Jimma University, Institute of Health

Faculty of Public Health

MSC Thesis defence evaluation tool

Name of department---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name of student-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thesis title--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thesis (80%) Points Remarks

(%)
Thesis Title (5%)
1. Does the thesis show scientific originality?
2. Is the title concise (not more than 20 words) and should include the
main theme of the paper?
3. Relevance to:
 National problem (Research thematic area)
 Scientific contribution (Novelty)
 Other (Mention)---------------------------------------------
Abstract (5%)
 Does the abstract contains (Background, Objectives, Methods, Results
and Conclusions) are included?
 Is the abstract independent and stand-alone/complete?
 Other (mention)________________________
Introduction (5%)
 Does it introduce the nature of the problem?
 Does it properly describe what is/are known about the problem?
 Is the research gap well addressed?
 What was the expectation of this study?
 Other (mention)________________________
Objectives and research questions (5%)
 Was the general objective linked with research question and the title?
 Were objectives specific? Generated from general objective?
 Are the objectives SMART?
 Are the hypotheses/research questions of the thesis clearly
formulated?
 Other (mention)________________________
Literature review (5%)
 Does the thesis demonstrate a thorough review of key literature
relevant to area of research?
 Flow and coherence of the text
 Is it the information organized logically and use subheadings
 Does the conceptual framework described?

1
  Do the direction/ connection of themes/ variables with outcome
variable appropriate?
 Other (mention)________________________
Materials and Methods (25%)
 Does the study setting well described?
 Does the chosen study design was appropriate for the research
questions?
 The study population appropriate for the research questions and set
eligible criteria
 Was the sample size computed considering the assumptions (design,
sampling, analysis…)?
 Was the sampling procedure appropriate and enough detail to allow
evaluation and replication?
 Has the research (field work, experiments, modelling, etc.) has been
carried out carefully?
 Is the methodology help to repeat the research without any (or
minimum) consultation
 Statistical methods applied was relevant
 Is there evidence on protection of study participants?
 Is there evidence on data quality control and quality assurance?
 Other (mention)________________________
Results (10%)
 Are the results presented relevant with the topic and help to answer
the objectives
 Are results presented in relevant format (Figures and Tables)?
 Was the table/figures title answering the what? Where? When?
Questions with appropriate formats and legends?
 Other (mention)________________________
Discussion (10%)
 Are important results discussed to answer the set objectives with the
relevant literatures?
 Are previous studies and the strengths and limitations of the own
work critically discussed?
 Does it examine the significance and explain how the work
contributes to a broader understanding of the topic?
 Other (mention)________________________
Conclusion and recommendations (5%)
 Is the conclusion based on the findings of the study?
 Are relevant recommendations forwarded based on the results?
 Are suggestions made for subsequent research?
 Other (mention)________________________
Citation and list of references (5%)
 Are citations proper (scientific) and consistent? (Style?)
 Does it include all cited references?
 Does it include recent literatures?
 Is there minimal use of gray literatures?
 Other (mention)________________________
2
 Defence Examination (20%) Points Remark
Manner of presentation (5%)
 Did the candidate presented in well organized and
professional manner?
Confidence in the subject matter (5%)
 Did the candidate demonstrate sufficient familiarity with
the subject matter?
Ability of answering questions (10%)
 Did the candidate answered questions knowledgably and
with confidence?

Additional comment (if available)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall assessment

Score/100% Decision/Recommendation
 75 The work is defendable in its present form with no corrections
60  X 75 The work could be defendable after minor corrections
50  X 60 The work could be defendable after substantial correction/parts of it has been rewritten

 50 The work is not defendable

NB: If the student fall on category three that means there is likely hood of him/she joining the
final defense as long as they are able to incorporate comments within two weeks and to the
satisfaction of advisers and if the student fall in category 4 this means the student will be delayed
and work on the document and join other schedule

Please write major correction areas for students who are expected to make correction especially
on category III and IV

Major comments: