Research Proposal help?

[timoteo]

I need to have my problem statement and purpose statements hashed out by tomorrow and thought I would ask some opinions Do you guys think these are well thought out or do you see some changes that need to be made. Appreciate all the help!

Problem Statement
If society has any chance of successfully reforming convicted felons, something must change in order to better facilitate their reentry into normal society. Employment barriers are the greatest obstacle in a former felons path to becoming a productive member of society. The solution to allow felons easier access to gainful employment is to disallow the unfair questioning on employment applications about felony charges.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this research is to examine what can be done to lessen the extreme rates of recidivism within the prison population and discover whether there is a direct link between recidivism and the lack of available acceptance within society.

[Jordaen]

Is it for an English class? A debate class? A politics class? A justice class? What level (high school, English 101, English 102..etc)?

Edit: since you're taking a bit, regardless of the class I don't think you should use the wording "THE solution to allow..." It sounds too concrete and implies that it's the only thing that could ever work. You could instead say "A popular solution" or "A solution that is easier to implement" or something along those lines. Something that sounds like your idea is the best but not the only idea. Based on my education, I would also mention the reasoning behind this solution at the end of your Problem Statement, such as "...about felony charges because it will one, blah blah blah, and two blah blah blah." If your instructor has specific requirements for your problem statement make sure to follow those and not what I'm suggesting >_>

[Sunseeker]

I need to have my problem statement and purpose statements hashed out by tomorrow and thought I would ask some opinions Do you guys think these are well thought out or do you see some changes that need to be made. Appreciate all the help!

Problem Statement
If society has any chance of successfully reforming convicted felons, something must change1 in order to better facilitate their reentry into normal society. Employment barriers are the greatest2 obstacle in a former felons path to becoming a productive member of society. The solution to allow felons easier access to gainful employment is to disallow the unfair3 questioning on employment applications about felony charges.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this research is to examine what can be done to lessen the extreme4 rates of recidivism within the prison population and discover whether there is a direct link between recidivism and the lack of available acceptance within society.

I have highlighted some things you will need to change or remove.
1: This makes it sound like you are unsure of what you're talking about. Try "changes must be made" or "the following must change".
2: You will need to substantiate why employment barriers are the greatest obstacle. I would suggest simply removing the value statement and simply say "an obstacle". You'll still need to substantiate it, but you won't need to prove it is the greatest.
3: "Fair" and "unfair" are moral judgements. Suggesting that one should not be asked about crimes is one thing. Suggesting that it is unfair to do so it likely impossible to substantiate. In either case you will need evidence that I suspect may be hard to come by, such as comparing businesses who ask as opposed to those who don't, you may need international information, which will call into question cultural factors.
4: Again, extreme is a value statement. You would need comparative data to say that the country in question's recidivism rates are abnormally high. I suggest simply removing the term, as lowering recidivism rates is a goal that neither requires the rates to be high or lower, just to simply exist at all.

Overall, your problem statement seems to focus on jobs, while your purpose statement seems to focus on social acceptance. I would recommend you bring the two of these into alignment, either with your purpose statement looking at employment acceptance or your problem statement to focus on social acceptance.

[timoteo]

Seriously THANK YOU for your help! I have edited my statements accordingly. I am going to try and squeeze one more question out of you, or anyone who can help!

f I chose to pick employment barriers as the basis for my proposal do you think there is enough content to be able to sufficiently write a proposal..that needs to be at least 50 pages. Keeping in mind that the proposal will have a methods chapter in which I would explain how I would carry out physical research(surveys, focus groups etc), but not perform any myself?

[Deleted]

Sorry for the many brackets, but I find it a little hard to explain things otherwise since I'm not sitting next to you.

Problem Statement

If society has any chance of successfully reforming convicted felons, something must change in order to better facilitate their reentry into normal society.

This part is vague, general, and doesn't say actually say anything. Which society are you talking about? What must change? I'd suggest something along this line:

During [concrete period], recidivism rates in [concrete country or region] were [concrete figure], an [increase/decrease] of [X percent] since [year or period] (alternatively, since [year], recidivism rates in [concrete country] have remained constant, demonstrating a lack of improvement [despite concrete laws or measures if applicable]). {Optional: this is [X percent] higher than rates in [list of developed countries]}. Additionally, according to [concrete study], [X percentage] of former convicts who do not re-offend struggle to find and maintain full-time employment, which, according to [concrete study] has [concrete consequences].

Employment barriers are the greatest obstacle in a former felons path to becoming a productive member of society.

According to whom? What evidence do you have that this is the case? What exactly do they mean by employment barriers? I know it's probably true and I'm not debating the point, but you need to provide data for all assertions of this type so they can't be questioned.

You'll want a list of contributing factors for starters. What about lack of qualifications? Lack of a permanent address? It's next to impossible to get a job if you don't have an address, which is part of what perpetuates the homelessness-joblessness cycle for a lot of people.

It's hard to formulate a statement here because I have no idea what the research says and what other aspects are in play. Do they make a sustained effort to look for work and give up in frustration? Or do a lot of them just go back to crime because that's all they know? What about people who re-offend not because they want to commit crimes, but because they want to return to prison, as they can't live on their own due to a lack of resources? What about white-collar criminals? Do they face the same difficulties or is reintegration easier because they have better support networks (i.e. families they can live with, friends and former colleagues who can help them find work, etc)? I think you might want to mention some of these things.

This is just a tiny skeleton which you should add to depending on what your research says:

[Concrete studies X, Y, and Z] suggest that [longer list of obstacles] represent significant obstacles to offender reintegration. Of these, according to [concrete studies], the difficulty of securing long-term employment is one of the main factors, along with [runner-up obstacle]. [Professors X, Y, Z] have found that [percentage] of employers are reluctant to hire former convicts, while [percentage] of jobs require thorough background checks. [Here add something about lack of national programs, if applicable, which makes the transition difficult or impossible; again, you need sources]

The solution to allow felons easier access to gainful employment is to disallow the unfair questioning on employment applications about felony charges.

A lot of problems here. "Unfair" is a value judgment of the kind you should avoid. "Felony charges" is probably inaccurate, because I imagine even people with misdemeanors might have trouble in a competitive job environment, especially if they did time for them. But I'm not exactly sure how things work in the US and whether there are things which can be erased from your record after a while, so you'll want to be very specific about the sort of criminal record which can present a significant difficulty.

The other problem is that your suggestion is very easy to argue with. Employers will argue that not being able to carry background checks has the potential to place both their employees and assets in danger, and some may bear legal responsibility for it.

It seems like a facile solution, so perhaps you should look at what countries with low recidivism and high reintegration rates are doing right. Do they offer training in prison? Do they offer extensive counseling? Do they have bridge programs like in Italy, where I think convicts can work outside during the day and return to prison for the night? This sort of program allows convicts to create a network and establish trust before they are released. They may also be able to obtain recommendations from trainers, employers, prison officers, and psychologists. What about state-run programs which offer employment to released convicts to give them a place to start?

I think you need to do some reading and propose a more complex solution, comprised of several programs working together. The only downside should be the expense, but you can justify it by explaining that it's more expensive in the long term to house and feed re-offenders than to turn them into tax-paying citizens. I'm sure you can find studies which have done the math already and can prove that an upfront investment can lead to ever-decreasing maintenance costs in the long run.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this research is to examine what can be done to lessen the extreme rates of recidivism within the prison population and discover whether there is a direct link between recidivism and the lack of available acceptance within society.

I see a disconnect between your "problem" and your "purpose." Your problem statement is actually a lot more specific, in that it identifies employment barriers as a serious factor which leads to recidivism and poor integration. Hence, your purpose should be to evaluate various programs and solutions which can improve employment prospects for former convicts, and either argue in favor of an existing one (the weak way out) or combine features to create a better one (preferable).

Basically, the link between poor acceptance and recidivism has already been established. I have no doubt that if you search a couple of databases, you can find dozens of studies based on much better research than you have the means to do and much bigger data sets than you can obtain. So what would be the point of trying to replicate their results in your little research kitchen? You should take their data and interpret it and see if you can think of viable solutions which haven't been implemented yet.

__________________________________________________________________________________________ __

My main piece of advice would be to do your research first, at least in terms of background reading (review of critical literature). You should know what has been studied thoroughly, what everyone agrees on, what has not been studied sufficiently, what's considered controversial, what the main positions are, etc.

What you may discover during research may completely surprise you and may alter your approach significantly, including the way you design your own methodologies. It's counter-intuitive to do it otherwise because you're basically pulling things out of your butt and making assumptions which may not even be true.

Lastly, regarding your topic, you might also want to consider the consequences of privatization on the US prison system. This will probably help you understand that one of the massive obstacles to prison reform is the fact that a lot of companies profit from prisons operating at full capacity at all times and that these companies probably enjoy a great deal of political support. If a lot of convicts become stable, law-abiding citizens, then there are fewer prisoners to house, feed, clothe, etc. at the government's expense.

Therefore, any solution you design must take into account their opposition and attempt to use it constructively. The only way you can fight them is via new legislation, but legislation opposed to their interests will be undermined by the politicians they finance. A contrary approach will not work unless you want to reform the entire political system. Hence, if you can't fight them, you need to throw them a bone. To get them on board with your programs, you need to give them something to do, i.e. services they can continue to provide so they can still profit even if the prison population decreases. I'm not sure that's even possible, but it's just a college paper and no one expects you to really solve the world's problems. But still, an honest attempt to understand your obstacles and offer some sort of compromise will go some way in showing that you've considered all angles.