Checklist for Evaluating a Manuscript

This comprehensive checklist was developed from various rubrics used in appraising social
research reports (see References for full list).

Depending on the quality of your work you can get between two to five points in each
performance area.

Evaluatio Points Indicator

n
Excellent 5 Includes all (or almost all) important elements of performance
area
Good 4 Includes most of the important elements of performance area
Satisfactor 3 Includes some but not all important elements of performance
y area
Fail 2 Includes none or minimal important elements of performance
area

The intention of this checklist is to guide both the student and the faculty in deciding what
constitutes a ‘good’ manuscript. This checklist can help the student on ‘what to include in which
part of the thesis.’ Meanwhile, the faculty/reviewer can be guided in ‘what to look for’ in a
section or a chapter. It is for this reason that the checklist is detailed and comprehensive.
Admittedly, some of the performance criteria in this checklist are only applicable to certain types
of research designs (i.e. quantitative, qualitative or mixed). Please use your best judgment in
determining which items are applicable in the manuscript being evaluated.

Kindly follow the following general directions:

1. Read the thesis manuscript then evaluate its chapters and relevant portions based on
the criteria below.
2. On the leftmost column, place a check mark  to indicated that the item/element within
the performance criteria is satisfactorily addressed in the manuscript.
3. Based on the discussion, assign a numeric mark and put it in the relevant column for
score.
4. Provide some comments (bullet points, about 30 words) that could help the author/s
understand how you arrived at the your evaluation rating.

Performance  Area and Criteria Scor Comments

e
Performance Area 1: OPENING ELEMENTS
1. Title is 12 words or less
2. Title indicates most important elements of report, i.e.,
population, focus, methodology, and findings
3. Abstract is 300 words or less
4. Abstract reflects organizational structure of paper (i.e.,
presents problem/focus of study, research questions,
 participants, methodology, findings, key points from
discussion of findings
5. Abstract includes “Key Words”
6. Key Words include term for research methods used

Performance  Area and Criteria Scor Comments

e
Performance Area 2: INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER
1. Establishes the research problem and the context for the study
2. Presents the goal of the study (i.e. predict, add to knowledge
base, have a personal, social, institutional, and/or
organizational impact; measure change; understand complex
phenomena; test new ideas; generate new ideas; inform
constituencies; and examine the past).
3. States the research objectives/ ‘researchable’ research question
(i.e. exploration, description, explanation, prediction and
influence).
4. Engages reader’s curiosity by describing why the topic is of
interest or why a local study has national/global importance.
5. States of rationale for study.
6. Names of intended audience.
7. Indicates benefit of research (answers the “so what?” question)
or potential unique contribution of this particular work will be.

LITERATURE REVIEW CHAPTER

Performance Area and Criteria Scor Comments
e
Performance Area 3: SYNTHESIS OF RESEARCH LITERATURE
1. Treat each related/relevant article as data that generate both
qualitative (e.g. qualitative findings, literature review of source
article, source article author’s conclusion) and quantitative
(e.g. p values, effect sizes, sample size score reliability,
quantitative results) information that yield a mixed method
synthesis
2. Subject each document selected as part of literature review to
 summarization, analysis, evaluation and synthesis
3. Presents a collected and organized understanding of the
literature domain and not just a series of reports from different
texts.
4. Assess the findings stemming from each individual study and
the emergent synthesis for trustworthiness, credibility,
legitimation, validity, plausibility, applicability, neutrality,
reliability, objectivity, confirmability, and/or transferability.
5. Provides a review that is comprehensive (i.e. includes classic
as well as related texts), current (i.e. 1990 and after) and
rigorous.
6. The review contains primary sources (i.e. refrains from using
“as cited in”) that are relevant to the research problem under
investigation
7. The text included in the review were compared and contrasted
based on key concepts employed, main knowledge claims and
research processes used, etc.
8. The review discusses the clear connections between the
sources presented and the present study.
9. Present clearly the theoretical/conceptual framework
Performance Area and Criteria Scor Comments
e
Performance Area 4: CRITICAL REFLECTION
Identify important knowledge gaps in the literature which may involve:
1. Confusion spotting by identifying competing explanations.
2. Neglect spotting by identifying a topic or area which is
overlooked, under researched or lacks empirical support
3. Application spotting by extending and complementing existing
literature.
4. (Problematize) Identify and challenge the assumptions (i.e. in-
house, root metaphor, paradigm, ideology, field) underlying
existing literature vis-à-vis one’s own familiar position and
other stances, and based on that, formulates research questions
that are likely to lead to more influential theories
5. Identify key texts that form the domain of literature reviewed.
6. Articulate main assumptions that underlie the chosen texts
within the identified domain
7. Evaluate the articulated assumptions by exposing systematic
theoretical or methodological biases.
8. Develop alternative theoretical underpinnings that may
fundamentally reorient understanding of a research topic or
central construct
9. Relate assumptions to audiences which hold them.
10. Evaluate alternative assumptions proposed.
 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY CHAPTER
Performance Area and Criteria Scor Comments
e
Performance Area 5: RESEARCH DESIGN
1. Outlines the quantitative (i.e. historical, descriptive,
correlational, causal-comparative/ quasiexperimental, and
experimental) or qualitative (e.g. biography, ethnographic,
auto-ethnography, oral history, phenomenological, case study,
grounded theory) or mixed research design.
2. Explains how research design fits with research
objectives/questions.
3. Provides step by step description of procedures, with
corresponding headings
Performance Area and Criteria Scor Comments
e
Performance Area 6: SAMPLING DESIGN
1. Presents all sample size considerations made for the
quantitative phase(s) (i.e. a priori power, population, sampling
frame) or qualitative phase(s) (e.g. information rich cases,
purposive).
2. Specifies the initial and final sample sizes for all phases of the
study.
3. Presents the sampling scheme for both the quantitative (e.g.
simple, stratified, systematic, cluster, multi-stage random)
qualitative (e.g. critical case, typical case, extreme case,
criterion, opportunistic etc.) or mixed (i.e. concurrent-
identical, concurrent-parallel, concurrent-multilevel,
concurrent-nested, sequential-identical, sequential parallel,
sequential nested, sequential-multilevel) phases of the study
4. Clarifies the type of generalization made (i.e. statistical
generalization, analytic generalization, and case-to-case
transfer) and links it to the selected sampling design, sampling
scheme and sampling size(s)
Performance Area and Criteria Scor Comments
e
Performance Area 7: ROLE OF RESEARCHER
1. Describes researcher’s context, interest in topic and investment
in study/intentions 
2. Makes clear who did what throughout study procedures 
3. Provides statement of an institutional review board (IRB) or
other third-party approval secured to conduct study 
4. Describes how ethical issues e.g. informed consent,
 confidentiality, incentives, funding sources, political conflicts
of interest, biases). were considered and addressed 
5. Describes how researcher bias was 
6. Discusses steps taken to ensure rigor and trustworthiness of
findings
Performance Area and Criteria Scor Comments
e
Performance Area 8: DATA COLLECTION
1. Explains steps/strategies of data generation, collection as well
as rationale for each design  choice
2. Cites literature used to guide procedures 
3. Presents information about all quantitative and qualitative
instruments and the process of administration 
4. Tells reader what constitutes “data”
Performance Area and Criteria Scor Comments
e
Performance Area 9: DATA ANALYSIS
1. Outlines mixed data analysis strategy (i.e. data reduction, data
display, data transformation, data correlation, data
consolidation, data comparison and data integration).
2. Provides relevant descriptive and inferential statistics for each
statistical analysis. 
3. Discusses the extent to which the assumptions (e.g. normality,
independence, equality of variances) that underlie the analyses
were met, as well as any observations that might have distorted
the findings (e.g. missing data, outliers).
4. Specifies statistical software used. 
5. Specifies where the responsibility or authority for the creation
of categories resided (i.e. participants, programs, investigative,
literature or interpretive), what the grounds were on which one
could justify the existence of a given set of categories (i.e.
external, rational, referential, empirical, technical, or
participative), what was the source of the name used to identify
a given category (i.e. participants, programs, investigative,
literature or interpretive) and at what point during the research
process the categories were specified (i.e. a priori, a posteriori,
or iterative).