Examiners’ Comments on Masters’ Dissertations at the Islamic University in Uganda

Abstract

This study aimed at exploring the prevalence and nature of examiners’ comments on the appropriateness of draft M. Ed dissertations at Islamic University in Uganda. A total of 530 reports were stratified according to specialisations and examiners from which a sample of 300 reports were randomly selected. Content and thematic analyses were conducted on the reports whose findings were interpreted using Bourke and Holbrook’s (2013) indicators for assessment of Masters’ thesis quality. Findings reveal that under Contribution, ‘originality’ attracted few comments which tended to be neutral, while ‘substantive’ and ‘advancement of knowledge’ tended to be inappropriately done. The Literature Review ‘accuracy’ and ‘application’ categories were among the most highly commented on, with most of them tending to be inappropriately done, while relatively few comments were made on ‘literature coverage’. Under Approach/Methodology, ‘research design’ tended to be appropriately done while ‘sampling’, ‘validity’, and ‘reliability’ tended to be inappropriately done. In Analysis/Findings, ‘quantitative data presentation’ tended to be appropriately done, while ‘qualitative data analysis’ and ‘interpretation’ tended to be inappropriately done. Throughout the dissertation components, concerns on Presentation: ‘communicative competence’ and ‘expression’ were common. It is recommended that the university should engage Masters’ students more in seminars and workshops on research methods and scholarly writing.