Writing a Research Proposal: Guidelines for prospective students at University of New England, Australia
Introduction
Formal research proposals are a very important aspect of professional life, both within and beyond academia. They are the central means through which researchers obtain institutional approval to undertake a university study, secure external funding, and gain the support and approval of key stakeholders. Despite their importance, few accessible guides address the fundamentals of proposal writing within Australian history, archaeology, and cultural heritage. This guide is designed to assist prospective students at the University of New England (UNE)—particularly those wishing to work with the author—as well as students in the humanities more broadly. These kinds of documents are first encountered during your degree, often in advance of starting a dissertation-scale project such as an Honours, Masters by Research, or PhD degree. They are also important for smaller-scale research proposals, such as those required for undergraduate and postgraduate special topic, reading, or research units at UNE (e.g. HASS301, HASS505, and HASS506), as well as coursework Masters research projects (e.g. HASS518, commonly ranging from 6,000–18,000 words in length for the dissertation).
The context of research
Good research takes time—and lots of it—and should be carefully designed and thought through before it is attempted (Burke et al., 2017). Thoughtful design ensures sharp focus and a solid rationale: why undertake a study if others have already done something similar? While there can be good reasons for repeating a study, most research consumes finite resources, including people’s time (yours, your supervisors’, and other stakeholders’), funding, and equipment. It is essential to weigh the need for the research before commencing. Research can also pose risks—most critically, the risk of causing harm to human participants or communities.
Research is not solely an academic pursuit. Heritage professionals, community development planners, and many others write ‘research proposals’ whenever applying for grants or institutional resources to support a new project. Because funding and resources are competitive and finite, formal proposals help decision-makers determine which projects warrant support. If you can write a persuasive, well-structured proposal, you will be far better placed to attract the funding needed to support your work.
The university sector is usually where you learn to write a research proposal. Academic departments are where a majority of scholarly proposals are produced, driven by the progression of graduates into higher studies such as Honours and Doctoral programs. When academic departments evaluate prospective research students at this level, they do so in a context of strictly limited resources. Most departments have finite staff capacity to supervise new projects, alongside constraints on workload, physical space, and internal funding. Furthermore, not every proposed project meets the standard required for acceptance. A proposal allows reviewers to evaluate your case for access to these limited resources, demonstrating that you have a viable project design and a clear grasp of how you will execute it before you are admitted. If a proposal is weak, careless, or unfeasible, the response will likely be a swift ‘no’—or your inquiry may simply go unanswered.
Learning to write an effective research proposal is therefore essential for attaining higher-level university qualifications, as well as for securing resources for discrete projects in professional life. Your capacity to write a high-quality proposal directly determines whether you can progress into Higher Degree by Research (HDR) programs (such as Masters by Research and Doctoral degrees). Without a rigorous proposal, your project risks stalling before it even begins.
Topic selection
Deciding what research topic you should focus on can be difficult. Some students have a very clear idea about what they would like to do, while others possess only a general feeling. It is best to meet with a potential supervisor only after you have made some initial decisions about your research topic, namely:
What sub-discipline would you like to work in, and where do you see the most opportunities? Historical archaeology? Critical heritage studies? Indigenous history? Figure that out first.
Is there a particular area of research within that sub-discipline that interests you? Do not set out to research a topic that does not ‘do it’ for you! If you do not have a defined project, feel free to write to specialists who may have a topic in mind, waiting for the right student.
Are there theoretical approaches that you would like to explore further? This is especially important in larger-scale projects where extensive engagement with current or historical theoretical debates is mandatory.
Are there methods that you want to use? You may wish to learn or demonstrate a specialised methodology or analytical approach, such as spatial analysis of historical datasets or zooarchaeology. Your proposal should be shaped to reflect and extend your personal interests and career goals.
There are, of course, many other considerations when choosing a topic. A key issue to keep in mind is that all academic staff have long-standing areas of research interest, clearly outlined on staff research pages. Look at the publications we author and our current and past research projects. Is there a staff member you would like to work with and learn from? Are there staff working on questions that interest you? In most academic proposals, matching your topic to staff expertise is vitally important to finding a supervisor and having your proposal accepted. You need to do some homework here!
Components of a viable topic
A core element of any research proposal is choosing a ‘viable topic’. This is one of the more difficult tasks faced by novice researchers, particularly those coming into a Masters or Honours program, and where assistance will usually be required. What is ‘viable’ depends on the type of project you are proposing, and generally speaking you should take note of the following points:
Time and scope
You need to be able to complete the research and write the thesis within the study period. There is no sense proposing an expansive research program that cannot be completed within your available timeframe. For smaller-scale projects, such as a reading or special topic unit, a single trimester or semester might be all the time you have. For an Honours or coursework Masters project, 8–10 months is more commonly available, while Master of Philosophy and Doctoral-scale projects extend over 2–4 years. Scale your proposal realistically for the degree in mind.
Human research ethics approvals
There should be no insurmountable ethical reasons that the research should not go ahead. Ask yourself: will you be able to obtain permission to work on a collection, visit a study area, or use the methods described? Is the topic going to immediately raise ethical concerns? Obtaining research ethics approval is a surmountable task that adds substantial rigor to your work. In all cases, research proposals should explicitly address whether ethics approval will be required. If not, explain why. If you feel ethics clearance is warranted, explain why it is necessary and outline your approach. Most studies that involve ethics include one or more of the following:
undertaking interviews, oral histories, or questionnaires;
using personal information, especially of people within living memory;
conducting invasive, destructive, or sampling work on cultural heritage sites, objects, or materials (particularly Indigenous heritage places, including dating, excavation, or destructive testing);
studies that are distressing, traumatic, or carry potential risk of emotional or physical harm to participants;
using unpublished or non-public Indigenous heritage information (site records, oral histories, material culture collections);
using cultural information that is restricted to a particular gender, cultural grouping, language group, cultural seniority, or community.
Such projects almost always require both community consent and at least a low-risk institutional ethics approval. You can learn more about UNE’s ethics approval procedures and resources on the UNE Human Research Ethics page. Projects involving Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property will almost always require formal ethics approval; see also the AIATSIS guidelines (AIATSIS, 2020).
Resources
A good proposal identifies the resources needed to complete the research and demonstrates realistic prospects of obtaining them. This might include access to primary sources, archives, physical samples, specialised laboratory equipment, or a stipend to support you during your candidature. If you need funds to cover field costs, volunteer expenses, or community participant remuneration, you must state this clearly and explain how those costs will be met. Most proposals benefit significantly from including a table summarising both financial and non-financial resources required. Make it easy for your reviewers to assess feasibility!
Supervision
Some of the fastest ‘no’ responses to supervision requests I write are to unsolicited requests outside my field of expertise—such as prospective students asking to research Viking burials, Celtic symbolism, colonial architecture in India, or the European local history of an unfamiliar town. Colleagues across Australian universities share similar experiences over the years. None of these projects are accepted simply because they fall well outside our research expertise; declining them is the only responsible option.
Every university research project requires supervisory endorsement. Your proposal will be rejected if staff members feel that they are unable to adequately supervise it. Few, if any, academic departments in history or archaeology in Australia have sufficient staff to cover all possible sub-fields and specialisations.
Before drafting a full proposal, ensure your project falls within a sub-field that available staff can supervise. Review departmental staff profile pages in detail. If an expert in your sub-field is unavailable at your institution, you will need to look elsewhere.
Understand what is expected
Take time to read completed dissertations in your field and at your target degree level well before writing a proposal. This will help you understand the expected scale, methodological depth, and writing standards, which in turn helps you refine your own design. This is also important if you are unsure what these degrees entail—for example, do not apply for a PhD unless you genuinely want to spend 3–4 years of your life conducting intensive research on a topic you are excited about. If you have questions about degree requirements, consult academic staff, a Higher Degree by Research (HDR) Coordinator, or current research students, who offer the best window into student life at your prospective institution.
What is a research proposal?
The purpose of a research proposal is straightforward: to guide the research. In it, the objectives of the study are formally enunciated and the course it will take is laid out. Writing a proposal clarifies thought by determining specifically what questions will be addressed and how they will best be answered. It facilitates data generation by identifying what constitutes data for your study, and how those data will be collected, managed, and analysed. The research design should also highlight a central scholarly problem that the question addresses (G. C. Booth Colomb, 2019). Essentially, the research proposal makes your working assumptions and research plans explicit.
You may not anticipate every methodological detail or final conclusion in advance, but you should outline a coherent starting framework informed by preliminary reading before submitting. Written early, the proposal establishes a shared roadmap between you and your supervisor. It is an initial phase of the work, and there are certain things it cannot and is not expected to do:
First, it is not written in stone. No one expects that the final dissertation will replicate the initial proposal exactly. Research inevitably encounters unexpected archival discoveries, logistical adjustments, or contradictory evidence. While remaining adaptable is essential, the proposal should provide durable parameters so your research does not drift aimlessly.
Second, a proposal is not expected to hold the final answers to the questions posed. If the answers were already known, the project itself would be redundant. If conclusions are obvious before the research begins, the questions are probably too simplistic. All scholarship should aim to generate new knowledge or fresh perspectives on a particular problem.
Often, your research problem will have multiple dimensions. For instance, you might address an empirical gap at a local or regional scale while simultaneously developing, testing, or refining an internationally relevant theoretical framework. In that scenario, your project carries both regional and international significance. Make this significance explicit: who cares about your study, and why?
Formulating reasonable questions requires preliminary reading. Before writing the proposal, determine why the project matters and explore the surrounding literature. If the topic has already been investigated—as is almost always the case—examine previous scholarship and background history to identify where the actual problem lies.
To learn more about defining research problems, and the differences and similarities between practical or applied problems on the one hand, and scholarly or academic problems on the other, see G. C. Booth Colomb (2019). These authors provide an excellent overview and you should read at least the first four chapters, if not the entire book!
Why is a proposal necessary?
A research proposal is one of the most important milestones of your research journey and should be taken seriously. In academic settings, your proposal needs to compel reviewers of the merits of your proposed study to secure an admission offer, supervisory agreement, or scholarship. The proposal must demonstrate that you have the required knowledge, skills, and realistic planning to undertake the work. It also provides an opportunity to obtain robust feedback. When reviewers see value in your proposal, they will offer constructive critique to help strengthen the project rather than merely rejecting it.
Common reasons proposals are rejected outright include:
Being generated by an AI chatbot rather than representing your own authentic work. We can tell immediately. Don’t do it;
Lacking alignment with the research expertise of the supervisor, research group, or department you are applying to;
Being unfeasible due to unaddressed ethical, financial, technical, or safety constraints;
Being ‘thin’ and superficial, lacking sufficient methodological detail; and finally,
Lacking references, demonstrating inadequate familiarity with the literature.
If a proposal has merit but needs refinement, these areas will be pointed out to you. If the proposal is careless or poor, you might not receive a response beyond the virtual sound of your email hitting the rubbish bin. Academics have demanding workloads and numerous projects of their own—having already completed multiple theses and formal studies ourselves—so you need to convince us that you have done the preliminary intellectual work and have a viable project idea!
Drafting a proposal and submitting it to scrutiny offers substantial benefits:
Sharper design: Performing before a critical audience galvanises action. Hypotheses and research questions become sharper, methods are explored in greater depth, and the validity and reliability of the study are considered.
Constructive feedback: Experienced readers often suggest productive avenues you may have overlooked. Listen to their comments, even when they challenge your preconceptions. Using the proposal process to air a problem you are grappling with can generate valuable advice.
Early troubleshooting: A proposal helps identify feasibility issues early in the research process. Critical feedback is an opportunity to learn, adapt, and improve the work—not a reason to give up.
Foundation for your dissertation: Some academics claim that a strong proposal can form Chapter One of a first dissertation draft. While this may not always be true, a robust proposal represents an early down payment on conceptualising and drafting background and methodology chapters. It helps you visualise your final thesis structure and workflow.
Project management: A proposal creates timelines, milestones, and contingency plans. Use these to manage your time, energy, and steady progress toward completion.
How long should a proposal document be?
Very simply put: as long as the relevant guidelines require!
The length of the proposal varies depending on the degree or unit level. For example, PhD candidates submit two different proposals: the first for admission, and the second for confirmation of candidature at the first-year review point.
Word counts listed below exclude references and any tables, figures, or appendices, and are intended to provide a general guide only:
UNE Special Topic / Reading / Research Units (HASS301, HASS505, HASS506): 500–750 words;
Honours and Coursework Masters applicants: 500–2,000 words;
Masters by Research: 1,500–3,000 words;
PhD application for admission: 2,000–4,000 words.
For students enrolling in undergraduate or postgraduate special topic, reading, or research units at UNE (such as HASS301, HASS505, or HASS506), consult the UNE HASS Special Topic, Reading and Research Units guide. For these units, a concise 500–750 word proposal serves as a formal learning and research agreement between you and your supervisor. It confirms the proposed scope, reading schedule, assessment structure, and feasibility, as well as establishing whether any human research ethics approvals will be required prior to enrolment approval.
A word of advice: do not start off on the wrong foot with the academic panel or your supervisor by submitting a document that is too long or too short (i.e. > ±10%). Word limits evaluate your ability to write concisely and define a realistic project. If you exceed the limit or are overly brief, your application runs the risk of being returned for revision or ruled out entirely.
What should be included?
A key question when planning your proposal is: why are you doing the research in the first place? A major requirement of research is that the proposed study makes an original contribution to knowledge. It might be a small contribution, but a contribution it must make!
During thesis examination, students must demonstrate that they have carried out critical research and produced an original body of work, or synthesised existing knowledge into a new and meaningful synthesis that contributes to scholarship. You are unlikely to revolutionise the discipline or single-handedly reshape debate on a topic, but you can raise fresh questions, introduce new data, or apply innovative theoretical frameworks that build productively on the work of others.
Organisation is critical, especially at the beginning of your research. How you organise your proposal determines how your reader interprets your ideas. As an indicative format, your thesis proposal should include:
1. Cover page
This should include a title, your name, and the names of your nominated supervisors where identified. List your prior qualifications (degrees and any credentials relevant to the proposed research).
Crafting a project title can be difficult, but there is no requirement to make it anything other than a clear, informative statement of what the project is about. Your final thesis title can be refined later; at this stage, ensure your title communicates clearly what the project entails. Avoid alienating the reader with obscure jargon or pretentious phrasing.
2. Introduction
This provides a concise synopsis of the proposal. Read G. C. Booth Colomb (2019) on developing a thesis statement, and write one. Use it to open the proposal: a clear, snappy, all-encompassing statement summarising the project. Give the reader an immediate sense of your specific question, the wider problem, and the significance of the study. Briefly outline what the project involves, its timeline, study area, and any major themes that emerge. An introduction of 100–300 words is recommended.
3. Research design
This is often the most challenging part of a research proposal. Start the research design with a clear statement of your problem and topic, paraphrased differently from the introduction.
Your research problem will emerge from your literature review. The literature review is usually the largest component of a research proposal, requiring you to read widely, identify gaps, theories, and debates, and present a well-referenced account of previous scholarship (see Section 4, Literature review). Once complete, you should be able to write a concise paragraph outlining the central research problem, after which you are ready to detail your research design (Burke et al., 2017).
3a. Research questions
Identify a central question or several related questions that your study will investigate. Phrase these strictly as questions, not statements. Avoid presenting a loose list of ‘quasi-questions’ resembling unformed ideas; this signals to the reader that your core inquiry is unfocused. While Doctoral and Masters by Research proposals often feature two to three carefully articulated questions, smaller projects usually require only one primary question.
A helpful approach is to build a ‘question bank’ in your notes as you read, then winnow and refine that list down to a focused question. Mind maps are an effective tool for visual thinkers. The central research question should clearly articulate how you will address the problem.
3b. Research aims
Research aims represent your project’s ‘to-do’ list. They spell out what milestones you must achieve to address your central question in the final discussion.
Aims are not statements about methods; they describe the analytical objectives you need to achieve. For example, a historical study examining the social life of Irish immigrants on a 19th-century goldfield might include aims such as:
Characterise the pattern, pace, and context for the establishment of goldfields in the study area, in relation to local and global processes;
Explore and thematically analyse historical scholarship on the Irish diaspora in Australia;
Document popular attitudes toward Irish and other immigrants on north Queensland goldfields from the mid-1800s onward;
Complete biographical life-histories of prominent Irish families working across goldfields in the study area; and
Characterise the extent and nature of social interaction through analysis of letter books and primary archival sources.
Notice how each aim generates a specific body of work: Aim 1 requires literature review on late colonial gold mining (>1850s); Aims 2 and 3 require targeted secondary source analysis for north Queensland; and the final two aims demand intensive primary archival work. An archaeological or cultural heritage study might include spatial analysis of settlement patterns or symbolic analysis of headstones in regional cemeteries.
3c. Methodology
This section explains the methods you will adopt to achieve your aims and answer your research questions. Provide specific, detailed explanations rather than generic statements.
Your methodology should outline:
Research strategy: Will you use qualitative or quantitative data, or mixed methods? What is your broader approach to integrating various lines of evidence to answer your question?
Theoretical framework: Is there a specific theory guiding your analysis? What assumptions underpin your study? Theory often plays a central role in framing the problem from the outset.
Specific methods: Detail the steps required to generate or collect data, as well as how you will analyse those data.
Case study and context: Define the geographic, chronological, or cultural scope of your study.
Limitations and constraints: Address potential constraints affecting project feasibility—such as archival access, travel logistics, permissions, or access to physical collections. If relying on existing datasets, remember that you cannot control how others created their data—your project must account for those parameters.
Historians often focus on conceptual framing (e.g. applying Foucault’s concept of governmentality to institutional records), whereas archaeological methodologies typically combine conceptual frameworks with discrete scientific techniques (radiocarbon dating, pXRF, geochemistry, faunal analysis, or GIS). Increasingly, historians use computational text analysis on large digital corpora, while archaeologists examine archival sources to reconstruct the history of places and collections. Interdisciplinary cross-pollination is valuable; do not restrict your methodology to narrow disciplinary silos.
Look at recent completed dissertations in your field for effective methodology models. Published articles often omit detailed procedural steps that a dissertation retains. Excellent starting points include UNE’s RUNE (Research @ UNE) repository and Trove (selecting ‘Research Reports’ and ‘thesis’).
3d. Project rationale
Explain why your project is significant in relation to current scholarship. Are you applying a novel theoretical framework or analytical method to a long-standing debate? Will you generate new data offering a fresh perspective on a known problem? Why is this research needed now? Furthermore, highlight any relevance to community stakeholders—for instance, if a project addresses a priority identified by a community organisation or land council, explain that connection clearly.
3e. Collaboration, community and stakeholder engagement, and human research ethics
Very little research occurs in total isolation from the need to consult, collaborate, or navigate human research ethics. All researchers bear a responsibility to address ethical matters well before commencing fieldwork.
Collaboration outlines the wider scholarly context of your study. If your research connects with a larger, externally funded research project or community initiative, explain that support network and describe any pre-existing funding arrangements.
Community and stakeholder engagement acknowledges the necessity of consulting landholders, local councils, archives, or Aboriginal Land Councils, and obtaining formal permissions. Address who you need to consult, what approvals are required, and how you will communicate research outcomes (such as summary reports, posters, or community presentations).
If you need institutional ethics approval through UNE, you must apply early in your candidature, although you cannot submit an application before you are formally enrolled. Review the UNE Human Research Ethics page for details. Projects involving Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP) almost always require ethics review and community consultation; see also the AIATSIS guidelines (AIATSIS, 2020).
4. Literature review
The literature review identifies the scholarly problem and contextualises your research within existing scholarship. It demonstrates your command of key findings, debates, theoretical perspectives, and methodological precedents. This section typically represents 30%–50% of your proposal in length and effort. For extensive guidance on conducting literature reviews and structuring dissertations, consult key guides (e.g. Barzun, 2004; Bill Mcdowell, 2013; Bolker, 1998; A. Booth et al., 2012; G. C. Booth Colomb, 2019; Burke et al., 2017; Connah, 2010; Eco, 2015; Fagan, 2006; Hayot, 2014; Murray, 2017).
5. Timeline and resources
Provide a structured summary of major research milestones and required resources across each stage. Explicitly identifying resource needs is critical for projects involving fieldwork, travel, laboratory processing, or specialized analysis. If you plan to self-fund certain expenses, state so. If applying for higher-degree research, investigate available university research funding and specify which internal or external grants you plan to apply for and when. A realistic timeline demonstrates that you have thought your project through.
6. References
Follow the referencing conventions of your discipline; for proposals in the humanities at UNE, use either History Footnoting or APA7. While there is no rigid quota, a robust proposal typically includes 1–2 pages of references, demonstrating thorough engagement with primary and secondary literature.
Always use a reference manager. I strongly recommend Zotero over EndNote or proprietary tools, as it provides an open-source, flexible bibliographic database you can maintain throughout your career.
Do I need to find a supervisor?
Yes, but ensure you have done your preliminary research first.
The role of an academic supervisor is to guide and support your research. Because your project begins with your proposal, you should identify a suitable supervisor early in the drafting process to ensure your topic aligns with staff expertise. If your topic does not fit available expertise, your proposal will likely be declined—or returned with a request for a major topic change. Approaching a prospective supervisor early also allows them to review a draft and provide feedback, provided you allow them reasonable time to comment. Finding an engaged supervisor whose research aligns with your interests sets your candidature up for success.
Develop your proposal with a specific supervisor in mind. Review academic staff profile pages to identify scholars with relevant expertise. Take time to read relevant publications they have authored as part of your preliminary literature review, and examine the topics they teach. In some cases, academics have specific projects developed for prospective students or accept proposals only within focused themes. Make contact early—ideally two months before proposal submission deadlines. This allows time to craft a proposal that integrates with ongoing research and aligns with supervisor interests, ensuring feasibility and mutual commitment.
For more details on supervisory roles and institutional expectations, consult the UNE Supervision Guidelines.
General tips
These pointers are offered for anyone considering an Honours, Masters, or PhD project in the near- to medium-term:
Are you ready? Think carefully about whether you can commit to a research degree before applying. An Honours or coursework Masters dissertation requires at least 6–8 months of sustained research; a PhD requires 3–4 years of full-time commitment. Can you maintain focus on a single research project over that timeframe? Discuss this significant commitment with family, mentors, and academic peers.
Respect word limits. Limits exist to evaluate your ability to present a focused, disciplined research design. Adhering to guidelines shows professional competence; exceeding or falling significantly short of word counts creates an immediate negative impression.
Write a rigorous literature review. Anchor your research problem in a well-grounded literature review with careful in-text referencing. Demonstrate that you have worked hard to identify a problem of scholarly significance. A weak proposal is almost always one where the applicant has not read widely enough to articulate their problem, question, or significance convincingly.
Avoid ‘surprise’ proposals. Never submit a formal proposal without discussing your ideas with a prospective supervisor several months in advance. When making contact, provide a half-page summary of your central topic, questions, and approach so the supervisor can provide initial feedback before you invest time in a full proposal.
Do not rely on AI. Conduct your literature review yourself: search scholarly databases (Google Scholar, OpenAlex, and university library catalogues) thoroughly, read the literature, and synthesise arguments in your own voice. Avoid AI-generated prose. Academic supervisors detect AI generated text quickly, and relying on it immediately calls your intellectual curiosity and scholarly integrity into question. Demonstrate that you are an independent thinker who wants to master your craft.
Good luck!
Mick Morrison
- 2025
Acknowledgements
This guide was developed through teaching research design and proposal writing at two Australian universities: UNE and Flinders University. It has significantly benefited from ideas, collaborative teaching, and discussions with colleagues including Professor Heather Burke, Professor Claire Smith, Professor Lynley Wallis, and Professor Wendy van Duivenvoorde. The document is authored by Mick Morrison and has been developed and refined since 2017.