Introduction G A R N/A • The title and subtitle are clear and focused • Project objectives are clear and manageable • The rationale for the research is clearly articulated • Research questions and/or hypotheses are clear (see below) • Limitations and delimitations are well defined • Potential theoretical contributions of the study are articulated Literature Review G A R N/A • Scope and definitions of key concepts used are clear (i.e. constitutive and operational definitions of key terms) • The theoretical bases (i.e. key literature) for the research are clearly identified and used effectively as the foundation in the current research. • Previous or related studies to the research topic are thoroughly reviewed • The gaps in the literature to be filled by the research are clearly identified. Research framework and hypotheses/questions G A R N/A • Research framework is clearly presented (e.g. using a diagrammatic illustration) • Research framework is well connected to the research objectives • Research questions / hypotheses are logical extension of the literature review • Research questions / hypotheses are testable Methodology G A R N/A • Justification of the selected methodology/ies is clear • Sample size, selection criteria, and sampling procedures are clear • Data collection method (e.g. survey instrument and/or interview protocol) is clear • Data analysis method is clear Presentation of the report G A R N/A • The report is coherent and reads well • The report is structured in a logical fashion • Citations and referencing styles are correct and complete Overall research project G A R N/A • The tentative timeline for completing the research project is clearly defined • The tentative timeline is reasonable against the size of the project • Overall, the research project is manageable and sufficient for PhD level G : Good or acceptable according to the requirements of confirmation A : Needs attention; advice is given for consideration; if necessary, minor revision is recommended. R : Needs revision; major concerns have been raised which requires major rework and re-assessment N/A: Not applicable for this study ASSESSMENT CRITERIA OF PROGRESS REPORT FOR HIGHER DEGREE BY RESEARCH (HDR) CONFIRMATION OR UPGRADING Department of Management - Monash University

Assessment Criteria for HDR Confirmation - Associate Professor Daniel Prajogo

Download PDF Report

Upload
department-of-management-monash-university
View
105
Download
0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

As part of the HDR Development Seminar Series, Associate Professor Daniel Prajogo held an engaging session on what will need to be considered in as part of Confirmation assessment. The checklist provides a useful guide.

Citation preview

Page 1: Assessment Criteria for HDR Confirmation - Associate Professor Daniel Prajogo

Introduction G A R N/A

• The title and subtitle are clear and focused

• Project objectives are clear and manageable

• The rationale for the research is clearly articulated

• Research questions and/or hypotheses are clear (see below)

• Limitations and delimitations are well defined

• Potential theoretical contributions of the study are articulated

Literature Review G A R N/A

• Scope and definitions of key concepts used are clear (i.e. constitutive and operational definitions of key terms)

• The theoretical bases (i.e. key literature) for the research are clearly identified and used effectively as the foundation in the current research.

• Previous or related studies to the research topic are thoroughly reviewed

• The gaps in the literature to be filled by the research are clearly identified.

Research framework and hypotheses/questions G A R N/A

• Research framework is clearly presented (e.g. using a diagrammatic illustration)

• Research framework is well connected to the research objectives

• Research questions / hypotheses are logical extension of the literature review

• Research questions / hypotheses are testable

Methodology G A R N/A

• Justification of the selected methodology/ies is clear

• Sample size, selection criteria, and sampling procedures are clear

• Data collection method (e.g. survey instrument and/or interview protocol) is clear

• Data analysis method is clear

Presentation of the report G A R N/A

• The report is coherent and reads well

• The report is structured in a logical fashion

• Citations and referencing styles are correct and complete

Overall research project G A R N/A

• The tentative timeline for completing the research project is clearly defined

• The tentative timeline is reasonable against the size of the project

• Overall, the research project is manageable and sufficient for PhD level

G : Good or acceptable according to the requirements of confirmation A : Needs attention; advice is given for consideration; if necessary, minor revision is recommended. R : Needs revision; major concerns have been raised which requires major rework and re-assessment N/A: Not applicable for this study

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA OF PROGRESS REPORT FOR HIGHER DEGREE BY RESEARCH (HDR) CONFIRMATION OR UPGRADING

Department of Management - Monash University