The criteria which generally underpin the marking of assignments in the School of Education are also used to inform the assessment of dissertations. The following notes are provided so that you can avoid obvious pitfalls in your submission.
Fail/Referral for Resubmission
A combination of several of the following problems might lead to failure or referral for resubmission:
- Incoherent thinking; the submission shows little evidence of planning and an unsatisfactory level of engagement with relevant literature and ideas.
- Aims and arguments vague and/or muddled.
- Inadequate representation of literature and key debates.
- Lack of a theoretical framework.
- Methods not fully described or justified, or misunderstood and misapplied.
- Ethical issues not recognised or addressed appropriately or no ethical review.
- Inadequate, inappropriate or misinformed analysis.
- Discussion is underdeveloped and misses important points.
- Overall presentation is messy and unclear with incorrect layout.
- Spelling and grammatical errors and typos are not corrected.
- General lack of commitment and care.
- Under or over the minimum/ maximum word length.
- Plagiarism, by which we mean copying other people’s work and/or failure to acknowledge where your ideas and material may have come from. This will normally result in failure, as will re-presenting your own work without acknowledgement that it has been presented previously. Of course, it is expected that you will draw on your own and others’ work - but this must always be acknowledged and must not just be ‘regurgitated’. Please refer to the section on The Use of Unfair Means in the Assessment Process in The School of Education Postgraduate Taught Student Handbook. Where unfair means is found to have been used, the University may impose penalties ranging from awarding no grade for the piece of work or failure in a PhD examination through to expulsion from the University in extremely serious cases.
Features of a successful dissertation will be:
- A concise and logical report which addresses a serious research question and locates this within an appropriate theoretical framework.
- Relevant literature is critically reviewed to identify key issues, - including issues relating to methodology.
- The process of data gathering is fully explained so that the reader can understand the way in which conclusions and recommendations have been arrived at.
- Methods are clearly described and justified showing evidence of planning and consideration of pertinent issues such as validity, subjectivity and ethical dimensions.
- Ethical issues are recognised and addressed appropriately.
- Analysis is succinct, structured and clearly focused.
- The discussion offers reflections on method and research process in general and draws some pertinent conclusions, ideally linking findings to education policy and/or practices.
- Well-organised, highly motivated writing, showing initiative and analytical thinking.
- A clear argument (or set of arguments) is developed, drawing on the literature and the researcher’s own experience and context.
- Recognition is given to the central importance of social and political context in defining and understanding research issues and interpreting data.
- Good presentation, correct spelling and grammar, and clear layout.
In general, a good dissertation will have the following characteristics:
- A wide range of relevant literature is critically discussed (including at least one or two references which make the reader say “Ah! That’s a new one.”).
- It is well structured and clear to follow.
- The researcher has managed to link his/her work to the work of others.
- Methods and methodology are deliberated before discussion of the researcher’s own empirical work.
- The researcher is honest and open about the methods used, and why, and reflects on methods and methodology after presenting and discussing her/his own work.
- There are no obvious spelling or grammatical errors, typos, clumsy sentences, or incorrect use of words (e.g. effect for affect; criterion for criteria; it’s for its). Pay particular attention to the use of the apostrophe.
- Some attempt to generalise from the study is made, where appropriate, and lessons which can be learned from it, are made explicit.
- Limitations of the study are discussed (without being apologetic) and areas for further research suggested.
- Possible implications for policy-makers or practitioners, or both, are identified.
- The dissertation is original and contributes to the ‘public store of knowledge’ (even, perhaps, the ‘public good’) and not just to the writer’s own personal development.
Support for resubmissions
Supervisors will support students who are required to resubmit their dissertation by offering at least one supervision session and commenting on one draft.
Disappointing outcomes can often be avoided if you discuss your work regularly with your supervisor.