Faculty-wide presentation

It’s worth being very precise when choosing a title.

It is important that, at the outset, you describe the thematic area and the general research interest that guides you (in short: what interests you) and from which your research question(s) are derived (see point 4). You should then explain what research has so far revealed about this general research interest and to which thematic area your research makes a contribution.

Here, you should outline what international research has achieved on this topic to date. Highlight where there is a research gap or a ‘blind spot’ in the existing literature. It is important to define the substance of this research gap and to precisely identify the challenge that you intend to address through your specific research project.

The point is not to claim that a particular research question has ‘never’ been addressed, but rather to be able to articulate and justify why this topic is of interest to (international) research. Your work should always aim to make a contribution – however small – to research.

On the basis of this identified research gap – or ‘blind spot’ – you can now formulate your specific research interest and, subsequently, your concrete research question(s): What exactly do you want to find out? To which wider context do you wish to contribute through your work?

You should also explain why this is important for educational research or subject-specific didactic research. These precise research questions are the be-all and end-all of any thesis, which essentially consists of answering these questions (methodologically and logically). It is also possible, instead of precise research questions, to formulate a precise thesis (or theses) – that is, to put forward claims which you intend to substantiate (or refute) methodologically and logically in the course of your work.

If you intend to write a cumulative doctoral thesis, it is often advisable to derive several specific research questions from an overarching research question, which you will then address in the various articles. However, the exact breakdown does not yet need to be finalised for the synopsis that you will present to the FöP.

Some research projects are theory-driven from the outset; in other words, the aim is to use the research to confirm, further develop or even refute certain hypotheses. At the start of your project – and once you have a rough overview of the state of research in your thematic area – you should nevertheless ask yourself which theoretical approaches to your research question are possible and convincing.

Theoretical foundations act as a kind of lens through which we can explain what we observe or investigate. Starting from your research interest, relevant theoretical foundations are identified and presented. If, for example, you are interested in social inequality, look for theoretical approaches that e.g. can sharpen your understanding of the origins and reproduction of social inequality. If your research interest centres on the question of why certain ideas were able to gain a foothold at particular times, we draw on theoretical tools that can, e.g. shed light on the emergence and transformation of discourses. View theory as a heuristic instrument – that is, a tool to help you make progress in your search for answers – rather than as a straitjacket into which your research project must be forced. In the case of cumulative doctoral theses, you can also establish or test different theoretical approaches in your various articles.

Your methodology, like the reference theory or theories with which you work (there is often little distinction between reference theory and methodology), is guided by your research interests. Which approach allows you to best engage with your research subject? What alternatives are there, and which do you choose, and for what reasons? In principle, methodology is the natural extension of theory: if the reference theory is your lens for seeing better or more clearly, then methodology is responsible for the various possible settings of this lens (e.g. close-ups, wide-angle). The methods, in turn, are the many small cogs that you operate to achieve your chosen setting.
‘Method’ therefore refers to everything you specifically intend to do to answer your research question (or to substantiate or refute your thesis), i.e. how you will carry out your work. It also involves setting out what material (written sources or documents, images, objects, data sets, interviews, statistics) you will use to address your research question. A first step is to consider how many sub-questions you need to break your research question down into: what exactly do you need to have worked out in detail beforehand in order to be able to answer the research question of your work at the end (or to be able to support or refute the thesis)? You have, of course, already provided one part of this, namely the state of the art. A further step is to consider how extensive your thesis might become and whether you will be forced to limit yourself to individual examples or case studies; the selection of examples or case studies must be justified. Think very carefully about exactly what you need to know, and in what order, and how you intend to – and are able to – tackle these individual steps in a manner appropriate to the subject matter, and how many sources, secondary and research literature, or empirical data collection methods you will need to do so. Key terms addressed in these methodological considerations include research and literature or journal searches, image analysis, source or data collection, contextual analysis, discourse analysis, content analysis, content summarisation, interviews, questionnaires, statistical methods, data analysis tools (including AI-supported ones), etc. In cumulative doctoral theses, the various chapters often draw on different methods.

In certain research projects, you will need to consider the extent to which your own research practice is compatible with ethical guidelines. This applies in particular to projects that involve elements of fieldwork (e.g. participatory/non-participatory observation, interviews, questionnaires) or include experiments – in other words, any research in which people (or animals) are the subjects of study. For other types of research, these considerations may be relevant if you are working with sensitive, personal data, the improper handling of which could have negative consequences for the individuals behind that data. Depending on the type of material you are working with, copyright issues may also arise – for example, you may need to obtain permission to use certain images. In particular, consider the following:

• How does your research affect the participants involved? How do you ensure that your research does not place a physical, psychological or material burden on your participants (e.g. through interview questions, conditions of participation, or the grouping of individuals)?
• How can your research participants be involved in your research? Do they have the opportunity to find out about your findings and results, or are you making decisions ‘over their heads’?
• How do you handle and store your data? How do you save the anonymity and integrity of your research participants?

If necessary, submit an application to the Ethics Committee of the University of Vienna

Draw up a rough timetable in which you set out your planned activities and targeted (interim) outcomes on a monthly or, where appropriate, termly basis. Take a critical look at it: Does one activity build on another? How will you manage overlapping commitments? What are the milestones you aim to achieve each year? A diagram might be a useful way of presenting this clearly.

Consider what risks might connect to your planned research project, and how you might manage these risks in the event of setbacks. For example:

• Source research: What is the state of the sources? Are there alternative but comparable sources that could be used as a Plan B? If there are too many sources: Is there a plan for how these might be narrowed down if necessary?
• Field research: What is the situation regarding access to the field? Who are the potential gatekeepers, and can you save multiple points of access? Would another field be a possibility if access to the first one proves impossible?

At the end, there is a formally correct bibliography drawn up in accordance with the academic citation guidelines of the relevant discipline.