Sometimes You Eat The Research Proposals...

One of the things that annoyed me the most about my undergraduate work was when professors asked for research proposals, especially early in the semester. How can I have a research question, or even a developed thesis, when I still know next to nothing about my topic? Professors always explained this as needing to make sure we were on the right track before it was too late to restart, but it frustrated me no end. At first, my proposals were unfocused and poorly received. Eventually, I learned to lie and pretend like I had a clearly developed thesis. I made up something that sounded nice in my general field of interest, and then once I began researching I typically changed direction dramatically.

My process was always to begin with a survey text in the field I was interested in; whatever the library had on hand that seemed most interesting. I would read the whole book, cover to cover (typically the only book I would read completely for each essay) and from there I would begin to develop a much more focused thesis.

A prime example would be a paper I wrote for a fourth year class on Canadian political leaders. My proposal was not well-received at all. In fact, I think the proposal, which essentially said that I wanted to study the role of the Governor General and listed some books about Canadian political systems, came back with more writing on it from my professor than my own.

Once I started, I quickly narrowed my focus to the rare occasions in Canadian history where the Governor General had played an active role in Canadian politics. In the end the paper became about Governor General's role in the 2008-2009 parliamentary crisis, and historical precedents. By following my own process, I ended up with a focused, concise, and extremely well-received final paper. But was that more by luck than judgement? It certainly did not hurt that there is not a lot of material about the Canadian Governor General, and far less that isn't painfully dry to read, let alone write about. The same applies for the history of UofT's Scarborough Campus, one of my other favourite undergraduate essay topics. If I followed this process for a much broader topic, would I be likely to find myself too overwhelmed with information and notes to turn it into an actual paper?

I like to think not; I've followed this process so many times by now that I hope that I've refined it to the point where I can find a focus point no matter what topic I choose. But history research is a different animal from social sciences, as Luker has now made plainly clear to me, and I can certainly see how my method might not work at all in that field. Wrapping my head around a new process, especially one which may contain elements I had grown to despise, will not be easy.