Graduate Program Form

Department of Human Development and Family Studies

School of Human Ecology
University of Wisconsin-Madison

Master’s Thesis/PhD Dissertation Evaluation

It is the student’s responsibility to distribute this form along with their thesis to each member of the
thesis/dissertation committee. After the defense all forms should be collected by the committee chair and
submitted to the SoHE Graduate Program Coordinator.

Student's Name:
Date of Defense:
Committee Members:

Degree: ◻ MS ◻ PhD

Title of Thesis/Dissertation:

Please review the attached evaluation guidelines and provide your assessment below.
Rating range 1-5 (ex. 1 = No Pass; 3 = Pass; 5 = High Pass)
Category Rating Comments
Research Questions/Set-up

Literature Review

Theory/Conceptualization

Methodology

Analysis/Presentation of Results

Discussion/Implications

Quality of Writing

Oral Presentation

Overall Rating

Additional Comments:

Faculty Signature:________________________
Print name:______________________________
Note: After the signed form is submitted to the SoHE Graduate Program Coordinator., it will be filed in the student's
permanent file and scanned to the S drive for future program evaluation purposes.

Updated October 2014

 Criteria Grade Descriptive Anchors
5 High Pass Includes clear description of the issue, identifies gaps in scientific knowledge and/or provides strong
justification for the current research study. Clarifies study question and, when relevant, provides clear
Research defendable hypothesis.
Question/Set-up
3 Pass Research questions clearly articulated and sufficient background information included.
1 No Pass Lacks a focused research question and importance is not justified. Topic outside of skill set or
knowledge.
5 High Pass Identifies relevant research and literature and accurately summarizes and integrates the information.

Literature Review 3 Pass Cites major works and places them in context.
1 No Pass Fails to cite or assimilate previous works.
5 High Pass Shows understanding of one or more theories, and uses theory to generate hypothesis or to make the
Theory/Conceptua problem area more understandable.
lization
3 Pass Shows a solid understanding and application of theory.
1 No Pass Theoretical framework is lacking or is not clearly linked to the research problem.
5 High Pass Demonstrates clear understanding and proper use of methodology, identifies relevant strengths and
weaknesses of methods used.
Methodology 3 Pass Demonstrates proficient knowledge of methodology and gives justification for selection of methods.
1 No Pass The methodology is not appropriate for study and understanding is not demonstrated.
5 High Pass Results interpreted in light of proposed research question and existing literature. Includes alternative
Analysis/ explanations and instructional tables and graphs.
Presentation of
Results 3 Pass Results clearly summarized, discussion of results focused and tied to research question.
1 No Pass Presentation lacks focus, tables are unorganized, and results produce no insight into proposed
question.
5 High Pass Clearly summarizes the key information gained from the study and describes advancement of
knowledge or new insights on an issue. Sophisticated discussion of implications of findings for
Discussion/ outreach, theory, and research.
Implications
3 Pass Discussion of results focused and connected to research questions. Implications for future research
discussed.
1 No Pass The new knowledge gained from the study and implications of the study are not clearly discussed.
5 High Pass Ideas expressed with exceptional clarity, logic, and conciseness.
3 Pass Coherent presentation with limited typos and grammatical errors. Logical progression of thought
Quality of Writing within overall thesis and within each section.
1 No Pass Significant parts difficult to understand, numerous errors. Repetition, poor organization of ideas, and
poor writing hinders reader understanding.
5 High Pass Engaging, polished presentation with well crafted slides that illustrate key points and emphasize
conclusions. Provided accurate, clear, and complete responses to questions regarding theories,
research methods/study design/statistics, and implications related to the study and broader topic area.
Oral Presentation Unexpected questions about the topic are answered with concise, coherent answers that draw upon
and Defense knowledge of the field and one's research methods.
3 Pass Solid presentation with coherent narrative and conclusions. Mastery of the topic is shown by ability to
answer unexpected questions about the topic.
1 No Pass Too much or too little detail, goals and directions not clear, order of slides not logical; poor slides; or
reads directly from many slides. Difficulty in answering questions and conversing about the topic in
ways that show an easy familiarity and mastery of the topic.

Updated: October 2013