A Checklist for Conceptualizing, Planning,

Writing, and Evaluating a Doctoral Dissertation

Chris L. S. Coryn, Ph.D.
Western Michigan University
2007


The following tools have been designed to be used for conceptualizing, preparing, writing, and evaluating
a doctoral dissertation, with an emphasis on research-based dissertations. These tools apply primarily to
quantitatively-designed studies, but with slight modification can be applied equally well to qualitative,
mixed methods, and other types of methods and designs.

A Checklist of Items for Possible Inclusion
The following is a checklist of items which are typically included in a research dissertation. Not all of the
suggested categories are necessary or appropriate, and the items within chapters may vary somewhat.
They are intended to serve as a guide.

As a point of reference when using this checklist, the overarching standard for an Interdisciplinary Ph.D.
in Evaluation (IDPE) dissertation is that it should be An original, significant contribution to evaluation
theory, methodology, or practice.

Chapter I: The Problem
Introduction
Background of the problem (e.g., educational trends related to the problem, unresolved issues,
social concerns)
Statement of the problem situation (basic difficultyarea of concern, felt need)
Purpose of the study (goal oriented)emphasizing practical outcomes or products
Questions to be answered or objectives to be investigated
Conceptual or substantive assumptions (postulates)
Rationale and theoretical framework (when appropriate)
Delineation of the research problem (explication of relationships among variables or
comparisons to be considered)
Statement of hypotheses (conceptual rendition subsequently followed by operational statements
in Chapter I or Chapter III)
Importance of the studymay overlap with statement of the problem situation
Definition of terms (largely conceptual; operational definitions may follow in Chapter III)
Scope and delimitations of the study (narrowing of focus)
Outline of the remainder of the thesis, dissertation, or prospectus or proposal
Chapter II: Review of the Related Literature
Organization of the chapteroverview
Historical background (if necessary)

Purposes to be Served by Review of Research Literature
Acquaint reader with existing studies relative to what has been found, who has done work, when
and where latest research studies were completed, and what approaches involving research
methodology, instrumentation, and statistical analyses were followed (literature review of
methodology sometimes saved for chapter on methodology)
Establish possible need for study and likelihood of obtaining meaningful, relevant, and
significant results
Furnish from delineation of various theoretical propositions a conceptual framework affording
bases for generation of hypotheses and statement of their rationale (when appropriate)
Note In some highly theoretical studies, the chapter Review of the Literature may need to precede
The Problem chapter so that the theoretical framework is established for a succinct statement
of the research problem and hypotheses. In such a case, the advance organizer in the form of a
brief general statement of the purpose of the entire investigation should come right at the
beginning of the Review of Related Literature chapter.
Sources for Literature Review
General integrative reviews that relate to the problem situation or research problem
Specific books, monographs, bulletins, reports, and research articlespreference shown in most
instances for literature of the last ten years
Unpublished materials (e.g., dissertations, theses, papers presented at professional meetings)
Selection and arrangement of literature review often in terms of questions to be considered,
hypotheses set forth, or objectives of specific purposes delineated in the problem chapter
Summary of literature reviewed
Chapter III: Methodology
Overview (optional)
Description of research methodology or approach (e.g., experimental, quasi-experimental, non-
experimental)
Research design (if relevant, describe independent, dependent, and classificatory variables and
sometimes formulate an operational statement of the research hypotheses in null form so as to
set the stage for an appropriate research design permitting statistical inferences)
Pilot studies or pre-testing (as they apply to the research design, instruments, data collection
techniques, and characteristics of the sample)
Selection of subjects (this is concerned with sample and population)
Instrumentation (tests, measures, observations, scales, and questionnaires)
Procedures (e.g., instructions to subjects or distribution of materials)
Data collection and recording
Data processing and analysis
Methodological assumptions
Limitations
Possible restatement of conceptual hypotheses from problem chapter in operational form
relative to instrumentation and experimental procedure or design followed (operationally stated
hypotheses can also be put in null form to furnish an optional third set of hypotheses amenable
to statistical testing)if not done elsewhere
Summary (optional)
Chapter IV: Findings (Analysis and Evaluation)
Findings are presented in tables or charts when appropriate
Findings reported with respect to furnishing evidence for each question asked or each
hypothesis posed in problem statement
Appropriate headings are established to correspond to each main question or hypothesis
considered
Factual information kept separate from interpretation, inference, and evaluation (one section for
findings and one section for interpretation or discussion)
Note In certain historical, case study and anthropological investigations, factual and interpretive
material may need to be interwoven to sustain interest level, although the text should clearly
reveal what is fact and what is interpretation.
Separate section often titled Discussion, Interpretation, or Evaluation ties together
findings in relation to theory, review of literature, or problem statement
Chapter V: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations
Brief summary of everything covered in first three chapters and in findings portion of Chapter IV
Conclusions (so what of findings; often the hypotheses restated as inferences with some degree
of definitive commitment and generalizability)
Recommendations (practical suggestions for implementation of findings or for additional
research)


Criteria for Evaluating a Proposed or Completed Doctoral Dissertation
I. Title of proposed or completed dissertation
A. Precise identification of problem area, often including specification of independent and
dependent variables and identification of target population
B. Sufficient clarity and conciseness for indexing of title
C. Effective arrangement of words in title
II. The problem
A. Description and statement of problem
1. Statement of basic (felt) difficulty or problem situationsignificance and importance
of the problem
2. Careful analysis of known and suspected facts and explanation of existing
information and knowledge that may have some bearing on problemthe specific
factors giving rise to the basic difficulty, of their interrelationships, and of their
relevance to the problem area
3. Soundness of the logic underlying selection of variables or factors to be studied and
expression of their relationship to the problem area
4. Systematic and orderly presentation of the interrelationships of relevant facts and
concepts underlying the problem
5. Clear identification of the problem statement through use of an appropriate heading
or paragraph caption (the same requirement holding for other categories of the
research)
6. Succinct, precise, and unambiguous statement of the research problem (including the
delineation of independent, dependent, and classificatory variables), of the major
questions to be resolved, or the objectives to be investigated
7. Distinction (if required) between problems or questions that are either factually
oriented or value oriented
8. Distinction in the instance of theoretically oriented research or of basic research
between the purpose, which is often goal-oriented or instrumental in relation to
certain pragmatic objectives, and the research problem which is primarily directed
toward the finding of relationships, the making of comparisons, or the noting of
changes (possible cause and effect relationships) relative to operationally formulated
research hypotheses
B. Sufficient delimitation of the problem areanarrowing the scope without becoming
concerned with a trivial problem
C. Review and evaluation of the literature pertinent to the problem areas
1. Adequacy and relevance of the previous investigation cited with reference to the basic
difficulty posed, design of the current investigation, procedures followed, and
projected analysis of the data
2. Appropriate development of a rationale or theoretical framework from the research
studies cited with reference to the current problem under investigation
D. Clear-cut statement of the conceptions, assumptions, or postulates underlying the problem
being investigated
E. Precise statement of (1) hypotheses or (2) deduced consequences of theories or (3) the
objectives of a study (objectives being most common in survey and descriptive research)
F. Definition of terms
1. Clarity in definitions of key terms and variables (especially constructs)
2. Use of operational definitions whenever possible
III. Design and methodology
A. Logic, structure, and strategy of study carefully delineated
1. Distinction made between whether the research involves variables manipulated and
controlled by the investigator (usually found in experimental research) or whether an
ex post facto situation exists involving the analysis of data already available or
collected as in most field studies and correlational investigations
2. Appropriate use of paradigms, flow charts, or schematic models
3. Specification of threats to internal and external validity of the design employed
B. Clear description of samples studied
1. Mode of selection of subject cited (e.g., random assignment, matching, voluntary
participation, or convenience by being available)
2. Data regarding how representative a sample is relative to a population
3. Information concerning the possible operation of selective drop-out and survival of
the fittest
C. Adequate information pertaining to reliability, validity, and standardization properties of
instrumentation; psychometric characteristics of scales or tests used
D. Sufficient description of operational or field procedures followed in the collection of data
where, when, and how data were obtained
E. Coordination of the specification of the relationship between the null (statistical) hypotheses
and the research (problem) hypotheses
F. Appropriateness of the statistical treatment and data processing procedures
G. Evidence of a preparatory pilot study having been conducted
H. Procedure clearly enough described so that other investigators can replicate (repeat) the
study performed under essentially comparable conditions in the future
I. Statement of methodological assumption such as adequacy of reliability and validity of
measures, representativeness of samples, fulfillment of requirements for carrying out
statistical tests
IV. Presentation and analysis of data
A. Logical and orderly exposition in terms of the framework of the hypotheses, deductions,
objectives, or questions asked in conjunction with the statement of the problem
1. Objective rather than subjective or speculative presentation
2. Analysis consistent with and supported by the facts obtained
3. Absence of overgeneralization or sweeping statements that go beyond the data
4. Relationships of the findings to previously cited research explicitly shown
5. Negative findings relevant to the hypotheses as well as positive findings presented
with minimal distortion or bias
6. Uncontrolled factors influencing data outcomes appropriately cited and discussed
7. Weaknesses in the data honestly conceded and discussed with appropriate emphasis
8. Lack of confusion between facts and inferences clearly shownseparation of analysis
of findings from interpretation and discussion of findings
9. Resolution of contradictions, inconsistencies, or misleading elements in the findings
B. Appropriate and clear use of charts, tables, figures, and graphs
V. Summary and conclusion
A. Precise and accurate statement of (1) the problem, (2) the methodology followed, and (3) the
findings without introduction of new or irrelevant information
B. Conclusions at a scope and level of generality justified by the data presented
C. Appropriate caution exercised and necessary qualifications made in drawing conclusions
D. Conclusions in a form that other investigators can understand and subsequently verify
E. Conclusions coordinated with the tentative acceptance or rejection of the research hypotheses
presented or with the objectives or questions posed
F. New questions set forth for possible investigationrecommendations for additional research
in the problem area
G. Recommendations concerning implementation of the research findings when appropriate
relative to the objectives stated in the purpose of the investigation (most frequently
encountered in survey studies and action research)

Steps to Designing and Making Inferences from a Study



Six Main Logical Features Common to all Forms of Inquiry