Dissertation Defense Evaluation Form

Question Title

* 1. Student’s Name:

Question Title

* 2. Chair’s Name:

Question Title

* 3. Faculty Member’s Name:

Question Title

* 4. Faculty Member’s Role:

Chair

Committee

Reader

Question Title

* 5. Date of Defense:

Date:

Date

Question Title

* 6. Proposal Defense Date (for Chair only)

Date:

Date

Instructions: All members of the dissertation committee (chair, committee members, and readers)
should complete this survey by the end of the defense hearing.

Please check the most appropriate score for each item, relative to the student’s research and the
dissertation defense process. Narrative comment may be added.

NOTE: Ratings of “3” represent a student who is performing as would be expected and is on target.
Ratings of “4” or above should be reserved for a student who is doing better than expectable or is
excelling, while ratings below “3” indicate a need for concern.

QUALITY OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Scoring Rubric

1 = Fails to Meet Expectations
2 = Below Expectations
3 = Meets Expectations
4 = Above Expectations
5 = Exceeds Expectations

Question Title

* 7. The dissertation provides a solid rationale for the research question or hypothesis.

1 (Fails)

3 (Meets)

5 (Exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 8. Comments:

Question Title

* 9. The dissertation conveys the research question or hypothesis in the corpus of relevant conceptual/theoretical literature

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 10. Comments:

Question Title

* 11. The dissertation conveys the research question or hypothesis in the corpus of relevant research literature

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 12. Comments:

Question Title

* 13. The dissertation conveys a complete statement of assumptions.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 14. Comments:

Question Title

* 15. The dissertation demonstrates the student’s ability to integrate and summarize theoretical and research perspectives related to the question studied

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 16. Comments:

Question Title

* 17. Total Score for Conceptual Framework:

QUALITY OF RESEARCH DESIGN AND PROCESS

Scoring Rubric

1 = Fails to Meet Expectations
2 = Below Expectations
3 = Meets Expectations
4 = Above Expectations
5 = Exceeds Expectations

Question Title

* 18. The dissertation conveys a solid and appropriate rationale for the selected research methodology.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 19. Comments:

Question Title

* 20. The dissertation clearly details the research methodology.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 21. Comments:

Question Title

* 22. The dissertation clearly depicts the process of data collection and management.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 23. Comments:

Question Title

* 24. The data analysis process is appropriate and coherent

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 25. Comments:

Question Title

* 26. Threats to validity were identified and discussed.

1 (fails)

2 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 27. Comments:

Question Title

* 28. Ethical considerations were maintained throughout the dissertation process

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 29. Comments:

Question Title

* 30. Total Score for Quality of Research Design and Process:

QUALITY OF WRITING

Scoring Rubric

1 = Fails to Meet Expectations
2 = Below Expectations
3 = Meets Expectations
4 = Above Expectations
5 = Exceeds Expectations

Question Title

* 31. The dissertation is a well-written document and is at the level expected for doctoral work.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 32. Comments:

Question Title

* 33. The dissertation is a coherent document that covers the problem studied, question or hypothesis, methodology, findings, discussion, and implications.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 34. Comments:

Question Title

* 35. The dissertation meets the Institute’s writing and style standards.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 36. Comments:

Question Title

* 37. Total Score for Quality of Writing

QUALITY OF ORAL PRESENTATION

Scoring Rubric

1 = Fails to Meet Expectations
2 = Below Expectations
3 = Meets Expectations
4 = Above Expectations
5 = Exceeds Expectations

Question Title

* 38. The student demonstrates the ability to verbally summarize all key components of the study.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 39. Comments:

Question Title

* 40. The student demonstrates the ability to articulate, in detail, the problem and question/hypothesis studied and its relevance in a larger context.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 41. Comments:

Question Title

* 42. The student demonstrates the ability to articulate, in detail, the data collection and analysis process and its value in the larger context.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 43. Comments:

Question Title

* 44. The student demonstrates the ability discuss the meaning of findings of the study in relation to literature and theory.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 45. Comments:

Question Title

* 46. The student’s verbal presentation, in conjunction with the written dissertation, leads to a meaningful discussion with the committee.

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 47. Comments:

Question Title

* 48. The student responds openly and thoughtfully to the committee’s questions and feedback

1 (fails)

3 (meets)

5 (exceeds)

Clear

i We adjusted the number you entered based on the slider’s scale.

Question Title

* 49. Comments:

Question Title

* 50. Total Score for Quality of Oral Presentation

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AND OVERALL SCORE

Question Title

* 51. Note any problems in learning that need to be addressed prior to final approval of the dissertation. Comment:

Question Title

* 52. Overall Score (subtotal of all scored domains above):

Score Interpretation:
Below 60 = significant practicum concerns exist and should be reported to the Practicum Chair
60 – 80 = met expectations - Pass
80 - 90 = above expectations - Pass
Above 90 = exceptional, well beyond expectations – Pass with Distinction