University of Wales Masters

Dissertations at RKC

A brief outline of research expectations
and processes


Professor Gabriel Jacobs
The nature of Masters research
dissertations
(See also my guidelines on the RKC website)

A research dissertation is not a descriptive
business report but a piece of analytical
academic writing. As well as being potentially
practical, it is an exercise in logical thinking, and
in particular avoiding sloppiness.

There is a recognized standard dissertation
structure which is not set in stone but
departure from it should be clearly justified.
Typical dissertation structure

Title page
Abstract (executive summary)
ToC, lists of abbreviations, tables and figures
Statement of originality, acknowledgements
Introduction: any background information deemed necessary,
and setting out specific research objectives
Literature review
Methodology
Analysis and findings
Conclusions, limitations, recommendations
Appendices, if any
References
Abstract
This should be a summary (i.e. not an introduction
or a cliff-hanger) of about 1 page


ToC, lists of abbreviations, tables and figures
Include page numbers in ToC.
Do not include silly abbreviations
Little mechanical things matter
e.g. table captions above, figure below.
What is research?
The word research within academia is
not used in its everyday sense. It
presupposes a hypothesis, the
dissertation being an attempt to prove
or disprove it. The hypothesis is set out
in a specific research question or series
of questions. The questions have to be
very clear.
A nicely focused research question
In order to support its core business, how cost-
effective is it for the Eastern Illyrian Ministry of
Spatial Planning to develop its own IT products
and services rather than outsourcing this
activity?

Too broad a one for a Masters dissertation
Is it cost-effective for companies to outsource
the development of their IT products and
services?
The literature review
Objectives:
1. Demonstrate familiarity with the field by
selection of appropriate publications
2. Show in which ways these publications throw
light on the research question(s).
3. Ensure an analytical, critical approach not a
merely descriptive or explanatory one. If
possible show any disagreements in the
published literature, in this way directly
informing the research question(s)
The literature review
What is appropriate literature?
Peer-reviewed journal publications or
established text books
Un-reviewed Web references are acceptable if
there is are corresponding peer-reviewed
sources. However, in certain cases Web
references may be preferable
Avoid unreliable sources such as popular
magazines or Wikipedia unless there is no other
source (in which case say so)
Research Methodology
In this chapter you state how and why you have
approached and carried out the research

Difference between (a) primary and secondary
data, and (b) quantitative and qualitative
research.
Numerous websites deal with both these matters,
and whole books have been written about them.
But in brief:
Research Methodology
(a) Primary and secondary data
Primary data is gathered directly from participants.
Secondary data is gleaned from published sources. Sometimes
called desk research.
Both can be used in tandem if appropriate. If only desk
research is used, the literature review may be combined with
this Methodology chapter.
Relying solely on desk-research can be tricky. In any event, a
valid reason why it has been adopted must be clearly justified,
since examiners tend to expect primary data.
J ustifying why you have adopted this or that method applies
equally to the choice of:
Research Methodology
(b) Quantitative and qualitative research

Quantitative research generates measurable
information that can be converted into numbers
and analyzed statistically. Data is often gathered in
questionnaire surveys.
Qualitative research generates text which is often
interpreted in a subjective way (although it is
possible in certain circumstances to convert textual
information to numbers). Data is gathered via
questionnaires or interviews.
Research Methodology
(b) Quantitative and qualitative research
Sometimes both approaches quantitative and
qualitative are adopted, either in parallel or in series.
All things being equal, a quantitative approach tends to
give rise to clearer answers to research questions, and
therefore is in some ways a safer option. But what you
choose depends on your individual project. Discuss the
most suitable approach with your Proposal tutor and
perhaps later with your supervisor.
In any case, you must always give clear reasons for
your choice.
Writing the Methodology chapter

Understand the difference between purely
descriptive writing (no credit on the contrary)
and focused analytical writing (lots of credit).
So, in justifying your choice of method, do not
simply describe available methods. Assume that
your examiners are familiar with them and
concentrate on why one fits better than another
for your research.
Analysis/findings chapter
Obviously much depends on the method
adopted, but here are two rules of thumb:
If you present data as graphs or tables, refer to
them with explanatory comments in the body-
text. Do not expect your examiners to do your
critical thinking for you.
Consider what you really need to include, and
avoid dilution and padding by relegating to
appendices that which can be dispensed with.
Conclusions, etc.
In this chapter, you present the answers to your research
question(s). Note that the chapter is not a summary of the
dissertation (that is the purpose of the abstract), but a drawing
together of the ideas you have discussed in previous chapters.

You may also present here any limitations of the findings (for
example, how generalizable are they?), but beware of
scratching around for something to say if there really isn't
anything sensible.

It is usual, if relevant, to make some specific recommendations
based on the research.
Referencing
See my detailed referencing guidelines on the
website.
We ask only for consistency, and thus do not specify
any particular system, though we prefer Harvard
since it is the world standard in academic writing, so
worth learning.
Appendices
Not too many! Only what is strictly necessary.
The RKC/UoW process
How the process works, summarized here, can also be found on the
Dissertation Forum
1. Choose your topic by discussing it with the Proposal tutor
and maybe other students
2. Produce a 3 to 5 page proposal
3. When the proposal is accepted, an individual supervisor is
allocated. You then have 6 months to complete
4. You upload drafts to the Thesis Repository. The
supervisor uploads feedback. There will also probably be
email correspondence with the supervisor
5. A final version is uploaded and signed off by the
supervisor as ready to be marked
The marking process
Your dissertation is marked by an RKC internal examiner who
is allowed a maximum of four weeks for the task (but it usually
takes a much shorter time).
A second RKC internal examiner reads your dissertation and
either agrees with the mark of the first examiner or disagrees.
If the latter, there is a further process He or she also has a
maximum of four weeks
Your dissertation is then marked by an independent external
examiner working for the UoW not RKC. He or she has 8 weeks
maximum to complete the process.
Thus, in theory, the marking can take up to 16 weeks, but the
timescale is usually much shorter.
The marking process (continued)

Once the marking is complete, you are informed of
your provisional result, but it has to be ratified at a
formal examination board.
Only extremely rarely will a provisional result not be
so ratified (for example in cases of unfair practice
such as passing off). But in theory this can happen,
so you do not get your degree until after the
ratification process.





Questions?