You are on page 1of 4

Revision 1

EVALUATION FORM : DISERTATION II (BCM653)

SUPERVISOR:
STUDENT NAME:

STUDENT No.:

0 = disagree ; 1=agree very little; 2: little agree; 3: moderately agree 4: Highly agree; 5: Totally agree

Section No Proposed Amended Criteria Scale Score percent weightage marks Remarks
1 The dissertation is the candidate’s own work 0 1 2 3 4
5
2 There is evidence of originality in the research topic 0 1 2 3 4
5
OVERALL CRITERIA 3 The study add to existing knowledge of the subject 0 1 2 3 4 0.0 0 0.0
5
4 The study is worth publishing as a research journal article 0 1 2 3 4
or conference paper 5
1 The title uses correct grammar, contains important 0 1 2 3 4
keywords and shows the actual research issues 5
2 The abstract accurately reflects the study. (The abstract
contains (a) brief statement of the problem or objectives 0 1 2 3 4
(b) concise description of research method (sample, data 5
collection/experiment method, data analysis method) and
(c) summary of the major findings)
3 The problem statement is clearly stated
0 1 2 3 4
(stated in clear terms in question form)
1. INTRODUCTION 5 0.0 10 0.0
4 The problem statement shows a cause-and-effect 0 1 2 3 4
relationship between variables in the problem or issue 5
5 The problem statement is supported by relevant and 0 1 2 3 4
current literature references 5
6 The objectives are clearly stated and relevant to aim, i.e.
suitable specific key words are used. Objectives are 0 1 2 3 4
relevant to the research aim 5

7 The objectives are related to the problem statement 0 1 2 3 4


5

Prepared by; Dissertation Committee


Designed by: IR 1
Revised by: MHA
Revision 1

Section No Proposed Amended Criteria Scale Score percent weightage marks Remarks
1 The literature review is relevant to the research objectives
(the candidate has a general understanding of the 0 1 2 3 4
relevant field and how these literature relates to the 5
research)
2 The literature review is sufficient with past and mostly 0 1 2 3 4
current literature. Minimum 12 nos. past research articles 5
from scholarly journals.
3 The relevant main points of the articles for the literature 0 1 2 3 4
review are well described, summarised, organised and 5
consistent with the sequence of the research
issues/objectives
4 The variables measured in the research clearly explained 0 1 2 3 4
(QUANT) / The variables relevant in the research are 5
2. LITERATURE clearly explained (QUAL)
5 The literature review is of suitable proportion to the rest of 0 1 2 3 4 0.0 20 0.0
REVIEW the dissertation 5
6 The text book materials are kept to minimum (i.e., less 0 1 2 3 4
than 10 percent of references are from text books) 5
7 There is evidence of critical appraisal of relevant past 0 1 2 3 4
research and writings (the review should not just describe 5
other past research and writings)
8 There is a summary of the essential features of other past 0 1 2 3 4
research and writings relevant to this study 5
9 The dissertation indicates that there are gaps/flaws in the
existing literature that can be remedied
1 The population to whom the results are to apply are 0 1 2 3 4
clearly identified and described 5
2 The population are selected from appropriate /reliable 0 1 2 3 4
sources 5
3 The measuring instrument is relevant to the objectives. 0 1 2 3 4
The measuring instrument is also described (ie. 5
Questionnaire contents (QUANT), interview questions and
procedure (QUAL), experimental equipment and
procedure (EXP))
4 The research design (e.g., sample size, choice of data 0 1 2 3 4
collection and analysis methods, etc) are suitable and 5
appropriate to meet the specified objectives
5 Precautions were taken from getting biased results 0 1 2 3 4
3. METHODOLOGY (QUANT/EXP) / Strategies were taken to prevent 5 0.0 15 0.0
misintepretation of data (QUAL)

Prepared by; Dissertation Committee


Designed by: IR 2
Revised by: MHA
Revision 1

Section
3. METHODOLOGY No Proposed Amended Criteria Scale Score percent
0.0 weightage
15 marks
0.0 Remarks
6 There is awareness of the limitations of research design. 0 1 2 3 4
The strengths and weaknesses of chosen research design 5
are described
7 The methodology for data collection is appropriate. In the 0 1 2 3 4
circumstances, the best design has been taken. (The 5
candidate has given an adequate justification for the
design used)
8 The chosen data collection and analysis methods have 0 1 2 3 4
relevant and sufficient references 5
9 The data analysis techniques is described clearly 0 1 2 3 4
5
10 From the description given in the methodology, It is 0 1 2 3 4
possible for other people to replicate (repeat) the 5
research. There is an account of the conditions under
which the data were collected
1 The appropriate statistics/ qualitative analysis techniques 0 1 2 3 4
were appropriately used (the level and form of analysis 5
are appropriate for the data)
2 The results are presented using appropriate tables and 0 1 2 3 4
charts (QUANT/EXP) / The results were presented using 5
suitable verbatim and paraphrased excerpts from the
transcripts (QUAL)
3 The results obtained from the analysis are relevant with 0 1 2 3 4
the stated objectives 5
4 The interpretation of the findings are logical and 0 1 2 3 4
acceptable within the context of the issues 5
4. ANALYSIS 5 The candidate shows that he had thought through the 0 1 2 3 4 0 25 0.0
implications of the findings (the candidate shows ability to 5
appropriately relate the results to the past findings,
writings and problem statement )
6 The discussion of the findings of the study in relation to 0 1 2 3 4
previous research findings, theories and writings was 5
done well (i.e. The candidate indicates correctly whether
the findings are 'similar' with previous research findings
or not. If the results are different from past research
findings, the candidate suggest suitable reasons (with
references) for the differences)
7 The candidate has shown the main points from the 0 1 2 3 4
analysis results and discuss these points. 5

Prepared by; Dissertation Committee


Designed by: IR 3
Revised by: MHA
Revision 1

Section No Proposed Amended Criteria Scale Score percent weightage marks Remarks
1 The conclusions match with the objectives/research 0 1 2 3 4
questions stated in the introduction. (The conclusions 5
obtained are relevant to the research questions/objective
posed)
2 The conclusions follow from the results reported 0 1 2 3 4
(i.e. statistically significant findings are 5
5. CONCLUSION & stated (QUANT / EXP) / categories, theme or hypothesis 0.0 10 0.0
RECOMMENDATION are stated (QUAL))
3 The limitations of the conclusions are clearly indicated 0 1 2 3 4
(There is description of the degree of the findings' 5
truthfulness' considering the research scope, research
methodology, sources of bias, etc)
4 Recommendations for further research are presented and 0 1 2 3 4
are relevant to the discussion of findings 5
1 The sequence of the chapters and sections in each 0 1 2 3 4
chapter helps in better understanding of research issues 5
2 The tables and figures are properly labelled, numbered 0 1 2 3 4
and placed in the appropriate sequence and section of the 5
dissertition
3 The figures, especially photograph are clearly reproduced 0 1 2 3 4
5
4 The standard of literary presentation is suitable i.e. text 0 1 2 3 4
good grammar, clear and no spelling errors. The style of 5
6. PRESENTATION language used is suitable to describe the research 0.0 10 0.0

5 The standard format of references and citation is followed 0 1 2 3 4


(i.e. American Psychological Association format) 5
throughout the dissertation
6 The reference list is extensive and included current 0 1 2 3 4
references 5
7 All references cited in the text are in the reference list. All 0 1 2 3 4
references in the list are found cited in the text 5

7. SUPERVISION 1 The candidate regularly consults the supervisor 0 1 2 3 4 0.0 10 0.0


5
Total 100 0.0

Prepared by; Dissertation Committee


Designed by: IR 4
Revised by: MHA