Dissertation & Thesis Tip
by Lovitts & Wert
The posting below looks at what
makes for outstanding, very good, and unacceptable dissertations in
the social sciences. It is from Chapter 3, Aiming for Excellence in
the Dissertation, in the book, Developing Quality Dissertations
in the Social Sciences: A Graduate Student's Guide to Achieving Excellence
by Barbara E. Lovitts and Ellen L. Wert. Published by Stylus Publishing,
LLC, 22883 Quicksilver Drive, Sterling,
Virginia 20166-2102 Copyright C 2009 By Stylus Publishing, LLC. All
rights reserved. Reprinted with permission.
NOTE: This book is one of three in a series that includes Developing
Quality Dissertations in the Humanities and Developing Quality Dissertations
in the Sciences. To find out more go to: www.styluspub.com
Aiming for Excellence in the Dissertation
You read the scholarship of others to learn. But in the process, you
also make judgments about the quality of their work. In the same way
that you make judgments about the scholarship of others, your advisor
and committee members make holistic judgments about the quality of
their
students' dissertations.
However, your faculty advisors also read student work with another
purpose: They read to teach. They must read carefully to see where
they
can suggest improvements in students' conceptualization of the topic,
in
their methods, in their presentation of results, and in their writing.
Moreover, your advisors and committee read to certify quality. That
is,
they must make sure their students' dissertations demonstrate
professional competence and capacity for future professional-quality
contributions.
In short, your advisors and committee are reading your drafts and
final
version to determine whether your dissertation is at a level of quality
that demonstrates your readiness to make the transition from student
to
professional.
Degrees of Quality
Like published articles, completed dissertations have been written
and
rewritten. The ideas and presentation have been subjected to expert
criticism and honed through repeated drafts, feedback, and editing.
And,
like published research articles and books, most dissertations are
very
good. A few dissertations are remarkable or outstanding in some aspect.
On the other hand, some dissertations are, for a variety of reasons,
just within the boundaries of the profession's standards of quality.
They are good enough. In rare instances, some dissertations are
unacceptable.
The faculty participating in the study provides descriptions of what
makes a dissertation outstanding, very good, acceptable, or
unacceptable. In the sections following, you will find summaries of
what
they said about quality at these different levels. Use these summaries
as a way to start planning and, later, evaluating your own work. They
are also useful guides as you discuss your project with your advisors
and committee members: Am I making progress toward my goal for
excellence? Where do I need to make a special effort to develop my
dissertation? What might I do to improve the quality?
Outstanding
Outstanding dissertations are characterized by originality, high-quality
writing, and compelling consequences. They show deep knowledge of
a
massive amount of complicated literature and mastery of the subject
matter. They display a richness of thought and insight, and make an
important breakthrough. The body of work in outstanding dissertations
is
deep and thorough. The student demonstrates a sophisticated grasp
and
use of theory. In experimental fields, the experiments are well designed
and well executed. The quality and care put into the measurement
techniques and analyses instill confidence in the results. The data
are
rich and come from multiple sources
Even though outstanding dissertations are rare -faculty see them once
or
twice a decade, if that often -the faculty in the study were able
to
proved a very consistent set of descriptors. They described an
outstanding dissertation in the social sciences at the higher levels
of
originality or significance in that it
* asks new questions;
* addresses an important question or problem;
* uses or develops new tools, methods, approaches, or new types of
analyses;
* pushes the discipline's boundaries and opens new areas for
research;
* has practical and policy implications;
* is of interest to a larger community and changes the way people
think.
They explained that in its execution, the outstanding dissertation
* is very well written and very well organized;
* exhibits mature, independent thinking;
* displays deep understanding of a massive amount of complicated
literature;
* exhibits command and authority over the material;
* challenges the literature and strongly held traditional views;
* is thoroughly researches;
* is synthetic and interdisciplinary;
* clearly states the problem and explains why it is important
* has a brilliant research design
* has well-planned and well-performed experiments (if
experimental);
* is theoretically sophisticated and shows a deep understanding of
theory;
* has rich data from multiple sources
* has a comprehensive, complete, sophisticated, and convincing
analysis
The faculty also described the outstanding dissertation as having
the
potential to "illuminate an entire area," "startle
the field," or
"stimulate a lot of activity in the profession." Indeed,
the results or
conclusion of an outstanding dissertation push the discipline's
boundaries and are publishable in the top-tier journals.
Along with offering new and significant knowledge, an outstanding
dissertation is a pleasure to read. It has a point of view and a strong,
confident, independent, and authoritative voice. Each part of the
outstanding dissertation, from introduction to conclusion, is excellent,
and the pieces are integrated seamlessly. The writing is clear and
persuasive. The ideas are set out very clearly and concisely. The
writer
anticipates -and answers -the reader's questions.
Outstanding dissertations were described as "page turners,"
surprising
and edifying the reader. Readers often react with, "Wow! Why
didn't I
think of that?" Other terms the faculty used to describe outstanding
dissertations were "compelling," "concise," "counterintuitive,"
"creative," "elegant," "engaging," "exciting,"
"insightful,"
"surprising," and "thoughtful."
Very Good
The very good dissertation is very good indeed. It fulfills the purposes
of the dissertation requirement and establishes the student as a capable
social scientist. The majority of the dissertations that faculty see
are
very good, and this is the level that they expect of most graduate
students.
The faculty in the study explained that a very good dissertation
displays the student's mastery of the field, addresses a meaningful
question or problem, and is executed competently. Although it might
not
hold the promise of altering the field, it has the potential to
contribute to the field by expanding its knowledge and thinking. The
dissertation contains material for two or three papers that could
be
published in top-tier professional journals.
More specifically, the faculty described a very good dissertation
as
"original or significant," making a "modest contribution
to the field."
A very good dissertation has a good question or problem. It shows
understanding and mastery of the subject matter; uses appropriate,
standard theory, methods, and techniques; includes well-executed
research; demonstrates technical competence; presents solid, expected
results/answers; and is well written and well organized.
Acceptable
A dissertation that meets the basic criteria for the award of the
PhD is
considered acceptable. Such a dissertation contains a sufficient amount
of solid work to demonstrate that the student can do research. It
might
result in some conference papers, but it has little in the way of
publishable material, and what is publishable is likely to be accepted
by lower-tier journals.
The faculty in the study explained that an acceptable dissertation
demonstrates technical competence and shows the student's ability
to do
research, use standard methods, and competently apply theory to a
problem. However, they noted, a student might display a narrow
understanding of the field. For instance, the student might present
an
uncritical review of the literature that does not show insight or
understanding of what is important. The analysis might be
unsophisticated or limited.
The acceptable dissertation shows little promise of adding much to
the
field. It is not very original or significant because it is narrow
in
scope. It typically focuses on a question or problem that is not
interesting or has predictable results. It might be a highly derivative,
small extension of someone else's work.
Sometimes a dissertation that is adequate may reflect circumstances.
In
some studies, the hypotheses turn out to be wrong or the results are
not
statistically significant, meaningful, or important. Sometimes an
acceptable dissertation is the result of choices and compromises:
The
student has accepted a job or post-doc position and needs to sprint
to
finish. In such instances, the student has achieved a primary purpose
of
graduate education, which is getting a professional position.
More typically, however, an acceptable dissertation is the product
of
poor communication between student and advisor, or inadequate advising.
Because much of this guidance should take place before you begin to
write the dissertation, it is important to talk soon and in detail
with
your advisor and other faculty members about your topic, your research
question or problem, your plan for researching it, the methods you
will
use to collect and analyze data, the results you are getting, and
your
interpretation of the results. Get early feedback on your plan for
organizing your dissertation and presenting your results.
In addition, be sure to get feedback on the quality of your writing
as
soon as you begin to draft the chapters. Because strong skills in
organizing and writing are a critical profession attribute, even if
your
dissertation is very good or even outstanding in other respects, it
will
be considered only acceptable if you cannot communicate your ideas
clearly and effectively. Just as excellent writing enhances a solid
piece of scholarship, weak writing undermines otherwise excellent
ideas
and research.
Unacceptable
It is your responsibility to produce professional-quality work, and
it
is your advisor's responsibility to prevent unacceptable work from
advancing.
As the faculty who participated in the study concurred, faculty advisors
should provide the guidance necessary to ensure that the dissertation
meets professional standards. The advisor should make sure that the
student is working with a clearly defined question or problem and
must
make sure that the student is using proper methods. The advisor should
also provide prompt and constructive feedback. It is also your
responsibility to follow through on your advisor's and committee's
advice and guidance.
Work that is poorly written and full of errors and mistakes or has
other
serious flaws is not of adequate quality. The faculty in the study
were
clear that they would turn back a draft if the question of problem
is
trivial, weak, or unoriginal. Work that does not demonstrate that
the
student understands the relevant literature and basic concepts and
the
key processes or conventions of the discipline is unacceptable when
* the literature review is weak or missing;
* methods are used inappropriately, or incorrect methods are used;
* theory is missing, wrong, or not handled well;
* hypotheses are inconsistent, do not flow from theory, or are
missing;
* the data are flawed, misrepresented, "fudged," or wrong;
* the results presented are obvious, already known, unexplained,
or misinterpreted;
* the analysis is wrong, inappropriate, incoherent, or confused;
* the conclusions drawn from the data are invalid or oversold.
The faculty also described the unacceptable dissertation in terms
of its
presentation: The organization is confusion and the writing is filled
with spelling and grammatical errors. They said that a dissertation
that
violates standards of academic integrity through plagiarism,
falsification of data, or misrepresentation of data is unacceptable.
These problems should be caught early. Use the criteria in this booklet
as a starting point for identifying problems or as a way to plan
improvements. If your advisor and other members of your dissertation
committee ask you to revise and rewrite, make sure you understand
specifically what you need to do to improve -and make the improvements.
NOTE: Anyone can SUBSCRIBE to the Tomorrows-Professor
Mailing List by
going to:
https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/tomorrows-professor
