PSY 540 Milestone Three Guidelines and Rubric: Rough Draft Overview For your rough draft, you will submit a complete proposal that includes all the required elements of the final proposal and incorporates any relevant instructor feedback you received on Milestones One and Two. In your rough draft, be sure to address all the following critical elements: I. Problem Statement a) Describe the contemporary problem that is the focus of your proposal with full details with respect to your selected applied setting. Here, consider how new developments or changes in your applied setting are creating new cognition-related challenges. For instance, you might note that increased use of online education is presenting new challenges to students with ADHD. b) Identify your selected area of cognitive psychology (attention, learning, memory, language, or decision making) and appropriate foundational theories that apply to your selected problem. What are the foundational aspects of these theories, and how do they relate to your selected problem? Carrying through with the previous example, you would indicate that your area of focus is attention and identify related theories that can shed further light on the contemporary problem of attention demands on students with ADHD. c) Describe performance issues in your selected applied setting based on limitations of human cognitive systems. What are some of the specific issues related to your contemporary problem, the applied setting, and the limits of the human cognitive system? Here, you will further break down your contemporary problem and explain how the problem relates to the applied setting, what we know about cognition, and how this impacts performance. d) Create a research question that addresses potential improvements to practices in the applied setting based on the strengths of human cognitive systems. Remember that your research question should address your contemporary problem. For instance, in keeping with the previous example, you might ask, “How can changes to online learning platforms better support increased attention to course materials for students with ADHD?” II. Contemporary Relevance a) Evaluate the utility of the theories you identified when describing your problem with respect to their strengths and limitations. Here, revisit the theories you noted in critical element I, part b. How do the theories you identified further explain the problems and performance issues you identified? What are the strengths and limitations of each theory in helping to understand your identified problem? b) Which particular theory offers the greatest utility for practitioners to apply in addressing real-world issues specific to the contemporary problem you selected? Defend your selection. III. Interpretation of Research Findings: Explain how each primary or secondary resource you selected supports your research question. This is where you will apply sound methodological principles (by following the prompts below, a–b) to qualify the research results and statistical findings. a) How do the research results and statistical findings apply to your research question and your proposed improvements? b) Explain the strengths and limitations of the research results and findings in supporting the research question. This is where you will explain how the research results and findings you have reviewed support your research question and identify specific gaps in the research. In other words, in reviewing your sources, is there sufficient support for this research question? This is also where you will identify what research does not yet exist that is necessary in supporting the application of your research question. IV. Methodological Principles: This is where you will look at your research question (critical element I, part d) and determine what types of strategies or techniques you would use if you were to hypothesize improving upon the problem in your selected applied setting. Here, you might propose an experiment, a new program or initiative, or adoption of new tools/technologies. Remember, you are not limited to a controlled experiment. a) What socially responsible strategies and techniques could be used for improving upon human cognitive processes specific to your applied setting? Here, consider how you could implement your proposed solution in a way that does not further aggravate the problem or put participating parties at risk of new problems or performance issues. b) What are the implications for using these strategies and techniques? Consider, who and what about the applied setting would be impacted by this proposed solution? What would change, and how might these changes be received? V. Conclusion a) What potential future direction do you see from implementation of your research specific to addressing the contemporary problem you cited in critical element I, part a? Here, consider how implementation of your proposed solution or improvement can add to the existing body of research on your topic. How might your proposed improvements and any follow-up research prove interesting to other applied settings? Rubric Please note that the grading rubric for the rough draft submission is not identical to that of the final project. The Final Project Rubric will include an additional “Exemplary” category that provides guidance as to how you can go above and beyond “Proficient” in your final submission. Guidelines for Submission: Your rough draft should be double spaced, 12-point Times New Roman font, with one-inch margins and APA citations. Your draft proposal should be a minimum of six pages, not including cover page and references, and use preapproved resources. (The submission should include a variety of research and findings from at least three of the provided publications. Review the Final Project Document to access the list of approved publications provided for you.) Milestone 2 feedback: Nice job describing the studies, in particular, the methods sections, as well as reporting on how the results could be extended. The main areas of improvement are in discussing strengths and weaknesses and reporting on specific statistical results (e.g., p :> .05). Some methodological strengths and weaknesses you may think about are what kinds of groups were studied, measures used, and statistics. Was there a large number of participants? Are the measures validated? Did the researchers use non-parametric analyses? Reviewing the limitations section of the articles will help you look for specific things. I will be posting information about reporting on results in an announcement within the next few days. Overall, great job finding interesting, relevant studies and I look forward to seeing your next milestone!