Examiners' Comments on Masters' Dissertations at the Islamic University in Uganda

Maimuna Aminah Nimulola
{"title":"Examiners' Comments on Masters' Dissertations at the Islamic University in Uganda","authors":"Maimuna Aminah Nimulola","doi":"10.53449/ije.v1i2.57","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed at exploring the prevalence and nature of examiners' comments on the appropriateness of draft M. Ed dissertations at Islamic University in Uganda. A total of 530 reports were stratified according to specialisations and examiners from which a sample of 300 reports were randomly selected. Content and thematic analyses were conducted on the reports whose findings were interpreted using Bourke and Holbrook's (2013) indicators for assessment of Masters' thesis quality. Findings reveal that under Contribution, 'originality' attracted few comments which tended to be neutral, while 'substantive' and 'advancement of knowledge' tended to be inappropriately done. The Literature Review 'accuracy' and 'application' categories were among the most highly commented on, with most of them tending to be inappropriately done, while relatively few comments were made on \\literature coverage'. Under Approach/Methodology, 'research design' tended to be appropriately done while 'sampling', 'validity', and 'reliability' tended to be inappropriately done. In Analysis/Findings, 'quantitative data presentation' tended to be appropriately done, while 'qualitative data analysis' and 'interpretation' tended to be inappropriately done. Throughout the dissertation components, concerns on Presentation: 'communicative competence' and 'expression' were common. It is recommended that the university should engage Masters' students more in seminars and workshops on research methods and scholarly writing.","PeriodicalId":286383,"journal":{"name":"INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF EDUCATION (IJE)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL OF EDUCATION (IJE)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.53449/ije.v1i2.57","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This study aimed at exploring the prevalence and nature of examiners' comments on the appropriateness of draft M. Ed dissertations at Islamic University in Uganda. A total of 530 reports were stratified according to specialisations and examiners from which a sample of 300 reports were randomly selected. Content and thematic analyses were conducted on the reports whose findings were interpreted using Bourke and Holbrook's (2013) indicators for assessment of Masters' thesis quality. Findings reveal that under Contribution, 'originality' attracted few comments which tended to be neutral, while 'substantive' and 'advancement of knowledge' tended to be inappropriately done. The Literature Review 'accuracy' and 'application' categories were among the most highly commented on, with most of them tending to be inappropriately done, while relatively few comments were made on \literature coverage'. Under Approach/Methodology, 'research design' tended to be appropriately done while 'sampling', 'validity', and 'reliability' tended to be inappropriately done. In Analysis/Findings, 'quantitative data presentation' tended to be appropriately done, while 'qualitative data analysis' and 'interpretation' tended to be inappropriately done. Throughout the dissertation components, concerns on Presentation: 'communicative competence' and 'expression' were common. It is recommended that the university should engage Masters' students more in seminars and workshops on research methods and scholarly writing.
乌干达伊斯兰大学硕士学位论文主考官评议
本研究旨在探讨在乌干达伊斯兰大学,审查员对硕士学位论文草稿适当性的评论的普遍性和性质。共有530份报告根据专业和审查员进行了分层,从中随机抽取了300份报告。对报告进行了内容和主题分析,这些报告的发现使用Bourke和Holbrook(2013)的硕士论文质量评估指标进行了解释。研究结果显示,在“贡献”项下,“原创性”吸引的评论很少,往往是中立的,而“实质性”和“知识的进步”往往是不恰当的。“文献评论”的“准确性”和“应用”类别是评论最多的,其中大多数都倾向于做得不恰当,而“文献报道”的评论相对较少。在方法/方法论中,“研究设计”往往是适当的,而“抽样”、“效度”和“可靠性”往往是不适当的。在分析/发现中,“定量数据呈现”往往是适当的,而“定性数据分析”和“解释”往往是不适当的。在整个论文的组成部分,对呈现的关注:“交际能力”和“表达”是常见的。建议大学应该让硕士生更多地参与研究方法和学术写作的研讨会和讲习班。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信