proposal, I am a student of m.phil( education), this guideline is suitable for me. Thanks

You’re welcome 🙂

Thank you, this was so helpful.

A really great and insightful video. It opened my eyes as to how to write a research paper. I would like to receive more guidance for writing my research paper from your esteemed faculty.

Thank you, great insights

Thank you, great insights, thank you so much, feeling edified

Wow thank you, great insights, thanks a lot

Thank you. This is a great insight. I am a student preparing for a PhD program. I am requested to write my Research Proposal as part of what I am required to submit before my unconditional admission. I am grateful having listened to this video which will go a long way in helping me to actually choose a topic of interest and not just any topic as well as to narrow down the topic and be specific about it. I indeed need more of this especially as am trying to choose a topic suitable for a DBA am about embarking on. Thank you once more. The video is indeed helpful.

Have learnt a lot just at the right time. Thank you so much.

thank you very much ,because have learn a lot things concerning research proposal and be blessed u for your time that you providing to help us

Hi. For my MSc medical education research, please evaluate this topic for me: Training Needs Assessment of Faculty in Medical Training Institutions in Kericho and Bomet Counties

I have really learnt a lot based on research proposal and it’s formulation

Thank you. I learn much from the proposal since it is applied

Your effort is much appreciated – you have good articulation.

You have good articulation.

I do applaud your simplified method of explaining the subject matter, which indeed has broaden my understanding of the subject matter. Definitely this would enable me writing a sellable research proposal.

This really helping

Great! I liked your tutoring on how to find a research topic and how to write a research proposal. Precise and concise. Thank you very much. Will certainly share this with my students. Research made simple indeed.

Thank you very much. I an now assist my students effectively.

Thank you very much. I can now assist my students effectively.

I need any research proposal

Thank you for these videos. I will need chapter by chapter assistance in writing my MSc dissertation

Very helpfull

the videos are very good and straight forward

thanks so much for this wonderful presentations, i really enjoyed it to the fullest wish to learn more from you

Thank you very much. I learned a lot from your lecture.

I really enjoy the in-depth knowledge on research proposal you have given. me. You have indeed broaden my understanding and skills. Thank you

interesting session this has equipped me with knowledge as i head for exams in an hour’s time, am sure i get A++

This article was most informative and easy to understand. I now have a good idea of how to write my research proposal.

Thank you very much.

Wow, this literature is very resourceful and interesting to read. I enjoyed it and I intend reading it every now then.

Thank you for the clarity

Thank you. Very helpful.

Thank you very much for this essential piece. I need 1o1 coaching, unfortunately, your service is not available in my country. Anyways, a very important eye-opener. I really enjoyed it. A thumb up to Gradcoach

What is JAM? Please explain.

Thank you so much for these videos. They are extremely helpful! God bless!

very very wonderful…

thank you for the video but i need a written example

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Reference management. Clean and simple.

How to prepare an excellent thesis defense

What is a thesis defense?

How long is a thesis defense, what happens at a thesis defense, your presentation, questions from the committee, 6 tips to help you prepare for your thesis defense, 1. anticipate questions and prepare for them, 2. dress for success, 3. ask for help, as needed, 4. have a backup plan, 5. prepare for the possibility that you might not know an answer, 6. de-stress before, during, and after, frequently asked questions about preparing an excellent thesis defense, related articles.

If you're about to complete, or have ever completed a graduate degree, you have most likely come across the term "thesis defense." In many countries, to finish a graduate degree, you have to write a thesis .

A thesis is a large paper, or multi-chapter work, based on a topic relating to your field of study.

Once you hand in your thesis, you will be assigned a date to defend your work. Your thesis defense meeting usually consists of you and a committee of two or more professors working in your program. It may also include other people, like professionals from other colleges or those who are working in your field.

During your thesis defense, you will be asked questions about your work. The main purpose of your thesis defense is for the committee to make sure that you actually understand your field and focus area.

The questions are usually open-ended and require the student to think critically about their work. By the time of your thesis defense, your paper has already been evaluated. The questions asked are not designed so that you actually have to aggressively "defend" your work; often, your thesis defense is more of a formality required so that you can get your degree.

• Check with your department about requirements and timing.
• Re-read your thesis.
• Anticipate questions and prepare for them.
• Create a back-up plan to deal with technology hiccups.
• Plan de-stressing activities both before, and after, your defense.

How long your oral thesis defense is depends largely on the institution and requirements of your degree. It is best to consult your department or institution about this. In general, a thesis defense may take only 20 minutes, but it may also take two hours or more. The length also depends on how much time is allocated to the presentation and questioning part.

Tip: Check with your department or institution as soon as possible to determine the approved length for a thesis defense.

First of all, be aware that a thesis defense varies from country to country. This is just a general overview, but a thesis defense can take many different formats. Some are closed, others are public defenses. Some take place with two committee members, some with more examiners.

The same goes for the length of your thesis defense, as mentioned above. The most important first step for you is to clarify with your department what the structure of your thesis defense will look like. In general, your thesis defense will include:

• your presentation of around 20-30 minutes
• questions from the committee
• questions from the audience (if the defense is public and the department allows it)

You might have to give a presentation, often with Powerpoint, Google slides, or Keynote slides. Make sure to prepare an appropriate amount of slides. A general rule is to use about 10 slides for a 20-minute presentation.

But that also depends on your specific topic and the way you present. The good news is that there will be plenty of time ahead of your thesis defense to prepare your slides and practice your presentation alone and in front of friends or family.

Tip: Practice delivering your thesis presentation in front of family, friends, or colleagues.

You can prepare your slides by using information from your thesis' first chapter (the overview of your thesis) as a framework or outline. Substantive information in your thesis should correspond with your slides.

Make sure your slides are of good quality— both in terms of the integrity of the information and the appearance. If you need more help with how to prepare your presentation slides, both the ASQ Higher Education Brief and James Hayton have good guidelines on the topic.

The committee will ask questions about your work after you finish your presentation. The questions will most likely be about the core content of your thesis, such as what you learned from the study you conducted. They may also ask you to summarize certain findings and to discuss how your work will contribute to the existing body of knowledge.

Tip: Read your entire thesis in preparation of the questions, so you have a refreshed perspective on your work.

While you are preparing, you can create a list of possible questions and try to answer them. You can foresee many of the questions you will get by simply spending some time rereading your thesis.

Here are a few tips on how to prepare for your thesis defense:

You can absolutely prepare for most of the questions you will be asked. Read through your thesis and while you're reading it, create a list of possible questions. In addition, since you will know who will be on the committee, look at the academic expertise of the committee members. In what areas would they most likely be focused?

If possible, sit at other thesis defenses with these committee members to get a feel for how they ask and what they ask. As a graduate student, you should generally be adept at anticipating test questions, so use this advantage to gather as much information as possible before your thesis defense meeting.

Your thesis defense is a formal event, often the entire department or university is invited to participate. It signals a critical rite of passage for graduate students and faculty who have supported them throughout a long and challenging process.

While most universities don't have specific rules on how to dress for that event, do regard it with dignity and respect. This one might be a no-brainer, but know that you should dress as if you were on a job interview or delivering a paper at a conference.

It might help you deal with your stress before your thesis defense to entrust someone with the smaller but important responsibilities of your defense well ahead of schedule. This trusted person could be responsible for:

• preparing the room of the day of defense
• setting up equipment for the presentation
• preparing and distributing handouts

Technology is unpredictable. Life is too. There are no guarantees that your Powerpoint presentation will work at all or look the way it is supposed to on the big screen. We've all been there. Make sure to have a plan B for these situations. Handouts can help when technology fails, and an additional clean shirt can save the day if you have a spill.

One of the scariest aspects of the defense is the possibility of being asked a question you can't answer. While you can prepare for some questions, you can never know exactly what the committee will ask.

There will always be gaps in your knowledge. But your thesis defense is not about being perfect and knowing everything, it's about how you deal with challenging situations. You are not expected to know everything.

James Hayton writes on his blog that examiners will sometimes even ask questions they don't know the answer to, out of curiosity, or because they want to see how you think. While it is ok sometimes to just say "I don't know", he advises to try something like "I don't know, but I would think [...] because of x and y, but you would need to do [...] in order to find out.” This shows that you have the ability to think as an academic.

You will be nervous. But your examiners will expect you to be nervous. Being well prepared can help minimize your stress, but do know that your examiners have seen this many times before and are willing to help, by repeating questions, for example. Dora Farkas at finishyourthesis.com notes that it’s a myth that thesis committees are out to get you.

Two common symptoms of being nervous are talking really fast and nervous laughs. Try to slow yourself down and take a deep breath. Remember what feels like hours to you are just a few seconds in real life.

• Try meditational breathing right before your defense.
• Get plenty of exercise and sleep in the weeks prior to your defense.
• Have your clothes or other items you need ready to go the night before.
• During your defense, allow yourself to process each question before answering.
• Go to dinner with friends and family, or to a fun activity like mini-golf, after your defense.

Allow yourself to process each question, respond to it, and stop talking once you have responded. While a smile can often help dissolve a difficult situation, remember that nervous laughs can be irritating for your audience.

We all make mistakes and your thesis defense will not be perfect. However, careful preparation, mindfulness, and confidence can help you feel less stressful both before, and during, your defense.

Finally, consider planning something fun that you can look forward to after your defense.

It is completely normal to be nervous. Being well prepared can help minimize your stress, but do know that your examiners have seen this many times before and are willing to help, by repeating questions for example if needed. Slow yourself down, and take a deep breath.

Your thesis defense is not about being perfect and knowing everything, it's about how you deal with challenging situations. James Hayton writes on his blog that it is ok sometimes to just say "I don't know", but he advises to try something like "I don't know, but I would think [...] because of x and y, you would need to do [...] in order to find out".

Your Powerpoint presentation can get stuck or not look the way it is supposed to do on the big screen. It can happen and your supervisors know it. In general, handouts can always save the day when technology fails.

• Dress for success.
• Ask for help setting up.
• Have a backup plan (in case technology fails you).
• Deal with your nerves.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Indian J Dermatol
• v.62(5); Sep-Oct 2017

Summary and Synthesis: How to Present a Research Proposal

Maninder singh setia.

From the MGM Institute of Health Sciences, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India

Saumya Panda

1 Department of Dermatology, KPC Medical College, Kolkata, West Bengal, India

This concluding module attempts to synthesize the key learning points discussed during the course of the previous ten sets of modules on methodology and biostatistics. The objective of this module is to discuss how to present a model research proposal, based on whatever was discussed in the preceding modules. The lynchpin of a research proposal is the protocol, and the key component of a protocol is the study design. However, one must not neglect the other areas, be it the project summary through which one catches the eyes of the reviewer of the proposal, or the background and the literature review, or the aims and objectives of the study. Two critical areas in the “methods” section that cannot be emphasized more are the sampling strategy and a formal estimation of sample size. Without a legitimate sample size, none of the conclusions based on the statistical analysis would be valid. Finally, the ethical parameters of the study should be well understood by the researchers, and that should get reflected in the proposal.

As we reach the end of an exhaustive module encompassing research methods and biostatistics, we need to summarize and synthesize the key learning points, to demonstrate how one may utilize the different sections of the module to undertake research projects of different kinds. After all, the practical purpose behind publishing such a module is to facilitate the preparation of high quality research proposals and protocols. This concluding part will make an attempt to provide a window to the different sections of the module, underlining the various aspects of design and analysis needed to formulate protocols applicable to different kinds of clinical research in dermatology.

Components of a Research Proposal

The goal of a research proposal is to present and justify the need to study a research problem and to present the practical ways in which the proposed study should be conducted. A research proposal is generally meant to be presented by an investigator to request an agency or a body to support research work in the form of grants. The vast majority of research proposals, in India, however, are not submitted to agency or body for grants, simply because of the paucity of such agencies, bodies, and research grants. Most are academic research proposals, self-financed, and submitted to scientific and ethics committee of an institution. The parts of a proposal include the title page, abstract/project summary, table of contents, introduction, background and review of literature, and the research protocol.

The title page should contain the personal data pertaining to the investigators, and title of the project, which should be concise and comprehensive at the same time. The table of contents, strictly speaking, is not necessary for short proposals. The introduction includes a statement of the problem, purpose, and significance of the research.

The protocol is the document that specifies the research plan. It is the single most important quality control tool for all aspects of a clinical research. It is the instrument where the researcher explains how data will be collected, including the calculation for estimating sample size, and what outcome variables to measure.

A complete clinical research protocol includes the following:

Study design

• Precise definition of the disease or problem
• Completely defined prespecified primary and secondary outcome measures, including how and when these will be assessed
• Clear description of variables
• Well-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Efficacy and safety parameters
• Whenever applicable, stopping guidelines and parameters of interim analyses
• Sample size calculation
• Randomization details
• Plan of statistical analysis
• Detailed description of interventions
• A chronogram of research flow (Gantt chart)
• Informed consent document
• Clinical research form
• Details of budget; and
• References.

(Modified from: Bagatin et al ., 2013).

Project Summary

The project summary is a brief document that consists of an overview, and discusses the intellectual merits, and broader impacts of the research project. Each of these three sections is required to be present and must be clearly defined. The project summary is one of the most important parts of the proposal. It is likely the first thing a reviewer will read, and is the investigators’ best chance to grab their interest, and convince them of the importance, and quality, of their research before they even read the proposal. Though it is the first proposal element in order, many applicants prefer to write the project summary last, after writing the protocol. This allows the writer to better avoid any inconsistencies between the two.

The overview specifies the research goal and it should demonstrate that this goal fits with the principal investigator's long-term research goals. It should specify the proposed research approach and the educational goal of the research project.

The intellectual merits (the contribution your research will make to your field) should specify the current state of knowledge in the field, and where it is headed. It should also clarify what your research will add to the state of knowledge in the field. Furthermore, important to state is what your research will do to enhance or enable other researches in the field. Finally, one should answer why your research is important for the advancement of the field.

The broader impacts (the contribution the research will make to the society) should answer the questions on the benefit to the society at large from the research, and the possible applications of the research, and why the general public would care. It should also clarify how the research can benefit the site of research (medical college or university, etc.) and the funding agency.

Background and Review of Literature

This is an important component of the research protocol. The review should discuss all the relevant literature, the method used in the literature, the lacunae in the literature, and justify the proposed research. We have provided a list of the useful databases in the section on systematic reviews and meta-analysis (Setia, 2017). Some of these are PubMed, Cochrane database, EMBASE, and LILACS.

Provide a critical analysis of the literature

The researcher should not provide a descriptive analysis of literature. For instance, the literature reviews should not be a list of one article followed by the next article. It should be a critical analysis of literature.

A study by XXXX et al . found that the prevalence of psoriasis was 20%. It was a hospital-based study conducted in North India. The prevalence was 35% in males and 12% in females.

Another study by YYYYY et al . found that the prevalence of psoriasis was 14%. The study was conducted in a private clinic in North India. The prevalence was 8% in males and 18% in females.

A third study by ZZZZZ et al . found that the prevalence of psoriasis was 5%. This study was a community-based study. The prevalence was 7% in males and 3% in females.

In this type of review, the researcher has described all the studies. However, it is useful to understand the findings of these three studies and summarize them in researcher's own words.

A possible option can be “ The reported prevalence of psoriasis in the Indian population varied from 5% to 20%. In general, it was higher in hospital-based studies and lower in community-based studies. There was no consistent pattern in the prevalence of psoriasis in males and females. Though some studies found the prevalence to be higher in males, others reported that females had a higher prevalence .”

Discuss the limitations and lacunae of these studies

The researcher should discuss the limitations of the studies. These could be the limitations that the authors have presented in the manuscript or the ones that the researcher has identified. Usually, the current research proposal should try to address the limitations of a previous study.

A study by BBBB et al : “ One of the main limitations of our study was the lack of objective criteria for assessing anemia in patients presenting with psoriasis. We classified the patients based on clinical assessment of pallor .”

The present proposal can mention “ Though previous studies have assessed the association between anemia and psoriasis, they have not used any objective criteria (such as hemoglobin or serum ferritin levels). Furthermore, pallor was evaluated by three clinicians; the authors have not described the agreement between these clinicians .”

In the above example, the authors have stated the limitation of their research in the manuscript. However, in the review of literature, the researcher has added another limitation. It is important to convince the reviewers that the researcher has read and understood the literature. It is also important that some or most of these lacunae should be addressed in the present proposal as far as possible.

Justify the present proposal by review

The researcher should adequately justify the present proposal based on the review of literature. The justification should not only be for the research question, but also the methods, study design, variables of interest, study instruments or measurements, and statistical methods of choice. Sometimes, the justification can be purely statistical. For example, all the previous studies have used cross-sectional data or cross-sectional analysis of longitudinal data in their manuscripts. The present proposal will use methods used for longitudinal data analysis. The researcher should justify the benefit of these methods over the previous statistical methods.

In short, the review should not be a “laundry list” of all the articles. The review should be able to convince the reader that the present research is required and it builds on the existing literature (either as a novel research question, new measurement of the outcome, a better study design, or advanced and appropriate statistical methods).

Kindly try to avoid this justification: “ It has not been done in our center .”

Aims and Objectives

The “aim” of the study is an overarching goal of the study. The objectives are measurable and help the researcher achieve the overall aim.

For example, the overall aim of our study is to assess the long-term health of patients of psoriasis.

The specific objectives are:

• To record the changes in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score in patients with psoriasis over a period of 5 years
• To study the side effects of medications in these patients over a period of 5 years.

It is important to clearly state the objectives, since the research proposal should be designed to achieve these objectives.

For example, the methods should describe the following:

• How will the researcher answer the first objective?
• Where will the researcher recruit the study participants (study site and population)?
• Which patients of psoriasis will be recruited (inclusion and exclusion criteria)?
• What will be the design of the study (cohort, etc.)?
• What are all the variables to be measured to achieve the study outcomes (exposure and outcome variables)?
• How will the researcher measure these variables (clinical evaluation, history, serological examination, etc.)?
• How will the researcher record these data (clinical forms, etc.)?
• How will the researcher analyze the data that have been collected?
• Are there any limitations of these methods? If so, what has the researcher done to minimize the limitations?

All the ten modules on research methodology have to be read and grasped to plan and design any kind of research applicable to one's chosen field. However, some key areas have been outlined below with examples to appreciate the same in an easier manner.

The study setting must be specified. This should include both the geographical location and the population from which the study sample would be recruited.

“The study took place at the antiretroviral therapy clinic of Queen Elizabeth Central Hospital in Blantyre, Malawi, from January 2006 to April 2007. Blantyre is the major commercial city of Malawi, with a population of 1,000,000 and an estimated HIV prevalence of 27% in adults in 2004” (Ndekha et al ., 2009).

This is a perfect example of description of a study setting which underscores the importance of planning it in detail a priori .

Study population, sampling strategy, and sample size

Study population has to be clearly and precisely defined. For example, a study on atopic dermatitis may be conducted upon patients defined according to the UK Working Party's modified diagnostic criteria, or the Hanifin and Rajka's criteria, or some other criteria defined by the investigators. However, it should always be prespecified within the protocol.

Similarly, the eligibility criteria of the participants for the study must be explicit. One truism that is frequently forgotten is that the inclusion and exclusion criteria are mutually exclusive, and one is not the negative image of the other. Eligible cases are included according to a set of inclusion criteria, and this is followed by administration of the exclusion criteria. Thus, in fact, they can never be the negative image of each other.

“Eligible participants were all adults aged 18 or over with HIV who met the eligibility criteria for antiretroviral therapy according to the Malawian national HIV treatment guidelines (WHO clinical stage III or IV or any WHO stage with a CD4 count < 250/mm 3 ) and who were starting treatment with a BMI < 18.5. Exclusion criteria were pregnancy and lactation or participation in another supplementary feeding program” (Ndekha et al ., 2009).

To put in perspective the point we made about inclusion and exclusion criteria, in the above example, “age above 18 years” or “CD4 count >250/mm 3 ” cannot be exclusion criteria, as these have already been excluded.

Sampling strategy has been adequately discussed in the Module 5 of the Methodology series (Setia, 2016). A few points are worth repeating:

• The sampling strategy should never be misrepresented. Example: If you have not done random sampling, no big deal. There are other legitimate sampling strategies available for your study. But once you have mentioned “random sampling” in your protocol, you cannot resort to purposive sampling
• Sometimes, the researcher might want to know the characteristics of a certain problem within a specific population, without caring for generalizability of results. In such a scenario, purposive sampling may be resorted to
• Nonprobability sampling methods such as consecutive consenting sampling or any such convenience sampling are perfectly legitimate and easy to do, particularly in case of dissertations where time and resources are limited.

Sample size is one of the most misunderstood, yet fundamentally important, issues among clinicians and has to be addressed once the study objectives have been set and the design has been finalized. Too small a sample means that there would be a failure to detect change following test intervention. A sample larger than necessary may also result in bad quality data. In either case, there would be ethical problems and wastage of resources. The researcher needs just enough samples to draw accurate inferences, which would be adequately powered (Panda, 2015).

Estimation of sample size has been dealt with adequately in the Module 5 biostatistics series (Hazra et al ., 2016), including the different mathematical derivations and the available software. Sample size determination is a statistical exercise based on the probability of errors in testing of hypothesis, power of the sample, and effect size. Although, relatively speaking, these are simple concepts to grasp, a large number of different study designs and analytical methods lead to a bewilderingly large number of formulae for determining sample size. Thus, the software are really handy and are becoming increasingly popular.

The study design defines the objectives and end points of the study, the type and manner of data collection, and the strategy of data analysis (Panda 2015). The different types of clinical studies have been depicted in Figure 1 . The suitability of various study designs vis-à-vis different types of research questions is summarized in Table 1 .

Types of study (Source: Panda, 2015)

Research questions vis-a-vis study designs

In our previous series of ten modules on methodology, we have discussed all these different kinds of studies and more. Some key issues that require reiteration are given below:

• The control of a case–control study and that of a randomized controlled trial is more different from each other than chalk is from cheese. The former is an observational study, while the latter is an interventional one. Every study with a control group is not a case–control study. For a study to be classified as a case–control study, the study should be an observational study and the participants should be recruited based on their outcome status (Setia, 2016). Apparently, this is not so difficult to understand, yet even now we have publications which confuse between the different kinds of controls (Bhanja et al ., 2015)
• Due to the fact that the outcome and exposure are assessed at the same time point in a cross-sectional study, it is pretty difficult, if not impossible, to derive causal relationships from such a study. At most, one may establish statistical association between exposures and outcomes by calculating the odds ratio. However, these associations must not be confused with causation.
• It is generally said that a cohort design may not be efficient for rare outcomes. However, if the rare outcome is common in some exposures, it may be useful to follow a cohort design. For example, melanoma is a rare condition in India. Hence, if we follow individuals to study the incidence of melanoma, it may not be efficient. However, if we know that, in India, acral lentiginous melanoma is the most commonly reported variant, we should follow a cohort of individuals with acral lentiginous and study the incidence of melanoma in this group (Setia, 2016).

Clinical researchers should also be accustomed with observational designs beyond case–control, cohort, and cross-sectional studies. Sometimes, the unit of analysis has to be a group or aggregate rather than the individual. Consider the following example:

The government introduced the supplementation of salt with iodine for about 20 years. However, not all states have used the same level of iodine in salt. Certain hilly states have used higher quantities compared with other states. Incidentally, you read a report that high iodine levels are associated with psoriasis. You are intrigued to find if introduction of iodine has altered the picture of psoriasis in the country. You feel compelled to design a study to answer this question .

It is obvious that here the unit of study cannot be individuals, but a large population distributed in a certain geographical area. This is the domain of ecologic studies. An allied category of observational studies is named “natural experiments,” where the exposure is not assigned by the investigator (as in an interventional study), but through “natural processes.” These may be through changes in the existing regulations or public policies or, may be, through introduction of new laws (Setia, 2017).

Another category of research questions that cannot be satisfactorily captured by all the quantitative methods described earlier, like social stigma experienced by patients or their families with, say, vitiligo, leprosy, or sexually transmitted infections, are best dealt with by qualitative research. As can be seen by the examples given above, this is a type of research which is very relevant to medical research, yet to which the regular medical researcher has got a very poor exposure, if any. We shall encourage interested researchers to take a look at the 10 th Module of the Methodology series that specifically deals with qualitative research (Setia, 2017).

Clinical studies are experiments that are not conducted in laboratories but in controlled real-life settings on human subjects with some disease. Hence, designing a study involves many pragmatic considerations aside pure methodology. Thus, factors to consider when selecting a study design are objectives of the study, time frame, treatment duration, carryover effects, cost and logistics, patient convenience, statistical considerations, sample size, etc. (Panda, 2015).

Certain truisms regarding study designs should always be remembered: a study design has to be tailored to objectives. The same question may be answered by different designs. The optimum design has to be based on workforce, budgetary allocation, infrastructure, and clinical material that may be commanded by the researchers. Finally, no design is perfect, and there is no design to provide a perfect answer to all research questions relevant to a particular problem (Panda, 2015).

Variables of interest and collection of these variables

Data structure depends on the characteristics of the variables [ Figure 2 ]. A variable refers to a particular character on which a set of data are recorded. Data are thus the values of a variable (Hazra et al ., 2016).

Types of data and variables (Source: Panda, 2015)

Quantitative data always have a proportional scale among values, and can be either discrete (e.g., number of moles) or continuous (e.g., age). Qualitative data can be either nominal (e.g., blood groups) or ordinal (e.g., Fitzpatrick's phototypes I-VI). Variables can be binary or dichotomous (male/female) or multinomial or polychotomous (homosexual/bisexual/heterosexual) (Panda, 2015).

Changing data scales is possible so that numerical data may become ordinal and ordinal data may become nominal. This may be done when the researcher is not confident about the accuracy of the measuring instrument, is unconcerned about the loss of fine detail, or where group numbers are not large enough to adequately represent a variable of interest. It may also make clinical interpretation easier (Hazra et al ., 2016).

The variables whose effects are observed on other variables are known as independent variables (e.g., risk factors). The latter kind of variables that change as a result of independent variables are known as dependent variables (i.e., outcome). Confounders are those variables that influence the relation between independent and dependent variables (e.g., the clinical effect of sunscreen used as part of a test intervention regimen in melasma). If the researcher fails to control or eliminate the confounder, it will damage the internal validity of an experiment (Panda, 2015).

Biostatistics begins with descriptive statistics that implies summarizing a collection of data from a sample or population. An excellent overview of descriptive statistics has been given in the Module 1 of the Biostatistics series (Hazra et al ., 2016). We would encourage every researcher to embark on designing and collecting data on their own to go through this particular module to have a clear idea on how to proceed further.

Statistical methods

As briefly discussed earlier, the “methods” section should also include a detailed description of statistical methods. It is best to describe the methods for each objective.

For example: Which statistical methods will the researcher use to study the changes in PASI score over time?

It is important to first identify the nature of the outcome – will it be linear or categorical?

• It may be noticed that the PASI is a score and can range from 0 to 72. The researcher can measure the actual score and assess the changes in score. Thus, the researcher will use methods for statistical analysis of continuous data (such as means, standard deviations, t -test, or linear regressions)
• However, the researcher may choose to cut off the PASI score at 60 (of course, there has to be justification!) and call it severe psoriasis. Thus, the researcher will have an outcome variable with two outcomes (Yes: >60 PASI, and No: <60 PASI). Thus, in this case, the researcher will use methods for statistical analysis of categorical data (proportions, Chi-square test, or logistic regression models).

The statistical methods have been described in detail in the Biostatistics section of the series. The reader is encouraged to read all the sections to understand these methods. However, the key points to remember are:

• Identify the nature of the outcome for each objective
• Describe the statistical methods separately for each objective
• Identify the methods to handle confounding and describe them in the statistical methods
• If the researcher is using advanced statistical methods or specific tools, please provide reference to these methods
• Provide the name of the statistical software (including the version) that will be used for data analysis in the present study
• Do not provide a laundry list of all the statistical methods. It just shows that the researcher has not understood the relevance of statistics in the study design.

Multivariate models

In general, multivariate analyses are used in studies and research proposals. These analyses are useful to adjust for confounding (though these are also useful to test for interaction, we shall discuss confounding in this section). For example, we propose to compare two different types of medications in psoriasis. We have used secondary clinical data for this study. The outcome of interest is PASI score. We have collected data on the type of medication, age, sex, and alcohol use. When we compare the PASI score in these two groups, we will use t -test (if linear comparison) or Chi-square test (if PASI is categorized – as described earlier). However, it is possible that age, sex, and alcohol use may also play a role in the clinical progression of psoriasis (which is measured as PASI score). Thus, the researcher would like to account for differences in these variables in the two groups. This can be done using multivariate analytical methods (such as linear regression for continuous variables and logistic regression for categorical dichotomous variables). This is a type of mathematical model in which we include multiple variables: the main explanatory variable (type of drug in this study) and potential confounders (age, sex, and alcohol use in this study). Thus, the outcome (PASI score) after multivariate analyses will be “adjusted” for age, sex, and alcohol use after multivariate analysis. We would like to encourage the readers to consult a statistician for these methods.

TRIVIA: The singular for “data” is “datum,” just as “stratum” is the singular for “strata.” Thus, “ data were analyzed …,” “ data were collected …,” and “ data have been ….”

Clinical Record Forms

We have discussed designing of questionnaires and clinical record forms (CRFs) in detail in two modules. We shall just highlight the most important aspects in this part. The CRF is an important part of the research protocol. The CRF should include all the variables of interest in the study. Thus, it is important to make a list of all parameters of interest before working on the CRF. This can be done by a thorough review of literature and discussion with experts. Once the questionnaire/CRF has been designed, the researcher should pilot it and change according to the feedback from the participants and one's own experience while administering the questionnaire or recording data in the CRF. The CRF should use coded responses (for close-ended questions), this will help in data entry and analysis. If the researcher has developed a scale, the reliability and validity should be tested (methods have been discussed in earlier sections). The CRF can be paper based or computer based (it will depend on the resources).

It is very important to describe the ethics for the present study. It should not be restricted to “ The study will be evaluated by an Institutional Review Committee …” The researcher should demonstrate that s/he has understood the various ethical issues in the present study. The three core principles for ethics are: autonomy (the participants have a right to decide whether to participate in the study or opt out), beneficence/nonmaleficence (the study should not be harmful to participants and the risk–benefit ratio should be adequately understood and described), and justice (all the risks and benefits of the present study should be equally distributed).

The researcher should try to address these issues in the section of “Ethics.” Currently, the National Institutes of Health has proposed the following seven principles of “Ethics in Clinical Research:” social and clinical value, scientific validity, fair subject selection, favorable risk–benefit ratio, independent review, informed consent, and respect for potential and enrolled subjects. The Indian Council of Medical Research has also published guidelines to conduct biomedical research in India. We strongly encourage the readers to be familiar with these guidelines. Furthermore, the researchers should keep themselves updated with changes in these regulations. If it is a clinical trial, the researcher should also be familiar with Schedule Y and Consent form requirements for these types of clinical trials.

Concluding Remarks

This module has been designed as a comprehensive guide for a dermatologist to enable him/her to embark on the exciting journey of designing studies of almost any kind that can be thought to be of relevance to clinical dermatology. There has been a conscious attempt to customize the discussion on design and analysis keeping not only dermatology, but also Indian conditions in mind. However, the module can be of help to any medical doctor embarking on the path to medical research. As contributors, it is our ardent hope that this module might act as a catalyst of good-quality research in the field of dermatology and beyond in India and elsewhere.

Financial support and sponsorship

Conflicts of interest.

There are no conflicts of interest.

Bibliography

Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics

• Degree Programs

8.0. Department Policies

The following are department policies of particular importance to graduate students.

8.1. Advisory Committee

An advisory committee chair should be selected during the student's first semester in the graduate program. The student and committee chair will jointly select other members of the advisory committee. Advisory committees for M.S. and MAB students must have a minimum of three faculty members, at least two of whom must be graduate faculty members in the Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics. Advisory committees for Ph.D. students must have at least four faculty members, one of whom must be from outside the department.

8.2. Degree Plan

M.S. and MAB students should file a degree plan by the end of the first semester of graduate study. Ph.D. students should file a degree plan before beginning the second year of coursework. The student and committee chair should work out a tentative plan, which will be discussed and approved by the full advisory committee. Degree plans must be approved and signed by the department Graduate Advisor.

8.3. Research Topic

Students working on M.S.-thesis and Ph.D. degrees should begin discussions on possible research topics with their committee chair and other commit¬tee members during the first semester in their program.

8.4. Thesis and Dissertation Proposals

Each M.S.-thesis or Ph.D. candidate will develop a formal written thesis or dissertation proposal. The proposal should include a title, a statement of the problem and rationale for the proposed research, a statement of objectives, hypotheses to be tested, a review of the literature, and a detailed description of the design, data analysis, and procedures of the study. Proposals must also include a conceptual framework that applies relevant economic theory to an analysis of the research problem.

After your committee chair approves your draft proposal, you need to distribute copies to the other members of your advisory committee. You should allow at least two weeks for the committee to read and evaluate the proposal prior to your proposal defense.

8.5. Proposal Defense

Under the direction of your committee chair, you should prepare an oral presentation of your thesis or dissertation research proposal. This presentation is expected to be formal and scholarly. Your presentation should include a clear rationale for the proposed research, a concise statement of objectives, hypotheses, and a detailed description of the design and methods of the proposed study.

You should be prepared to defend your proposal during a question-and-answer period following the oral presentation. When the questioning has concluded, the committee will determine whether you have satisfactorily completed the defense/exam. They will also decide what modifications, if any, should be made to the proposal before proceeding with the research. All committee recommendations at the proposal stage should be appropriately reflected in the final thesis or dissertation submitted in preparation for the Final Examination.

8.6. Preparation of Thesis or Dissertation

In preparing even the earliest draft of the thesis or dissertation, you should follow style conventions currently accepted by the department and Graduate School.

8.7. Final Requirements for Graduation

Students who are within nine months of completing their graduate degree programs are advised to consult the Graduate School Web site, and personnel in the Graduate School for information on graduation requirements and deadlines. Students are responsible for meeting all of these requirements and deadlines.

8.8. Offices and Computers

Graduate student office space is assigned by the department Graduate Advisor. All funded students are provided office space. Other M.S. and Ph.D. students are assigned office space if available. Office space should be used or it may be reassigned.

The department has computer facilities which are available to all graduate students. Students with office spaces are often furnished with a computer. Students should use these computers for academic purposes only. Any relocation of departmental computers will be done by the department's computer support staff at the request of the Graduate Advisor.

8.9. Copying and Office Supplies

Office supplies are available to faculty and staff. They are available to graduate students only by special request from their graduate advisors and for use only on department business, not for the student's course or personal use.

The department copy machines are restricted to staff and faculty use. Graduate students gain access to the copy machines only when approved by the student's committee chair or work supervisor. The copy machines are intended to support research and teaching activities and are not intended for copying course work material or books

8.10. Vacations

Part-time research and teaching appointments do not carry provisions for vacation or sick leave. Absences from campus must be approved by your committee chair or work supervisor. If a requested absence conflicts with departmental needs it may be denied

<<<   top   >>>

Contact TTU

• Like Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics on Facebook Like Department of Agricultural and Applied Economics on Facebook

Search form

• Publications
• Get Involved
• Planned Giving

Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment, May 11, 2024

Riley Bailey, Angelica Evans, Nicole Wolkov, Christina Harward, and Frederick W. Kagan

May 11, 2024, 8:20pm ET  

Click here to see ISW’s interactive map of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This map is updated daily alongside the static maps present in this report.

Click here to see ISW’s 3D control of terrain topographic map of Ukraine. Use of a computer (not a mobile device) is strongly recommended for using this data-heavy tool.

Click here to access ISW’s archive of interactive time-lapse maps of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. These maps complement the static control-of-terrain map that ISW produces daily by showing a dynamic frontline. ISW will update this time-lapse map archive monthly.

Note: The data cut-off for this product was 1:15pm ET on May 11 (excluding certain evidence of Russian gains in northern Kharkiv Oblast). ISW will cover subsequent reports in the May 12 Russian Offensive Campaign Assessment.

Russian forces are conducting relatively limited offensive operations along the Russian-Ukrainian border in northern Kharkiv Oblast and continued to make tactically significant gains in likely less defended areas. The reported sizes of the Russian elements committed to these limited operations and of the Russian force grouping deployed along the border in northeastern Ukraine indicate that Russian forces are not pursuing a large-scale operation to envelop, encircle, or seize Kharkiv City at this time.  Ukrainska Pravda  reported that Russian forces resumed offensive operations north of Lyptsi (north of Kharkiv City) on the morning of May 11 and focused on Hlyboke (immediately north of Lyptsi), where Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced to the outskirts of the settlement and later seized and cleared the settlement.[1] NASA Fire Information for Resource Management (FIRMS) data captured on May 10 indicates that there has likely been heavy fighting near Hlyboke, and ISW assesses that Russian forces have advanced up to the outskirts of the settlement.[2] Geolocated footage published on May 11 indicates that Russian forces have seized Morokhovets and Oliinykove (both northeast of Lypsti), and Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces seized these settlements.[3] Ukrainian officials reported that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian assaults west of Vovchansk (northeast of Kharkiv City) near Ohirtseve and Hatyshche, two settlements that the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) and Russian sources claimed that Russian forces seized as of May 11.[4] ISW assesses that Russian forces have advanced at least to the outskirts of Ohirtseve and Hatyshche. The Russian MoD claimed that Russian forces also seized Strilecha, Pylna, and Borsivika (north to northwest of Lypsti), claims that ISW assesses to be accurate, as well as Pletenivka (north of Vovchansk).[5] Russian sources also claimed that Russian forces seized Hoptivka and Kudiivka (both northwest of Lyptsi and southeast of Kozacha Lopan).[6] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced further towards Lukyantsi (northeast of Lyptsi), to the northern outskirts of Neskuchne (northeast of Lyptsi), and to the western outskirts of Staritsa and Izbytske (west of Vovchansk and east of Lyptsi).[7] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced from Hatyshche to the northwestern outskirts of Vovchansk, south from Pletenivka, and towards Tykhe (on Vovchansk's northeastern outskirts).[8] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces seized Tykhe and are currently trying to advance east of the settlement into Vovchansk.[9] ISW has not observed evidence that would support an assessment that these Russian claims correspond with Russian advances at this time.

Ukrainian Khortytsia Group of Forces Spokesperson Lieutenant Colonel Nazar Voloshyn stated that Russian forces are trying to advance in areas that were already contested "grey zones," suggesting that Ukrainian forces did not maintain enduring positions in many of the small border settlements that Russian forces have seized or have reportedly seized.[10] It is unlikely that Ukrainian forces would have established serious strongholds and fortifications along a contested grey zone or enduring positions in small border settlements that Russian forces have long subjected to routine indirect fire. Russian forces will likely face more intense resistance when trying to advance near settlements further south of the border and into larger border settlements like Lyptsi and Vovchansk. The proximity of Kharkiv City to the border magnifies the significance of limited Russian tactical gains, however, as Russian forces do not have to advance much further to begin threatening Kharkiv City with routine shelling.[11]

Russian forces reportedly launched offensive operations along the Russian-Ukrainian border in northern Kharkiv Oblast before they had completed bringing the Northern Grouping of Forces up to its reported planned end strength and have so far only committed a limited amount of combat power to offensive operations in the area.  Ukrainian military observer Kostyantyn Mashovets stated on May 11 that Russian forces have committed up to two companies of the 7th Motorized Rifle Regiment (11th Army Corps [AC], Leningrad Military District [LMD]) and up to two battalions of the 18th Motorized Rifle Brigade (11th AC, LMD) to the ongoing operations in the Lyptsi and Vovchansk directions.[12] Ukrainian military observer Alexander Kovalenko stated on May 11 that elements of the 30th Motorized Rifle Regiment (72nd Motorized Rifle Division, 44th AC, LMD) and the 128th Motorized Rifle Brigade (44th AC, LMD) are also operating in the area.[13] Kovalenko stated that Russian forces have committed 2,000 personnel to the frontline along the border and have 1,500 to 2,000 personnel in immediate reserve.[14] Kovalenko stated that elements of the 44th AC are currently redeploying to Belgorod Oblast and that 3,750 additional Russian personnel from the 44th AC may arrive in the area within the next week.[15] Kovalenko stated that the Russian Northern Grouping of Forces has 30,000 to 35,000 personnel deployed along the entire border with Ukraine in Kursk, Bryansk, and Belgorod oblasts, a figure consistent with Ukrainian Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) Deputy Chief Major General Vadym Skibitskyi's May 2 report that Russian forces had roughly 35,000 personnel deployed to the international border area.[16] Skibitskyi stated that Russian forces intend to establish a grouping in the area that is between 50,000 and 75,000 personnel in size.[17] Ukrainian sources stated that Ukrainian forces have destroyed at least 20 Russian armored vehicles since Russian forces began offensive operations in the area on the morning of May 10, but Russian and Ukrainian sources continue to characterize Russian offensive operations along the border as consisting primarily of heavy infantry assaults.[18]  Russian forces will likely introduce reserves to intensify ongoing offensive operations in the area in the coming days, however, the Russian forces lack the necessary manpower required to attempt a large-scale offensive operation to envelop, encircle, or seize Kharkiv City according to all available reports.

ISW continues to assess that the Russian offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast likely aim to draw Ukrainian forces from other sectors of the front while allowing Russian forces to advance to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City. [19]   Russian forces are maintaining the tempo of their offensive operations along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line, near Chasiv Yar, and west of Avdiivka, and the Russian military command likely hopes that operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast could cause the Ukrainian military command to dedicate manpower and materiel to the defense north of Kharkiv City that it could otherwise dedicate to defending in these other directions. A Russian advance towards Kharkiv City that would allow Russian forces to conduct effective and routine indirect fire would give Russian forces the capability to inflict significant damage to Kharkiv City in order to prompt mass migration from the city and set conditions for a larger offensive operation at a later date.[20] US National Security Council Spokesperson John Kirby stated on May 10 that Russian forces are preparing to use long-range fire capabilities within the radius of Kharkiv City and that this indicates that the Russian military is considering a larger offensive operation against Kharkiv City.[21] Russian long-range fire may similarly intend to set conditions for a subsequent offensive operation against Kharkiv City, and Kirby did not indicate that the White House believes that the Russian military is considering an immediate effort to seize Kharkiv City.  The seizure of Kharkiv City most certainly is a desired operational objective for Russian forces, but not one that the Russian military appears to be pursuing in the near term.

Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian military command may be evaluating the risks, prospects, and timeline of offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast based on the assumption that Ukraine cannot and will not be able to liberate territory seized by Russian forces. Putin's and the Russian military command's calculus about the threat of Ukrainian territorial gains is likely shaping Russia's overall operational approach to seizing territory in Ukraine.  The US Office of the Director of National Intelligence's (ODNI) 2024 Annual Threat Assessment reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin "probably believes" that Russian forces have blunted Ukrainian efforts to retake significant territory and that US and Western support for Ukraine is "finite."[22] Russia's intended timeline for its ongoing offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast remains unclear, but Russian forces may intend for their offensive operations in northern and northeastern Kharkiv Oblast to achieve their operational objectives long after summer 2024. The Russian military command may assume that Russian forces will be able to hold any limited gains they make in northern Kharkiv Oblast and other oblasts in perpetuity because they think that Ukrainian forces will be unable to launch successful counteroffensive efforts at any point in the future. Russian forces have made a series of tactically significant advances in Donetsk Oblast, particularly near Avdiivka, in recent months without Ukrainian counterattacks even momentarily pushing back Russian forces, and these recent unchallenged gains may be contributing to Putin's and the Russian military command's calculus.[23] Putin may believe that Russian forces can continue to make opportunistic and unchallenged advances throughout the frontline over the next months, or even years, and ultimately force Ukraine to submit to total Russian subjugation. Ukrainian materiel constraints due to delays in Western security assistance have prevented Ukrainian forces from launching significant counterattacks against Russian offensive operations, but the arrival of US security assistance to the front at scale will likely allow Ukrainian forces to resume counterattacks that threaten Russian forces' ability to hold tactical gains.[24]

The limited Russian offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast suggest that the resumption of US security assistance has not changed Putin's calculus or that he launched the Kharkiv effort without reassessing the operation's fundamental assumptions about Ukrainian capabilities in light of the resumption of aid.  Russian forces are currently attacking with a force grouping well below its reported intended end strength, a risky decision if Putin and the Russian military command believed that there was a threat for Ukrainian forces to roll back any tactical gains that this understrength force could make before Russian forces staffed it to end strength. Russian forces are currently advancing in several areas that do not provide immediate avenues of advance toward Kharkiv City or other immediate operationally significant objectives. Russian forces may be advancing in these areas because they believe that they can hold any seized ground indefinitely and use that ground to launch subsequent operations to more operationally significant goals. Russian forces may also believe that they can pursue gradual creeping advances across a wide swath of territory in northern and northeastern Kharkiv Oblast for an extended period of time without achieving relatively rapid operationally significant advances but in a way that would disadvantage any future Ukrainian counteroffensive operations in the area.

It is imperative for Ukrainian forces to disrupt any such Russian calculations as soon as possible through both limited and large-scale counteroffensive operations that liberate Russian-occupied territory as soon as conditions permit. ISW has routinely argued that Ukrainian forces should contest the theater-wide initiative as soon as possible because ceding the theater-wide initiative to Russia into 2025 affords Russian forces the ability to determine the timing, location, and intensity of Russian attacks and control the resources that Ukrainian forces expend during this protracted period.[25] Ukrainian forces will not have a chance to liberate territory if they remain on the defensive for the foreseeable future, and remaining entirely on the defensive will only encourage Putin to continue grinding offensive operations indefinitely seeking complete victory over time. ISW has repeatedly assessed that the consistent provision of key Western systems to Ukraine will play a critical role in Russia's prospects in 2024 and Ukraine's ability to conduct future counteroffensive operations and liberate Ukrainian territory from Russian occupation.[26] The West must proactively and preemptively provide Ukrainian forces with the necessary equipment and weapons for their future counteroffensive operations if Ukrainian forces are to liberate significant swaths of occupied Ukraine and challenge Putin's belief that Ukraine is and will remain unable to do so.

The directions of Russian offensive operations in the international border area suggest that Russia may be attempting to create a "buffer zone" to protect Belgorod City, as Russian and Ukrainian officials have recently stated.  Russian officials, including Russian Vladimir Putin, have recently called for the creation of a "buffer zone" to protect Russia's claimed and actual territories from Ukrainian strikes.[27] Although this stated goal is actually unachievable as long as an independent Ukraine with any strike capabilities and will to fight remains, Kremlin officials have explicitly listed Kharkiv City as a part of a hypothesized limited demilitarized zone aimed at protecting Belgorod City.[28] Western and Ukrainian media reported on May 10 that Ukrainian military sources stated that Russian forces intend to establish a 10-kilometer deep buffer zone along the northern border in Kharkiv Oblast.[29] This objective likely is intended not only to push Ukrainian tube artillery out of range of Russian military logistics in Belgorod Oblast, but also to bring Russian tube artillery within striking distance of Kharkiv City. Russian forces are currently conducting offensive operations near Hoptivka (northwest of Lyptsi), and it is notable that Russian forces are also attempting to advance in areas that are separate from the area north of Lyptsi where Russian forces have already made tactically significant advances. Russian forces are also notably conducting offensive operations north and west of Vovchansk on both sides of the Siverskyi Donetsk River, which would pose a significant obstacle to Russian forces on the east side of the river should they attempt to advance southwestward to Kharkiv City. These various directions of Russian offensive operations further suggest that Russian offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast are not aimed at an immediate large-scale offensive operation to envelop, encircle, or seize Kharkiv City. Russian forces may, however, be aiming to seize a wide swath of Ukrainian territory in the area immediately south of the border with Belgorod Oblast, likely including Vovchansk, to create a "buffer zone." Russian attempts to advance in an area that is relatively wide and not very deep along the border, especially in the area north of Hoptivka towards Kozacha Lopan, would further indicate that this is the Russian operational objective in the international border area.

Russian forces appear to be attempting to quickly isolate the battlespace east of the Siverskyi Donets River and seize Vovchansk, a direction of advance that Russian forces may believe could threaten the Ukrainian grouping defending in the Kupyansk direction.  Geolocated footage published on May 11 shows a Russian strike destroying the Siverskyi Donets Dam bridge in Stary Saltiv (southwest of Vovchansk).[30] Footage published on May 11 purportedly shows Russian forces striking a bridge over the Vovcha River connecting Tykhe and Vovchanski Khutory (both west of Vovchansk).[31] Russian forces likely destroyed the bridges in an effort to isolate the Ukrainian forces operating on either side of the water features to prevent them from supporting Ukrainian forces defending against ongoing Russian attacks near Vovchansk. Russian attempts to destroy Ukrainian ground lines of communications (GLOCs) southwest and east of Vovchansk indicate that Russian forces will likely focus on seizing Vovchansk instead of attempting to bypass the settlement or expanding the front further east along the international border between Russia and Ukraine. Russian forces reportedly conducted at least 20 glide bomb strikes against Vovchansk on May 11 and are heavily focusing artillery, MLRS, and drone strikes on the settlement.[32] Russian forces may also intend to use offensive operations near Vovchansk to pressure the operational rear of Ukrainian forces defending against Russian attacks in the Kupyansk direction and draw away Ukrainian units defending in the Kupyansk area. A Russian foothold in Vovchansk does little to support a Russian effort to advance towards Kharkiv City, although Russian forces may imagine that a foothold in the settlement could allow Russian forces to launch offensive operations in the direction of Velykyi Burluk, a notable settlement in the rear of the Ukrainian grouping in the Kupyansk direction. Russian advances further south of Vovchansk would require long drives across open terrain, a capability that Russian forces have not shown in the past year and a half of fighting in Ukraine even during the period of most acute Ukrainian resource shortages.[33]

Donetsk People's Republic (DNR) Head Denis Pushilin reiterated a series of Kremlin narratives intended to justify Russia's invasion of Ukraine and attempted to flatter Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian military during an interview in honor of the 10th anniversary of the DNR's founding, likely in an attempt to curry favor in the Kremlin.  Pushilin claimed during an interview with Kremlin newswire  TASS  on May 11 that Russia must seize Kharkiv, Odesa, Dnipro, Sumy, and a number of other unspecified cities during its invasion of Ukraine   and "liberate" all of the "Russian people" who live in these supposedly "Russian" cities.[34] Pushilin strangely claimed that his list of cities encompasses more than "real historical Russian cities." Pushilin claimed that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered Russian forces to not conduct strikes against Ukraine's energy grid this past winter due to Putin's great concern for Ukrainian civilians but also claimed that Russian forces should intensify their strikes against bridges and transportation hubs in Ukraine.[35] Pushilin claimed that Putin is the "main curator" of Donbas and Novorossiya and is "immersed" in the details of everything happening in occupied Ukraine and that the pace of Russian forces operation to seize the remainder of Donetsk Oblast is "adequate" and is not "too fast or too slow."[36]

Ukrainian forces reportedly conducted successful drone strikes against a Russian oil refinery in Volgograd Oblast on the night of May 10 to 11.  Sources in Ukrainian special services told Ukrainian outlet  Suspilne  that Ukraine's Main Military Intelligence Directorate (GUR) conducted drone strikes against a Lukoil refinery in Volgograd Oblast and damaged the AVT-1 and AVT-6 oil processing facilities and control cables for the facility's air coolers.[37] Volgograd Oblast Governor Andrei Bocharov claimed on May 11 that Russian forces intercepted a drone over Volgograd Oblast and that it did not damage any infrastructure.[38] Ukraine's Security Service (SBU) reportedly conducted a drone strike against the same oil refinery on February 3.[39]

Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin submitted proposals on the composition of the new Russian government to the State Duma on May 11. [40] Mishustin proposed that current Minister of Agriculture Dmitry Patrushev become a Deputy Prime Minister and that current Kursk Oblast Governor Roman Starovoit become the Minister of Transport.[41] Mishustin also proposed that current Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Industry and Trade Denis Manturov leave his position as Minister of Industry and Trade and become First Deputy Prime Minister. Mishustin nominated current Kaliningrad Oblast Governor Anton Alikhanov to replace Manturov as Minister of Industry and Trade. Dmitry Patrushev is notably the son of Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev, and this is the second recent case of nominations to high ranking positions for children of people in Russian President Vladimir Putin's inner circle after Russian Federation Council Chairperson Valentina Matvienko nominated Boris Kovalchuk – the son of Putin's "personal banker" Yuri Kovalchuk – as a candidate for the head of the Federation Council Accounts Chamber on May 10.[42]

Key Takeaways:

• Russian forces are conducting relatively limited offensive operations along the Russian-Ukrainian border in northern Kharkiv Oblast and continued to make tactically significant gains in likely less defended areas. The reported sizes of the Russian elements committed to these limited operations and of the Russian force grouping deployed along the border in northeastern Ukraine indicate that Russian forces are not pursuing a large-scale operation to envelop, encircle, or seize Kharkiv City at this time.
• Russian forces reportedly launched offensive operations along the Russian-Ukrainian border in northern Kharkiv Oblast before they had completed bringing the Northern Grouping of Forces up to its reported planned end strength and have so far only committed a limited amount of combat power to offensive operations in the area.
• ISW continues to assess that the Russian offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast likely aim to draw Ukrainian forces from other sectors of the front while allowing Russian forces to advance to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City.
• Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian military command may be evaluating the risks, prospects, and timeline of offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast based on the assumption that Ukraine cannot and will not be able to liberate territory seized by Russian forces. Putin's and the Russian military command's calculus about the threat of Ukrainian territorial gains is likely shaping Russia's overall operational approach to seizing territory in Ukraine.
• The limited Russian offensive operations in northern Kharkiv Oblast suggest that the resumption of US security assistance has not changed Putin's calculus or that he launched the Kharkiv effort without reassessing the operation's fundamental assumptions about Ukrainian capabilities in light of the resumption of aid.
• The directions of Russian offensive operations in the international border area suggest that Russia may be attempting to create a "buffer zone" to protect Belgorod City, as Russian and Ukrainian officials have recently stated.
• Russian forces appear to be attempting to quickly isolate the battlespace east of the Siverskyi Donets River and seize Vovchansk, a direction of advance that Russian forces may believe could threaten the Ukrainian grouping defending in the Kupyansk direction.
• Donetsk People's Republic (DNR) Head Denis Pushilin reiterated a series of Kremlin narratives intended to justify Russia's invasion of Ukraine and attempted to flatter Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian military during an interview in honor of the 10th anniversary of the DNR's founding, likely in an attempt to curry favor in the Kremlin.
• Ukrainian forces reportedly conducted successful drone strikes against a Russian oil refinery in Volgograd Oblast on the night of May 10 to 11.
• Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin submitted proposals on the composition of the new Russian government to the State Duma on May 11.
• Russian forces recently made confirmed advances in northern Kharkiv Oblast; near Svatove, Chasiv Yar, Avdiivka, and Donetsk City; in western Zaporizhia Oblast; and in east (left) bank Kherson Oblast.
• The Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) continues to highlight frontline Russian units fighting in Ukraine.

We do not report in detail on Russian war crimes because these activities are well-covered in Western media and do not directly affect the military operations we are assessing and forecasting. We will continue to evaluate and report on the effects of these criminal activities on the Ukrainian military and the Ukrainian population and specifically on combat in Ukrainian urban areas. We utterly condemn Russian violations of the laws of armed conflict and the Geneva Conventions and crimes against humanity even though we do not describe them in these reports.

• Russian Main Effort – Eastern Ukraine (comprised of two subordinate main efforts)
• Russian Subordinate Main Effort #1 – Push Ukrainian forces back from the international border with Belgorod Oblast and approach to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City
• Russian Subordinate Main Effort #2 – Capture the remainder of Luhansk Oblast and push westward into eastern Kharkiv Oblast and encircle northern Donetsk Oblast
• Russian Subordinate Main Effort #3 – Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast
• Russian Supporting Effort – Southern Axis
• Russian Air, Missile, and Drone Campaign
• Russian Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts
• Russian Technological Adaptations
• Activities in Russian-occupied areas
• Ukrainian Defense Industrial Base Efforts

Russian Information Operations and Narratives

• Significant Activity in Belarus

Russian Main Effort – Eastern Ukraine

Russian Subordinate Main Effort #1 – Kharkiv Oblast   ( Russian objective: Push Ukrainian forces back from the international border with Belgorod Oblast and approach to within tube artillery range of Kharkiv City)

NOTE: ISW is adding a section to cover Russian offensive operations along the Belgorod-Kharkiv axis as these offensive operations comprise an operational effort separate from Russian offensive operations along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line. ISW may enlarge the scope of this section should Russian forces expand offensive operations along the Russian-Ukrainian international border in northeastern Ukraine.

See topline text.

Russian Subordinate Main Effort #2 – Luhansk Oblast  (Russian objective: Capture the remainder of Luhansk Oblast and push westward into eastern Kharkiv Oblast and northern Donetsk Oblast)

Russian forces recently made a confirmed advance along the Kupyansk-Svatove-Kreminna line amid continued Russian offensive operations in the area on May 11. Geolocated footage published on May 11 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced west of Kolomyichykha (west of Svatove).[43] A Russian milblogger claimed that Russian forces also advanced one kilometer in depth towards Pishchane (southeast of Kupyansk), but ISW has not observed visual confirmation of this claim.[44] Fighting continued northeast of Kupyansk near Synkivka and Vilshana; northwest of Svatove near Ivanivka, Stelmakhivka, and Berestove; southwest of Svatove near Novoyehorivka and Makiivka; northwest of Kreminna near Nevske; west of Kreminna near Terny and Torske; southwest of Kreminna near the Serebryanske forest area; and south of Kreminna near Bilohorivka.[45]

Ukrainian forces struck an oil depot in occupied Rovenky, Luhansk Oblast on May 10. Geolocated footage published on May 10 shows a strike against an oil depot in Rovenky. [46]  Russian Luhansk People's Republic (LNR) Head Leonid Pasechnik and Ukrainian Mariupol Mayoral Advisor Petro Andryushchenko stated that Ukrainian forces likely used an ATACMS missile in the strike.[47] Ukrainian Luhansk Oblast Head Artem Lysohor stated that the Ukrainian strike caused "considerable" damage and that there are no fuel reserves left at the depot.[48]

Russian Subordinate Main Effort #3 – Donetsk Oblast  (Russian objective: Capture the entirety of Donetsk Oblast, the claimed territory of Russia’s proxies in Donbas)

The Ukrainian General Staff reported on May 11 that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian assaults in the Siversk direction (northeast of Bakhmut) near Rozdolivka (south of Siversk), Verkhnokamyanske (southwest of Siversk), and near Spirne and Vyimka (southeast of Siversk).[49]

Russian forces recently made confirmed advances near Chasiv Yar amid continued Russian offensive operations in the area on May 11. Geolocated footage published on May 10 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced north of the Kanal Microraion (easternmost Chasiv Yar) and south of Chasiv Yar near the T0504 (Bakhmut-Kostyantynivka) highway.[50] Fighting continued northeast of Chasiv Yar near Hryhorivka and Bohdanivka, near the Novyi and Kanal microraions in eastern Chasiv Yar, east of Chasiv Yar near Ivanivske, and southeast of Chasiv Yar near Andriivka.[51] Elements of the Russian 58th Spetsnaz Battalion (1st Donetsk People's Republic [DNR] Army Corps [AC]), 17th Artillery Brigade (3rd Army Corps [AC]), and the “Sarmat” Battalion of the DNR's “Pyatnashka” International Volunteer Brigade are reportedly operating near Chasiv Yar.[52] Elements of Chechen “Shustry” Detachment of “Akhmat” Spetsnaz along with elements of the Russian 4th Motorized Rifle Brigade (2nd LNR AC) reportedly continue operating near Klishchiivka (southeast of Chasiv Yar), and elements of the 27th Artillery Regiment (6th Motorized Rifle Division, 3rd AC) are reportedly operating in the direction of Stupochky (south of Chasiv Yar).[53]

Russian forces recently made confirmed advances west of Avdiivka amid continued Russian offensive operations in the area on May 11. Geolocated footage published on May 10 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced within central Netaylove (southwest of Avdiivka) and south of the settlement.[54] Russian milbloggers claimed that Russian forces advanced west of Netaylove and south of Pervomaiske in an area up to 1.5 kilometers wide and 750 meters deep, although ISW has not observed visual evidence of these claims.[55] Fighting also continued northwest of Avdiivka near Kalynove, Novooleksandrivka, Yevhenivka, Novopokrovske, Ocheretyne, Semenivka, Novoselivka Persha, and Sokil; and west of Avdiivka near Umanske, and Netaylove.[56]

Russian forces recently made confirmed advances west of Donetsk City amid continued Russian offensive operations in the area on May 11. Geolocated footage published on May 10 indicates that Russian forces recently advanced in southern Krasnohorivka (west of Donetsk City).[57] Fighting also continued west of Donetsk City near Heorhiivka and south of Donetsk City near Pobieda, Kostyantynivka, Novomykhailivka, Paraskoviivka, Solodke, and Vodyane.[58] Elements of the Russian 1472nd Motorized Rifle Regiment (68th AC, Eastern Military District [EMD]) are reportedly operating near Vodyane; elements of the 5th and 110th motorized rifle brigades (1st DNR AC) are reportedly operating near Krasnohorivka; and elements of the 103rd Motorized Rifle Regiment (150th Motorized Rifle Division, 8th CAA, Southern Military District [SMD]) are reportedly operating in the direction of Kurakhove.[59]

The Ukrainian General Staff reported on May 11 that Ukrainian forces repelled Russian ground attacks in the Donetsk-Zaporizhia Oblast border area south of Velyka Novosilka near Staromayorske and Urozhaine.[60] Elements of the Russian 57th Motorized Rifle Brigade (5th CAA, EMD) reportedly continue operating near Vuhledar.[61]

Russian Supporting Effort – Southern Axis  (Russian objective: Maintain frontline positions and secure rear areas against Ukrainian strikes)

Russian forces recently marginally advanced in western Zaporizhia Oblast amid continued fighting in the area on May 11. Geolocated footage published on May 11 indicates that Russian forces recently marginally advanced southwest of Novopokrovka (northeast of Robotyne).[62] A Russian milblogger claimed that unspecified Russian airborne (VDV) forces also seized two unspecified positions northwest of Verbove (east of Robotyne).[63] Russian forces continued assaults near Robotyne.[64] Elements of the Russian 292nd Self-Propelled Artillery Regiment (19th Motorized Rifle Division, Southern Military District [SMD]) are reportedly operating in the Zaporizhia direction.[65]

Russian forces recently marginally advanced in the east (left) bank of Kherson Oblast amid continued fighting in the area on May 11. Geolocated footage published on May 9 indicates that Russian forces recently marginally advanced within Krynky.[66] A Russian milblogger claimed that elements of the Russian 61st Naval Infantry Brigade (Leningrad Military District [LMD], formerly Northern Fleet) recaptured Nestryha Island (southwest of Kherson City), although ISW has not observed confirmation of this claim.[67] Ukrainian Southern Operational Command and Navy Spokesperson Captain Third Rank Dmytro Pletenchuk reported on May 10 that Russian forces periodically attempt to land on Nestryha Island but that Ukrainian forces continue to repel Russian forces from the island.[68]

Russian Air, Missile, and Drone Campaign  (Russian Objective: Target Ukrainian military and civilian infrastructure in the rear and on the frontline)

Russian forces conducted individual missile strikes against targets in Ukraine on May 11. Ukrainian officials reported that Ukrainian air defense shot down a Russian Kh-59/69 cruise missile near Kryvyi Rih, Dnipropetrovsk Oblast, and that Russian forces struck civilian infrastructure in Sumy City with an unspecified missile.[69] Russian sources amplified footage on May 11 purporting to show Russian forces striking a Ukrainian airfield near Manvelivka, Dnipropetrovsk Oblast with an Iskander ballistic missile.[70]

Russian Mobilization and Force Generation Efforts  (Russian objective: Expand combat power without conducting general mobilization)

The Russian MoD continues to highlight Russian units fighting in Ukraine. Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu congratulated the 26th Tank Regiment (47th Tank Division, 1st Guards Tank Army [GTA], Moscow Military District [MMD]) for its role in the seizure of Kuzmenivka, Kyslivka and Krokhmalne in Kharkiv Oblast and the 132nd Motorized Rifle Brigade (1st Donetsk People's Republic [DNR] Army Corps [AC]) for its role in the seizure of Novokalynove in Donetsk Oblast.[71]

The Russian MoD continues to delay issuing veteran certificates to former Wagner Group servicemen and convict recruits who have returned home after serving in Ukraine. Russian opposition outlet  Astra  amplified an appeal by several Wagner and Storm-Z convict recruits from Oryol Oblast to Russian President Vladimir Putin on May 11.[72] The men claimed that they have been waiting to receive their veteran certificates for over a year, but that Russian military registration and enlistment officials are unwilling to approve their applications because they do not have official military service documents from the Russian MoD. The men claimed that they know over 200 men who are not receiving the benefits that the Russian MoD promised them.  Astra  noted that the Russian government has so far failed to expunge the criminal records of many Storm-Z veterans.

Russian Technological Adaptations  (Russian objective: Introduce technological innovations to optimize systems for use in Ukraine)

Nothing significant to report.

Ukrainian Defense Industrial Efforts  (Ukrainian objective: Develop its defense industrial base to become more self-sufficient in cooperation with US, European, and international partners)

ISW is not publishing coverage of Ukrainian defense industrial efforts today.

Activities in Russian-occupied areas  (Russian objective: Consolidate administrative control of annexed areas; forcibly integrate Ukrainian citizens into Russian sociocultural, economic, military, and governance systems)

ISW is not publishing coverage of activities in Russian-occupied areas today.

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) is conducting a highly coordinated effort to promote information operations targeting the Baltic States that aim to justify future Russian aggression abroad. Director of the Russian MFA Second European Department Sergei Belyaev gave an interview with Kremlin newswire  TASS  published on May 11 in which he repeated Russian MFA Spokesperson Maria Zakharova's May 5 statements about the Baltic states almost identically.[73] Belyaev and Zakharova both claimed that Russia must not forget its "compatriots" in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania who are allegedly facing persecution and are subject to police brutality, and that Russian diplomatic missions in the Baltic states are operating under "siege conditions."

Significant activity in Belarus  (Russian efforts to increase its military presence in Belarus and further integrate Belarus into Russian-favorable frameworks and Wagner Group activity in Belarus)

Note: ISW does not receive any classified material from any source, uses only publicly available information, and draws extensively on Russian, Ukrainian, and Western reporting and social media as well as commercially available satellite imagery and other geospatial data as the basis for these reports. References to all sources used are provided in the endnotes of each update.

[1]  https://t.me/rybar/59972 ; https://t.me/dva_majors/42218 ; https://t... https://www.pravda.com dot ua/rus/news/2024/05/11/7455297/ ;

[2]  https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/map/#t:tsd;d:2024-05-10; @36.45,50.23,12.17z

[3]  https://twitter.com/blinzka/status/1789402870351081667 ; https://t.me/... https://t.me/warriorofnorth/308 ;  https://t.me/dva_majors/42257

[4]  https://t.me/mod_russia/38680 ; https://www.understandingwar.org/backg...

[5]  https://t.me/mod_russia/38680

[6]  https://t.me/rybar/59945 ; https://t.me/RVvoenkor/67926 ; https://t.me/warriorofnorth/308 ;  https://t.me/dva_majors/42257 ; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/10528 ;

[7]  https://t.me/rybar/59972 ; https://t.me/warriorofnorth/308 ; https://t.me/dva_majors/42257

[8]  https://t.me/rybar/59972 ; https://t.me/motopatriot/22728 ; https://...

[9]  https://t.me/rybar/59972 ; https://t.me/dva_majors/42265

[10]  https://armyinform.com dot ua/2024/05/11/sira-zona-ne-rozshyryuyetsya-u-sylah-oborony-rozpovily-pro-sytuacziyu-na-slobozhanskomu-napryamku/

[11]  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign...

[12]  https://t.me/zvizdecmanhustu/1853 ; https://www.facebook.com/pashtetof/posts/pfbid029JCw9iMDUPK1Xh238DzfhWBT...

[13]  https://t.me/zloyodessit/21676

[14]  https://suspilne dot media/kharkiv/743333-golovni-novini-harkova-ta-oblasti-11-travna-situacia-na-harkivsini-sogodni/

[15]  https://suspilne dot media/kharkiv/743333-golovni-novini-harkova-ta-oblasti-11-travna-situacia-na-harkivsini-sogodni/

[16]  https://t.me/zloyodessit/21676 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar051024 ; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign...

[17]  https://t.me/zloyodessit/21676 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar051024 ; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign...

[18]  https://t.me/negumanitarnaya_pomosch_Z/17598 ; https://t.me/ButusovPlus/10187 ;  https://www.facebook.com/butusov.yuriy/posts/pfbid0iReeFSR4oNMfmvGszC2JT... https://t.me/Sladkov_plus/10433 ; https://t.me/Sladkov_plus/10434 ;  https://t.me/Sladkov_plus/10435 ; https://www.facebook.com/mvs.gov.ua/...

[19]  https://isw.pub/UkrWar051024

[20]  https://isw.pub/UkrWar051024

[21]  https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-bolstering-ukraine-russia-sets-sight... ;

[22]  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign...

[23]  https://isw.pub/UkrWar021524 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar021624 ; https:...

[24]  https://isw.pub/UkrWar042024

[25]  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign...

[26]  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign...

[27]  https://isw.pub/UkrWar013124 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar042224 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar031824

[28]  https://isw.pub/UkrWar013124 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar042224 ; https://isw.pub/UkrWar031824

[29]  https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-ass...

[30]  https://x.com/AMK_Mapping_/status/1789190225945821455 ;  https://t.me/RVvoenkor/67888 ; https://t.me/frontbird/9133

[31]  https://t.me/warriorofnorth/310 ; https://t.me/dva_majors/42265 ; ht...

[32]  https://suspilne dot media/kharkiv/743333-golovni-novini-harkova-ta-oblasti-11-travna-situacia-na-harkivsini-sogodni/

[33]  https://isw.pub/UkrWar122623 ; https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign...

[34]  https://tass dot ru/armiya-i-opk/20766621

[35]  https://tass dot ru/armiya-i-opk/20766829 ;  https://t.me/tass_agency/248090

[36]  https://tass dot ru/armiya-i-opk/20766667 ; https://tass dot ru/politika/20767147

[37]  https://suspilne dot media/743625-droni-gur-urazili-naftopererobnij-zavod-lukojla-u-volgogradskij-oblasti-rf-dzerela/

[38]  https://tass dot ru/proisshestviya/20766251

[39]  https://isw.pub/UkrWar020324

[40]  http://government dot ru/news/51571/

[41]  http://government dot ru/news/51571/

[42]  https://understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-ass...

[43]  https://x.com/EjShahid/status/1789232961667113004; https://t.me/oaembr7...

[44]  https://t.me/notes_veterans/17045

[45]  https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid02pFDZ2fQGxXJZJmRNmR... https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0w99RmHnDvBAtLrjJnqd... ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid031GeDMHNiZWJRYNDrrZ... https://t.me/luhanskaVTSA/18773

[46]  https://x.com/Dmojavensis/status/1789018069337256318; https://x.com/NOE... https://t.me/obstanovkalnr/56894

[47]  https://t.me/glava_lnr_info/2404 ; https://t.me/andriyshTime/21722

[48]  https://t.me/andriyshTime/21722

[49]  https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid02pFDZ2fQGxXJZJmRNmR... https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0w99RmHnDvBAtLrjJnqd... ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid031GeDMHNiZWJRYNDrrZ...

[50]  https://t.me/creamy_caprice/5475; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeReF... https://t.me/creamy_caprice/5470; https://t.me/shofront_ua/2083

[51]  https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid02pFDZ2fQGxXJZJmRNmR... ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0w99RmHnDvBAtLrjJnqd... ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid031GeDMHNiZWJRYNDrrZ... ;  https://t.me/wargonzo/19862 ; https://t.me/z_arhiv/26768 ; https://t...

[52]  https://t.me/RVvoenkor/67893 ; https://t.me/boris_rozhin/123233 ; ht...

[53]  https://t.me/RKadyrov_95/4762 ; https://t.me/boris_rozhin/123329

[54]  https://t.me/rubpak28/159; https://x.com/giK1893/status/1789054451489136729; https://t.me/ssternenko/28408; https://t.me/creamy_caprice/5469

[55]  https://t.me/z_arhiv/2674 ; https://t.me/RVvoenkor/67883

[56]  https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0w99RmHnDvBAtLrjJnqd... ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid031GeDMHNiZWJRYNDrrZ... ; https://t.me/mod_russia/38680 ; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/10532 ; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/10544 ;  https://t.me/wargonzo/19862 ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua... https://t.me/voenkorKotenok/56161

[57]  https://t.me/creamy_caprice/5467; https://t.me/boris_rozhin/123256

[58]  https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid02pFDZ2fQGxXJZJmRNmR... ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0w99RmHnDvBAtLrjJnqd... ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid031GeDMHNiZWJRYNDrrZ... ;  https://t.me/wargonzo/19862 ; https://t.me/negumanitarnaya_pomosch_Z/1... https://t.me/dva_majors/42267

[59]  https://t.me/nm_dnr/12194 ; https://t.me/RVvoenkor/67918 ; https://t...

[60]  https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid02pFDZ2fQGxXJZJmRNmR... https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0w99RmHnDvBAtLrjJnqd... ;  https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid031GeDMHNiZWJRYNDrrZ...

[61]  https://t.me/voin_dv/8480 ; https://t.me/voin_dv/8489

[62]  https://t.me/creamy_caprice/5471; https://t.me/russian_airborne/5608

[63]  https://t.me/RVvoenkor/67889

[64]  https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid02pFDZ2fQGxXJZJmRNmR... https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid0w99RmHnDvBAtLrjJnqd... ; https://www.facebook.com/GeneralStaff.ua/posts/pfbid031GeDMHNiZWJRYNDrrZ... ;  https://t.me/mod_russia/38681 ; https://t.me/DnevnikDesantnika/10538 ...

[65]  https://t.me/boris_rozhin/123283

[66]  https://t.me/WarArchive_ua/14727; https://t.me/ze_bg1920/4372

[67]  https://t.me/boris_rozhin/123349

[68]  https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign...

[69]  https://www.facebook.com/pvkshid/posts/pfbid02kJCniuMz1JaB6TPA2pGrn2hKgc... https://t.me/Sumy_news_ODA/26251

[70]  https://t.me/rybar/59976 ; https://t.me/RVvoenkor/67920 ;  https://t.me/nm_dnr/12195 ; https://t.me/z_arhiv/26769 ; https://t.me/The_Wrong_Side/15957

[71]  https://t.me/mod_russia/38669

[72]  https://t.me/astrapress/55165

[73]  https://mid dot ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1948065/ ;  https://mid dot ru/ru/foreign_policy/news/1949465/