Rubrics for Dissertations
Introduction.
Rubrics used to evaluate research-based dissertation most often rate each section or chapter as well as the overall document. The section ratings may be holistic or broken down into components. There are examples of rubrics for the proposal and the final dissertation, as well as for the oral defense. These rubrics focus on many of the same dimensions used to rate papers (e.g., organization, thoroughness, mechanics, format). Rubrics for Written Assignments
Lovitts (2005) argued that faculty have implicit standards for evaluating dissertations and that making them explicit in a rubric makes evaluation of dissertations more valid, reliable, and consistent. In a study of faculty members in a sample of universities and disciplines, she asked participants to characterize dissertations and their components (i.e., problem statement, literature review, theory, methods, analysis, and discussion) at four levels of quality (i.e., Outstanding, Very Good, Acceptable, and Unacceptable).
Based on her data, she developed a table of the characteristics of dissertations of differing quality. For example, outstanding dissertations were described as
- Original, significant, compelling, creative, engaging, interesting, and thoughtful
- Very well written and organized
- Synthesizing information and connecting components seamlessly
- Exhibiting mature, independent thinking
- Having a point of view and authoritative voice
- Asking a new question or addressing an important problem
- Displaying deep understanding of massive amount of complicated literature
- Making focused, logical, rigorous, and sustained argument
- Theoretically sophisticated
- Using or developing new tools, methods, approaches, or types of analyses
- Having rich data
- Using analysis that is comprehensive, complete, and convincing
- Showing significant results
- Creating a conclusion that ties the whole thing together
- Of interest to a larger community
On the other hand, unacceptable dissertations were described as
- Poorly written, having grammatical and spelling errors,
- Having a sloppy presentation
- Plagiarized or deliberately misread or misused sources
- Lacking in understanding of basic concepts, processes, or conventions of discipline
- Lacking careful thought
- Looking at a problem that is trivial, weak, unoriginal, or already solved
- Misunderstanding or missing relevant literature
- Making a weak, inconsistent, self-contradictory, unconvincing, or invalid argument
- Not handling theory well, neglecting theory, or missing theory
- Relying on inappropriate of incorrect methods
- Presenting data that are flawed, wrong, false, or misrepresented
- Using wrong, inappropriate, incoherent, or confused analysis
- Including results that are obvious, already known, unexplained, or misinterpreted
- Having unsupported or exaggerated interpretation
- Failing to make a contribution
These descriptions could be used as a basis for a rubric to rate dissertations. Lovitts concluded that such a rubric could be used as a teaching tool during the dissertation process. Distributing it to students would set clear expectations at the outset and filling it out periodically would allow the advisor and student to evaluate progress and areas for improvement. Thus, the rubric can be a tool for faculty to provide feedback and establish benchmarks against which students can subsequently evaluate their own work. It can also be used in peer review, with students evaluating the work of their peers to provide an additional source of feedback. How to Grade a Dissertation
These are example of dissertation-related rubrics developed by Alliant schools and programs.
ELM and Ed Psych CSOE dissertation
LA Clinical PsyD proposal
LA Clinical PsyD dissertation and defense
CSPP Organizational Psychology dissertation
Examples of Rubrics for Rating Dissertation Proposals
Rubrics for Assessing Dissertations Texas A&M/Commerce Thesis and Dissertation Services
Dissertation Proposal Rubric Syracuse University Graduate School of Education
Thesis/Dissertation Proposal Rubric Fresno State Academics
Examples of Rubrics for Rating Dissertations
Rubric for Evaluating Dissertations The Chicago School of Professional Psychology
Dissertation Rubric California State University/Northridge Michael D. Eisner School of Education
Dissertation Manuscript Evaluation Rubric Northcentral University Dissertation Center
Rubrics for evaluation proposal and final orals focus not only on the research itself, but also on the presentation, including how clear and organized the presentation is, how knowledgeable the student is, and how well the student answered questions.
Examples of Rubrics for Rating Oral Defense
Dissertation Defense Oral University of Mississippi Medical Center
Dissertation Defense Rubric Loyola University Stritch School of Medicine
University of Rhode Island Graduate Council Thesis/Dissertation Defense Evaluation
Inclusive Education Framework: Standardised rubrics for fairer marking
- Introduction
- What is inclusive education?
- The Framework
- Structures and Processes
- Assessment and Feedback
- Community and Belonging
- Pathways to Success
- List of Case Studies
- Video Case Studies
- Active Bystander Training
- AD(H)D support
- Building an online community of foundation year students
- Demystifying assessment and community building in Chemistry
- Diversifying the Business Studies and Marketing curriculum
- Embedding Inclusivity into Curriculum Transformation
- Gender identity inclusive Statistics teaching
- Inclusion in the Library
- LGBT Inclusive Teaching within Law
- Overcoming implicit bias through explicit representations of diversity
- Peer Assisted Study Support
- Personal supervision embedded into taught programmes
- Standardised rubrics for fairer marking
- Tackling Awarding Gaps across an Institution
- Video Assessment Instructions
- Framework PDFs to download
- Inclusive Education Checklist
- Infographic: Inclusive Assessment
- Infographic: Simple Steps for more Inclusive Education
- How does the framework help students?
- Links to other inclusive education resources
- Project Information Documentation for Ethics
- Awarding Gaps: Definitions and Targets
- Awarding Gaps: Frequently Asked Questions
- Awarding Gaps: Audit tool for programme teams
- Awarding Gaps: What can I do?
- Awarding Gaps: External Resources
- Awarding Gaps: Internal Reports and Analysis
Standardised Assessment Rubrics for Fairer Marking
Contact details.
Paula Gawthorpe
Adult Nursing
Background:
I lead the final year nursing 40 credit dissertation module which comprises of three separate components, each weighted independently. Given the large cohort size (>250 students), assessment and moderation are shared between a module team of over 20 academic colleagues. The pre-existing level 6 FHS rubric contained generic descriptors such as ‘good’; ‘exemplary’, and ‘outstanding’. Use of such terminology was open to individual interpretation and lacked clarity of meaning for students in relation to academic expectations.
It was acknowledged that this subsequently led to a lack of consistency of grading across markers, and it was also highlighted via student feedback and evaluation that there was frustration at perceived disparities between grades awarded.
Activity:
In an attempt to ensure equity across the wide group of markers, I developed a separate rubric for each component of the three-part dissertation (see example below). The rubrics contain specific and detailed content which directly related to completion of each part of the dissertation. As an example, the literature review element sections include aspects such as background, question formation, search strategy, and critical appraisal. Each section then clearly specifies, using understandable student-friendly language, what would be expected for inclusion at each grade boundary.
All rubrics were reviewed by module team members, a BJL Skills Team member, and also student representatives from four separate nursing fields. Prior to being incorporated for use in the 18/19 academic year each rubric was ‘tested’ against exemplars from two previous assessment years to ensure that grades were consistent with those awarded previously. Each year following assessment period feedback is sought from the module team to ensure quality assurance, and amendments made if indicated.
Marks are transparently allocated depending on level achieved, and an overall grade is generated. once all sections are selected by the marker as deemed appropriate. Students can use the rubric to guide their writing and can work towards achieving their desired grade / classification, with the reassurance that work submitted will be consistently graded independent of assessor.
- Example Rubric used in Nursing
Impact:
Following the introduction of specific detailed rubrics and associated guidance documents including Frequently Asked Questions, and completion Step by Step guide, the overall number of students achieving either a 2i or first classification has demonstrated a steady increase. This can be viewed in the table below:
Colleague feedback:
- I found the rubric useful, as with any tool such as this it comes down to academic judgement when applying the tool, therefore there will still be some subjective element to grading. For students this does support them to see more clearly what is expected of their work and that can only be of benefit.
- this is a great tool to support academics and students and offers a degree of transparency for how grades are awarded, which we have not previously had.
Student feedback:
- I think the rubric is extremely helpful, especially for those who want to map their grades. The information is concise and easy to understand and it serves as a good reminder of the bits we should be including. I, and my group of friends have no issues with the rubric at all. One friend commented on how readable the rubric is, and found it easy to follow. Thank you for providing it for us. It's a really helpful tool.
- The marking grids have been made clear on CANVAS and in lectures. These have helped along with the feedback on my drafts to improve my dissertation.
- << Previous: Personal supervision embedded into taught programmes
- Next: Tackling Awarding Gaps across an Institution >>
- Last Updated: Jul 7, 2023 9:25 AM
- URL: https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/inclusiveeducationframework
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Dissertation Chapter 1 - 5 Sections Rubric - Version 1 May 1, 2019 APA formatting errors. Verb tense is an important consideration for Chapters 1 through 3. For the proposal, the researcher uses future tense (e.g. "The purpose of this study is to…"), whereas in the dissertation, the chapters are revised to reflect past tense (e.g. "The
All examination documents (rubrics and written comments) must be completed regardless of the outcome of the Dissertation Defense. A copy of the completed forms (both rubrics and written comments) must be submitted to the College of Graduate Studies Dean (or Dean's designee), at the conclusion of the dissertation defense.
Rubric for Evaluation of Dissertation The following rubric is to be used for evaluation of the quality of TCSPP dissertations both at the proposal (Chapters 1-3) and defense (Chapters 1-5). Each chapter of doctoral dissertations, to be accepted at TCSPP, must achieve or be rated at Performance Level 3 or 4. Failure to meet these standards ...
Rubrics used to evaluate research-based dissertation most often rate each section or chapter as well as the overall document. The section ratings may be holistic or broken down into components. There are examples of rubrics for the proposal and the final dissertation, as well as for the oral defense. These rubrics focus on many of the same ...
The dissertation is a very acceptable piece of work, but needs that extra spark to turn it into an above-average dissertation. Seen as a whole, the dissertation is of an acceptable academic standard and deserves an average mark. Less serious revision/editing is required. The academic standard of the dissertation is sufficient to merit a pass mark.
student's dissertation examining committee. Assessment Rubric for Defense of Dissertation . Criteria High Pass (HP) Pass (P) Low Pass (LP) Fail (F) Assessment (HP, P, LP, or F) Student demonstrates ability to describe clearly a well - conceptualized problem. Demonstrates excellent ability to describe and conceptualize research problems.
A completed thesis/dissertation is . expected to be above the "developing" category in all areas. However, there is no minimum passing score associated with specific criteria. The rubric is primarily used for feedback and assessment in the thesis and dissertation proposal stages, and to guide final assessment at the dissertation defense stage.
The purpose of this grading rubric is to support your development as a scholar-researcher during the dissertation process. Your committee will use this rubric to evaluate your proposal and
1 Scientific quality and/or creative and design quality: depending on whether the Master's dissertation can be categorised as a scientifically appropriate thesis or a creative thesis with a focus on design (or both), the commission is to use the appropriate sections in the rubric during assessment.
In an attempt to ensure equity across the wide group of markers, I developed a separate rubric for each component of the three-part dissertation (see example below). The rubrics contain specific and detailed content which directly related to completion of each part of the dissertation.
Dissertation Marking Criteria - Level 7 N.B. These marking criteria are based on the QAA Framework for higher education qualification in England, Wales and Northern Ireland (2008) Structure & organisation Knowledge Application of knowledge & understanding (incl. critical reflection) Analysis (including critical evaluation) Use of source material
evaluation tool, as a guide, prior to the preparation of a thesis/dissertation proposal. 2. The rubric should be scored by the Major Professor at the time the first complete draft of the proposal is submitted. 3. The feedback provided by the scored rubric should be discussed directly with the student. 4.
Texas A & M University - Commerce, Department of Health & Human Performance - Thesis Grading Rubric. CRITERIA. Beginning = 1. Basic = 2. Proficient = 3. Mastery = 4. Significance of Topic. Topic is of little importance or unrelated to field of study. Topic will not add to the body of literature in the field of study.
Dissertation Proposal Rubric. Graduate School of Education: Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership. Dissertation Proposal Rubric: 5-part dissertation (with edits by Dannelle D. Stevens, Coordinator and Gayle Thieman, Doctoral Program Committee Member) Score every dimension: Unsatisfactory = 1; Emerging = 2; Proficient = 3; Exemplary = 4.
the dissertation. There are some errors regarding language, grammar, and spelling. ... standards of judgement for the assignment and the rubrics are showing the marking against those standards of judgement. Use cases • Where assessments where the responses are not complex (i.e. at remembering, understanding and applying levels) ...
Liberty University: A Christian University in Virginia and Online
Rubrics for Assessing Dissertations. The following links are to the rubrics that will be used to provide detailed feedback on your dissertation proposal. OTDS currently has a rubric for quantitative, qualitative, interpretive, and mixed-method research. The rubric will be completed by a Graduate Representative at your Dissertation Proposal ...
1.6 Timeframes for Dissertation Tutorials 1.7 Grading Criteria 1.8 Hard Bound Presentation and Front Cover 2. Internship Framework 2.1 Undergraduate Internship Framework 2.2 General Regulations for the Internship Framework APPENDIX 1: Sample of Content Page for Dissertation APPENDIX 2: General Dissertation Grading Criteria and Rubric
Marking rubric for School of Mathematics MSc dissertations, 2018-19. Summary of project in the abstract. Introduction to contain statements of project's aims (what they will do) and objectives (how they will do it). Overview of the underlying problem and of what the dissertation accomplishes/ reason(s) for project.
The rubric assessments and thesis grades are always agreed on by two independent examiners, of which at least one is an Utrecht University biology faculty member or approved faculty member of an affiliated department within the university and certified with at least a basic teaching qualification. ... Rubric scores and grading. The final ...
The purpose of this grading rubric is to support your development as a scholar-researcher during the dissertation process. Your committee will use this rubric to evaluate your proposal and dissertation and communicate feedback about necessary revisions that will help you complete this project. As you write, use this rubric as an outline for ...
and exposure in the process of thesis writing. Assessment Rubric A rubric is a measurement tool that describes the criteria against which a performance, behaviour, or product is compared and measured. ... expectations and grading practices. The use of a properly designed analytical assessment rubric (Dawson, 2017; Mertler, 2001; Tierney & Simon ...