Dissertation Guidelines
(DH)
for the MScCRA
© All rights reserved 2010. The Dissertation Guidelines, in all its parts, guidelines, examples, layouts, appendices, technical notes, forms, images and any additional material, is a copyright of Laureate Online Education B.V.
The Dissertation Guidelines
For Students and Dissertation Advisors
For the Master of Science in
Clinical Research Administration Programme
Version 1.2 27 July, 2010
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION TO THE DISSERTATION MODULE ... 5
Glossary / Personnel ... 5
Learning Outcomes ... 6
Overall structure ... 6
The student and the Dissertation Advisor (DA) ... 7
Outside help with language skills ... 9
-2 PLAGIARISM, COPYRIGHTS, CONFIDENTIALITY AND PUBLISHING .. - 9 Citations and plagiarism ... 9
Copyrights and confidentiality ... 10
Publishing and posting ... 12
-3 METHODOLOGY (STEPS, SCHEDULE AND DURATION) ... 12
PART ONE: Formal requirements (The ‘must do’s’) ... 12
Dissertation classrooms (‘DA Office’) ... 13
Submission of outline proposal ... 13
Ethics applications ... 14
-Dialogue between student and DA ... 15
Chapter drafts ... 15
Submission of final Dissertation ... 15
PART TWO: Recommended Key Stages (The ‘should do’s’) ... 16
Phase 1 (Weeks 1–8): ... 17 Phase 2 (Weeks 9–14): ... 18 Phase 3 (Weeks 15–24): ... 18 Phase 4 (Weeks 25–28): ... 18 Phase 5 (Weeks 29–32): ... 18 Phase 6 (Weeks 33–40): ... 18
Throughout all stages: ... 19
Access to the Dissertation support materials ... 19
MScCRA Dissertation module materials folder ... 19
-4 GETTING STARTED—PREPARATION FOR RESEARCH ... 20
The topic to be investigated: ... 20
Reviewing the background research ... 21
Stating your aim and objectives/research question/assumptions ... 22
Formulating your research question ... 22
Deciding how you will carry out your research ... 22
Planning your research timetable ... 23
Obtaining ethics approval ... 23
Expedited review: ... 24
Full (Committee) review: ... 24
The structure of your Dissertation ... 25
Abstract ... 25
Acknowledgements ... 25
Introduction and background (Literature review—Why do this work?) ... 26
Results (What did you find?) ... 27
Discussion (What do your results mean?) ... 28
Conclusion and recommendations (So what?) ... 28
Reference list ... 29 The appendices ... 29 General format ... 29 Presentation... 29 Word limit ... 29 Title page ... 30 Declaration ... 30 List of abbreviations ... 30 Contents page ... 30 Regulations ... 30 Intention to submit ... 30 Typographical detail ... 30 Pagination ... 30
APPENDIX A: DA and Student: Working Relationship Summary ... 32
APPENDIX B: Extension Application Process ... 33
Dissertation outline approval... 33
Ethics application ... 33
Final submission ... 33
APPENDIX C: Assessment Schema ... 34
-1 Introduction to the Dissertation module
This guide should help you towards successful completion of your Dissertation. You are advised to refer to it regularly when planning, researching, and writing your Master of Science in Clinical Research Administration (MScCRA) Dissertation to ensure that it fulfils the University and Faculty of Medicine requirements.
Glossary / Personnel
Several Laureate Online Education/UoL administrative positions are referred to in this document according to their functions. The table below links the function/position title to the person who currently has that position.
Position Function
Academic Administration Coordinator (AA)
The AA confirms receipt of your final submission and arranges assessors for submitted papers. Assessors The people who grade the dissertation after
submission. The Dissertation Advisor (below) is the first assessor and a second assessor is assigned by Laureate Online Education Director - Academic
Studies
The Director of Academic Studies is the
University of Liverpool academic responsible for overall management of the programme of study. Director of Online
Studies (DOS)
The DOS is the Laureate Online Education academic responsible for delivery of the programme online.
Dissertation Advisor (DA)
The DA is the instructor that acts as the personal academic advisor for the student as they develop and write their dissertation.
Faculty Staff Coordinator (FC)
The Faculty staff coordinator supports the Instructors with administrative issues. General Dissertation
Advisor (GDA)
The GDA is the instructor who teaches the Research Methods Training class.
Online Librarian The Online Librarian is the University of Liverpool library assistant assigned to assist Laureate Online students.
Student Support Manager (SSM)
The Student Support Manager is the student‘s prime contact point for all non-academic issues. Student Administrator
(SA)
The SA is responsible for class creation and enrolling students and Instructors in class
Learning Outcomes
The purpose of the Dissertation is for students to develop and demonstrate broad clinical research administration knowledge and skills relevant to the MScCRA programme. Students must synthesise and integrate across
subjects, selecting material and approaches appropriate to their specific area of study.
The aim of the Dissertation is to conduct and write a piece of ‗original‘ research of relevance to clinical research administration. On completion of the Dissertation, students will have demonstrated ability, within a clinical research setting, to:
Prepare and present a research proposal;
Conduct a literature search and critically review literature;
Plan and implement a small-scale research project relevant to clinical research administration; and
Produce a clear and accurate written research report that conveys the clinical research administration context and implications.
A Dissertation should generate new knowledge (or new applications of existing knowledge). This can include secondary data analysis, but not normally routine audit projects.
Overall structure
At the end of the sixth module, students are sent ‗getting started‘ information from their Student Support Manager (SSM). This information begins the process of supporting the student to identify a topic for their Dissertation in the context of the research ethics and the MScCRA requirements.
(From April 2010, students who begin their Dissertation will be expected to have completed a self study, and a short module called ‗Dissertation Readiness‘. This module is a short series of ‗locked steps‘ tested through multiple choice questions which aim to provide an important introduction to the basics: how to carry out literature searches; the overall Dissertation process; ethical issues; etc.)
The MScCRA Dissertation (DH) process has an overall length of 9 months: 2 months within the introductory ‗Research Support‘ module (that ends with the production of the outline proposal); then another 7 months prior to submission of the final draft, including a minimum of 2 weeks for the Dissertation Advisor (DA) to review the final draft, and 2 weeks for the student to make any final changes prior to submission i.e.,, a month before the final deadline for submission.
As within the other MScCRA modules, there is a procedure of applying for extensions on the basis of serious and unforeseen circumstances that have significantly interfered with the student‘s planned timeline. Requirements for ethics applications over and above the 1 month allowed will automatically be
supported for extensions on application. All applications have to be made via the SSM and have the support of the student‘s DA. The details of the
extensions application process can be found in Appendix B.
The student will be enrolled in two Dissertation classes—a Research Methods Training (RMT) class and a Dissertation Advisor (DA) class. The RMT class will be conducted by a General Dissertation Instructor (GDI) and will include other students enrolling in the same Dissertation cohort. The GDI will oversee the class and ensure that students are able to work through the research support materials (intensively for the first 2 months and then intermittently for designated activities over the rest of the Dissertation period).
By the end of the first 2 weeks, Dissertation students will have identified their Dissertation subject, and by the end of the fourth week, they will have been assigned their own DA. Here, the student is enrolled into the second class with their DA. For the final 4 weeks of this introductory 2 months the students will focus on developing, revising, and submitting the outline Dissertation proposal with the help of both their own DA and their fellow students within the Research Support Class.
The student and the Dissertation Advisor (DA)
Throughout the Dissertation process, the input from the DA will vary according to the needs of the student. It is important that the student maintains steady progress and, especially at the beginning of the process, agrees to their specific timetable so that both the student and the DA are clear what is expected and when. A ‗guide‘ timetable is provided in this document as an example of the structure of the Dissertation process. However, this will obviously change depending on the nature of the student‘s Dissertation subject and design.
The DA and the student should both read through the Working Relationship Summary found in Appendix A. This will need to be adapted to reflect each DA-student relationship, but is proposed as the basis of a ‗signed‘ agreement to which both the student and the DA commit.
The first process that the DA will help students with is to define their outline proposal. The University of Liverpool sees the outline proposal as a key stage in the Dissertation process and has specific requirements that the proposal must address (see Appendix D: Outline Dissertation Proposal Checklist). The reason for this early emphasis is to ensure a strong foundation on which the rest of the Dissertation can develop smoothly.
The DA‘s role in developing the Outline Dissertation Proposal is to offer advice and feedback on the required elements:
The clinical research administration context and study aims The ethical issues and approval process
Describing the study design, data collection and handling Data analysis methods
The implications and relevance of the results to clinical research administration
As the Dissertation progresses, the DA is expected to discuss with the student their ideas, read and comment on early well-crafted drafts of each chapter and then, when the whole Dissertation is drafted, comment on all chapters in relation to the overall work. It is important that the student arranges with his/her DA the stages at which s/he can allocate time to read and discuss draft(s) well in advance, otherwise a great deal of time may be wasted for both.
Students should not expect their DA to comment on more than the proposal and two drafts of the Dissertation (as complete drafts or their component chapters). The student should check the accuracy of all drafts for typography, grammar, spelling, formatting, referencing, and data presentation before asking for comments on them. It is the student‘s responsibility to correct any such errors. The examiners will pay particular attention to such problems in presentation.
Authorship and potential future publications—please note that:
Although the Dissertation is ultimately the student‘s own work, the DA is likely to contribute considerable time and expertise to the development and writing of the Dissertation. If students subsequently submits the material for
publication, for example, as an article in an academic journal, they should not omit any authors who fulfil the international authorship criteria1:
‗Substantial contributions to conception and design, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data‘
‗Drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content‘
‗Final approval of the version to be published‘
Ahead of starting to draft such an article, the student should at least discuss with the DA whether his/her contribution to the Dissertation merited authorship of any intended article and whether anyone else qualifies as a potential
author.
The final responsibility for the quality of the Dissertation rests with the student, but the DA takes responsibility for providing sound advice along the way. The student is also responsible for keeping in touch with the DA. The Working Relationship Summary should be discussed and agreed upon during stage
1International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts
Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication. Philadelphia: American College of Physicians, 2006. (Last accessed September 2007 at:
one of the Dissertation as this outlines the responsibilities of both the student and the DA. The DA is responsible for updating the core team about student progress, via the monthly reporting mechanism.
If a student is unhappy about any aspect of his/her supervision, s/he should consult the Student Support Manager as soon as possible. It should be noted that a fee may be imposed if the student wants to change his/her DA after the Outline Proposal has been approved. The student will need to submit a request to the Student Support Manager (SSM) if s/he changes DA at this stage. The SSM will discuss this request with the student‘s DA and the Director of Online Studies (DOS), and a decision will be made as to whether the change requested can be achieved.
Outside help with language skills
The writing as well as the work presented should be the student‘s own. It is acceptable for the student to ask the DA when reading a chapter to point out unclear sentences, problematic paragraph structure, etc., but it is clearly unacceptable to give the text to a professional editor for corrections. Even the most minor assistance should be clearly acknowledged in the Dissertation preface (see the declaration at the beginning of the DH template file which is an integral part of the DH package).
It is not permissible to write the Dissertation in another language and have it translated into English.
The University of Liverpool will treat the use of a professional editor as unauthorized collusion.
2 Plagiarism, Copyrights, Confidentiality and Publishing Citations and plagiarism
The importance of proper citation in all stages of the project cannot be stressed enough. The Dissertation is to follow the same requirements for proper citation that were applicable in the other modules of the programme. Students must use the Harvard system as explained later in this document and as promoted throughout the programme.
Proper credit to other sources should be present in the proposal and then continue throughout each stage of the Dissertation. Proper citation must be an integral part of the final thesis. Failure to adhere to the citation rules, which are simple to follow, will most likely be considered as plagiarism.
The final draft of the Dissertation will be submitted to the DA by the student (via one of two dropdown boxes in Blackboard) for the DA to do a final review. The draft will pass through the Turnitin application that checks for plagiarism. The final Dissertation will be submitted for assessment (via the second
are obliged to inform the academic department of any suspicion of plagiarism or collusion. An explanation will be requested from the student, and this explanation, together with the other evidence taken from analysis of the Dissertation, will be brought to the Board of Examiners (BoE) when it considers the assessment of the Dissertation. The Board has the power to decide what final result should be recorded, in the light of the evidence, and also to consider whether further action is necessary.
Thus, great care should be exercised when posting the final Dissertation document, as no additional submissions or corrections are allowed after the final draft is submitted. Missing citations and references will not be allowed to be added late to any document.
For more information, please see the ‗Plagiarism and Unauthorised Collusion Policy‘ in the Student Handbook.
Copyrights and confidentiality
There are two separate issues regarding copyrights:
a) What is the copyright status of a student‘s Dissertation and to whom does it belong?
Traditionally, all academic work completed at a university will be owned by the university. Usually it is beneficial for them to share the credit with the student, and even though they don't have to technically, most universities choose to do this. Due to most of the University of Liverpool Online Higher
Education/Laureate (UoL/Laureate) students being active working
professionals, often using their companies/organisations as case studies, the ownership of the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) becomes a little more complicated.
The UoL/Laureate official stance is:
'Except in the case of students supported by outside bodies, where specific provisions relating to intellectual property are embodied in the conditions of the support, all postgraduate students are required to agree to assign to the university all their rights to intellectual property arising from their studies or research at the university... the University has a policy of sharing profits arising... with the staff and students concerned'.
The most relevant section here is 'except in the case of students supported by outside bodies', as most UoL/Laureate students are employed and so
supported externally. However, it is also believed that:
1. They (students) are the effective copyright holders of their Dissertation. Other than placing a copy in the library, the University/Laureate will not publish their work without their consent.
2. Any published work arising out of a Dissertation project should normally be viewed as collaboration between the student and the supervisor, and each has an obligation to discuss this with the other, and to agree on authorship and/or acknowledgements as appropriate. The UoL/Laureate has no rights over any such publication, but it is expected that it will include an acknowledgement that the work was carried out as part of the student's studies with the UoL/Laureate. 3. In the case where a student's Dissertation project is sponsored by their
employer, or relates directly to their employment, the UoL/Laureate will not make any claim on the IPR of the work.
4. In any other case, the student is required to inform the UoL/Laureate if any commercial exploitation of work carried out in the Dissertation is planned. The UoL/Laureate will not normally assert its claim to IPR, however, unless there is a reasonable argument that the Dissertation supervisor should share in the benefits of any exploitation.
The most important factor to consider is probably that it is not in the interests of the UoL/Laureate to forcibly claim rights over a piece of work or
information. At most, the UoL/Laureate will request acknowledgement that the work was carried out as part of the student‘s studies with the University. (b) The second issue regarding copyrights has to do with what is permitted in terms of quotations, etc. within your Dissertation. The University of Liverpool policy can be found in the following publications:
A basic guide for staff and students of the University of Liverpool
http://www.liv.ac.uk/library/info/copyright.html
Further guidance about acceptable use of electronic Library resources is available at:
http://www.liv.ac.uk/library/techserv/ejrnl/copyright.html
A list of contacts:
Confidentiality: Students who need to keep their Dissertation confidential should include the following sentence on the same page that they make their declaration about plagiarism:
‗This Dissertation contains material that is confidential and/or commercially sensitive. It is included here on the understanding that this will not be revealed to any person not involved in the assessment process.‘
Inserting this statement will also preclude the Dissertation from being placed in the Dissertation Library.
Publishing and posting
All documents concerned with the progress of the Dissertation during the Dissertation process (proposals, monthly reports and interim Dissertation drafts), are internal documents submitted to the University for assessment. They should thus be regarded as coursework assignments which belong to the UoL/Laureate rather than to the student. In particular, the Dissertation is an internal document until after final assessment, at which point it becomes public.
3 Methodology (Steps, Schedule and Duration)
The overall duration of the Dissertation module is 9 calendar months from initiation (classroom allocation) to submission, beginning with a concentrated 8-week block of participation with other students within the same Dissertation cohort.
This section provides guidance on the key steps to be taken by the student in the development, ‗doing‘, and eventual submission of the Dissertation. There are two parts to this section. Part One provides a summary of the formal requirements (the ‗must do‘s‘) in terms of the administrative processes and key milestones that govern the whole process. Part Two sets out a series of (‗should do‘) key stages that the student is strongly advised to adopt in order to ensure a suitably structured approach to the whole process.
PART ONE: Formal requirements (The ‘must do’s’)
After starting the seventh credited module, the Student Support Manager will send an e-mail with a reminder to start to prepare for the Dissertation module and to review the ‗My Dissertation‘ materials.
Once notified, students should access ‗My Dissertation‘ in ohecampus and familiarize themselves with the materials and guidelines.
Please note that students cannot take a break between modules for a period longer than 16 weekswithout special authorization. This means that students have approximately 4 months (i.e., 16 weeks) after finishing the last module to start working on the Dissertation.
Dissertation classrooms (‘DA Office’)
The Dissertation begins with the 8 week ‗Research Methods Training‘ (RMT) phase with other students beginning their MScCRA Dissertation at the same time.
Four weeks into the RMT phase, the student will have confirmed their Dissertation subject, will be assigned a DA, and have access to their DA classroom. Please note that a DA will probably be assigned rather than chosen by the student—as we have a limited number of DAs and it will be important to get the right match for the student as well as the right balance and number of Dissertation students for the DA.
All the correspondence between students and the DA should be conducted through the individual classroom that is shared between them. Once in the classroom, the student will be reminded to repost any important prior messages e.g., the Academic Honesty Declaration, which is part of the Week 1 folder.
At the end of the initial 8-week RMT phase, the student will have submitted his/her outline proposal via their DA to the Outline Proposal Review Panel. See below for further details.
Participation in the cohort class initially within the RMT phase and
subsequently within the designated, monthly activities has a ‗pass to progress‘ requirement. This means that the student must participate adequately (as judged by the General Dissertation Instructor supervising the cohort class) to progress to the next phase of the Dissertation.
The aims here are to (a) further develop students‘ research skills by learning from colleague students about their research, and (b) provide a structure and a healthy degree of ‗peer pressure‘ to sustain consistent progress in what past students have found a very lonely and unstructured process.
Submission of outline proposal
The outline proposal development will take place within both the Research Methods Training classroom and your individual classroom with your DA. Submission of the outline proposal will take place within the DA Classroom, to the student‘s DA.
Once the DA believes that the outline proposal has reached a stage that will gain academic approval, the DA submits the proposal to the Review Panel.
This Review Panel is made up of DAs, members of the University of Liverpool on-campus team and the Director of Online Studies (DOS). Feedback will be provided via the DA within 10 days. The outcome of that feedback will be one of three possibilities:
1. Approval
2. Approval subject to minor amendments that can be signed off by the DA and the Review Panel do not need to see the proposal again 3. Not approved, further work required, and resubmission to the review
panel
It is important for the DA and the student to view the Review Panel process as an opportunity for learning and academic rigor. Often when two people are engaged in developing the proposal, they can become so focused on the subject that they can miss elements. Hence, the Review Panel can offer a fresh and objective perspective.
It is worth noting that the initial submission of the proposals might be returned requiring further work. If this occurs, clear feedback will be provided pointing out how the Outline Proposal could be improved. Once the Outline Proposal has been approved, you should begin the development of your Dissertation. Outline proposals must be submitted by the end of Month 2 (a date is set for each cohort —see the ‗Personal Planner‘ in the cohort ‗Research Methods Training‘ classroom, under module materials), and should be approved by the end of Month 3 at the latest. If the student has failed to either submit or gain approval by the third month, his/her SSM will refer him/her to the Academic Progress Committee. If the outline proposal is not approved by the end of Month 4, the student will fail the Dissertation. Obviously, if there are mitigating circumstances, the student will inform his/her SSM who will advise the student of the process to gain an extension. This should be done as in other modules at the earliest opportunity. For further details, see Appendix B.
Ethics applications
All students will be required to complete a UoL/Laureate ethics application form. The DA will determine if it requires Committee on Research Ethics (CRE) approval. The DA will submit the application to the Ethics Approval Panel once he/she judges it as ready for review and following approval of the outline Dissertation proposal. For full details, see the ‗Getting started‘ section. If the student has a local country or area ethics process, the student will also have to make application there. Normally, this is done in parallel with the UoL/Laureate ethics application. However, both processes are required and the application is judged independently by the UoL/Laureate Committee on Research Ethics.
Throughout the preparation for the Dissertation, the student is being advised to steer away from ethically sensitive research topics/design. This advice is given with the intention of minimising the time taken to complete the
Dissertation i.e., within the 9-month period. However, if the student following consideration of this advice chooses to select an ethically sensitive topic
and/or design, the process for gaining ethics approval via the UoL/Laureate and the local area/country ethics approval process will take longer—often many months longer. Although applications for extensions based on documented waiting time for ethics approval will be favourably reviewed by the Academic Progress Committee, the student is still strongly advised to avoid ethically sensitive topics/research designs for the MScCRA Dissertation.
Dialogue between student and DA
The target turnaround time for the DAs‘ responses to questions posed by the student is within 4 days, and within 10 days for feedback on draft chapters. Past experience has shown that work should proceed in well-planned steps and intermediate results should be shown to the DA. The completion of your own research time table is a key early activity: specifying your own
milestones, agreed and signed off by your DA—so that each of you can plan your time accordingly. All discussion should be done in the DA classroom. This is very important as with other modules the quality of teaching and student effort is regularly monitored by the DOS and subsequently by the UoL/Laureate Monitors and the External Examiners (EE).
Chapter drafts
Submission of initial chapter drafts should be included in the planning of any Dissertation. This will allow the student to gain feedback on each completed chapter before submitting a final full draft of the Dissertation to the DA for comments.
If a student decides to submit a final full draft (this is highly recommended), s/he should allow at least 1 month for this phase (submission to the DA, 10 days turnaround from the DA and time then for the student to make any suggested changes prior to the final Dissertation submission date). This draft should be submitted in one of the two drop down boxes to check the
Dissertation through Turnitin.
Submission of final Dissertation
Submission of the final Dissertation document should be made on or before the Dissertation deadline. The completed Dissertation should be posted
through the second dropbox in the DA Classroom. The student must also click on the appropriate ‗button‘ to declare that the thesis is submitted in
‗myohecampus‘. This must be completed for the Dissertation to be graded. Please be aware that failure to complete this notification of submission could lead to a penalty for late submission.
Once the final submission has been made, this marks the point at which communication between the student and the DA should end so that the grading process can begin. The student should monitor his/her classroom for 4 weeks after receipt to address any questions that may arise as part of the grading process. . Your dissertation will then be marked by your DA – as the first assessor – and by a second assessor appointed by Laureate. Once the final submission has been made, you will receive an email confirming the receipt of your dissertation. This contains the final acceptance of your
dissertation and marks the point at which communication between you and your DA should end so that the grading process can begin.
A second assessor will be assigned and added to the DA class. You will be informed who the second assessor is, and the second assessor will introduce himself/herself to you in class. As part of the process the second assessor, and sometimes the DA acting as the first assessor, may ask you to answer a few questions in order to clarify the work presented and to assess the
student‘s depth of understanding of it. The assessors will coordinate the date when the questions will be posted with you, and you must provide response within one week.
When the assessors have no more questions to ask, he/she should inform the student, by placing a message and a note in the DA class, so you will not have to continuously access the system in search of additional questions. Grading will continue for several weeks once the dissertation is complete. Final grades will be released to you as soon as possible after the Board of Examiners has met and agreed on a final award. This could mean a wait of several months, depending upon the deadline and submission date of the dissertation. You will be contacted by your Student Support Manager with official confirmation of the results, once the Board of Examiners has made its decision.
PART TWO: Recommended Key Stages (The ‘should do’s’)
The Dissertation project carries 60 credit points, the same weight as four regular modules. Writing a Dissertation is a creative process, and it does not progress along a straight path. As a guide the student is expected to spend about 600 hours of work on the Dissertation.
One of the most important requirements is that the Dissertation must be completed as scheduled. The deadline is 9 calendar months, from the date the cohort classroom was initiated. The student will be penalized for late submission (grade capped at ―C‖) and will Fail if they are more than 1 month late. Extensions will not normally be granted, except in clearly unexpected circumstances beyond student control, such as waiting for ethics approval over and above the expected 4 weeks and/or in cases of real personal/ family/ medical/work emergencies. As stated earlier, the case for an extension will need to be made in writing with supporting documentation. Such requests should be sent to the Student Support Manager (with the support of the DA gained and posted within the DA classroom), who will approach the Director of Online Studies for approval via the Academic Progress Committee (see Appendix B).
The Dissertation calls for less online attendance than the regular core and elective modules. There might be periods of intensive interaction such as when you are writing chapters, when applying for ethics approval, starting the field work, etc. Nevertheless, it is strongly suggested that students keep an
ongoing dialogue with their DA along with the required participation within the cohort Research Methods Training class—using both to gain feedback, ask questions or simply swop experiences and discuss progress. Feedback from previous students suggests that the timetable and maintaining regular contact with the DA and other Dissertation students is really important to successful completion within the time available.
Timings can vary greatly depending on the nature of the design, the need for ethics approval, and/or the practical requirements for data collection. Once data are collected, again timing will vary, but those stated are to try to help the student plan realistically in order that they can complete the Dissertation according to schedule.
It is strongly recommended that students adopt the following framework as a template to ensure a suitably structured approach to tackling the key stages required for successful completion and subsequent submission of the
Dissertation.
Phase 1 (Weeks 1–8):
This phase is probably the most interactive and structured of the entire 9 months. Students do some quick introductions, exchange of bios, etc and then work through the Research Methods Training materials. These materials aim to provide students with a reminder of key information and support, clarification of expectations, and a review of their proposed subject area. This comprises the first 4 weeks spent within the cohort class in much the same way as previous modules have worked, but with a much lower level of assessment.
The second 4 weeks of this phase are focused on testing out proposal ideas and methods with other students in a similar format to a Discussion Question (DQ). Based on their chosen subject area, students will be assigned a DA and a ‗class‘ through which all the communications with their DA will take place. This runs in parallel to the cohort class for the rest of the Dissertation. Initially students will be asked to post their brief proposals in the Research Methods Training class to gain feedback from as many of the other students as possible. Students will probably be expected to comment substantively and constructively on at least two other outline proposals in each of the 2 weeks when this activity takes place within the cohort classroom. Students will receive feedback on their comments and on the comments other students have made on their proposal from the GDI overseeing the cohort class. It is expected that the outline proposal will be submitted to the student‘s own DA at the start of the fifth week, and students will receive feedback from their DA as to whether the proposal is approved.
Students may or may not be required to complete further work. Whilst awaiting feedback from the DA in parallel, students will be further reviewing and expanding the initial literature review (completed for the outline proposal) and refining their research questions. Finally, when the proposal is
satisfactory, the DA will submit it to the Review Panel who will respond within 2 weeks. Hence, by the end of the second week of Month 3, the outline proposal should be approved. If resubmission is required, then obviously more time will be taken at this stage.
Phase 2 (Weeks 9–14):
Once the outline proposal has been approved, the ethics application can be submitted, if necessary. In the event that it is required, the ethics approval process takes approximately 6weeks: up to 3 weeks for development of the application (which will require many of the practical elements of the research; participant information, consent forms, etc.) and up to 3 weeks waiting for approval by the Committee on Research Ethics (CRE). Whilst awaiting outcome by the CRE, it is expected that students will complete their own Dissertation timetable and sign this off with their DA. In addition, students are expected to be further refining their study design and methodology and also be planning their field work/ collection of data, in anticipation of gaining CRE approval. If students have a local country or area ethics process, then students will also have to make application there. Normally, this is done in parallel with the UoL/Laureate ethics application. However as stated previously, both processes are required and the application judged independently by the UoL/Laureate CRE.
Depending on when students submit their ethics approval application (see section below), a minimum of 4 weeks awaiting the outcome should be
anticipated. Students cannot begin collection of data until ethics approval has been authorised by the DA, following UoL/Laureate ethics application
approval, and where necessary posting local ethics approval (see below ‗Getting started—preparing for research‘).
Phase 3 (Weeks 15–24):
(CRE approval to completion of the data collection and initial analysis) The aim for this stage is the completion of field work/collation of data. The key output is the submission of your draft introductory chapter to your DA (allow 2 weeks for the DA to read and comment); detailed analysis of data and initial results; and a summary of the methods used and the results achieved—draft to DA (allow 2 weeks for the DA to read and comment).
Phase 4 (Weeks 25–28):
(Detailed review of results and discussion of implications) Post a summary of the main results and implications to the Dissertation group in order to present your findings, your view of the implications, and obtain their views (allow 2 weeks in the Dissertation group).
Phase 5 (Weeks 29-–32):
Draft Discussion chapter and send the draft to your DA for feedback (allow 2 weeks for the DA to read and comment).
Phase 6 (Weeks 33–40):
Receive feedback from your DA on the Discussion chapter and complete revisions where required.
The submitted Dissertation must be written according to the guidance given in the section ‗The structure of your Dissertation‘. The DA must receive notice that you intend to submit your draft Dissertation as planned at least 2 weeks before submitting the draft. A complete draft should be sent to the DA at the start of Week 36 at the latest, so that there will be ample time for corrections and revisions i.e., 4 weeks prior to the agreed submission date. The final submission will be evaluated by two assessors as stated earlier.
Throughout all stages:
As stated in the previous sections of this guide, the student and DA should review the due date for the next stage at each stage of the process, and this should be reported in the monthly Status Report. Students should be aware that the ability to keep to agreed deadlines is a key ability for the clinical research administrator.
Each activity of the Dissertation will be carried out in full consultation with the DA, who should be willing to discuss submitted section drafts before the final delivery date. Students should have their DA approve submitted sections before proceeding to the next section during the writing of the Dissertation. It is recommended that each stage should also meet the satisfaction of the DA before the next stage is started.
It is extremely important that a last draft of the Dissertation be submitted to the DA before the final Dissertation submission. The DA will normally
comment in detail only on a single, full last draft before the final submission of the Dissertation.
Access to the Dissertation support materials MScCRA Dissertation module materials folder
Dissertation guidelines—the file that you are reading now Dissertation submission declaration
MScCRA Dissertation categories and example titles
Academic Honesty Declaration—Acknowledging proper behaviour concerning plagiarism and collusion
4 Getting started—preparation for research
Please note: This is written directly for the student as a step by step guide.
The topic to be investigated:
Members of the University of Liverpool clinical research staff have suggested broad research areas of their own current interest which they believe will offer topics suitable for feasible dissertation projects. If a student opts for one of these, he/she can expect to be directly supervised by UoL staff or receive indirect support from UoL through his/her DA in formulating a precise research question and acceptable research methodology.. YOU ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO CHOOSE YOUR DISSERTATION TOPIC FROM ONE OF THESE AREAS on the grounds of feasibility and efficiency alone.
Please be aware that if you chose to follow your own research interest, rather than an area suggested by university research staff, you must be able to defend both the scientific merit of your question and develop an approved research methodology both of which may entail substantial additional time for the proposal review and approval process.
As you will devote so much time to your Dissertation, it is essential that you choose a topic that you will enjoy and find interesting. It is also important to consider the practical aspects of the proposed study. Some topics may simply not be researchable because the necessary skills, procedures, and techniques are not feasible, available, or ethically acceptable, or would take too long, or involve too many people. In addition, you should consider the value of the proposed study in terms of providing new and meaningful insights. This may contribute to your own career development and may provide material for a peer-reviewed publication or preliminary work for a higher research degree. Looking at potential Dissertation titles might help you to choose your topic.
Gaining ethics approval is a ‘must do’ if the research involves human beings, human tissue or human data. In order to obtain ethics approval quickly and so without complications, it is important to choose a non-sensitive focus for your Dissertation. The list of proposed Dissertation categories and titles aims to guide you towards a non-contentious topic in order that your application for ethics approval can be looked at within the ‗expedited‘ rather than the full committee route.
Students are required to share their Dissertation ideas within their Dissertation group, in order to receive feedback on their ideas from the group and DA prior to submitting a formal outline proposal of no more than two pages to the DA, who once satisfied with the proposal, will forward it to the DOS for final
The outline-proposal should be no more than 2 pages in length and the format should be as follows:
1. Title
2. Introduction and background (1 paragraph) 3. Summary of relevant literature (1 paragraph) 4. Research question
5. Study aim and objectives; and assumptions made about the nature of knowledge
6. Methods (including summary of study design; data collection and setting; ethical aspects/expertise available/data protection/confidentiality issues) 7. Research outcomes (1 paragraph)
8. Costs
9. Draft timetable 10. Key references
The appendix of your Dissertation MUST include the final, approved, outline proposal. Please use the Oultine Proposal Checklist to aid successful
completion (See Appendix D).
Reviewing the background research
It is essential to review the relevant literature to inform your hypothesis, research question/study aim(s). This will provide you with a sound theoretical basis, ensure that your proposed topic has merit, and will suggest alternative methods and techniques for conducting your research. A comprehensive review of previously published research should inform your approach and prevent time-wasting.
There are a number of practical tips when searching through the literature: Use the collections of the University of Liverpool Online Library to access e-journals, e-books and databases. These are available through the University portal http://portal.liv.ac.uk and the Online Library home page
http://www.liv.ac.uk/library/ohecampus/
The Library contains important databases for your research such as OVID (Medline), Global Health, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source,
ScienceDirect, and Web of Knowledge.
If you are not sure how to access this information, ask the online librarian:
[email protected] Discuss your keywords and search strategy with your DA, together with likely sources of ‗grey literature‘. Do not forget to search sentinel articles for useful references and to check whether their keywords help you to refine your search strategy.
There are also some search tips on the Library Web site that might help
Consult relevant reference books.
Regularly review current journals for articles that may be relevant. Consult other (local) sources such as previous MScCRA, MPhil, or
PhD Dissertations.
Do not forget the opportunity provided by local libraries for obtaining information.
Stating your aim and objectives/research question/assumptions
It is essential that you clarify the aim of your research. You need to develop a clear idea of what you are hoping to investigate and how this is to be done before you start your research. It might be helpful to start by trying to articulate the overall research question that you are interested in tackling. The study aim(s) and objectives are crucial to your proposal. The study aim should describe the overall purpose of the project and the objectives should outline specific elements (not methods). Keep the objectives concise and restricted in number. Long lists of objectives result in (or from) confusion and do not get done! The objectives can often take quite a while to get right, so do not be surprised or disheartened by the iterative process involved in designing them.
If your study involves testing a hypothesis, define your hypothesis clearly and ask yourself whether the hypothesis is testable and whether the proposed study is feasible. Be aware that how you frame your research question and, for example, whether or not you have a hypothesis to test will be guided by certain assumptions that you make about the nature of ‗knowledge‘/‘the truth‘ and possible study design. You need to note what assumptions underpin your work and clarify the implications for your research approach and findings. In the Dissertation, this can take the form of several concise statements (with a clear link to the reflective parts of the discussion), or be a lengthier reflective discourse integrated in the relevant sections, as appropriate.
Formulating your research question
It is usually crucial to identify a clear research question before starting the study. The research question is simply the question that you intend your study to answer, in part or in full. It should follow on from the previous research questions identified by the studies in your literature review and should provide an overview for the study aim and objectives that you have identified. You should try toarticulate one overall research question.
Deciding how you will carry out your research
Once you have carried out a thorough literature search, you must then formulate a plan for conducting the research. First, consider the main research design, e.g., whether the research involves, for example, a descriptive, analytical, or intervention-type quantitative study design, a qualitative approach, a mixed methods approach, etc. For surveys involving questionnaires, you need to plan the instrument very carefully and this can take a lot of time, especially as you should allow time for piloting. Discuss and
obtain advice from your DA as soon as possible and keep testing out your new ideas.
Having formulated your study design, you then need to establish how the data are to be analysed, e.g., using appropriate statistical tests, clarifying the philosophy underpinning any analysis of data collected by a qualitative approach. Try to avoid complicated research designs or studies that involve long or indeterminate waiting-times to receive data from (especially multiple) routine data sources. If you need epidemiological, statistical, social science, health economics, management advice, etc. seek such advice from your DA at the design stage. Do not wait until you start your analysis.
Once you have a clear idea in your mind of the design and methods of data collection and analysis, you should consider how many participants/cases will be included in your study, if they are required. This will be influenced by the feasibility given the overall time involved and the requirements of your particular study. You may already have a clear idea of the numbers that you require from previously published literature, but you must demonstrate a clear rationale, other than just feasibility, for deciding on that particular sample size and type. If in doubt, take advice.
Do not forget to consider the cost of various components including, for example: travel, telephone, stationery, survey forms, etc.
Planning your research timetable
It is essential in planning research that you specify the estimated length of time required at each stage. Obviously, you cannot be exact in your time predictions because all sorts of unforeseen circumstances may cause delays. Obtaining ethics approval, for example, can take more than a few weeks and can involve numerous changes to your original intentions. Hence, it is better to take this into account right at the beginning in formulating a non-senstive focus. A timetable enables you to plan the project, and focus on its essential components. Remember that wishful thinking at this stage can lead to serious stress later.
Obtaining ethics approval
Complying with legal and ethics guidance and specific local or other codes of practice regarding use of all personal data is a requirement of the
UoL/Laureate. Any research study that involves access to human participants, human tissue, or identifiable data derived from human participants will require primary ethics approval by a research ethics committee in the researcher’s local jurisdiction and secondary review by the University of Liverpool/Laureate Research Ethics Committee.
Depending on which country you are carrying out the Dissertation will
determine the necessary ethics approval. Please do check this out thoroughly. This also applies to the organisation within which your study is carried out: Do they have a specific ethics approval procedure?
Any research study that involves access to UK National Health Service (NHS) patients, staff or patients‘ records, health service facilities, for example, will require the approval of an NHS local research ethics committee (there may be other non-local research ethics committee approval requirements depending on your topic of study). You should also refer to the NHS Central Office for Research Ethics Committees (COREC) guidance available on the National Research Ethics Service (NRES) Web site: http://www.nres.npsa.nhs.uk (The NRES was formed from the Central Office for Research Ethics Committees (COREC) and Research Ethics Committees (RECs) in England.)
If you do need to submit your proposal for such approval, attention to the detail/format that such committees require is essential to avoid unnecessary delay. Ethics committees usually meet no more than monthly, which has implications if the committee returns your research proposal for amendments and resubmission. You must highlight the ethical considerations/processes addressed in your study in the Methods section of your Dissertation, discuss these in the Discussion section, and submit written evidence on the decision for approval (or waiving of such approval) to proceed with the study in an appendix. You must also ensure that you have written permission from any organisation within which (or on behalf of which) you are carrying out your research, and any permissions for reproducing/using materials, as appropriate (also including these in an appendix).
Any research that does not require the permission of an UK NHS Local Research Ethics Committees will need to seek University of
Liverpool/Laureate ethics approval.
In order to access the appropriate forms for expedited or full committee approval please download:
http://www.liv.ac.uk/pcbs/ethics.htm
Expedited review:
Expedited review may be considered:
Where it is judged that the potential risk of harm to participants and others affected by the proposed research is minimal
Where the research is undertaken as part of Undergraduate or
Postgraduate training and follows a previously approved generic study plan
Full (Committee) review:
Applications for full review are considered where expedited conditions have not been met.
The full review process involves one lead reviewer who in turn will discuss the application at Committee. The applicant will also be invited to attend the Committee.
The ethics approval form provides instructions on whether or not the
application will be able to be expedited or if it should be sent for full committee review. If there is any confusion about whether or not your application can be expedited, please ask your DA.
Where ethics approval has been sought from a Local Research Ethics Committee in the country in which the student is carrying out the research, this must be noted on the ethics approval application form and a copy of the ethics approval form MUST accompany the UoL/Laureate ethics application form. Please post a copy in the DA classroom in the first instance.
The important thing to remember is that practising research ethics—whatever your Dissertation topic or method—is an excellent way to prepare for the practicalities of your research. The application will require you to think through each stage of your study and will also require submission of such documents as your participant information and your consent form, for example.
The structure of your Dissertation
The Dissertation structure provided below is to be used as an example. It does not need to be followed exactly. Some aspects of the structure may be more relevant to quantitative Dissertations. Students wishing to undertake a qualitative Dissertation are advised to also consult the journal Social Science and Medicine, which caters to qualitative styles and methodologies.
Abstract
This is a 150- to 300-word, concise, but comprehensive resume of the Dissertation. It is a very important part of the report. Select this text carefully as the abstract gives the reader a framework on which to orient the details of the report and allows the reader to ‗dip in‘ and find out the main purpose, design, outcomes, and ‗so what?‘ of the piece of work. Take care to craft the abstract very carefully as it may well be the first part (and the last part!) that a reader accesses. The abstract should therefore convey the reason for the investigation, the key research design features, important results (with supporting evidence, as appropriate) and conclusions. The abstract should contain all the key-words, if possible, that might be useful in an information retrieval system. It is your responsibility to include sufficient specific detail to convince the casual browser through ‗Dissertation Abstracts‘ that your work is credible, your findings are interesting, and your report is worth reading. Write your abstract using a structured format (or semi-structured format, as
appropriate) such as that used in reputable academic medical journals (e.g., the British Medical Journal, the Lancet, the Journalof the American Medical Association, and the New England Journal of Medicine. You must keep within the specified word-limits. You should also list five key-words on your abstract page that best describe the content and process of your research.
Acknowledgements
You should acknowledge (usually at the beginning of your Dissertation-report) people/agencies who/that have contributed to the intellectual content, data collection, etc. of your Dissertation (this excludes domestic support, but
includes those people who have helped directly with the project). Specify the contribution for which you are acknowledging them. This is additional to any formal thanks that you feel that you should convey in writing directly to the appropriate people/bodies concerned.
Introduction and background (Literature review—Why do this work?)
The short opening section of your Dissertation should explain clearly to the reader why you have decided to embark on this area of research and summarise any necessary background. The introduction should justify the reasons for doing the work to be described and should also provide the context about the ‗problem‘/situation generating the research question. The emphasis is on setting the scene that existed at the start of the project so that the purpose of your research is made clear.
The background should provide more detail on the issues outlined in the Introduction, reviewing the literature critically (and raising any ethical issues). The aim of such a review is not only to identify what you have read but also to demonstrate your ability to critique the literature. You should highlight flaws in the logic or argument, method or analyses in such research reports. You should be able to present a balanced appraisal of research approaches and the evidence-base for your topic, and how this leads to your research aim. Furthermore, try to outline what you hope to achieve through carrying out this research. Outline your literature search strategy either in this section or in the methods. Consider carefully where you should place it in the context of your own Dissertation.
The background should conclude with a clear statement of the study aim(s) and objectives, hypothesis and a specific research question where relevant. Be explicit about the clinical research context of your study and the rationale for that specific research question/study aim. Having written your research question/aim/objectives (and acknowledged, outlined, and justified your
theoretical assumptions), everything else should follow logically on from there.
Methods (What did you do?)
The methods must be designed to meet the objectives. This internal
consistency is very important for a good project design. Key aspects of the methods include:
Identify the source(s) of information such as routine data sources, an existing research dataset, or new data from survey work that you wish to carry out.
If you intend to collect new data, define the population that you will use, the sampling method and sample size.
For all data (whether existing or to be collected), think about definitions and ‗validity‘, including any possible sources of bias, and the data collection method that you intend to use. If you intend to use a
questionnaire (semi-structured, structured, etc.), consider whether to design a fresh or use a tried and tested instrument. If you design one yourself, allow time to develop it and to pre-test it to check the
It is also useful to think through how you would handle, present, and analyse the information that relates to your key objective(s). Try and imagine what that part of your report will look like in terms of tables, graphs, quotations from informants, etc.
The methods sectionshould tell the reader exactly how the study was
undertaken. Ethical considerations/processes must be highlighted. A written statement, from the ethics committee consulted, should be included (in an appendix) to indicate that ethics approval was given or not required. You must state clearly what tests/questionnaires/interview procedures/observation techniques were used and how they were constructed so that a reader could replicate the approach if necessary. In order to clarify what was done,
methods could, for example, be subdivided into the following sections:
(i) Participants– Should be described giving all the relevant details,
e.g., sex, age etc.; how they were selected, and include any inclusion/exclusion criteria
(ii) Design– This section should summarize the design (e.g., observational study–case-control design) and then describe all aspects of your data collection and ways in which you
addressed sources of bias (random sampling, etc.). If you have conducted a survey, describe the design and distribution of questionnaires.
(iii) Materials– If a questionnaire was used, summarize its main features of the design. The instrument itself is usually best put in an appendix.
(iv) Procedures– This section should include a clear, logical, and detailed description of what was done. The reader should be able to replicate the study.
(v) Data Analysis– This section should outline how data were analysed, including, as appropriate:
a) The nature of statistical tests and the level of probability or statistical significance that was used
b) The qualitative approach used
c) The ways in which data were validated/verified
Results (What did you find?)
This section should only include the straightforward reporting of results. Generally, do not comment or discuss your data in this section, simply present it in a clear and meaningful way. Be selective in highlighting the key findings. Summarize the data, e.g., in tables, graphs, text boxes. If required, present any examples of raw data (non-identifiable) or statistical calculations in an appendix. Note that negative results are acceptable.
Ensure that summary material (tables, graphs, line drawings, text boxes, and photographs) are self-explanatory and can ‗stand alone‘, requiring no
reference to the text for the reader to understand them. This means that headings, captions and legends must be carefully composed so that they are succinct and self-contained. This is not to say that the results section should only consist of tables and figures or only consist of quotations. At the very least, you must guide the reader through the data, indicating which
tables/figures/text boxes, etc. illustrates a particular statement: ―X% of the population agreed that Y was more important than Z (Table A), but did not include Y in their overall top five rankings Table B).‖ Do not describe the results merely in terms of ‗Table a shows that… and Table B shows that…‘ as if the section is merely a guided tour of the tables, etc. Avoid repetition of the material presented in the tables in the text; only highlight the important
elements. The results should be a summary of the important findings, with due reference to the summary material. Be clear whether material is integral to the reader‘s understanding of the text or whether it is a stand-alone
summary-element (table, text-box, etc.) to which the reader can refer for further information. Where you are presenting quotations, you must be selective and be clear about what concept that a particular selection
illustrates. If you are analysing quantitative data, you should also be aware of, and pay attention to, the dangers of multiple statistical significance testing.
Discussion (What do your results mean?)
Ensure that you comment on the strengths and limitations of alternative approaches, methods chosen (e.g., Why did you choose to use a
questionnaire/focus group/semi-structured interview, etc.? How well were ethical challenges addressed? What theoretical assumptions underpinned your approach to this research?), and results reported, alternative
interpretations, and how this all relates to your original research question / study aim(s). Within the discussion, you should make clear the lessons that you have learned as a result of carrying out this research. Here, your work and the results obtained should be related to the knowledge base from earlier published material discussed in your review. You should demonstrate that you have reflected on the literature in relation to your own findings. You must not present new results in this section, but may need to refer back to tables or synthesise your emerging ideas into diagrammatic format. By acknowledging caveats, you should place your findings in context and suggest how
improvements could have been made. Above all, this section should
demonstrate your ability to interpret and argue the importance of your findings in a clinical research administration context.
Conclusion and recommendations (So what?)
This section should summarize the conclusions arising directly from your study, and those arising from further discussion in relation to other work. The conclusion should be linked to the aim of the study as stated in the
introduction and clarify ‗lessons learned‘. You should also add some suggestions/recommendations for further work (where these clearly follow your findings) or changes that you would make if the study were to be repeated. Be explicit about the public health implications of your study.
Reference list
This should list all written sources referenced in the text. Use the Harvard style of referencing and be consistent. A useful Web site is:
Guide for Referencing from the UoL Online Library for Laureate students
http://www.liv.ac.uk/library/ohecampus/ref.htm
This guide also provides information about using the online reference management tool, RefWorks, which is freely available to all UoL students.
You should only quote references that you have consulted and verified fully.
The appendices
These should contain details, for example, of data collected if appropriate (non-identifiable), questionnaires, ethics committee approval (and other permissions), statistical calculations, additional data, or additional reflections as appropriate to the research approach. The appendices may also contain additional material about: (i) methods; (ii) data or results; and (iii)
correspondence;but should be kept to a minimum and be selective. Each item included must be justifiable. You should also include a copy of your final proposal in your appendix.
General format Presentation
Good presentation of your Dissertation is crucial.When writing and editing your Dissertation, consider the person reading your work for the first time. Careless presentation will raise doubts in the reader‘s mind about the quality and accuracy of the work itself and will obscure the main messages even where content is good. Presentation covers everything from the strategic considerations of selection of material for inclusion to the structuring of your Dissertation. The key points are careful selection, organization, emphasizing your most important material, and clear, concise writing without errors. Use short and succinct sentence and paragraph construction, not long and tedious text. Use a dictionary and thesaurus to prevent overuse of common words. If the text requires much technical terminology that may require explanation, include a glossary of terms and abbreviations. Ensure that you expand all abbreviations on first use in each section to allow the reader to ‗dip into‘ a section without having to trawl through the whole Dissertation to find out what an abbreviation means.
Word limit
The type of research design, style and content of a Dissertation will influence the length of the finished document. The Dissertation should demonstrate succinct writing, clarity of thought, critical analysis, and the depth of enquiry required for the award of a Master-level degree. You must keep within 10,000 ± 10% words, excluding self-contained elements such as figures, tables,
headings, ‗stand-alone text boxes‘, appendices, reference citations, and reference list (and of course the abstract). Dissertations over the word limit will not normally be accepted as a submission for marking. Please note that inappropriate use of text boxes, figures, tables, and appendices is not a substitute for careful editing and will be penalised.
Title page
This should contain a succinct title that accurately describes the project, your name, the institution to which your Dissertation has been submitted and the date (see Appendix X).
Declaration
The following signed declaration is required following the title page:
No portion of this work has been submitted in support of an application, for degree or qualification of this or any other university or institute of learning.
Signature
List of abbreviations
Present abbreviations in alphabetical order. (If appropriate, include a ‗Glossary of Terms‘. This should follow the list of abbreviations and be presented in a similar manner).
Contents page
This should contain a full list of page numbers for different sections of the Dissertation (and subsections, if appropriate) including a full list of tables and figures (and other such stand-alone elements).
Regulations
Intention to submit
You must submit an ‗intention to submit‘ form to the DA, by e-mail giving 1 month notice of your submission date.
Typographical detail
Be consistent and accurate in your grammar, punctuation, capitalisation, abbreviation, and underlining practices. Use capital letters (upper-case) for proper names only and the initial word of titles in citations. Furthermore:
Use double-spaced typing (except for quotations, as appropriate). Use the Times New Roman or Helvetica/Arial font, size 12.
You must state the overall word count at the end of the Abstract (and provide a separate count for the Abstract itself).
As noted previously, the Dissertation must not be more than 10,000 words +/- 10%.
Pagination
Pages must be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3...) throughout the Dissertation, beginning at page one of the Introduction.
