Your Dissertation Proposal: What is Expected?
The information below sets out what is expected in your research proposal submission. This information is found in the module material
Word Limit: The proposal should be no more than 2500 words (plus 10%)
• Title: State the working title of your proposed dissertation in no more than 7 words. The title needs to capture the essence of the whole work. It is not the same as your aim, research question or hypothesis.
• Problem Specification: The purpose of this section is to provide an account of the problem(s) which has given rise to the research. It should give a clear account of the problem giving rise to the research. You will include appropriate background information and an explanation of why the selected topic is of interest to you. It should set out the problem and the reasons for the proposed study. The aim and objectives of the study should be clearly stated
• Initial Literature Review: Provide a brief critical review and discussion of the relevant literature. This should demonstrate that you have a clear idea of the arguments and the range of opinion found in your research field. You should, in conclusion to this section, also indicate where your study will stand in relation to this field and then specify your research question or hypothesis. It is important to note that you are not being asked to provide a list of relevant books, rather you should identify the most important half dozen or so texts (books, journal articles, and other research), and briefly describe what they have to say, how they are related to one another, and why they are useful (see Analysing/Reviewing an Article). You can then indicate where other, less important material is to be found. The research questions/hypothesis should have been seen to have emerged from this brief review of literature.
• Outline Methodology: Briefly discuss and justify the proposed methodology for your study. Issues such as the research approach, methods of data collection, sampling techniques, method of data analysis, and reliability & validity issues should be considered. A brief discussion of ethics consideration should also be included. In addition, you are expected to clearly indicate the proposed structure of your dissertation.
• Appendices
1. Ethics Release form: In addition to the above it is expected that you will submit your ethics forms with relevant information (i.e. invitation letters, consent forms, questionnaires etc). 2. Programme/Work plan: Indicate also the timeline of the project showing all the key milestones.
School of the Built Environment & Engineering The Dissertation Proposal Assessment Criteria [16% of dissertation mark]
Student Name/ID Course: Title:
Criteria Comments Ethics: Has the student applied for ethics approval using the online system [Evidence required: Copy of email confirmation to be include in the appendix] Yes/No Problem Specification The purpose of this section is to provide an account of the problem(s) which has given rise to the research. It should give a clear account of the problem giving rise to the research. You will include appropriate background information and an explanation of why the selected topic is of interest to you. It should set out the problem and the reasons for the proposed study. The aim and objectives of the study should be clearly stated
Initial Literature Review: Provide a brief critical review and discussion of the relevant literature. This should demonstrate that you have a clear idea of the arguments and the range of opinion found in your research field. You should, in conclusion to this section, also indicate where your study will stand in relation to this field and then specify your research question or hypothesis. It is important to note that you are not being asked to provide a list of relevant books, rather you should identify the most important half dozen or so texts (books, journal articles, and other research), and briefly describe what they have to say, how they are related to one another, and why they are useful (see Analysing/Reviewing an Article). You can then indicate where other, less important material is to be found. The research questions/hypothesis should have been seen to have emerged from this brief review of literature.
Outline Methodology Briefly discuss and justify the proposed methodology for your study. Issues such as the research approach, methods of data collection, sampling techniques, method of data analysis, and reliability & validity issues should be considered. A brief discussion of ethics consideration should also be included. In addition, you are expected to clearly indicate the proposed structure of your dissertation.
Presentation: The assessment criteria indicated above takes into consideration the presentation of the work. It is expected that the proposal will be professionally presented. The following will be considered: Fluently written: concise and accurate. Attention has been paid to grammar and spelling; No unnecessary use of direct quotations; Graphical material is well presented and where possible created for the dissertation. Visually attractive; Accurate use of Harvard System of referencing. [See Quote/Unquote and Dissertation Module Booklet for details on how to do this properly]; and Bibliography is alphabetically arranged without bullet points or numbers.
Mark %
Generic Assessment Criteria
Marks will be awarded based on the following criteria
Grade Criteria
Excellent Performance
70+
Excellent grasp of theoretical/conceptual/practical elements; Most of the relevant information/skills accurately deployed; shows a very good level of originality and independence of thought; A strong evidence of wider reading of relevant material; greater depth of critical analysis; well presented, written and directed
Above Average Performance
60-69
Most of relevant information/skills accurately deployed; Generally, a good grasp of theoretical/conceptual/practical elements. Evidence of wider reading of relevant material; some originality of thought is evident in the work; a good depth of critical analysis of evidence; well written and presented.
Average Performance
50-59
Much of the relevant information/skills mostly accurately deployed; Adequate grasp of the theoretical/conceptual/practical elements; limited evidence of wider reading of relevant material; a satisfactory depth of critical analysis of evidence; Generally well presented in majority of work submitted.
Satisfactory Performance
40-49
No major omissions or inaccuracies in the deployment of information/skills. Adequate grasp of the theoretical/conceptual/practical elements. Little or no evidence of wider reading of relevant material; Satisfactory presentation of work submitted.
Unsatisfactory Performance
Below 40
Major deficiencies or omissions in the information/theoretical/practical elements. Poor presentation
