Walden University

Dissertation Rubric
March 19, 2009

The purpose of the rubric is to guide students and dissertation supervisory committees as they work
together to develop high quality proposals and dissertations. The committee will use the rubric to
provide on-going and flexible evaluation and re-evaluation of the proposal and dissertation drafts as
they are developed. The University Research Reviewer (URR) who approves the
proposal/dissertation on behalf of the University, will also use this rubric to communicate feedback
and any required revisions.

In the writing process, use the rubric as a suggested outline for the dissertation and as a basis for
feedback on early drafts.

Before the proposal or dissertation oral, each member of the committee should complete the rubric
(Chapters 1 – 3 for the proposal, Chapters 1-5 for the dissertation) and submit it to the committee
chairperson. These rubrics (not necessarily with a consensus achieved) will then be shared with the
URR who will also complete a rubric. The URR forwards his or her rubric to the Office of Student
Research Support (with a copy to the chair), along with a summary letter, for distribution to the
student and committee members, using the research@waldenu.edu address.

After the proposal or dissertation oral, and once the student has completed any requested
revisions to the manuscript, the committee will review it and make any needed modifications to the
ratings in the consensus rubric. A consensus rubric should then be submitted by the chair to
research@waldenu.edu.

About consensus: For the final copy of the proposal or dissertation, there must be unanimous
agreement by the dissertation supervisory committee before the student proceeds to the next step in
the process.

About research methodology: The rubric has been developed for use with studies employing
qualitative, quantitative, and mixed research designs. Chapters 1, 2, and 5 are common to all designs.
For Chapters 3 and 4, the rubric is divided into two separate threads: one for qualitative research
designs and one for quantitative designs. As the student begins the process of developing a proposal
for the dissertation, each dissertation supervisory committee should select the threads of the rubric
(for Chapter 3 and 4 specifically) that best reflect the design of the proposed dissertation study.

Using the rating scale and comment areas: A 5-level rating scale is used for scoring each of the
quality indicators in the rubric. This provides a summary overview of the relatively strong and weak
areas of the document. Ratings of 3 or above are considered satisfactory, while ratings of 1 or 2 do
not achieve minimal standards for passing. A Not Applicable (NA) category is also used when a
component of the rubric is not relevant to the manuscript.

A space for comments is provided for each chapter component. This space can be used to provide
specific guidance for revision, and it should also be used to praise strong work or noteworthy
improvements. More extensive notes can be submitted as a separate attachment or as a marked-up
copy of the manuscript. There is also a column to indicate the page or pages where revisions are
needed and a column for the chair to identify how the concerns were addressed in the revision.

1
 Student and Committee Information

Chair: Complete the shaded fields in this section before submitting the
rubric. Be sure to include the names of all members of the committee.

Date: (click here and type today’s date )      

Student’s Name:
(Last, First) -- (click here and type student’s name )     
Student ID (for office use only) --      
School: (click here and pull down to select school name )

Committee Members’ Names:

Chairperson      
Member      
Member      
University Research Reviewer      
Other (if applicable)      

Evaluation

Each member of the committee should complete the following evaluation.

Stage of the Rubric: (click here to select which period this rubric represents)

Evaluation of State of the Dissertation or Proposal:

Accepted
Not Accepted,

Total Score:      

(Please add up all of your rating scores below and enter the total above.)

Name of member providing this evaluation:      

2
 Proposal and Dissertation Quality Indicators

Assign ratings using the shaded fields in this section for each relevant quality indicator for
the proposal or dissertation. Complete either the qualitative or quantitative sections for
Chapters 3 or 4, depending on which is most appropriate. For proposal rubrics, complete
Chapters 1, 2, and 3. For dissertation rubrics, complete all chapters. (You may wish to
simply add new ratings for Chapters 4 and 5 to your prior ratings for the proposal.)

Definitions of Ratings for Proposal/Dissertation Quality Indicators

5 = Approved with commendation. The level of scholarship is exceptional in this section of

the quality indicators.

4 = Acceptable as written; All crucial elements are included and adequately described.

3 = Approved, although revisions are strongly suggested in one or more important

component(s) that are of markedly lesser quality than the rest of the quality indicators in
this section.

2 = Must be revised and resubmitted because one or more essential component(s) are not
satisfactorily described.

1 = Must be revised and resubmitted because one or more required element(s) are
missing or previous requests for revision were ignored.

NA = Not Applicable. This quality indicator does not apply to the document.

3
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 1 (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

1. Abstract includes all of the following:            

a. Describes the overall research problem being addressed
in the first couple of sentences and indicate why it is
important (e.g. who would care if the problem is solved).
b. Identifies the purpose and theoretical foundations, if
appropriate.
c. Summarizes the key research question(s).
d. Describes, briefly, the overall research design, methods
and data analysis procedures.
e. (For the final dissertation): Identifies the key results, one
or two conclusions, and recommendations that capture
the heart of the research.
f. Concludes with a statement on the implications for
positive social change.

Comments: (click here)      

2. The Introduction section has a clear statement            

demonstrating that the focus of the study is on a
significant problem that is worthy of study. There is a
brief, well-articulated summary of research literature that
substantiates the study (by indicating a knowledge gap),
with references to more detailed discussions in Chapter
2.

Comments: (click here)      

3. In quantitative studies the Problem Statement concisely            

states what will be studied by describing at least two
variables and a conjectured relationship between them.
In qualitative studies the Problem Statement describes
the need for increased understanding about the issue to
be studied.

Comments: (click here)      

4. The Nature of the Study, Specific Research Questions,            

Hypotheses, or Research Objectives (as appropriate for
the study) are briefly and clearly described. Reference is
made to more detailed discussions in Chapter 3.

Comments: (click here)      

5. The Purpose of the study is described in a logical, explicit            

manner.

4
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 1 (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

Comments: (click here)      

6. In quantitative studies the theoretical base or in            

qualitative studies the conceptual framework shows
which ideas from the literature ground the research being
conducted.

Comments: (click here)      

7. Operational Definitions of technical terms, jargon, or            

special word uses are provided.

Comments: (click here)      

8. Assumptions, Limitations, Scope and Delimitations            

provide descriptions of
a. facts assumed to be true but not actually verified,
b. potential weaknesses of the study,
c. the bounds of the study.

Comments: (click here)      

9. The Significance of the Study is described in terms of            

a. how this study will fill a gap in the literature
b. professional application, and
c. positive social change (improvement of human or social
conditions by promoting the worth, dignity, and
development of individuals, communities, organizations,
institutions, cultures, or societies).

Comments: (click here)      

10. Chapter 1 ends with a Transition Statement that contains            
a summary of key points of the study and an overview of
the content of the remaining chapters in the study.

Comments: (click here)      

5
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 2 (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

1. There is an Introduction that describes            

a. the content of the review,
b. the organization of the review, and
c. the strategy used for searching the literature.

Comments: (click here)      

2. The review of related research and literature is clearly            

related to the problem statement as expressed in
a. research questions and hypotheses, or
b. study questions and study objectives.

Comments: (click here)      

3. The review of related research and literature includes            

a. comparisons/contrasts of different points of view or
different research outcomes, and
b. the relationship of the study to previous research.

Comments: (click here)      

4. The review contains concise summaries of literatures that            

help
a. define the most important aspects of the theory that will
be examined or tested (for quantitative studies), or
b. substantiate the rationale or conceptual framework for
the study (for qualitative studies).

Comments: (click here)      

5. There is literature-based description of            

a. the research variables (quantitative studies), or
b. potential themes and perceptions to be explored
(qualitative studies).

Comments: (click here)      

6. The content of the review is drawn from acceptable peer-            
reviewed journals or sound academic journals or there is
a justification for using other sources.

Comments: (click here)      

7. Literature related to the method(s) is reviewed.            

6
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 2 (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

Comments: (click here)      

8. Literature related to the use of differing methodologies to            

investigate the outcomes of interest is reviewed.

Comments: (click here)      

9. The review is an integrated, critical essay on the most            

relevant and current published knowledge on the topic.
The review is organized around major ideas or themes.

Comments: (click here)      

Rating Page # Committee chair

Chapter 3 – Qualitative Studies (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

1. Introduction describes how the research design derives            

logically from the problem or issue statement.

Comments: (click here)      

2. Design describes which qualitative tradition or paradigm            

will be used. The choice of paradigm is justified, with
explanations why other likely choices would be less
effective.

Comments: (click here)      

3. The Role of the Researcher in the data collection            

procedure is described.

Comments: (click here)      

7
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 3 – Qualitative Studies (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

4. Where appropriate, questions and sub questions make            

sense, are answerable, are few in number, are clearly
stated, and are open-ended. When it is proposed that
questions will emerge from the study, initial objectives are
sufficiently focused.

Comments: (click here)      

5. The context for the study is described and justified.            
Procedures for gaining access to participants are
described. Methods of establishing a researcher-
participant working relationship are appropriate.

Comments: (click here)      

6. Measures for ethical protection of participants are            

adequate.

Comments: (click here)      

7. Criteria for selecting participants are specified and are            
appropriate to the study. There is a justification for the
number of participants, which is balanced with depth of
inquiry - the fewer the participants the deeper the inquiry
per individual.

Comments: (click here)      

8. Choices about which data to collect are justified. Data            
collected are appropriate to answer the questions posed
in relation to the qualitative paradigm chosen. How and
when the data are to be or were collected and recorded is
described.

Comments: (click here)      

9. How and when the data will be or were analyzed is            
articulated. Procedures for dealing with discrepant cases
are described. If a software program is used in the
analysis, it is clearly described. The coding procedure for
reducing information into categories and themes is
described.

Comments: (click here)      

8
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 3 – Qualitative Studies (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

10. If an exploratory study will be (or was) conducted, its            
relation to the larger study is explained.

Comments: (click here)      

Rating Page # Committee chair

Chapter 3 – Quantitative Studies (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

1. Introduction includes a clear outline of the major areas of            

the chapter.

Comments: (click here)      

2. Research Design and approach:            

a. includes a description of the research design and
approach,
b. provides justification for using the design and approach,
and
c. derives logically from the problem or issue statement.

Comments: (click here)      

3. Setting and Sample            

a. describes the population from which the sample will be
or was drawn,
b. describes and defends the sampling method including
the sampling frame used,
c. describes and defends the sample size,
d. describes the eligibility criteria for study participants, and
e. describes the characteristics of the selected sample.

Comments: (click here)      

4. If a treatment is used, it is described clearly and in detail.            

Comments: (click here)      

9
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 3 – Quantitative Studies (Click here should describe
(FOR PROPOSAL & DISSERTATION ) how and where
(page #) this
DOCUMENTS) concern has been
Quality Indicators addressed.

5. Instrumentation and Materials            

a. presents descriptions of instrumentation or data
collection tools to include
-name of instrument,
i. -type of instrument,
ii. -concepts measured by instrument,
iii. -how scores are calculated and their meaning,
iv. -processes for assessment of reliability and
validity of the instrument(s),
v. -processes needed to complete instruments by
participants,
vi. -where raw data are or will be available (appendices,
tables, or by request from the researcher), and
b. includes a detailed description of data that comprise
each variable in the study.

Comments: (click here)      

6. Data Collection and Analysis includes            

a. an explanation of descriptive and/or inferential analyses
used in the study, such as
i. -nature of the scale for each variable,
ii. -statements of hypotheses related to each
research question,
iii. -description of parametric, nonparametric, or
descriptive analytical tools used, and
iv. -description of data collection processes, and
b. description of any pilot study results, if applicable.

Comments: (click here)      

7. Measures taken for protection of participants’ rights are            

summarized.

Comments: (click here)      

10
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 4 – Qualitative Studies (Click here should describe
) how and where
(FOR DISSERTATION DOCUMENTS) (page #) this
Quality Indicators concern has been
addressed.

1. The process by which the data were generated,            

gathered, and recorded is clearly described.

Comments: (click here)      

2. The systems used for keeping track of data and emerging            
understandings (research logs, reflective journals,
cataloging systems) are clearly described.

Comments: (click here)      

3. The findings            

a. build logically from the problem and the research design,
and
b. are presented in a manner that addresses the research
questions.

Comments: (click here)      

4. Discrepant cases and nonconfirming data are included in            

the findings.

Comments: (click here)      

5. Patterns, relationships, and themes described as findings            

are supported by the data. All salient data are accounted
for in the findings.

Comments: (click here)      

6. A discussion on Evidence of Quality shows how this            

study followed procedures to assure accuracy of the data
(e.g., trustworthiness, member checks, triangulation,
etc.). Appropriate evidence occurs in the appendixes
(sample transcripts, researcher logs, field notes, etc.).
(May appear in chapter 5.)

Comments: (click here)      

11
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 4 – Quantitative Studies (Click here should describe
) how and where
(FOR DISSERTATION DOCUMENTS) (page #) this
Quality Indicators concern has been
addressed.

1. Chapter 4 is structured around the research questions            

and/or hypotheses addressed in the study, reporting
findings related to each.

Comments: (click here)      

2. Research tools:            

a. Data collection instruments have been used correctly.
b. Measures obtained are reported clearly, following
standard procedures.
c. Adjustments or revisions to the use of standardized
research instruments have been justified, and any
effects on the interpretation of findings are clearly
described.

Comments: (click here)      

3. Overall, data analysis (presentation, interpretation,            

explanation) is consistent with the research questions or
hypotheses and underlying theoretical/conceptual
framework of the study.

Comments: (click here)      

4. Data analyses            

a. logically and sequentially address all research questions
or hypotheses, and
b. where appropriate, outcomes of hypothesis-testing
procedures are clearly reported (e.g., findings support or
fail to support....), and
c. do not contain any evident statistical errors.

Comments: (click here)      

5. Tables and Figures            

a. are as self-descriptive as possible, informative, and
conform to standard dissertation format,
b. are directly related to and referred to within the narrative
text included in the chapter,
c. have immediately adjacent comments,
d. are properly identified (titled or captioned), and
e. show copyright permission (if not in the public domain).

Comments: (click here)      

12
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 4 – Quantitative Studies (Click here should describe
) how and where
(FOR DISSERTATION DOCUMENTS) (page #) this
Quality Indicators concern has been
addressed.

6. The comments on findings address observed            

consistencies and inconsistencies and discuss possible
alternate interpretations.

Comments: (click here)      

7. In a concluding section of Chapter 4, outcomes are            

logically and systematically summarized and interpreted
in relation to their importance to the research questions
and hypotheses.

Comments: (click here)      

Rating Page # Committee chair

Chapter 5 (Click here should describe
) how and where
(FOR DISSERTATION DOCUMENTS) (page #) this
Quality Indicators concern has been
addressed.

1. The chapter begins with a brief Overview of why and how            
the study was done, reviewing the questions or issues
being addressed and a brief summary of the findings.

Comments: (click here)      

2. The Interpretation of Findings            

a. includes conclusions that address all of the research
questions,
b. contains references to outcomes in Chapter 4,
c. covers all the data,
d. is bounded by the evidence collected, and
e. relates the findings to a larger body of literature on the
topic, including the conceptual/theoretical framework.

Comments: (click here)      

13
 Rating Page # Committee chair
Chapter 5 (Click here should describe
) how and where
(FOR DISSERTATION DOCUMENTS) (page #) this
Quality Indicators concern has been
addressed.

3. The Implications for Social Change are clearly grounded            
in the significance section of Chapter 1 and outcomes
presented in Chapter 4. The implications are expressed
in terms of tangible improvements to individuals,
communities, organizations, institutions, cultures, or
societies.

Comments: (click here)      

4. Recommendations for Action            

a. should flow logically from the conclusions and contain
steps to useful action,
b. state who needs to pay attention to the results, and
c. indicate how the results might be disseminated.

Comments: (click here)      

5. Recommendations for Further Study point to topics that            

need closer examination and may generate a new round
of questions.

Comments: (click here)      

6. For qualitative studies, includes a reflection on the            

researcher's experience with the research process in
which the researcher discusses possible personal biases
or preconceived ideas and values, the possible effects of
the researcher on the participants or the situation, and
her/his changes in thinking as a result of the study.

Comments: (click here)      

7. The work closes with a strong concluding statement            

making the “take-home message” clear to the reader.

Comments: (click here)      

14
 Rating Page # Committee chair
General Comments (Click here should describe
Comments on the following indicators of quality apply ) how and where
to the manuscript as a whole. (page #) this
concern has been
addressed.

Writing Style and Composition            

The dissertation is written in scholarly language (accurate,
balanced, objective, tentative). The writing is clear,
precise, and avoids redundancy. Statements are specific
and topical sentences are established for paragraphs.
The flow of words is smooth and comprehensible.
Bridges are established between ideas.

Comments: (click here)      

Organization and Form            

The proposal/dissertation
a. is logically and comprehensively organized, using
subheadings where appropriate,
b. has a professional, scholarly appearance,
b. is written with correct grammar, punctuation, and
spelling,
c. includes citations for the following: direct quotations,
paraphrasing, facts, and references to research studies,
and
d. in-text citations are found in the reference list.
Comments: (click here)      

15