(ED 695) Master’s Thesis

Common Course Assessment: Research Thesis

(ED 695) Master’s Thesis

Common Course Assessment: Research Thesis

Course Outcomes:

NBPTS Proposition 4: Systematic Thinking about Practice and Experience - Draw on research and scholarship to improve practice

NBPTS Proposition 5: Members of Learning Communities - Collaborate with other professionals

College of Education Research Standards: Research Competency

  1. Research Question. Identify the research question and situate it within the educational context
  2. Literature Review. Analyze the literature to demonstrate need and rationale for this research
  3. Research Description. Design the research method, provide rationale, discuss results and conclusions
  4. Research Presentation. Present all work according to standard written expression, organization and APA research guidelines

Directions to the Student:

Design and present a research thesis that will generate new knowledge or understanding.

Rubrics for Thesis:

1. RESEARCH QUESTION

Elements / Distinguished
(3) / Proficient
(2) / Progressing
(1) / Unsatisfactory
(0)
Knowledge of problem / Shows thorough knowledge of problem and educational context / Shows adequate knowledge of problem and educational context / Shows limited knowledge of the problem and educational context / Does not
meet standard
Importance of problem and rationale / Reasoning is excellent. Findings would make an important contribution to knowledge or practice / Reasoning is adequate. Findings would contribute to knowledge or practice / Reasoning is basic. Findings would make a limited contribution to knowledge or practice / Does not
meet standard
Statement of purpose / Contains clear, logical statement of purpose / Contains adequate statement of purpose / Statement of purpose is unclear / Does not
meet standard
Knowledge of background / Shows thorough knowledge of background / Shows adequate knowledge of background / Shows limited knowledge of background / Does not
meet standard
Key terms and limitations / Defines terms appropriately. Addresses limitations thoroughly. / Defines terms and addresses limitations adequately / Over- or under-defines terms. Does not address limitations thoroughly / Does not
meet standard
  1. LITERATURE REVIEW

Elements / Distinguished
(3) / Proficient
(2) / Progressing
(1) / Unsatisfactory
(0)
Synthesize of research / Thoroughly synthesizes research and explains its direct relevance to the research question / Generally summarizes research and/orstates only its general relevance to the research question / Cites limited research and/or shows only loose relevance to the research question / Does not
meet standard
Analysis of key work in the field / Analysis shows that the writer is in command of key research in the field. / Analysis shows that the writer has basic knowledge of key work in the field / Analysis is limited in demonstrating knowledge of key work in the field / Does not
meet standard
Development of an argument for the project / Development of the argument flows directly and reasonably from the research / Development of the argument flows only generally from the research / Development of the argument is only loosely related to the research / Does not
meet standard
Gaps in the literature / Thoroughly identifies gaps in the literature and clearly shows how this study would fill them / Generally identifies gaps in the literature and how this study would fill them / Gaps in the literature are poorly identified and/or explanation does not show how this study would fill them / Does not
meet standard
Theoretical perspective driving the project / Thoroughly and accurately explains theoretical stance / States theoretical stance / Explanation of theoretical stance is limited or inaccurate / Does not
meet standard

3. RESEARCH DESCRIPTION

Elements / Distinguished
(3) / Proficient
(2) / Progressing
(1) / Unsatisfactory
(0)
Study design, sampling, subjects, instrumentation, procedures, and evaluation criteria / Thoroughly describes all components and evaluation criteria for the study. Rationale for each is well supported / Adequately describes components, evaluation criteria, and rationale / Description of components, evaluation criteria,and/or rationale is limited / Does not
meet standard
Data findings, analysis, results / Data findings are analyzed thoroughly and accurately / Data findings are stated adequately / Presentation of data findings is limited / Does not
meet standard
Interpretation, conclusions, implications / Results and implications are well interpreted, well reasoned, and lead to valid conclusions / Results, implications, reasoning and validity are adequately interpreted / Interpretation and implications are limited in scope, reasoning, or validity / Does not
meet standard
Dissemination plans / Dissemination plans and usefulness are explained thoroughly / Dissemination plans and usefulness are explained adequately / Dissemination plans and usefulness are limited / Does not
meet standard

4. RESEARCH PRESENTATION

Elements / Distinguished
(3) / Proficient
(2) / Progressing
(1) / Unsatisfactory
(0)
Written Expression and Organization / Writing conforms well to professional expectations. Organization within sections is clear. Contains no more than 5 errors / Writing conforms adequately to expectations. Organization within sections is generally clear. Contains no more than 10 errors / Writing and organization conform poorly to expectations. Contains more than 10 errors / Does not
meet standard
Section Formats / Chapters, title page, contents, appendices, etc. conform to APA guidelines. Contains no more than 5 errors / Format for individual sections usually conforms to APA guidelines. Contains no more than 10 errors / Format for individual sections conforms poorly to APA guidelines. Contains more than 10 errors / Does not
meet standard
Text Citations / Text citations are present, used appropriately, and conform to APA guidelines. Contains no more than 5 errors / Text citations are usually present, used appropriately and conform to APA guidelines. Contains no more than 10 errors / Text citations are missing or overly extensive and conform poorly to APA guidelines. Contains more than 10 errors / Does not
meet standard
References / Reference list meets requirements, matches text citations, and conforms to APA guidelines. Contains no more than 5 errors / Reference list usually meets requirements, matches text citations, and conforms to APA guidelines. Contains no more than 10 errors / Reference list conforms poorly to requirements, or does not match text citations,or does not conform to APA guidelines. Contains more than 10 errors / Does not
meet standard
Abstract / Abstract contains a clear and accurate description of the project / Abstract contains a general description of the project / Abstract is limited or contains too much information / Does not
meet standard