John McDonald of the University of Ballarat undertook an analysis of examiners’
reports submitted to his university, and identified numerous common elements that for the examiners were characteristics of poor or of strong theses. A digest of these is listed below (used with permission; thanks John). These points are at a mix of levels of significance and breadth, but they are all valuable. Think of them as a checklist.
A key message that is worth highlighting is the extent to which examiners felt that the ultimate quality of a thesis is largely determined in its formative stages—I agree! A great result requires that you make a good start.
Characteristics of a High Quality Thesis
• The title clearly reflects the focus and the argument.
• A significant and substantial problem has been selected for investigation.
• There is an early statement of the project aims.
• The project presents a considerable advance on existing knowledge.
• The thesis demonstrates a systematic pursuit of a consistent line of inquiry.
• It is well-planned and executed, with each section clearly building on the last (that is, there is a coherent and unifying macro-level structure).
• There is clear signposting and linking between paragraphs, sections, and chap- ters. It consistently (but not repetitively) reminds the reader of the purpose, argu- ment, or overall thrust of the thesis.
• The literature review is critical and evaluative, and sets forth an argument for why and how the study should be conducted.
• The discussion of the rationale for selecting a methodology and method (in- cluding up-to-date methodological literature) is balanced. The ground-setting is sophisticated and appropriate (including exposition of underlying assumptions, and relevance to the research aim).
• The research design is appropriate and allows the questions to be answered.
• There is a meticulous account of the procedure.
• A rich variety of evidence is employed to develop a balanced argument.
• Advanced analytical skills are used to demonstrate a deep understanding of the problem; a clear chain of evidence is laid down.
• The discussion is disciplined and not excessively speculative.
• Conclusions are well drawn and convincing (they relate the outcomes back to the research aims); clear and strong knowledge claims are made about the exact contributions of the thesis.
• Key concepts or variables are clearly defined and consistently used throughout.
• Written expression is elegant, precise, and economical.
• There is evidence of systematic proofreading and error correction.
To these, I would add that it is particularly impressive to receive a thesis that is the product of thorough work, in the sense that discussions are considered and insight-
154 Appendix
ful rather than superficial, and key arguments have been diligently explored. I try to not be too critical of presentation (in particular because the majority of theses I have examined are by students whose first language is not English), but I do value a thesis where the copy-editing is careful and significant effort has gone into creation of figures and tables that are easy to understand.
Characteristics of a Poor Thesis
• Objectives and protocol of the study are not stated.
• The research questions are either not significant or are self-evident (no risk of a successful outcome).
• The principal purpose or argument of the thesis is difficult to discern.
• No clear delimitations to the study.
• Overly simplistic comments and generalizations.
• The scope of the thesis is overly ambitious.
• Grasp of the literature has serious limitations (the student is unaware of major relevant works, or uses older works that are no longer authoritative or never were authoritative).
• The description of the literature is serial rather than interpretative (with scant critical analysis or argument emerging).
• There is no clear connection between the focus of the study and the logic or foundations of the research on which it is based.
• Theoretical perspectives or conceptual frameworks are left implicit; the rationale for a particular theoretical approach is missing or undeveloped.
• Shows no awareness of the alignment or compatibilities of particular theoretical and methodological approaches.
• The overview of theory is broad and lacks depth or persuasiveness (especially noted by a reliance on undergraduate texts without reference to primary authors).
• The description of the sample selection strategy is inadequate (inclusion and exclusion criteria not stated).
• The arguments are intrinsically weak.
• Large slabs of (qualitative) data are used to present a point when smaller excerpts with richer or deeper analyses are needed.
• No demonstrated understanding of appropriate statistical analyses and interpre- tation, or insufficient detail on how the data analysis was undertaken.
• Triangulation often claimed but rarely delivered.
• Contains sweeping, unfounded conclusions that have little or no basis in evi- dence.
• Definitions of key terms are either omitted or imprecise.
• Contains poor photos, confusing diagrams, and inadequately labelled tables.
• Contains poor written expression that detracts from the candidate’s argument.
Littered with spelling and typographical errors; has incorrect or inconsistent ref- erencing.
• The text is unnecessarily long and wordy. Material is repeated.
• Lack of critical self-evaluation of the research.
There are several aspects of poor theses that I find plainly bewildering, but that do seem to be common. In addition to the issues listed above, I note: descriptions of processes that cannot be understood; theses that seem incomplete, with some entire component missing (most damning is a lack of critical analysis of the work presented in the thesis, or even a complete absence of discussion of results); in- sufficient data to support the conclusions, or indeed any concrete conclusions at all; whole bodies of work unreferenced, despite obvious relevance; and persistent
‘microgarbling’, in which sections and even paragraphs don’t have a clear thread of ideas, but instead are just a jumble.
I suspect that many such theses are a consequence of the student simply hav- ing run out of time. If there is one single lesson I have learnt from examination, is that starting the thesis early is not just important, but is critical. If you are doing a research degree and haven’t yet begun to write your thesis, don’t delay any further!
157