MM/DMA Documents and Lecture Recitals

(Written by Carol A. Hess in 2007, revised in 2018 by Sarah Ann Long)

View an example of a Proposal here

View another example here

The following is an incremental plan that should help you select a topic and write a proposal for your DMA document.

1. Broad topics. To decide on a topic, try this exercise:

Jot down three topics that interest you and that you think you’d like to pursue in detail. Flesh out each topic a bit. Ask yourself about its

a. relationship to what you already know
b. broader ramifications
c. the tools you would need to answer further questions about it

Write informally on each without worries about writing style. Allowing your imagination and your musical training to take flight, write a few lines about each topic.

2. Narrowing. For each of your topics, ask three questions that interest you.

Example: Let’s say your topic is Beethoven. You might ask:

2a. At what point in his career did Beethoven become deaf?
2b. What are some of the most important pieces Beethoven wrote after becoming deaf?
2c. Does the fact that Beethoven was deaf affect the way we think of his music?

3. More narrowing. “Interrogate” each of the three questions in greater detail. For example:

3a. How might the question I have posed be divided into 3-4 subcategories of inquiry?
3b. Can any one of these subcategories be broken down further? Ideally, you will identify a manageable “problem.” Around this problem, you’ll form an argument, that is, a point of view.
3c. List any concerns or problems you might confront. Consider a possible advisor and committee.
3d. Don’t overlook the personal. Keep asking: why does this topic appeal to me? Could I live with it for many months? Do I have the necessary skills for this project? These include foreign languages, availability of sources, compatibility of your personal time-table with the demands of the topic.

Do this additional “narrowing” for each of your three topics.

4. Finding Sources. A paper depends on good sources. Part of your work is to engage with others’ reflections. For each topic and its accompany series of “narrowing” questions, find three relevant sources. Provide a bibliographic citation for each source and a brief annotation that shows the source’s relevance to the question posed. Use Chicago format (consult cheat-sheets provided in MUS 830).

Remember: as you track down sources, you are seeking out the company you will be keeping for a good many months. Do you like the authors you’ve found? If they strike you as boring, move on! There are plenty of authors out there.

5. Commitment. By now you are probably drawn to one of your topics, with its “narrowing” questions. Find 3-4 more sources for that topic only. Begin to elaborate on the following:

5a. What, exactly, is the question you will be addressing?
5b. Who else has thought about it?
5c. How can previous insights be enhanced or modified?
5d. What broader issues is it connected to?

Example: Let’s go back to Beethoven. The string quartet you’re playing with this semester is working on op. 132, which you and colleagues find perplexing. You will be glad to learn that many others have seen the work this way. At the same time, you will deepen your interpretation of this work if you understand the role the late quartets have played in our understanding of Beethoven. (This is the “broader issue.”)

NOTE: the student’s initial interest in Beethoven has suddenly ballooned into a huge topic. At this point, the adviser would encourage the student to narrow further.

6. More Sources. Continue finding and annotating additional sources. For your proposal, you will need around twenty-five. Again, use Chicago format.

7. Proposing. Draft your proposal as described below. (Note: The excerpts here are from student efforts.)

DOCUMENT PROPOSAL MODEL

Although there is no formula for writing a document proposal, you might consider the following as a possible roadmap.

Introductory paragraph. Explain your topic (research problem) in broad outlines.

Example [for a document in music history on Charles Mingus]: “The boundaries between classical music and jazz have long confounded scholars and audiences alike . . .”

You should end the first paragraph with your thesis statement.

Paragraphs 2 and 3. Bibliographic overview. In one or two paragraphs, describe what sort of work has already been done on your topic or in closely related areas. This section will give the reader confidence (1) that you have command of the literature on your subject and (2) that you are prepared to engage with existing scholarship. These two paragraphs should bristle with footnotes, showing that you have become intimately acquainted with all those sources you’ve painstakingly gathered. At the conclusion of this section, the reader should be aware of the gap (lacuna) in the literature that your document will fill.

Note that footnotes are not given in the examples in this handout.

Example [for a document on film score composers during the McCarthy period]: “To date, there are but a handful of studies on music during the McCarthy period. In her 1997 doctoral dissertation, Jennifer DeLapp discusses the effects of McCarthyism on Aaron Copland [footnote]. In another dissertation from the 1990s, Donald C. Myer devotes a chapter to McCarthyism in relation to the NBC Symphony [footnote]. In addition, a few scholars have dealt with McCarthy’s impact on visual artists [footnote, two or three sources]. Others deal specifically to Hollywood, the aspect of American culture that may well have been most deeply affected by the senator from Wisconsin [footnote, two or three sources]. Yet there is no study of the relationship between film music and the political upheavals of this period.”

This portion can also include studies you consider models or theoretical bases for your document.

Paragraph 4. Enter–your document! At this point, you “announce” how you will explore the research problem stated at the outset. (Remember, in the proposal you have not yet solved the problem, and therefore an “answer” is not expected at this point.)

Example: “This document explores the Capuchin aesthetic [you’ve just described it] in musical terms. In addition to consulting the archival sources described above, I will also observe the choir rehearsals at [Fill in name] Monastery . . .”

Paragraphs 5 and 6. Chapter breakdown. This will show that you have conceived of a logical order in which to explore your topic. Tell the reader what the main topics will be and how you envision addressing them. One sentence per chapter is usually fine. “Chapter 1, “Introduction,” sets forth . . . etc.”

For a longer DMA document (ninety pages) a five-chapter layout works well. Chapters 1 and 5, “Introduction” and “Conclusions,” need not be more than five pages each. Essentially they serve as “bookends”; chapter 1, moreover, is simply a fleshed-out version of your proposal. Every good document has a “core” chapter, where the really original ideas unfold. In the five-chapter format, this is usually chapter 4. Chapter 2 offers needed background. Chapter 3, which is a bit more flexible, links the background of chapter 2 to the “core” material in chapter 4. Of course, variations are possible, depending on your topic.

Chapter format will vary depending on the length of the document. For example, a forty-page document may be divided into two sections, roman numerals I and II, with “bookend” passages as described above.

Your proposal should be no more than three pages, double-spaced. You should also attach a detailed outline and an unannotated bibliography of at least twenty-five sources. (Some advisors require an annotated bibliography. Check with your advisor to see if they want you to have one.) You must also come up with a working title. See the checklist at the end of this handout.

PRACTICAL DETAIL:
Remember the 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 formula (research, writing, editing) discussed in MUS 830. The final third, editing, is usually the least familiar to students. Yet you can save yourself a great deal of time if you print out and edit portions of your work before turning them in to your advisor. As you write the final drafts, use the Editorial Checklists distributed in MUS 830. Allow time also for inputting figures and musical examples, cleaning up footnotes, and other clerical work. This kind of work always takes longer than one expects.

It is also helpful to purchase–and read–the following manual, which has inspired generations of writers:

Strunk, William Jr. and E. B. White. The Elements of Style. 4th ed. New York and London: Macmillan, 2000. Paperback ISBN: 0-205-30902-X .

Certainly there will be frustrating times ahead. But it is perfectly reasonable to think of eventually publishing an article version of your work. If you aspire to university-level teaching, this can greatly enhance your employment prospects. Most important will be the adventure of getting to know your own voice as a writer and of saying exactly what you want to say–with elegance and polish.
Good luck!

DMA DOCUMENT PROPOSAL:
Checklist

1. proposal text, not to exceed three double-spaced pages, with footnotes in Chicago style

2. bibliography of twenty-five sources, unannotated or annotated, depending on committee’s request and in Chicago style

3. detailed outline

4. verification of committee’s approval of proposal

(Written by Carol A. Hess in 2007, revised in 2018 by Sarah Ann Long)

View an example of a Proposal here

The following is an incremental plan that should help you select a topic and write a proposal for your DMA lecture recitals.

1. Broad topics. To decide on a topic, try this exercise:

Jot down three topics that interest you and that you think you’d like to pursue in detail. Flesh out each topic a bit. Ask yourself about its

a. relationship to what you already know
b. broader ramifications
c. the tools you would need to answer further questions about it

Write informally on each without worries about writing style. Allowing your imagination and your musical training to take flight, write a few lines about each topic.

2. Narrowing. For each of your topics, ask three questions that interest you.

Example: Let’s say your topic is Beethoven. You might ask:

2a. At what point in his career did Beethoven become deaf?
2b. What are some of the most important pieces Beethoven wrote after becoming deaf?
2c. Does the fact that Beethoven was deaf affect the way we think of his music?

3. More narrowing. “Interrogate” each of the three questions in greater detail. For example:

3a. How might the question I have posed be divided into 3-4 subcategories of inquiry?
3b. Can any one of these subcategories be broken down further? Ideally, you will identify a manageable “problem.” Around this problem, you’ll form an argument, that is, a point of view.
3c. List any concerns or problems you might confront. Consider a possible advisor and committee.
3d. Don’t overlook the personal. Keep asking: why does this topic appeal to me? Could I live with it for many months? Do I have the necessary skills for this project? These include foreign languages, availability of sources, compatibility of your personal time-table with the demands of the topic.

Do this additional “narrowing” for each of your three topics.

4. Finding Sources. A paper depends on good sources. Part of your work is to engage with others’ reflections. For each topic and its accompany series of “narrowing” questions, find three relevant sources. Provide a bibliographic citation for each source and a brief annotation that shows the source’s relevance to the question posed. Use Chicago format (consult cheat-sheets provided in MUS 830).

Remember: as you track down sources, you are seeking out the company you will be keeping for a good many months. Do you like the authors you’ve found? If they strike you as boring, move on! There are plenty of authors out there.

5. Commitment. By now you are probably drawn to one of your topics, with its “narrowing” questions. Find 3-4 more sources for that topic only. Begin to elaborate on the following:

5a. What, exactly, is the question you will be addressing?
5b. Who else has thought about it?
5c. How can previous insights be enhanced or modified?
5d. What broader issues is it connected to?

Example: Let’s go back to Beethoven. The string quartet you’re playing with this semester is working on op. 132, which you and colleagues find perplexing. You will be glad to learn that many others have seen the work this way. At the same time, you will deepen your interpretation of this work if you understand the role the late quartets have played in our understanding of Beethoven. (This is the “broader issue.”)

NOTE: the student’s initial interest in Beethoven has suddenly ballooned into a huge topic. At this point, the adviser would encourage the student to narrow further.

6. More Sources. Continue finding and annotating additional sources. For your proposal, you will need around twenty-five. Again, use Chicago format.

7. Proposing. Draft your proposal as described below. (Note: The excerpts here are from student efforts.)

PROPOSAL MODEL

Although there is no formula for writing a proposal, you might consider the following as a possible roadmap.

Introductory paragraph. Explain your topic (research problem) is in broad outlines.

Example [for a lecture recital featuring works of Charles Mingus]: “The boundaries between classical music and jazz have long confounded scholars and audiences alike . . .”

You should end the first paragraph with your thesis statement.

Paragraphs 2 and 3. Bibliographic overview. In one or two paragraphs, describe what sort of work has already been done on your topic or in closely related areas. This section will give the reader confidence (1) that you have command of the literature on your subject and (2) that you are prepared to engage with existing scholarship. These two paragraphs should bristle with footnotes, showing that you have become intimately acquainted with all those sources you’ve painstakingly gathered. At the conclusion of this section, the reader should be aware of the gap (lacuna) in the literature that your lecture recital will fill.

Note that footnotes are not given in the examples in this handout.

Example [for a lecture recital featuring Isaac Albéniz’s Iberia suite] “To date, there is little detailed discussion on the pianistic writing in Albéniz’s notoriously difficult Iberia. The most reliable study, Walter Aaron Clark’s 1999 biography, discusses the suite largely in terms of its historical significance [footnote]. Earlier studies, such as those by Henri Collet and Gabriel Laplane discuss the work in picturesque terms but without reference to Albéniz’s sonic conception [footnote]. At the other extreme is the doctoral dissertation (in theory) of Paul B. Mast, in which the author analyzes vertical sonorities in terms of theoretical models current in the 1970s [footnote].Yet no scholar has considered Albéniz’s use of texture in Iberia in any detail. Nor is there any study on the relationship between Iberia’s often dense textures and the challenges these pose to the interpreter.”

Paragraph 4. Enter–your lecture recital! At this point, you “announce” how you will explore the research problem stated at the outset.

Example: “My lecture recital will explore the presence of humor in Beethoven’s early rondos for chamber ensembles. Works to be considered will be the third movements of the Piano Trio in E-flat Major, op. 1, no. 1, the Violin Sonata in D Major, op. 12 no. 1, and the Trio for Clarinet, Cello, and Piano in B flat, op. 11. For each, I will discuss Beethoven’s use of dynamic contrast, register, and metrical shifts. I will then briefly explain how our concentration on Beethoven’s middle-and late-period works has tended to eclipse these early examples of his individual voice.”
Your proposal should be no more than three pages. You should also attach an unannotated bibliography of at least twenty-five sources. You must also come up with a working title. See the checklist at the end of this handout. (Some advisors require an annotated bibliography. Check with your advisor to see if they want you to have one.)

PRACTICAL DETAIL:
Remember the 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 formula (research, writing, editing) discussed in MUS 830. The final third, editing, is usually the least familiar to students. Yet you can save yourself a great deal of time if you print out and edit portions of your work before turning them in to your advisor. As you write the final drafts, use the Editorial Checklists distributed in MUS 830.

It is also helpful to purchase–and read–the following manual, which has inspired generations of writers:

Strunk, William Jr. and E. B. White. The Elements of Style. 4th ed. New York and London: Macmillan, 2000. Paperback ISBN: 0-205-30902-X .

 

LECTURE-RECITAL PROPOSAL:
Checklist

1. proposal text, not to exceed three double-spaced pages, with footnotes in Chicago style

2. bibliography of twenty-five sources, unannotated or annotated, depending on committee’s request and in Chicago style

3. verification of committee’s approval of proposal

4. abstract, not to exceed 300 words

Lecture-Recitals

During each lecture-recital the student should communicate meaningfully about the music to the audience by both speaking and playing. The student may speak from an outline, note cards, or Powerpoint but may not read the lecture. Each lecture-recital shall be approximately 60 minutes in length, with approximately 30 minutes of that time devoted to the lecture and 30 minutes to the music itself. The music may follow the lecture or may be interspersed throughout the lecture.

Each lecture-recital is presented twice—first to the guidance committee as part of a final oral examination and then to the public.

The final oral examination (in connection with each lecture-recital) cannot take place until the student has successfully completed all required coursework (with the exception of MUS 996 credits) and has passed the comprehensive examination in music history and theory. The student must be enrolled in at least one credit during any semester in which a final oral examination in connection with a lecture-recital is given. A student may perform two lecture-recitals in one semester.

The student’s guidance committee must approve each of the two lecture-recital proposals at least 1 month in advance of the final oral examination before the guidance committee.

The format of the final oral examination begins with a presentation to the guidance committee of the lecture-recital itself (with speaking and musical performance). The student must be prepared to perform all of the music, but may, at the discretion of the committee, be asked to perform only representative excerpts. Following the lecture-recital presentation to the guidance committee, the student must answer questions from the committee members in a coherent, thoughtful, and organized manner.

The student’s performance on the final oral examination in connection with each lecture-recital must be approved by the members of the student’s guidance committee with no more than one dissenting vote. In no case may the lecture-recital be presented to the public until the final oral examination has been approved by the committee. Should the committee fail to approve the student’s performance on the final oral examination, the student shall be allowed to repeat the examination only once. The examination must be repeated within one year, during a Fall or Spring semester. A cd or dvd of the lecture-recital will be retained by the College as part of the permanent degree record.

Cognate Area

The required cognate will consist of two courses (minimum of four credits at the 400-level or above) in addition to and beyond those courses required for the degree. Each area within the College of Music may develop and offer cognates, including—but not limited to—music theory, music history, composition, pedagogy, collaborative piano, music education, and applied music (in a secondary instrument or instruments). The student who elects the applied music cognate must audition and be approved for study at either the master’s secondary or specialist emphasis level (MUS 844-848) or the master’s performance level (MUS 850-855). Independent study courses cannot count toward the cognate requirements, but Special Topics courses (MUS 491, 891, 991) may be counted. Courses from outside the College of Music may be counted as part of a cognate area, as long as they are at the 400-level or above.

The student will develop a cognate in consultation with the advisor and the cognate area and with the approval of the guidance committee and the Associate Dean for Graduate Studies.

The composition of the guidance committee for the student who selects the Two Lecture-Recitals with Cognate option will be as follows: the major professor, a representative from music history, a representative from music theory, and a representative from the cognate area (if that area is not already represented). The guidance committee must consist of four faculty representatives, in addition to the Associate Dean for Graduate Studies who serves as an ex-officio member.

(Written by Carol A. Hess in 2007, revised in 2018 by Sarah Ann Long)

The following is an incremental plan that should help you select a topic and write a proposal for your master’s thesis (music history or theory).

1. Broad topics. To decide on a topic, try this exercise:

Jot down three topics that interest you and that you think you’d like to pursue in detail. Flesh out each topic a bit. Ask yourself about its

a. relationship to what you already know
b. broader ramifications
c. the tools you would need to answer further questions about it

Write informally on each without worries about writing style. Allowing your imagination and your musical training to take flight, write a few lines about each topic.

2. Narrowing. For each of your topics, ask three questions that interest you.

Example: Let’s say your topic is Beethoven. You might ask:

2a. At what point in his career did Beethoven become deaf?
2b. What are some of the most important pieces Beethoven wrote after becoming deaf?
2c. Does the fact that Beethoven was deaf affect the way we think of his music?

3. More narrowing. “Interrogate” each of the three questions in greater detail. For example:

3a. How might the question I have posed be divided into 3-4 subcategories of inquiry?
3b. Can any one of these subcategories be broken down further? Ideally, you will identify a manageable “problem.” Around this problem, you’ll form an argument, that is, a point of view.
3c. List any concerns or problems you might confront. Consider a possible advisor and committee.
3d. Don’t overlook the personal. Keep asking: why does this topic appeal to me? Could I live with it for many months? Do I have the necessary skills for this project? These include foreign languages, availability of sources, compatibility of your personal time-table with the demands of the topic.

Do this additional “narrowing” for each of your three topics.

4. Finding Sources. A paper depends on good sources. Part of your work is to engage with others’ reflections. For each topic and its accompany series of “narrowing” questions, find three relevant sources. Provide a bibliographic citation for each source and a brief annotation that shows the source’s relevance to the question posed. Use Chicago format (consult cheat-sheets provided in MUS 830).

Remember: as you track down sources, you are seeking out the company you will be keeping for a good many months. Do you like the authors you’ve found? If they strike you as boring, move on! There are plenty of authors out there.

5. Commitment. By now you are probably drawn to one of your topics, with its “narrowing” questions. Find 3-4 more sources for that topic only. Begin to elaborate on the following:

5a. What, exactly, is the question you will be addressing?
5b. Who else has thought about it?
5c. How can previous insights be enhanced or modified?
5d. What broader issues is it connected to?

Example: Let’s go back to Beethoven. The string quartet you’re playing with this semester is working on op. 132, which you and colleagues find perplexing. You will be glad to learn that many others have seen the work this way. At the same time, you will deepen your interpretation of this work if you understand the role the late quartets have played in our understanding of Beethoven. (This is the “broader issue.”)

NOTE: the student’s initial interest in Beethoven has suddenly ballooned into a huge topic. At this point, the adviser would encourage the student to narrow further.

6. More Sources. Continue finding and annotating additional sources. For your proposal, you will need around twenty-five. Again, use Chicago format.

7. Proposing. Draft your thesis proposal as described below. (Note: The excerpts here are from student efforts.)

 

THESIS PROPOSAL MODEL

Although there is no formula for writing a thesis proposal, you might consider the following as a possible roadmap.

Introductory paragraph. Explain your topic (research problem) is in broad outlines.

Example [for a master’s thesis in music history on Charles Mingus]: “The boundaries between classical music and jazz have long confounded scholars and audiences alike . . .”

You should end the first paragraph with your thesis statement.

Paragraphs 2 and 3. Bibliographic overview. In one or two paragraphs, describe what sort of work has already been done on your topic or in closely related areas. This section will give the reader confidence (1) that you have command of the literature on your subject and (2) that you are prepared to engage with existing scholarship. These two paragraphs should bristle with footnotes, showing that you have become intimately acquainted with all those sources you’ve painstakingly gathered. At the conclusion of this section, the reader should be aware of the gap (lacuna) in the literature that your thesis will fill.
** Note that footnotes are not given in the examples in this handout. **

Example [for a thesis on film score composers during the McCarthy period]: “To date, there are but a handful of studies on music during the McCarthy period. In her 1997 doctoral dissertation, Jennifer DeLapp discusses the effects of McCarthyism on Aaron Copland [footnote]. In another dissertation from the 1990s, Donald C. Myer devotes a chapter to McCarthyism in relation to the NBC Symphony [footnote]. In addition, a few scholars have dealt with McCarthy’s impact on visual artists [footnote, two or three sources]. Others deal specifically to Hollywood, the aspect of American culture that may well have been most deeply affected by the senator from Wisconsin [footnote, two or three sources]. Yet there is no study of the relationship between film music and the political upheavals of this period.”

This portion can also include studies you consider models or theoretical bases for your thesis.

Paragraph 4. Enter–your thesis! At this point, you “announce” how you will explore the research problem stated at the outset. (Remember, in the proposal you have not yet solved the problem, and therefore an “answer” is not expected at this point.)

Example: “This thesis explores the Capuchin aesthetic [you’ve just described it] in musical terms. In addition to consulting the archival sources described above, I will also observe the choir rehearsals at [Fill in name] Monastery . . .”

Paragraphs 5 and 6. Chapter breakdown. This will show that you have conceived of a logical order in which to explore your topic. Tell the reader what the main topics will be and how you envision addressing them. One sentence per chapter is usually fine. “Chapter 1, “Introduction,” sets forth . . . etc.”

For a master’s thesis (75-100 pages) a five-chapter layout works well. Chapters 1 and 5, “Introduction” and “Conclusions,” need not be more than five pages each. Essentially they serve as “bookends”; chapter 1, moreover, is simply a fleshed-out version of your proposal. Every good thesis has a “core” chapter, where the really original ideas unfold. In the five-chapter format, this is usually chapter 4. Chapter 2 offers needed background. Chapter 3, which is a bit more flexible, links the background of chapter 2 to the “core” material in chapter 4. Of course, variations are possible, depending on your topic.

Your proposal should be no more than three pages. You should also attach a detailed outline and an unannotated bibliography of at least twenty-five sources. (Some advisors require an annotated bibliography. Check with your advisor to see if they want you to have one.) You must also come up with a working title. See the checklist at the end of this handout.

PRACTICAL DETAIL.
Remember the 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 formula (research, writing, editing) discussed in MUS 830. The final third, editing, is usually the least familiar to students. Yet you can save yourself a great deal of time if you print out and edit portions of your work before turning them in to your advisor. As you write the final drafts, use the Editorial Checklists distributed in MUS 830. Allow time also for inputting figures and musical examples, cleaning up footnotes, and other clerical work. This kind of work always takes longer than one expects.

It is also helpful to purchase–and read–the following manual, which has inspired generations of writers:
Strunk, William Jr. and E. B. White. The Elements of Style. 4th ed. New York and London: Macmillan, 2000. Paperback ISBN: 0-205-30902-X .
Certainly there will be frustrating times ahead. But it is perfectly reasonable to think of eventually publishing an article version of your work. If you aspire to university-level teaching, this can greatly enhance your employment prospects. Most important will be the adventure of getting to know your own voice as a writer and of saying exactly what you want to say–with elegance and polish. Good luck!

 

MASTER’S THESIS PROPOSAL:
Checklist

1. proposal text, not to exceed three double-spaced pages, with footnotes in Chicago style

2. bibliography of twenty-five sources, unannotated or annotated, depending on committee’s request and in Chicago style

3. detailed outline

4. verification of committee’s approval of proposal

What is IRB?

IRB is an acronym for Institutional Review Board. This is a committee established to review and approve research involving human subjects.

The IRB office is part of the Human Research Protection Program (HRPP) which facilitates the MSU IRB review processes in accordance with federal, state, and local regulations, university policies, and ethical standards.

If you are planning to use interviews, observations, or other interactions with composers, musicians or performers for your research, you will need go through the IRB approval process. This process protects you, the individuals you are interviewing, and the university.

What do I do?

NOTE: Each research project is specialized. It is best to talk with the HRPP office for further instructions. You can also find information at hrpp@msu.edu

1.) With the assistance of your Guidance Committee, first determine if you will be using interviews, observations or other interactions with composers, musicians or performers for your research.

2.) Contact the HRPP office to determine if the research you are doing requires IRB Approval.
HRPP Office – Olds Hall, 408 West Circle Drive – Room 207 – (517) 355-2180
• irb@ora.msu.edu (IRB project specific questions, website or training suggestions, FAQs, presentations)
• irbdocs@ora.msu.edu (IRB application and attachment submissions)
3.) If your research requires IRB Approval, take the required online training (SABA) on the HRPP website.

https://train.ora.msu.edu/Saba/Web/Main/goto/CertificationDetailDeeplinkURL?certificationId=crtfy000000000001221&baseType=0&pageMode=GuestLogin

4.) Fill out the application form found on the HRPP website. College of Music students will typically use the exempt application form.

https://hrpp.msu.edu/initial-application-exempt-determination

5.) Wait for the results of the application.