AERAlpha Epsilon Rho

What’s Next? Imagining the Future.

The Society’s signature research‑and‑service program. This page documents our process as it happens — including the parts we have not decided yet.

Three phases, in order

Each year Phi Theta Kappa publishes an Honors Study Topic, and chapters conduct substantive academic research on one theme within it. The research comes first: develop a question, investigate credible sources with varied viewpoints, draw conclusions — and only then design an action that responds to what the research found.

A group of people sitting together looking at an open book.
PHASE 1

Investigate and analyze

Set research objectives, develop a question, investigate sources, draw conclusions.

PHASE 2

Act and collaborate

Identify a real problem the findings point to, then execute a plan of action.

PHASE 3

Assess and reflect

Evaluate research, action, and teamwork; assess whether objectives were met.

A chapter selects exactly one

  1. What influence will relationships and identity have on how people interact with an ever‑changing world?
  2. How will people recognize the appropriate need, time, and manner for separation and reconciliation in the future?
  3. How will people navigate the tensions between conviction and culture?
  4. How will future societies balance individual liberties and social responsibilities?
  5. How will migration and exchange influence the future of communities?
  6. In what ways will data in all forms influence decision‑making for the future?
  7. Where and how will humans live, work, and play in the future?
  8. How can humans design a better future, and what barriers stand in the way?

Our research subcommittee has not selected a theme or a research question yet. That’s deliberate. The Society’s own guidance is explicit that research informs action, and that ideas for action should not determine the research. We would rather show an honest empty section here than reverse‑engineer a research question to justify a project we already picked.

Fills in as the work happens

Not selected

Research question

Not yet selected. Developed after choosing a theme and reading into it.

Pending

Findings

Pending. Will summarize the sources reviewed and the conclusions drawn.

Pending

Action

Pending. Will describe the project we run in response, and who we work with.

Pending

Impact

Pending. Will report measured outcomes and what the team learned.

Hallmark Award entries are scored out of 100 — rigor of research (34), service and action (33), and impact (33) — with essay responses across the full application capped at 2,600 words. We will confirm this year’s exact deadline through the chapter’s Society dashboard once an advisor has access.

Choosing a theme, and reading it properly

Two ways in

Convergent
Start by brainstorming what the chapter is actually interested in, then select the theme that best fits the consensus.
Divergent
Start by selecting a theme that interests the chapter, then generate as many approaches to it as possible.

Neither is better. The choice depends on whether a chapter already has a shared interest or is starting cold.

The three-read method

Once a theme is chosen, its introductory essay gets read three times — or across three groups, which is faster and produces better argument.

  1. Read for scope. What is the central question? What is included and excluded? Highlight the sentence that best defines the boundary.
  2. Read for context. What background matters, and what gaps does the essay imply? Highlight the sentence that best explains why the theme matters.
  3. Read for action. What specific actions or constraints appear? Highlight the sentence that hints at how to approach it.

A strong research question is specific, answerable and purposeful. Specific means it focuses on a single issue. Answerable means it requires evidence to conclude. Purposeful means it leads somewhere — to an action the research actually justifies.

How the project runs

Honors in Action is not a single event. It runs across the academic year, and the Hallmark entry at the end is assembled from work done throughout it rather than written in a weekend.

  1. Now

    Subcommittee forms

    Members join the research subcommittee. No theme is selected yet — that is the subcommittee’s first decision, not ours.

  2. Phase 1

    Investigate and analyse

    Select a theme, set research objectives, review credible sources with varied viewpoints, draw conclusions.

  3. Phase 2

    Act and collaborate

    Identify how the findings manifest locally, find a real problem the conclusions point to, then plan and execute the action.

  4. Phase 3

    Assess and reflect

    Measure outcomes qualitatively and quantitatively, assess whether objectives were met, reflect on the team’s growth.

  5. Entry

    Hallmark submission

    The written entry. We will confirm the exact deadline through the Society’s dashboard once an advisor has access to it.

The rubric, out of 100

Knowing the weighting in advance shapes how a chapter spends its year. Research is the single largest component — which is the Society’s way of saying the research is the project, not a preamble to it.

Essay responses across the full application are capped at 2,600 words.

Rigor of research
34
Service and action
33
Impact
33

Honors in Action is one of five categories — see the rest