Marking Criteria for Thesis Proposal Pass Minor amendments (i)(ii) Major amendments (i) (ii) (iii) OA (outstanding amendments) Fail for all assessed criteria (i.e. achievement of an E or S for all assessed criteria To achieve a ‘Pass’ grade, doctoral standard must be achieved Structure Guidelines Marking Criteria Extensive Sufficient Insufficient Introduction Relevant theory is described briefly Strong and Satisfactory or good Inadequate or no and a critical evaluation of relevant convincing evidence evidence that the evidence that the Background literature is provided. Clear and that the work is of work is of work is of Aims, research concise statements explaining the professional doctoral professional doctoral professional doctoral questions and rationale for the research are standard. standard. standard. hypotheses provided. The rationale is both Demonstrates Demonstrates some Demonstrates little understandable and convincing. advanced and original scholarship of a or no original scholarship of a quality to satisfy scholarship of a The proposal contains clear and quality to satisfy peer peer review. quality to satisfy peer concise statements of research aims, review. review. research question(s) and hypotheses. The research question logically follows from the extant literature, addresses a meaningful gap or debate in the field, and is of value in answering.
Marking Criteria for Thesis Proposal Pass Minor amendments (i)(ii) Major amendments (i) (ii) (iii) OA (outstanding amendments) Fail To achieve a ‘Pass’ grade, doctoral standard must be achieved for all assessed criteria (i.e. achievement of an E or S for all assessed criteria Structure Guidelines Marking Criteria Extensive Sufficient Insufficient Introduction Background Aims, research questions and hypotheses Relevant theory is described briefly and a critical evaluation of relevant literature is provided. Clear and concise statements explaining the rationale for the research are provided. The rationale is both understandable and convincing. The proposal contains clear and concise statements of research aims, research question(s) and hypotheses. The research question logically follows from the extant literature, addresses a meaningful gap or debate in the field, and is of value in answering. Strong and convincing evidence that the work is of professional doctoral standard. Demonstrates advanced and original scholarship of a quality to satisfy peer review. Satisfactory or good evidence that the work is of professional doctoral standard. Demonstrates some scholarship of a quality to satisfy peer review. Inadequate or no evidence that the work is of professional doctoral standard. Demonstrates little or no original scholarship of a quality to satisfy peer review.