Exercises — Chapter 9: The Project Narrative / Research Approach

Part C builds your real approach section. Selected answers in the appendix.

Part A — Recall and Understand

9.1. State the threshold concept in one sentence. Why is a disclosed weakness less damaging than a discovered one?

9.2. What question does the approach answer, and what are its parts (sound, feasible, thought-through, credible)?

9.3. Explain "strategic detail" and the "wall of methods" failure it prevents.

9.4. Why structure the approach to mirror the aims? Name the two benefits.

9.5. What forms can feasibility evidence take for research vs. programs?

9.6. What makes an innovation claim strong vs. weak? Give the test.

Part B — Apply

9.7. Spend the detail. A study involves standard consent, routine data entry, and a novel measurement method. Where should the detail go, and what gets one sentence?

9.8. Write a pitfalls-and-alternatives passage. For a program whose main risk is participant attrition, write the three-part passage (pitfall, assessment, contingency).

9.9. Fix the innovation claim. Rewrite: "Our innovative, cutting-edge approach will revolutionize the field." (Invent a plausible specific.)

9.10. Place the evidence. A reviewer's biggest doubt about a project is whether the applicant can recruit a hard-to-reach population. What feasibility evidence would you deploy, and where?

9.11. Diagnose the timeline. An applicant's timeline has recruitment done in month 2 and publications submitted by month 8 for a 12-month project. What's wrong, and what does it signal?

Part C — Analyze and Create (your real project)

9.12. Structure your approach. Draft your approach with one sub-section per aim/objective (restate aim → rationale → plan at strategic detail → expected outcomes → pitfalls/alternatives).

9.13. Deploy feasibility evidence. Identify your reviewer's biggest feasibility doubt and the evidence that answers it; place the evidence there.

9.14. Write your pitfalls-and-alternatives. Identify your two or three genuine risks (ask a colleague to play skeptic) and write a passage addressing each.

9.15. State your innovation. Name specifically what's new and the advance it enables (and "why now"), or — if incremental — note which other strengths you'll lean on.

9.16. Build your timeline. Draft a realistic timeline with milestones; check that it sequences activities sensibly and builds in slack.

Part M — Mixed Review

9.17. (From Ch 8) How must the approach relate to the need/gap you established? Give the coherence rule.

9.18. (From Ch 6) What must the approach do with respect to each aim, and how does structure show it?

9.19. (From Ch 2) How does pitfalls-and-alternatives address the "two reviewer fears"?

Reflection

9.20. Learning check-in. Did disclosing a weakness feel dangerous? Write the risk you almost hid, and why naming it (with a contingency) is the safer choice.