Topic |
Example |
Reason |
|
Improved
Example |
Reason |
not
overly broad |
defining
human cloning |
very
broad topic to cover in 10 to 15 pages |
Better: |
the
ethics of human cloning |
narrower
and affords a pro and con position |
not
overly narrow |
using
genetic marker technology to screen embryos for Tay-Sachs syndrome |
too
specific and technical for an undergraduate paper; requires
specializiation |
Better: |
the
ethical debate about genetic screening |
broader
and affords a pro and con position |
not
too bland |
defining
genetic screening |
rather
bland (and broad) |
Better: |
arguments
for and against genetic screening in at-risk populations |
immediately
suggests an argument (pro and con) and is narrow enough for focus |
not
grounded in beliefs, but rather in evidence |
human
cloning should be banned |
topic
stems from opinion, not objective facts |
Better: |
the
ethics of human cloning |
allows
author to research and present both sides objectively, allowing for
analysis (e.g., breaking arguments up into categories) |
not
simply a fact-finding mission |
percentage
of at-risk mothers who submit to embryonic genetic testing |
narrow
topic that will lead to a fact-finding mission rather than critical
analysis |
Better: |
how
race, class, and religion are related to at-risk mothers' decision to
submit to embryonic genetic testing |
brings
in several variables, affording the author an opportunity to propose
theory |
not
impossible to form into a research question |
God's
attitudes toward cloning |
"God"
is a subjective matter of faith; topics associated with faith-based
concepts cannot be empirically researched |
Better: |
relationship
between people's religiosity and their attitude toward cloning |
can
be directly transformed into an empiral research question (What is the
relationship between people's religiosity and attitude toward
cloning?), for which data (GSS data or survyes) is accessible |