Research Plan

SMART: Learner Form

PSL Scientific Merit Action Research Template (SMART) Form (Research Plan)

Scientific Merit Process

Learners who are doing action research for their dissertation will use this form to go through the process of scientific merit review. The goals of this process are: (1) to facilitate the planning of the details of your action research project, (2) to ensure that the proposed project has rigor and allows for scientific merit review, and (3) to facilitate your progress through the dissertation. This is not an addition to your dissertation but a step to assist you in obtaining mentor, committee, school, and IRB approval more efficiently. You must obtain mentor, committee, and school approval of your research plan before submitting your IRB application.

Scientific Merit Criteria

The following criteria will be used to establish scientific merit. The purpose of the review will determine if the proposed project:

 

1. Contributes to society by improving a practice.
2. Documents need for change by utilizing evidence-based needs assessment.
3. Meets certain “hallmarks” of a good action research project including:
   • Action research design:
     • Defined action plan.

Scientific Merit Approval

Your completed SMART form will be approved, not approved, or deferred for major or minor revisions. Your committee will use a checklist to determine if the study meets the criteria for scientific merit and the committee will provide specific feedback designed to identify any issues related to the scientific merit that must be resolved. You will have up to three opportunities to submit this form for committee approval.

 

Obtaining scientific merit approval does not guarantee you will obtain IRB approval. The IRB review will focus on ethical issues. A detailed ethical review will be conducted during the process of IRB approval.

Recommendations for How to Use This Form

The SMART form is intended to help you and your mentor plan the design and details of your dissertation. Once your mentor approves your SMART form, your entire committee will review the form for scientific merit. After the entire committee approves your SMART form, it will be submitted for school approval. It is recommended that you use this form in a step-by-step way to help plan your design. Expect that you will go through a few revisions before your mentor and committee approve this form.

 

Tips for filling out the SMART form:

• Prepare your answers in a separate Word document for ease of editing and revision.
• Copy and paste items into the right-hand fields when they are ready.
• Retain the descriptions in the left column.
• Keep the form unlocked for ongoing editing and revision.
• Leave no blank spaces in the form. If an item does not apply to your study, type “NA” in its field.
• Read the item descriptions carefully. Items request very specific information. Be sure you understand what is asked (Good practice for your IRB application!).
• Use primary sources to the greatest extent possible as references. Textbooks (Patton, Leedy and Ormrod, and so on) are not acceptable as the only references supporting methodological and design choices. Use them to locate the primary sources.

Upcoming Milestone Steps:

 

Milestone Group 1   ·         Milestone 1: Learner Completed CITI Modules Milestone 2: School approved topic (Sections 1 & 2 of SMART form) Milestone 3: Mentor Approved Research Plan (complete SMART form)

Milestone Group 2   ·        Milestone 4: Committee Approved Research Plan ·        Milestone 5: School Approved Research Plan ·        Milestone 6: University Approved IRB ·        Milestone 7: Committee Conference Call

 

 

SMART Learner Form

SECTION #1	To be completed by learner
1.1 Learner Name	Yolanda Tucker
1.2 Learner Program	Doctorate of Public Administration
1.3 Learner Email	Yolanda811@yahoo.com
1.4 Learner Phone	301-922-1300
1.5 Mentor Name and Email	Dr. Rod Erakovich rod.erakovich@capella.edu
1.6 Committee Member #1 Name and Email	Dr. Devin Daugherty Devin.Daugherty@capella.edu
1.7 Committee Member #2 Name and Email	Dr. Cheryl Nelson Cheryl.Nelson@capella.edu
1.8 Dissertation Title	Measuring Election Performance Outcomes: An Action Research of the Prince George’s County Election Board.
1.9 Site Selected	Prince George’s County Election Board
1.10 Contact Info for Site Approver and Expected Approval Date	Alisha Alexander, Elections Administrator Tentatively Approved
SECTION #2	To be completed by learner
2.1 Project Write one paragraph that describes the action research project and the basis for it being addressed.	This research paper seeks to establish parameters for measuring election performance outcomes. It is an action research of Prince George’s Election Board, an entity that is responsible for administering efficient voting process consistent with the U.S Constitution and other State and County laws. Recent addition to the body of knowledge in electoral integrity suggests that reliable procedures are necessary to contribute to democratic legitimacy (Norris, 2014; Montjoy, 2008). While election boards usually follow consistent legal procedures in running election programs, declaration of winners is often associated with contention regarding the integrity of the electioneering process (Bowler,Brunell, Donovan &Gronke, 2015). Additionally, increasing dissatisfaction with the current election system puts to perspective the need to establish effective measures of election performance that not only meet legal parameters but also satisfy public expectations. As a result, the research indicates that an analysis of the programs, procedures, and decisions taken by the Prince George Election Board in the course of discharging its mandate will provide insight into developing acceptable measures of successful election performance. This study intends to use qualitative descriptive research design. The study population will encompass election board members at the Prince George’s County Election Board. The data collection procedure will be conducted via interviews and questionnaires. The interviews will be conducted with members of the election board staff and members of the county who volunteer in the election office. The questionnaires will also be distributed to various members of the board.  Questionnaires will be designed with both closed and open-ended questions to help the researcher to obtain detailed information about the issues that affect the public and how to improve the election process and gather opinions. Qualitative descriptive design is most appropriate for this research since stakeholders would be interested in straightforward description of research outcomes. Qualitative descriptive research is ideal when a description of a phenomenon is preferred (Lambert & Lambert, 2012) since it avoids complex interpretation of research findings (Kim et al., 2016). Research findings will be shared with stakeholders through official contacts. Furthermore, the written research report will be published in a professional journal for review.

 

 

2.2 Contribution to Society: Using citations, answer the following questions in the order provided:
1. How does your project improve a current practice?	This action research is aimed at establishing objective standards for measuring the performance of an election board in public elections at the county level. It focuses on how to improve election performance of Prince George’s County Election Board (PGCEB) consistent with established goals of the board as well as establish an educational platform where the public can be made aware of election rules and regulations. PGCEB’s plan for service delivery and performance is to ensure that they provide election services in a manner that ensures participation of all eligible voters in the county in primary and general elections (Missions and Services, 2015). They also aim to educate the public about the election process. Essentially, the board aims at increasing the number of voter turnout during elections through providing better voter education. Porter and Rogowski (2018) argue that voter turnout is influenced by the confidence voters have in the integrity of the election processes. This process starts with voter engagement and registration and culminates in declaration of verifiable results in free and fair elections (Nabatchi & Amsler, 2014). This research seeks to support this goal by aligning legal responsibilities of the board such as voter registration and supervision of elections with the public expectations.  It reasserts the legal responsibilities of the Board and recommends how public expectations of large voter turnout, openness in voting and counting, and enhancing public faith in the Board can be accomplished as measures of election performance.
2. If your action research project is successful, how could your project impact your field of interest?	As multiparty elections take root globally, public administration experts regard public confidence in election outcomes as vital to entrenching democracy and legitimacy of winners.  However, limited cross-national studies have examined how public elections outcomes can be measured including perceived electoral manipulation and post-poll management. This paper addresses this gap by exploring standards, rules, and collaborative framework between a county elections board and the public aimed at establishing agreeable standards of measuring an election outcome. Public administrators have a responsibility of providing various stakeholders including election boards with pertinent information about voters, budgetary allocations, and participation in public programs at various levels of governance. They are often advising responsible for organizations including public elections board. This project is designed to increase credibility of election boards by establishing standards of performance that satisfy legal requirements while fostering public confidence. Standards of performance will be used by the elections board to establish the level of performance that builds confidence in the election system leading to increased voter turnout and positive perception that election winners duly merited their victory (Persily & Thornburg, 2010). The study of PGCEB would develop metrics for measuring excellence in the management of public elections. The recommendations would act as a yardstick for measuring election performance in the state of Maryland and beyond. Integrating the values and aspirations of all stakeholders in managing election fosters a culture of participative approach in public administration. Muhammad, Wallerstein, Sussman, Avila, Belone, and Duran (2015) argued that public elections are primarily a function whose outcome should reflect public values. Furthermore, a collaborative approach to managing elections is crucial in entrenching the perception that the election outcome would mirror the wishes of the voter (Porter & Rogowski, 2018). This research aims to add to the goal of strengthening public confidence in institutions charged with overseeing voter registration, implications for this narrative are that election boards will adopt a macro-dimensional approach to managing elections rather that the narrow lens of satisfying basic legal requirements. High public confidence in election boards has the advantage of (1) increasing the voter turnout (Nabatchi & Amsler, 2014), (2) minimizing electoral litigation (Porter & Rogowski, 2018), and sustaining legitimacy of winning candidates (Bowler, Brunell, Donovan, & Gronke, 2015). Kerr and Lührmann (2017) add that it would entrench democratic principles at the county level that is likely to trickle to national level of governance.
3. What are the practical implications of your project? For example, what will be the impact of this project on your sample, your site location, or your workplace?	The immediate implication of this research on the PGCEBs would be to reexamine the existing rule book that governs local elections. The conduct of members of the board and employees serving in the electoral body is governed by Article 33 of the Annotated Code of Maryland. Successful implementation of the findings of this project will necessitate reengineering of organizational processes, procedures, and terms of engagement resulting in the overhaul of the established protocol for conducting county primaries and general elections (Persily & Thornburg, 2010). These changes may require establishment of a Standard Operating Manual to guide stakeholders in the election management. Fundamentally, the project would call for increased transparency in the management of the elections by embracing public participation throughout the planning phase of elections extending into the post-election management (Porter & Rogowski, 2018). It may also call for the restructuring of the election board to reflect new ideals.
2.3 Need and Evidence to Make Change Provide current information on your needs assessment or analysis for change. Include the cost-benefit analysis if indicated by design.	The 2018 elections conducted by the PGCEB were mired by accusations of inept management by the board. Voter complains included insufficient voter materials. Several voting stations ran out of ballot papers (Anderson, 2018) while other voting precincts populated by thousands of residents were supplied with only one electronic voting machine. Hundreds of eligible voters did not vote with complaints directed at the board for ineffectiveness lack of adequate preparations (Anderson, 2018). It was evident that either PGCEB does not have sufficient standards to guide the election process or the internal systems are not strong enough to guarantee enforcement of internal policies. Failure of one voter to cast a vote undermines the ideals of democracy (Porter & Rogowski, 2018). The consequence of the substandard performance in discharging their duties was the disputing of the election outcomes (Bowler et al., 2015). The public lost confidence in the board which ultimately undermined the institutionalization of democracy in the county (Kerr & Lührmann, 2017). Candidates who were eventually declared winners were left with questions regarding their legitimacy. Ultimately, the will of the people while reflected somehow in the declared results, was not seen to be upheld in courts of public opinion. The threat to democratic ideals cannot be overemphasized in bungled elections (Porter & Rogowski, 2018). The need for reevaluation and restructuring of the board to meet legal and public expectation was laid bare.
2.4 Theoretical Foundation Describe the theory or theories that serve as the backbone of your project. Provide references for each theory.	The study on effective performance metrics for PGCEB would be guided by the Economic Theory of Democracy, also called the Theory of Rational Choice. Developed by Anthony Downs, the theory creates an analogy between enterprises and political parties/election boards on the one hand and voters and consumers on the other (Downs, 1957; Hindmoor, 2005). By this design, the theory presupposes that consumers aim at maximizing utility while enterprises aim at maximizing profits. By the same token, we can theorize that voters in Price George County would aim at maximizing the utility of their vote. If the utility derived from participating in the elections is worthwhile, then it is instructional that voters would be willing to participate in future elections (Hindmoor, 2005). The role of the PGCEB in influencing voter turnout and public perception of the election process is critical. This theory resonates with this action research because of its ability to relate the performance of the board with the utility derived by the voters. This theoretical framework is based on three fundamental premises: (1) the democratic system demands a level of consistency that can reliably predict consequences of decisions ultimately determined by voters (Downs, 1957); (2) decisions made by voters are rational and reflect their self-interest in the quest to maximize individual utility (Hindmoor, 2005); and (3) a level of uncertainty exists in democratic systems allowing for multiple outcomes (Downs, 1957; Hindmoor, 2005). These premises position the election boards at the center of influencing the democratic behavior of the voters and the community at large.
2.5 Researcher Positionality ·      Insider ·      Insider with collaboration ·      Reciprocal collaboration ·      Outsider, collaboration with insiders Define your role, position, and how positionality will affect your research study.	The researcher will assume the positionality of an outsider collaborating with insiders. This position has the advantage of allowing the researcher to see properties that may otherwise be lost to the insider because of familiarization (Damsa & Ugelvik, 2017). This advantage would allow the researcher to discover valuable information that either support or disapprove the theory or working hypothesis (Muhammad et al., 2015).  Furthermore, Damsa and Ugelvik (2017) argue that outsider positionality may allow access to sensitive information in an organization because of the temporary stay. However, being an outsider requires collaboration with insiders in the process of collecting research data and developing effective channels of communications (Muhammad et al., 2015). The outsider positionality also suffers from lack of trust during initial stages of inquiry and may take long to build mutual trust.
2.6 Research Questions and Project Objectives List the research questions or project goals. These should align with the need for organizational structure or project activities and outcomes.	The following research questions will guide this research study: i.            What are the roles, responsibilities and functions of the PGCEB? ii.            What are the short-term and long-term goals of the election board? iii.            How does PGCEB measure its election performance and how can the measures be strengthened to satisfy the legal requirement and inspire public confidence. Consequent upon these research questions, the action research will seek to achieve these goals:   i.            To establish if PGCEB has satisfied its constitutional mandate in discharging its duties ii.            To establish gaps, if any, between current performance of the board and public expectations iii.        To develop operational standards that can be used as a benchmark for effectiveness in overseeing public elections at the county level in Maryland and beyond.

 

TOPIC APPROVAL

1.    At this point, seek topic approval from mentor. 2.    Mentor will submit mentored approved sections 1 and 2 to the school for approval of topic to doctoral@capella.edu. 3.    After school topic approval, complete the remainder of the SMART form.

 

References

Anderson, M. (2018). Prince George’s County Voters Faced Hours In Line Due To Ballot Shortage. WAMU. Retrieved from https://wamu.org/story/18/11/06/voters-in-prince-georges-county-face-shortage-of-ballots-hours-in-line/

Ariely, G. (2013). Public administration and citizen satisfaction with democracy: cross-national evidence. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 79(4), 747-766.

Bowler, S., Brunell, T., Donovan, T., & Gronke, P. (2015). Election administration and perceptions of fair elections. Electoral Studies, 38, 1-9.

Damsa, D., & Ugelvik, T. (2017). A difference that makes a difference? Reflexivity and researcher effects in an all-foreign prison. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1609406917713132.

Diamond, J., & Schultz, D. (2018). Democracy and the teaching of public administration.

Downs, A. (1957). An economic theory of political action in a democracy. Journal of political economy, 65(2), 135-150.

Hindmoor, A. (2005). Reading Downs: New Labour and an economic theory of democracy. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 7(3), 402-417.

Kerr, N., & Lührmann, A. (2017). Public trust in elections: The role of media freedom and election management autonomy. Journal of Public Administration.

Kim, H., Sefcik, J. S., &Bradway, C. (2017). Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: a systematic review. Research in nursing & health, 40(1), 23-42.

Lambert, V. A., & Lambert, C. E. (2012). Qualitative descriptive research: An acceptable design. Pacific Rim International Journal of Nursing Research, 16(4), 255-256.

Missions and Services. (2015)Board of Elections- 125. Prince George County Government.

Montjoy, R. S. (2008). The public administration of elections. Public Administration Review, 68(5), 788-799.

Muhammad, M., Wallerstein, N., Sussman, A. L., Avila, M., Belone, L., & Duran, B. (2015). Reflections on researcher identity and power: The impact of positionality on community based participatory research (CBPR) processes and outcomes. Critical Sociology, 41(7-8), 1045-1063.

Nabatchi, T., & Amsler, L. B. (2014). Direct public engagement in local government. The American Review of Public Administration, 44(4_suppl), 63S-88S.

Norris, P. (2014). Why electoral integrity matters. Cambridge University Press.

Persily, N., & Thornburg, M. (2010). Measuring Election System Performance.. Stephen Ansolabehere 445.

Porter, E., & Rogowski, J. C. (2018). Partisanship, bureaucratic responsiveness, and election administration: Evidence from a field experiment. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(4), 602-617.

 

 

 

To be completed by mentor
	Mentor Name	Member #1 Name	Member #2 Name	Date and reason for deferral if needed
Topic Approval
SMART Approval
First Review
Second Review (if needed)
Third Review (if needed)
Faculty Chair consult (if needed)
Notes:

 

Please attach the formal letter requesting permission and letter of approval (on letterhead) to the end of this SMART form prior to submission for School approval.

 

Mentors: Once you submit Milestone #4 – Committee Approved SMART form – please send this completed SMART form to: doctoral@capella.edu for school approval.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW

 

 

3313 mod 6

Module Six Reading Assignment Chapter 14-15

Assignment 1- Module Six Discussion Part 1

1. Locate and summarize an article related to concepts of this module’s Chapter 14-15. Discuss your article in relation to the reading (in 100 words) and cite the source of your article using APA format. (This article is NOT required to be a scholarly article however you must provide the article’s citation.)

Assignment 2- Module Six Essay Assignment

PLACE ALL ANSWERS IN THIS ASSIGNMENT ON ONE WORD DOCUMENT ONLY, IDENTIFYING EACH ACCORDINGLY.

After reading Chapter Fourteen answer the following questions in 40 words each. Place question with your answer

1. “As a leader, how might you recognize a culture gap? What techniques might you use to influence and change cultural values when necessary?”
2. “Compare and contrast the achievement culture with the clan culture. What are some possible disadvantages of having a strong clan culture? A strong achievement culture?”
3. “If you were the leader of a small technology firm, how might you imprint in people’s minds the values shown in Exhibit 14.2 for adaptive cultures in order to create a high performance culture? Be specific with your ideas.”
4. After reading Chapter Fifteen answer the following questions in 40 words each. Place question with your answer
5. “How are Kotter’s eight-stage framework for change and the appreciative inquiry method similar? How are they different? Explain.”
6. “Do you think creative individuals and creative organizations have characteristics in common? Discuss.”
7. “Why are idea champions considered to be essential to innovation? Do you think these people would be more important in a large organization or a small one? Discuss.”
8. “Planned change is often considered ideal. Do you think unplanned change could be effective? Discuss. Can you think of an example?”

 

Assignment 3- Module Six Research Assignment

Research Assignment: Using https://www.fsw.edu/library/ locate one scholarly article that recognizes the communication styles of leadership to a variety of audiences and how these skills are developed to communicate effectively. For this article prepare a summary paper as follows:

Page One Article Title: List the article publication information using APA style for reference list citations, “e.g. Smith, N (2005).  Information technology in the public sector. Technology and Public Administration Journal, 12(3), 125-136.”

 

Page Two Summary (100 words): List the article’s thesis (or hypotheses), methodology and evidence, its logic or argument, and summarizes its conclusions.

 

Page Three Evaluation (100 words): Using the article you summarized for Module 5, critique the article’s thesis (or hypotheses), methodology, evidence, logic, and conclusions from your perspective on the problem.  Be constructively critical, suggesting how the research could be better or more useful.  Be sure to cite other scholarly articles, by way of comparison and contrast, in support of your critique.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW

Bell, California

After reading about Bell, California, discuss what techniques or steps you would take to instill trust in public administration. In 500-750 words, do the following:

• Create a plan to instill trust with citizens in regard to public administration. Include specifically what action you as an administrator will take.

Use two to four scholarly resources to support your explanations.

Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW

PAD3313

Assignment 1- Module 5 Discussion Part 1

1. Locate and summarize an article related to concepts of Chapters 11-13. Discuss your article in relation to the reading (in 100 words) and cite the source of your article using APA format. (This article is NOT required to be a scholarly article however you must provide the article’s citation.)

 

Assignment 2-Module 5 Essay this all goes in same word doc

1. After reading Chapter Eleven answer the following questions in 40 words each. Place the essay questions along with your answers as a Word Doc  
2. “Why is diversity of thought important for today’s organizations? Do you think an organization can have diversity of thought if all employees are of the same race and approximately the same age and background?”
3. “Discuss ways in which low power distance as a social value among followers could affect their interaction with a leader who displays high power distance.”
4. “Why is it important for today’s leaders to develop cultural intelligence? Do you think a leader who has never had experience with people different from himself or herself can develop the ability to smoothly adapt to culturally different ways of thinking and behaving? Discuss.”
5. After reading Chapter Twelve answer the following questions in 40 words each. Place the essay questions along with your answers as a Word Doc  
6. “Lord Action, a British historian of the late 19^thcentury, said that ‘power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely,’ suggesting that a person’s sense of morality lessens as his or her poser increases. Do you agree? Considering this idea, is it ethical for leaders to try to increase their power? Discuss.”
7. “What do you consider the most important difference between transformational leadership and transactional leadership? Between transformational and charismatic leadership? How is transformational leadership similar to charismatic leadership?”
8. “Which of the four organizational frames of reference do you most admire? How do you think this frame of reference could be beneficial or detrimental to your leadership capability?”
9. After reading Chapter Thirteen answer the following questions in 50 words. Place the essay questions along with your answers as a Word Doc
10. “What is the difference between mission and vision? Can you give an example of each?”
11. “Strategic vision and strategic action are both needed for a leader to be effective. Discuss.”

Assignment 3 Module 5 Research Article

Research Assignment: Using this library https://www.fsw.edu/library/ locate one scholarly article that demonstrates an understanding of the behavioral aspects of managing human resources and the legal and policy considerations governing hiring, promotion, evaluation, grievances, discrimination, and collective bargaining. For this article prepare a summary paper as follows:

 

Page One Article Title: List the article publication information using APA style for reference list citations, “e.g. Smith, N (2005).  Information technology in the public sector. Technology and Public Administration Journal, 12(3), 125-136.”

 

Page Two Summary (100 words): List the article’s thesis (or hypotheses), methodology and evidence, its logic or argument, and summarizes its conclusions.

 

Page Three Evaluation (100 words): Using the article you summarized for Week Five, critique the article’s thesis (or hypotheses), methodology, evidence, logic, and conclusions from your perspective on the problem.  Be constructively critical, suggesting how the research could be better or more useful.  Be sure to cite other scholarly articles, by way of comparison and contrast, in support of your critique.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW

Module/Week 5 — Process Management in Public Administration

Topic: Project Management in Public Administration

Thread: After carefully reading Exercise 6 and the “Key Competencies of Public Sector Project Managers,” you will 1) explain how the Critical Path Method would apply to the issues presented in the Northway Preconstruction Planning memorandum in Form 26, and 2) describe which competencies discussed in the “Key Competencies of Public Sector Project Managers” article would best equip a public sector manager to effectively address complex public sector projects.

Replies: Respond to at least 2 classmates; explore the limits of the Critical Path Method and contrast your ideas regarding the most important competencies of public sector managers.

 

For each forum, you are required to post 1 thread of 400–500 words and 2 replies of 250–300 words. For each thread, you must support your assertions with at least 2 citations in current APA format. Each reply must incorporate at least 1 citation in current APA format. Acceptable sources include scholarly articles, public administration trade publications, statistical research, the textbook, and the Bible.

Responding to a classmate’s thread requires both the addition of new ideas and analysis. A particular point made by the classmate must be addressed and built upon by your analysis in order to move the conversation forward. Thus, the reply is a rigorous assignment that requires you to build upon the thread to develop deeper and more thorough discussion of the ideas introduced. As such, replies that merely affirm, restate or unprofessionally quarrel with the previous thread(s) and fail to make a valuable, substantive contribution to the discussion will receive appropriate point deductions.

PLACE YOUR ORDER NOW