Research Plan
What the Plan Is For
The research plan is not a bureaucratic document. It serves two functions:
- Establish a verifiable starting point. Without it, there is no way to measure progress or identify deviations.
- Force early decisions. Writing the plan requires defining scope, method, and timeline before bad choices accumulate.
A vague plan produces vague evaluations. A plan with clear decisions allows specific feedback.
Graduate Regulations
Res. 7493/2018
The Regulations establish that every graduate student must develop a research project under the supervision of an accredited faculty member. The project must:
- Be linked to the program’s research lines
- Be feasible within the course deadline
- Contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field
The research project is the foundation for developing the dissertation (Master’s) or thesis (Doctoral), and its approval is a requirement for continuing in the program.
Research Plan in the Chemistry Program
Program Regulation 2026
The research plan is the first formal document the student must submit after admission. It establishes the foundations of the project that will be developed during the course and serves as a reference for monitoring progress.
Submission Deadline:
- Up to 60 days after first enrollment
- Consequence of non-compliance: Dismissal from program
The deadline is short because the plan should record decisions the student already made upon entering, not discoveries yet to be made.
Research Plan Structure
Program Regulation 2026
The research plan must contain the following sections:
| Section | Expected Content |
|---|---|
| Abstract | Project summary in up to 300 words, presenting the problem, objectives, and methodological approach |
| Introduction | Contextualization of the topic, presentation of the research problem, and state of the art in the field |
| Justification | Project relevance, expected contribution to the field, and motivation for the study |
| Objectives | General objective and specific objectives, in a clear and measurable manner |
| Work Plan | Description of the stages and activities to be developed |
| Timeline | Temporal distribution of activities throughout the course |
| Materials and Methods | Methodological approach, techniques, equipment, and necessary resources |
| Bibliography | References that support the project (main articles and books in the field) |
Formatting:
- Maximum length: 20 pages
- Spacing: double
What Makes a Plan Useful
Verifiable objectives: Vague objectives (“study”, “investigate”, “analyze”) do not allow knowing if they were met. Verifiable objectives have clear success criteria.
- Vague: “Investigate reaction X”
- Verifiable: “Determine the rate constant of reaction X as a function of temperature”
Realistic timeline: A timeline that ignores courses, qualification, and unforeseen events does not guide — it deceives. Reserve time for what will happen, not just for what you would like to do.
Justified methodology: It is not enough to list techniques. Explain why these techniques answer the project’s questions.
What the Program Expects from the Supervisor
The supervisor must:
- Review the plan before submission, ensuring decisions are recorded clearly
- Verify feasibility of the timeline and necessary resources
- Ensure the scope is appropriate for the course level (Master’s or Doctoral)
Plans approved without adequate review generate problems that manifest at qualification or defense.
Plan Evaluation
Regulation 2020
All students already enrolled will have until April 9, 2026 to register documentation in Sabiá. The Program will no longer use the SIAD system, but the project can be the same one submitted there. Ad hoc assessment will be replaced by the new open assessment model.
The research plan is evaluated by the advisor designated by the CCP, who verifies:
| Criterion | Question |
|---|---|
| Clarity | Are decisions explicit or just implicit? |
| Coherence | Are objectives, methods, and timeline compatible? |
| Feasibility | Can the work be completed within the course deadline? |
| Foundation | Are choices supported by the literature? |
Possible results:
| Result | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Approved | The plan is adequate |
| Needs revision | There are specific problems to correct |
| Failed | Results in dismissal from program |
When the review indicates revision, it must be clear what needs to change and where the problem is.
Program Regulation 2026
The research plan is evaluated by the advisor designated by the CCP, who verifies:
| Criterion | Question |
|---|---|
| Clarity | Are decisions explicit or just implicit? |
| Coherence | Are objectives, methods, and timeline compatible? |
| Feasibility | Can the work be completed within the course deadline? |
| Foundation | Are choices supported by the literature? |
Possible results:
| Result | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Approved | The plan is adequate |
| Needs revision | There are specific problems to correct |
When the review indicates revision, it must be clear what needs to change and where the problem is.
Project Changes
Program Regulation 2026
It is natural for the research project to undergo adjustments throughout the course, as the student deepens their knowledge of the topic and obtains preliminary results.
Permitted changes:
- Scope and methodology adjustments
- Objective refinement
- Timeline modification
Procedure:
- Changes must be agreed upon with the supervisor
- Significant changes must be communicated to the advisor
- Replanning must be recorded in annual reports
Topic change: In exceptional cases, a substantial change in the project topic may be necessary. This requires:
- Well-founded justification
- Supervisor consent
- CCP approval
- Evaluation of impact on deadlines
The problem is not changing the project. The problem is changing without recording, making it impossible to evaluate whether there was progress.