SET 1

Top 25 Likely Thesis Defense Questions and

Answers
The following are the highest 25 academic scientific research defense questions that you
simply may encounter during a tutorial scientific research defense. Please use this guide to
assess yourself to ascertain if you’re actually ready for your research defense.

Question 1: In few sentences, are you able to tell us what your study is all about?
The question is simple right? Many professors will tell you that the majority students get
choked on an issue like this. Anyways the question is straightforward , but a touch technical.
To answer this question, you would like to understand every detail of your scientific research
from chapters one to the top.

The question needs a solution in sort of a summary of the whole study, therefore, to ace this
particular question you would like to understand every detail in your abstract. If you wrote
an honest abstract, this question are going to be a cross over for you.

Question 2: what’s your motivation for this study?

Now you must be careful here. This question are often very tricky and it goes an extended
way in convincing your panel members that your study is worth their time. Another way this
question might be twisted is what’s THE RESEARCH PROBLEM?

To answer this question, you’ll plan to elaborate on the matter investigated within the study.
Your zeal to solve this problem becomes your motivation. Do not state financial reasons or
the necessity to graduate as a motivation as you’ll easily explode point.

Question 3: How will this study contribute to the body of knowledge?

At some point the necessity for justification will arise which is once you are going to be
asked to say how your study will increase the body of data if approved.
Here you’ll got to use your methods, case study or any unique model or conceptual
framework utilized in the study to defend it.

Question 4: What is the significance of the study?

Just like stating how your study will contribute to the body of data , you’ll got to state the
importance of your study. To answer this question, you’ll got to highlight how your study
will aid the govt in policy development and implementation, how it’ll help other students
who may wish to conduct research studies on the topic matter and therefore the way
organizations and the society will enjoy your study.
Question 5: Did you bridge any gap from your study?
Every research study must have a problem. Your ability to unravel this problem and explore
into areas not yet researched on gives you the complete marks allocated for answering this
question. You must be ready to convince the committee members that your approach is
exclusive and it’s covered areas where much haven’t been done by other researchers.

Question 6: What limitations did you encounter?

This is another simple but tricky question. Most times the question isn’t asked to feel for
you, rather to urge loopholes to criticize your work. To answer this question, you want to
take care with words as you’ll implicate yourself. Be careful enough not to sell out yourself.

Do not discourse limitations in your methods or data analysis techniques as this might imply
that your study could also be biased or not well researched. Use simple limitations like
difficulties encountered in combining lectures and project rather than limiting your study.

Question 7: What are your findings?

At now it’s expected of you to present your results or findings from the study during a clear
and concise manner. Always link your findings to your research objectives/questions. This
will make your panel members to simply be carried along.

Question 8: What Methods or Sampling Technique did you employ?

To answer this question, you want to be conversant in your research methodology. Your
chapter three (in Most Projects) must be at your fingertips. Your ability to justify your
sample size and technique are going to be highly rewarded here.

Question 9: Why choose this method?

As discoursed above, you ought to not only state a specific method for the study. You must
even be ready and ready to justify why you chose the tactic during a convincing manner. At
now you’re liberal to quote sources or similar studies where such methods were adopted.

Question 10: supported your findings what are your recommendations?

Recommendations are very vital in every research study and will not be joked with. In
essence you ought to know your recommendations off hand.
Question 11: supported your findings what areas will you suggest for future research?
Questions like this are just there to check your reasoning and authority in your research area.
Based on your findings during a manageable scope, you ought to be ready to suggest future
research areas in line together with your study.

For example, if I researched on the challenges of private tax collection in Nigeria, an honest
area for further study are going to be in other sorts of taxation such as VAT, Company tax
etc.
Question 12: How can your research study be put into practice?
Easy for the pc scientist and engineering students, but a touch tough for management and
social sciences since most management/social science projects are more of abstract in nature.

However, you ought to try your best to be realistic here. Relate your study to current trends
in your environment, office, economy, government, schools, church etc. Use of relevant
examples and illustrations will score you good point here.

Question 13: How would you summarize your study to a practitioner during a few
sentence?
Your ability to convey technical information from the study will score you good points here.

Question 14: What would you modify if you were to conduct the study again?

Hmmm. Be careful! don’t be too jovial. there’s a loophole here! a bit like your limitations,
this question are often asked to spot your week points.

Question 15: what’s your measurement Instrument?

In simple terms, what data collection method did you use for the study? Here you state if
questionnaires were distributed or data was gotten from secondary sources. For more
information on measurement instruments.

Question 16: What are your research variables?

Here you’ll got to convince your panel members that you simply know what you’re talking
about. you would like to elucidate your independent and dependent variable(s) to convince
them that you simply are on point. Your variables are present in your project topic. you
would like to spot these variables and know their definitions also to ace your defense.

Question 17: What are your research questions?

Very simple question. It should take about 0.015 seconds to answer this question if you’re
fully prepared.

Question 18: What does one decide to do together with your scientific research after
Graduation?

Here you’re at liberty to mention your mind. If you plan to publish it, this is often the
simplest opportunity to discourse and interact with the committee members-maybe a
professor there can help.

Question 19: What source of knowledge was employed for the study?
At now you’ve got to state the source(s) you bought data from. generally , you’ve got to state
whether data was gotten from primary or secondary source or both. you’ll further convince
the committee members by discoursing on literature reviewed for the study-both theoretical
and empirical.

Question 20: What theories or theoretical framework is your study based on?

This is a really technical question but interesting. Before you step into the defense room, you
ought to know a minimum of two relevant theories that relate to your study. for instance , the
“impact of motivation on employee productivity” are going to be supported Maslow’s
Theory and other theories of motivation. If you can’t find relevant theories to copy your
study, consult your supervisor for help.

Question 21: How would you relate your findings to existing theories on the study?

To ace this question, one will need to read extensively. you ought to know existing theories
on the topic matter also as empirical studies too. Your ability to link your findings to
previous research studies (Whether they agree or not) will go an extended way in validating
your study. you’ll score good points here trust me.

Question 22: What recommendations does one have for future research?

Your problem solving skill is put to check here. you ought to be ready to identify areas
which will need more research.

Question 23: what’s the scope of the study?

This one may be a cheap or should I say bonus question? Here you quickly state the
delimitation of the study in short .

Question 24: What question(s) does one have for the committee?

Not a possible question in our Nigerian context, but I even have defended a seminar project
where this question was asked and that i was shocked to my marrows. this is often a chance
to interact together with your committee members and ask some constructive questions.
don’t ask silly or too difficult questions because the goal should be to form the committee
members feel because the “boss”. it’ll also go an extended way in showing that you simply
are an excellent individual.

Question 25: does one have any closing comments?

This is praising time! Use this chance to thank your committee members for his or her time
and questions. Tell them what proportion you’ve got learnt from them and the way you plan
to correct errors (if any) identified in your work. this will go an extended way in impressing
your internal and external supervisors.
Set 2
Common project defense questions and answers
1. Why did you choose this topic?
This might be the first question you will be asked, and you need to have a good response.
You should talk about the motivations for the study. Talk about the research problem you
wanted to address which made you embark on the study.

2. Briefly, explain what your research project is all about?

To respond to this question, you need to fully understand your research project. Basically,
be able to repeat your abstract.

 
3. What is the scope of the study
Here you briefly state the specific aspects of your project topic that was covered.

 
 
4. What is the significance of the study?
To answer this question, you will need to state how your research work will help other
researchers, educators, organizations(like the case study used), practitioners and
policymakers.

5. Did you bridge any gap from your study?

Here you should talk about how your study addressed the existing problems/concerns that
made you carry out the research.

6. What are your research variables?

This question is asked in order to find out if you really know what your research project is
all about. Explain your independent and dependent variable(s) to show them you really
grasp the concept of your research topic. Identify the variables in your project topic,
define and explain them.

7. What research methodology did you use?

This is usually the chapter three of your project report. To respond to this question, you
should briefly state the research design procedure you adopted for the research. Talk about
the data collection methods and sampling techniques employed in the research.

8. Why did you use that research methodology?

This is where you state the reason(s) for the choice of research methodology used. For
example, if you used the survey research method, you can state reasons such as: no
interviewer bias, cost-effective, it enabled you (the researcher) to collect information from
the sample without influencing the population of the study e.t.c

 
9. Why do you think your research is reliable?
To answer this question, simply tell your audience/panel of assessors that the threats to
research reliability (which are participants error, participant bias, research error, and
researcher bias) did not occur during the research. Or you can simply say that you made
sure the threats were reduced to the barest minimum.

10. Why do you think your research is valid?

To answer this question, simply tell your audience/panel of assessors that the findings
from your study can be generalized to other relevant settings, group or case study.

11. In what way(s) does your research project contributes to knowledge?

This question is similar to your significance of the study. You should talk about how your
research is aimed at addressing a problem that was not addressed by previous researchers
in your field of study. You should also briefly state how your project will advance
understanding in your research field.

12. What are the limitations encountered

No research project is perfect. It is common for at least one limitation to be identified. To
answer this question, talk about the weaknesses that were out of your control. You can
talk about how weaknesses such as the short time frame for the research, lack of research
studies/materials on the topic, lack of available data, the combination of lectures, exam
and project research, limited sample size and selection, e.t.c impacted the analysis of your
research data.

13. Which programming language did you use to write your program? (for computer
science students)
State the programming language and database used in the development of your
software/program. If you did not design the program yourself or you were assisted by a
friend or colleague, find out from the person which programming language was used. You
might also ask the person to give you a crash course on the programming language.

14. Show us how your software works (for computer science students)
Make sure you are familiar with how the software works. Also, be sure that there are no
errors in the software. Go ahead and show the panel of assessors how the software
functions. You can also show them some records which you entered previously.

15. What source of data was employed for the research?

Here, you simply state the data collection methods that were used in the study. You should
state if primary sources such as questionnaires, interview, observation OR secondary
sources such as textbooks, journals, articles, e.t.c were used. If you combined primary and
secondary sources, briefly talk about it.

16. What are your findings?

Show the descriptive results from the study in a convincing and clear style. Make sure
your findings refer to your research objectives/questions.

17. Based on your findings what are your recommendations/suggestions?

This is where you talk about the importance and implications of your findings from three
levels namely:
1. Research (various ways other researchers can improve or refine the study)
2. Theory (the new contributions that you are adding to the body of knowledge) and
3. Practice (how the information gotten from your study can make practice better, improve
the operational procedures, solve problems, improve policy making e.t.c).
Note: Avoid the temptation to make recommendations that are not supported by your
findings. Do not recommend based on your beliefs.

18. What is the strongest point in your project?

The duration of the defense might just be 10 - 15 minutes, as such the questioners will not
have the time to ask you about every detail. They will want to focus on the major ideas
and ask you the most important aspects of your research. Be ready to answer.

19. If you could change something regarding your study, what would it be?
The answer to this question can be gotten from the limitations of your study. You can give
answers such as:
1. Given the constraints (like the short time frame for the research or lack of sufficient
funds) I was working with, this was what I was able to do but if I could do more, this is
what I would have done.
2. In doing this I learned a problem with this kind of data collection. Next time, I will do it
this way.
 20. What questions do you have for us
You can ask them if there any revisions they want you to make in your report. Ask them
to summarize the major revisions, so you can take some notes.

 
21. Do you have any closing comments
Thank the panel of assessors and let them know that the revisions/corrections that were
given (such as rewriting the conclusion, tables/graphs that are not in the right format,
something you said during the defense and they want you to include it in the report or
some other issues they noticed you did not capture) would be implemented and shown to
your supervisor.

SET 3
The following are some of the most defense questions that you may be asked; the answers,
of course, are personal to you and your research:
 Can you summarize your thesis in just a few sentences? (or even in a single
sentence)
 What motivated you to undertake this research?
 Who are the main researchers in this area?
 What are the main ongoing debates or issues?
 Why is your research in this area important?
 Who will be interested in your research?
 What do you recommend based on your findings?
 What are the implications of what you have found to society in general?
 What are the most important papers related to your own research and how is yours
different?
 What other developments have been made in your field recently?
 Why did you select the research methodology that you used?
 In hindsight should you have used a different methodology? (Beware they may be
looking for you to dig a hole for yourself to invalidate your conclusions and
analysis.)
 Would you have discovered anything else if you had used a different approach?
 What are the ethical implications of your work and how should they be dealt with?
 How do you know that what you have found is right?
 What is the weakest part of your work?
 What would you suggest as future research and why?
 If you could start over what would you have done differently? (Again don’t dig a
hole to fall into.)
 What advice would you give to yourself if you could go back to the start of your
research?
 In a project defense you are expected to:
 Present yourself as a scholar in the discipline and an authority on your
subject.
 Cogently and clearly explain your work.
 Have a conversation with the panel of assessors.
 Defend any idea that might be disagreed upon. (That is why it is called a
project defense).

Project Defense tips

1. Be academically, mentally and physically prepared for your presentation.
2. Practice, practice, practice. Rehearse several times with the equipment
you will use for your presentation.
3. Have a thorough understanding of the nature of your research
problem.
4. Make eye contact with more than one member of the panel of assessors
during the course of your presentation.
5. Don't speak too fast. Talk calmly with confidence.
6. Bring a copy of your project report with you for reference.

Learn more tips and tricks to ace your project defense

Most students and beginning researchers do not fully understand what a research proposal means, nor do they
understand its importance. To put it bluntly, one's research is only as a good as one's proposal. An ill-conceived
proposal dooms the project even if it somehow gets through the Thesis Supervisory Committee. A high quality
proposal, on the other hand, not only promises success for the project, but also impresses your Thesis
Committee about your potential as a researcher.
A research proposal is intended to convince others that you have a worthwhile research project and that you
have the competence and the work-plan to complete it. Generally, a research proposal should contain all the key
elements involved in the research process and include sufficient information for the readers to evaluate the
proposed study.
Regardless of your research area and the methodology you choose, all research proposals must address the
following questions: What you plan to accomplish, why you want to do it and how you are going to do it.
The proposal should have sufficient information to convince your readers that you have an important research
idea, that you have a good grasp of the relevant literature and the major issues, and that your methodology is
sound.
The quality of your research proposal depends not only on the quality of your proposed project, but also on the
quality of your proposal writing. A good research project may run the risk of rejection simply because the
proposal is poorly written. Therefore, it pays if your writing is coherent, clear and compelling.
This paper focuses on proposal writing rather than on the development of research ideas.
Title:
It should be concise and descriptive. For example, the phrase, "An investigation of . . ." could be omitted. Often
titles are stated in terms of a functional relationship, because such titles clearly indicate the independent and
dependent variables. However, if possible, think of an informative but catchy title. An effective title not only pricks
the reader's interest, but also predisposes him/her favourably towards the proposal.
Abstract:
It is a brief summary of approximately 300 words. It should include the research question, the rationale for the
study, the hypothesis (if any), the method and the main findings. Descriptions of the method may include the
design, procedures, the sample and any instruments that will be used.
Introduction:
The main purpose of the introduction is to provide the necessary background or context for your research
problem. How to frame the research problem is perhaps the biggest problem in proposal writing.
If the research problem is framed in the context of a general, rambling literature review, then the research
question may appear trivial and uninteresting. However, if the same question is placed in the context of a very
focused and current research area, its significance will become evident.
Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules on how to frame your research question just as there is no
prescription on how to write an interesting and informative opening paragraph. A lot depends on your creativity,
your ability to think clearly and the depth of your understanding of problem areas.
However, try to place your research question in the context of either a current "hot" area, or an older area that
remains viable. Secondly, you need to provide a brief but appropriate historical backdrop. Thirdly, provide the
contemporary context in which your proposed research question occupies the central stage. Finally, identify "key
players" and refer to the most relevant and representative publications. In short, try to paint your research
question in broad brushes and at the same time bring out its significance.
The introduction typically begins with a general statement of the problem area, with a focus on a specific
research problem, to be followed by the rational or justification for the proposed study. The introduction generally
covers the following elements:
State the research problem, which is often referred to as the purpose of the study.
Provide the context and set the stage for your research question in such a way as to show its necessity and
importance.
Present the rationale of your proposed study and clearly indicate why it is worth doing.
Briefly describe the major issues and sub-problems to be addressed by your research.
Identify the key independent and dependent variables of your experiment. Alternatively, specify the phenomenon
you want to study.
State your hypothesis or theory, if any. For exploratory or phenomenological research, you may not have any
hypotheses. (Please do not confuse the hypothesis with the statistical null hypothesis.)
Set the delimitation or boundaries of your proposed research in order to provide a clear focus.
Provide definitions of key concepts. (This is optional.)
Literature Review:
Sometimes the literature review is incorporated into the introduction section. However, most professors prefer a
separate section, which allows a more thorough review of the literature.
The literature review serves several important functions:
Ensures that you are not "reinventing the wheel".
Gives credits to those who have laid the groundwork for your research.
Demonstrates your knowledge of the research problem.
Demonstrates your understanding of the theoretical and research issues related to your research question.
Shows your ability to critically evaluate relevant literature information.
Indicates your ability to integrate and synthesize the existing literature.
Provides new theoretical insights or develops a new model as the conceptual framework for your research.
Convinces your reader that your proposed research will make a significant and substantial contribution to the
literature (i.e., resolving an important theoretical issue or filling a major gap in the literature).
Most students' literature reviews suffer from the following problems:
Lacking organization and structure
Lacking focus, unity and coherence
Being repetitive and verbose
Failing to cite influential papers
Failing to keep up with recent developments
Failing to critically evaluate cited papers
Citing irrelevant or trivial references
Depending too much on secondary sources
Your scholarship and research competence will be questioned if any of the above applies to your proposal.
There are different ways to organize your literature review. Make use of subheadings to bring order and
coherence to your review. For example, having established the importance of your research area and its current
state of development, you may devote several subsections on related issues as: theoretical models, measuring
instruments, cross-cultural and gender differences, etc.
It is also helpful to keep in mind that you are telling a story to an audience. Try to tell it in a stimulating and
engaging manner. Do not bore them, because it may lead to rejection of your worthy proposal. (Remember:
Professors and scientists are human beings too.)
Methods:
The Method section is very important because it tells your Research Committee how you plan to tackle your
research problem. It will provide your work plan and describe the activities necessary for the completion of your
project.
The guiding principle for writing the Method section is that it should contain sufficient information for the reader
to determine whether methodology is sound. Some even argue that a good proposal should contain sufficient
details for another qualified researcher to implement the study.
You need to demonstrate your knowledge of alternative methods and make the case that your approach is the
most appropriate and most valid way to address your research question.
Please note that your research question may be best answered by qualitative research. However, since most
mainstream psychologists are still biased against qualitative research, especially the phenomenological variety,
you may need to justify your qualitative method.
Furthermore, since there are no well-established and widely accepted canons in qualitative analysis, your
method section needs to be more elaborate than what is required for traditional quantitative research. More
importantly, the data collection process in qualitative research has a far greater impact on the results as
compared to quantitative research. That is another reason for greater care in describing how you will collect and
analyze your data. (How to write the Method section for qualitative research is a topic for another paper.)
For quantitative studies, the method section typically consists of the following sections:
Design -Is it a questionnaire study or a laboratory experiment? What kind of design do you choose?
Subjects or participants - Who will take part in your study? What kind of sampling procedure do you use?
Instruments - What kind of measuring instruments or questionnaires do you use? Why do you choose them? Are
they valid and reliable?
Procedure - How do you plan to carry out your study? What activities are involved? How long does it take?
Results:
Obviously you do not have results at the proposal stage. However, you need to have some idea about what kind
of data you will be collecting, and what statistical procedures will be used in order to answer your research
question or test you hypothesis.
Discussion:
It is important to convince your reader of the potential impact of your proposed research. You need to
communicate a sense of enthusiasm and confidence without exaggerating the merits of your proposal. That is
why you also need to mention the limitations and weaknesses of the proposed research, which may be justified
by time and financial constraints as well as by the early developmental stage of your research area.
Common Mistakes in Proposal Writing
Failure to provide the proper context to frame the research question.
Failure to delimit the boundary conditions for your research.
Failure to cite landmark studies.
Failure to accurately present the theoretical and empirical contributions by other researchers.
Failure to stay focused on the research question.
Failure to develop a coherent and persuasive argument for the proposed research.
Too much detail on minor issues, but not enough detail on major issues.
Too much rambling -- going "all over the map" without a clear sense of direction. (The best proposals move
forward with ease and grace like a seamless river.)
Too many citation lapses and incorrect references.
Too long or too short.
Failing to follow the APA style.
Slopping writing.

View
The following are some of the most defense questions that you may be asked; the answers, of course, are personal
to you and your research:
 Can you summarize your thesis in just a few sentences? (or even in a single sentence)
 What motivated you to undertake this research?
 Who are the main researchers in this area?
 What are the main ongoing debates or issues?
 Why is your research in this area important?
 Who will be interested in your research?
 What do you recommend based on your findings?
 What are the implications of what you have found to society in general?
 What are the most important papers related to your own research and how is yours different?
 What other developments have been made in your field recently?
 Why did you select the research methodology that you used?
 In hindsight should you have used a different methodology? (Beware they may be looking for you to dig a
hole for yourself to invalidate your conclusions and analysis.)
 Would you have discovered anything else if you had used a different approach?
 What are the ethical implications of your work and how should they be dealt with?
 How do you know that what you have found is right?
 What is the weakest part of your work?
 What would you suggest as future research and why?
 If you could start over what would you have done differently? (Again don’t dig a hole to fall into.)
 What advice would you give to yourself if you could go back to the start of your research?
 Do you intend to publish any of your research? If so, where?