THESIS EVALUATION PROCESS
Presentation of the Thesis
When the student delivers his Thesis on the scheduled dates, it begins to go through a correction and evaluation process before defending it. The aforementioned evaluation has a first pre-evaluation instance that verifies its formal aspects of writing, authority citations, If, and norms. Once this step has been completed, the academic evaluation is carried out according to the Evaluation Criteria provided and available to students, defined as the set of indicators with which the Evaluation Courts analyze the Thesis after it is received and
write my essay.
Pre-evaluation of the Thesis
If deemed necessary, the master or doctoral student may be asked to make corrections or adjustments before sending the work to the Evaluation Court. With the new delivery of the Thesis, the correction process begins again.
Evaluation Court
This correction period evaluates the contents and will not be less than 60 days. The work is corrected by the evaluators, who will make a correction and will prepare an opinion with the criticism of the document and the suggested rating. The members of the Tribunal are chosen from among the postgraduate teachers or guests who meet the conditions of the Academic Regulations, with the provision that one of them is external to the institution.
The thesis will be:
a) Approved (from 7 to 10 qualification points)
b) On hold (from 4 to 6 points)
c) Failed (less than 4 points)
When the Thesis, after passing the evaluation instance, is "Approved", the master or doctoral student is informed of the assignment of the Table for Defense of their Thesis, according to the scheduled calendar. If the Thesis, having passed the evaluation period, is "On hold", proceed as follows:
a) the statement "On hold" will be entered in the opinion,
b) the Evaluation Court will make recommendations to the student in written form,
c) the author will be granted an additional term, not less than sixty days and that cannot exceed six months, to adjust and deepen the topics covered in the work presented by completing the request and
write essay for me.
Once the new presentation is received, the process described for the first instance will be repeated. After six months, if there is no new presentation, it will be considered 'Disapproved'. In the case of the 'Disapproved' Thesis in the Court's Evaluation process, the masters or doctoral students must take the subjects that the corresponding postgraduate authorities consider and resubmit the Thesis in the periods that correspond to this new course.
CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE MASTER'S AND DOCTORATE THESIS
To establish evaluation standards, the evaluation team must minimally consider the following reference items to measure and evaluate the writing for its later defense.
Approach to the topic
In the introduction, the topic is delimited with conceptual, temporal, and spatial precision. Also, it is framed -justifying it- within the thematic lines of the Faculty. The reasons for their choice (due to cognitive vacancy, to deepen or reformulate a theory) and their relevance (scientific or social impact) are also made explicit and
write my essay for me.
On the other hand, the title and subtitle must show that they are a synthesis of the topic. The title has to be short and precise; and, be in close relationship with the general objective. The subtitle serves to specify and specify the generic or impact formulation of the title. In the case of the subtitle, it should be stated as a reduced definition of the topic.
Conceptualizations and theoretical foundations
In the chapter that follows the introduction, you will contain: a) the problem; b) hypothesis; c) objectives; d) theoretical framework; e) state of the matter; f) methodology.
A scientific knowledge problem must be developed, which seeks to expand or question disciplinary knowledge. The problem has an approach (description) and a formulation (questions). The approach shows that it is constructed from not only the critical reading of the literature related to the subject but also by the reference of observable data; it must also contain the problematic axes, presented by the questions. The problem must be located in time and space, avoiding generalizations without support in reality and abstract statements. In the formulation, several general and specific questions derived from them are asked. These questions have to be correctly formulated: do not imply philosophical, informative, yes/no, counterfactual answers that seek action; do not contain value judgments. From the formal point of view, the problematic questions must be precise, feasible, and disaggregate the research problem.
A general hypothesis and more than one working hypothesis are postulated. They must be well formulated: they must not be prescriptive, evaluative, ambiguous ('it is possible that, 'maybe', or similar expressions), counterfactual, refer to already verified facts. They should be characterized by being counterintuitive (not trivial), as well as by having the capacity for anticipation or predictability.
The objectives are formulated in congruence with each problematic nucleus - posed by the questions - and with the hypotheses. There will be a general objective and specific objectives derived from the previous one.
The theoretical framework and the state of the question are developed in independent sections. The theoretical framework shows the position of the thesis about the chosen topic concerning the established scientific traditions; here, the operational concepts are defined with terminological precision, which will establish the guidelines for the construction of the indicators. In the state of the question, the advances achieved by the field of research in which the object of study is inserted are exposed and the research vacancies are indicated.
Methodology
As stated above, in the chapter that follows the introduction, you will find the methodology.
Aquí, se describe: a) el tipo de investigación según el enfoque general (explicitación y justificación de la utilización de los paradigmas cualitativo y/o cuantitativo); b) el tipo de investigación según los objetivos (explicitación y justificación del grado de profundidad y tipo de resultado de la investigación: descriptiva, explicativa); c) el diseño de la investigación (explicitación y justificación de la utilización de estrategias de carácter documental, de campo, experimental); d) la población y el muestreo (representatividad, variabilidad); e) la matriz de datos, elaborada en función de los objetivos (se explicitan las unidades de análisis; se expresan con claridad las variables (con sus valores) o categorías (con sus dimensiones); se construyen y aplican los indicadores); f) técnicas de recolección de datos, ligadas estrechamente al procedimientos del indicador, (utilización de más de un instrumento; empleo metódico y fiable de las mismas) &
essay writing service.
The data collected will be analyzed, interpreted, systematized, and turned into the body of the thesis. (On the other hand, all the raw data from the observation files, surveys, interviews, as well as other annexes, will be placed in body C).
Content integration
The academic discourse will be written with precision, clarity, brevity, using the third person and/or the plural of modesty.
The table of contents should advance the sequence of chapters and subchapters in a logical order. In the introduction, a synthesis of the chapters will be developed. The chapters will maintain a logical chain of contents between them and, at the end of each one of them, a personal conclusion will be drawn up. In them, the theories and concepts of the theoretical framework will be integrated into the expository-explanatory device. In the conclusion: the working hypotheses will be corroborated or refuted; the general hypothesis will be validated (totally, partially) or not; the fulfillment of the objectives will be evaluated, based on a synthesis of results; a balance will be made on the proposed explanatory theoretical model; it will be made explicit if there are unexpected findings; the genuine disciplinary contribution will be raised; The possibility of knowledge transfer to be used in the thesis reference community will be exposed; and, future lines of research / new research niches will be proposed, considering their viability.
It is hoped that there is innovation in the proposed proposal to solve the research problem.
Bibliography, presentation rules, APA protocol
An updated, scientific-quality bibliography is used. The bibliography is discriminated into primary and secondary sources. The presentation rules established by the University of Palermo are followed. APA rules apply.
THE THESIS DEFENSE COLLOQUIUM
After the approval of the thesis writing by the Evaluation Board, the master or doctoral student accesses the thesis defense colloquium, which must be oral and public, on the date and time previously communicated. The duration of the presentation and defense by the thesis will not exceed 40 minutes and
paper writing service.
It is recommended minimally for the oral presentation of the thesis: a) clearly state the reasons why the research was carried out (research vacancy, brief description of the problem); b) make explicit the general hypothesis to be validated (frame it in the theoretical foundation and academic traditions of the discipline), as well as the general objective; c) review the methodology used; d) indicate the results that have been reached (corroboration and refutation of working hypotheses; total or partial validation of the general hypothesis; fulfillment of the objectives; balance - in light of the conclusions - of the proposed explanatory theoretical model; findings unexpected; disciplinary contribution; knowledge transfer to be the use of the community; future lines of research).
After the presentation, the members of the panel will ask questions, make observations, and raise objections, to which the thesis student must respond, consider, and/or counter-argue. After this process, the Court will issue its final opinion.
CRITERIA FOR THE EVALUATION OF THE DEFENSE OF THE THESIS
The evaluation team constituted as an evaluation tribunal in the thesis defense colloquium, will consider the following criteria:
• For the presentation: a) clarity, pressure, and coherence in the presentation of the content; b) ability to focus on the essential and significance of the proposal addressed; c) theoretical and methodological rigor; d) the results of the research (validation of hypotheses, fulfillment of objectives, disciplinary contribution, transfer, planning of future lines of research); e) didactic, creative and dynamic presentation (ease; graphic or audiovisual support; use of technological means); f) compliance with the time established for the presentation (45 minutes).
•For the defense: a) the responses to the court are satisfactory (completeness, depth, degree of specificity); b) consider the suggestions, observations, or contributions of the court; c) counter-argues with scientific solidity the objections of the court.
Post new
My articles
Deals Facebook
Google plus
Deals Twitter