Masters Level Dissertation Guidance

Module Title:
Module Code:

Dissertation
MF7 400

Content

Page

Introduction

Module Leaders and Dissertation Administrators Contact Details

Module Learning Outcomes

Guidance on the Dissertation Process

Ethical procedures for the conduct and approval of research

10

The Role of the Supervisor and the student

13

Presenting your dissertation guidelines for formatting and binding your

dissertation including the cover sheet

14

Appendix 1: Sample dissertation cover sheet

18

Appendix 2: Sample letter to study site/organisation

19

Appendix 3: Sample letter to participants

20

Appendix 4: General Consent form and right to withdraw

21

Appendix 5: Dissertation check list

22

Appendix 6: Dissertation marking and feedback sheet tutors will use this
is feedback sheet to mark your work and give you feedback. Also
Dissertation performance descriptors (which explain the marks for each
assessment criteria)

23

Introduction
The Masters level dissertation is 60 credits (equivalent to 4x15 credit modules) and occupies an
important and distinctive position in your study programme. It provides an opportunity for you to
demonstrate a range of intellectual and practical skills which will prove vital in any future career.
The dissertation requires the student to evaluate and synthesise relevant literature and use
appropriate research methodology to produce high quality academic work of approximately
15,000 words. The dissertation may be involve either empirical research, literature analysis, or use
a mixed method approach, based on the topic chosen.
The dissertation is your own work and so represents a vehicle through which you demonstrate an
ability to initiate and pursue rigorous independent analysis of an issue/problem in your field of
study, clearly presenting the results of your own academic research. Subsequently, this will prove
useful as tangible evidence in support of a job application. Furthermore, the techniques you
deploy, the insights you explicate, and the skills you develop as you work through the dissertation
process, will serve you well for the future, as these skills are generic.
The dissertations requirements allow you to concentrate on a specific topic, issue or problem
within your field of study that is of particular interest to you, while developing expertise within
your chosen speciality. Given that the research is conducted on an individual basis, and is not part
of a normal taught module, it allows vital personal traits to be demonstrated throughout the
process. These would typically be your initiative, your time management skills (i.e. your ability to
work on your own within a given time-frame and deadlines) and your organisational skills (i.e.
initiating the research programme, determining the methodology, conducting the research (for
primary/secondary data collection), accessing and analysing the literature/data and presenting the
results/conclusions/policy implications).
Please read this guidance carefully so that you understand what is required for each chapter of the
dissertation and the standard you are expected to reach.

Module Leader and Dissertation Administrator

Module Leader: Dr Zahid Parvez

01530 244 922 Ext. 304

Email: zahid.parvez@mihe.org.uk

Dissertation Administrator:
Ruqaiyah Hibell

01530 244 922 Ext. 281

Email:
ruqaiyah.hibell@mihe.org.uk

CATS Value: 60 credits

Module Curriculum Led Outcomes

The dissertation builds upon other taught modules that you have undertaken within your award
programme, as outlined above, enabling you to demonstrate a range of intellectual and practical
skills, especially:

The initiation of a research project within a business/management context;

The determination of appropriate methods;

Conducting practically-oriented research;

Accessing, analysing and synthesising information (both literature and raw data); and

Presentation of the results/conclusions and commenting on the implications of your findings.

This module aims to:

A. Knowledge and understanding

Produce a self-managed, analytical and scholarly study of an appropriate topic in the field
of study.

Develop critical understanding of how research is conducted in a particular area relating to

the relevant programme of study.

Justify the application of appropriate research methods and techniques acquired through
the programme of study.

B. Subject specific skills, including practical and professional skills

Ability to produce a clearly structured and written major piece of academic writing.

C. Advanced skills and experience

Carry out an extensive and relevant literature review, showing critical awareness of the
subject.
Have confidence in exploring new challenges faced by Muslims in a modern secular world
and provide some directions through a piece of research.

Your work will be assessed for the following:

The standard of presentation and structure;

The validity and scope of research;

Illumination of the topic/issue/problem;

The appropriateness of the theoretical approach/framework; the depth and critical discussion
of relevant literature.

The extent to which the material is applicable to the issues/problems under study;

The effective analysis of relevant data and use of primary/secondary resource materials;
3

An in-depth appreciation of the issues involved;

Thorough and consistent referencing of materials using a standard referencing system.

Word limit: 15,000 words

Submission Deadline: Please note carefully that no extensions to deadlines can be provided
under any circumstances by members of academic staff. All applications for extensions need to go
through the Admissions Office with supporting documentary evidence e.g. medical report/letter.
Any late submission without prior written approval (before the original deadline) from the
Mitigating Circumstance Committee will be assigned a fail grade.

Guidance on the Dissertation Process

Dissertation Structure
Typically the dissertation is organised into five main chapters as shown below:

Preliminary pages (title page, page of contents, acknowledgements, list of appendices, list
of figures and list of tables, using the same layout as for a Table of Contents )

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Literature review

Chapter 3: Methodology

Chapter 4: Findings and discussion

Chapter 5: Conclusion (and recommendations)

References

Appendices

Selecting a suitable topic/issue/problem

Your ideas may develop naturally out of particular interests developed in a module that you have
studied, or are currently studying: alternatively, they may be experiential and relate perhaps to
aspects of your previous work environment or organisation.
Whatever the origin, the first important step is clearly to choose an appropriate topic, i.e. one that
is both viable and of genuine interest to you. You should appreciate that a substantial proportion
of your time will inevitably be devoted to background reading, engaging in secondary research (or
fieldwork if you elect to undertake primary research) and/or other preparatory research before
finally writing-up your dissertation. You should not underestimate the time commitment that this
process entails (15,000 words), but concentrating on a topic of genuine personal interest should
ensure that this at least represents a pleasurable experience rather than an onerous task! You will
also need to give thought to the following: will you have access to the required data, background
etc.? Are there any specialist facilities and resources required to carry out your investigation? Do
you have the required expertise?

Note: The difference between the research problem and research question is that the problem is
broader, while the research question represents the one question that you will answer at the end
of your dissertation.
Your dissertation title should be clear and focused. Start with your topic or research problem and
then try to narrow down to specific questions. To focus your dissertation title and research
questions you will need to determine the following issues:

Select a topic.
Define your core concepts.
Specify your time frame.
What is the geographical location?
What aspect of the topic are you interested in?
What is your unit of analysis (i.e. the thing that you collect data about and from which you
draw conclusions)?

Below is an example (six steps) of how a focused dissertation title developed from areas of
interest.
1. Identify your broad area of interest: e.g. Foreign Direct Investment
2. Identify which country/region are you interested in studying: e.g. Foreign Direct Investment in
the UK
3. Identify which time period particularly interest you: e.g. FDI investment in UK Industry 20002010
4. Which industry in the UK: e.g. FDI in the UK Car Industry 2000-2011
5. What aspects of FDI are you are interested in: e.g. the Determinants of FDI in the UK Car
Industry 2000-2011
6. The final dissertation title from the above steps: An Analysis of the regional determinants of
FDI in the UK Car Industry a comparison with the West Midlands and the North East 20002011
Abstract
Provide a brief (100-350 word) overview of the dissertation. Summarise important elements from
the Introduction, Statement of the Problem, Background of the Study, Research Questions or
Hypotheses, Methods and Findings.
Introduction Chapter
Include the following:
The background and purpose of your dissertation study;
Provide a rationale for the study;
Outline clearly your research questions, research objectives;
Outline the approach and methodology adopted, and;
Outline how the dissertation is organised (that is, what is briefly covered in each chapter
that follows the Introduction).

You should introduce your dissertation study to the reader. Include the motivation and the
background behind the topic you have decided to focus on. Why is it necessary to study the
chosen topic? Explain the research problem you are exploring. What is original? What is known
about it and what is unknown? More specifically what are the major research questions,
hypotheses/propositions and the objectives of the research? In other words justify your
dissertation study, outline the approach and methodology adopted and how the dissertation is
organised (that is, what is briefly covered in each chapter that follows the Introduction).
Below are some further guidance on research questions and objectives.
Research is adding to knowledge, so if someone has already researched the topic, how do you
make it original? Veal (2006) has some suggestions:

Geographically. Certain theories may have been tested in one area but have not received
the same attention elsewhere. Thus, you may find research focused on a topic in the USA.
Undertaking similar research in the UK would provide you with the basis for an original
study.

Socially. You may find that certain social groups have not received as much attention as
others related to your topic of interest. Existing work may focus exclusively upon men, and
exclude women, or you may find a certain theory that has not been applied to the elderly
or to the physically disabled, for example.

Temporally. A theory may have been developed a number of years ago, thus its relevance
in contemporary society could be investigated. Comparing the findings would be an original
study in itself. You may also come across a study that took place some years ago. Collecting
more up to date data may also form the basis for an original project.

Contextually. You may find existing theories from outside your discipline or another
context that might be relevant but have yet to be applied to the context you are interested
in studying. Alternatively, you could revisit existing research using new theories and assess
whether such theories have greater explanatory power.

Methodologically. You could collect different data to explore a phenomenon. An example

may be if you find a theory that has been tested quantitatively, and apply a qualitative
research design, or if you collect data using in-depth interviews rather than questionnaire
surveys.

(Veal, A.J. (2011) Research methods for leisure and tourism: a practical guide. 4th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education)

Research Questions and Objectives: The research question should be specific, concise, and clear.
The research question can be expanded upon by stating sub-questions.
Decide whether your research is descriptive, explanatory or predictive research. Your research
question can then follow one of the following templates (the list is not exhaustive):

What(e.g. what is the relationship between)

In what ways(X affects Y)

To what extent

Under what conditions

6

How(e.g. how would X affect Y)

Why (e.g. why is the uptake of e-commerce low for everyday goods)

Does [name of construct] differ by [variable]?

To what extent does a set of variables explain (or predict) a given outcome variable?

Is there a relationship between [variable] and [variable]?

Is the relationship between [variable] and [variable] the same for [names of groups]?

Does a given explanatory variable (or set of variables) explain a criterion, after taking into
account one or more extraneous variables?

Does [dependent variable] change [or improve or decline] across time among [population
of interest]?

Is the pattern of change [or improvement or decline] on [name of dependent variable] the
same for [names of groups]?

Research Objectives: Next, you have to describe the research objectives as it relates to your
research problem and research question you are interested in. That is, what you aim to cover in
your dissertation in order to find answers to your research questions. This discussion should
explicitly hint towards the contribution you want to make with the intended study.
See below an example of a research question and objectives for understanding why and
how Muslims in the UK might switch their ethnic identification
Research Question: The guiding research question is: under what conditions do Muslim
youth in Birmingham and Bradford inner city areas aged between 14-17 years switch their
ethnic identification?
This involves the following specific objectives:
1. to document the incidence of multiple ethnic identities among research participants through
collecting life histories that focus on the ethnic background of informants and their experience
with ethnicity.
2. to determine the contexts under which the participants invoke their ethnic identity through
collecting data (through observations of the participants in their day-to-day activities) on
characteristics of the communities and social networks of participants.
3. to determine speech acts and behaviours associated with ethnic identity switching through
analyzing participants verbal interactions.
4. to identify rules for invoking one ethnic identity over another through interviews posing a
number of hypothetical scenarios to the participants to assess the appropriate ethnic identities
for a given situation.
The literature review
Having determined the subject area and basic topic, the logical starting point is to conduct a
literature review in order to access as much existing information/data on your chosen topic as
possible. This procedure in itself should enhance your knowledge about your chosen area and
assist in further specifying that topic, i.e. in determining a working title for your dissertation and
7

the necessary detail on how you should proceed with your research programme. You should look
for what are the most important works completed in this area? Who has done it? What was their
theoretical structure? How did they analyse the issue? What were the limitations within their
study? How can your study improve upon it?
In other words, this review process should also help you to decide on appropriate methods and an
academic framework for your research programme. It is, therefore, essential that you embark on
this well before the Dissertation Registration deadline in order to ensure that your research is
viable, i.e. that there is sufficient material (literature, data, statistics, etc.) available for your
purposes.
Note that as your research programme progresses and develops the detailed focus changes in the
light of the literature review and the nature of the material gathered. This will mean that the
detail of the programme is no longer precisely as specified in the original Registration Proposal
that you submitted. This tends to be an almost inevitable part of a dynamic research process, and,
therefore, does not constitute a problem per se, and in such circumstances your original formal
Registration Proposal should remain as originally specified, which means that a copy of it must still
be included as an appendix to your final submission.
Research methodology/techniques
The term methodology relates to the way in which academic research may be legitimately
conducted. To cite an example, if a questionnaire or similar form of data collection and analysis is
central to your research programme, it is vital to understand the most efficient and valid way of
conducting that type of fieldwork. It should be appreciated that surveys of this type or even the
relatively simple task of contacting individuals or institutions directly can be highly timeconsuming. The planning and actual data collection must, therefore, be started as soon as possible
in your research programme, not least because of the time delays that inevitably accompany this
type of fieldwork, and taking into account the time required to analyse the responses received.
This is why some students engage in secondary research, as time constraints can make the task of
primary collection difficult.
In what way is the proposed methodology different than is found in the literature? What are
major assumptions and what are their limitations? What is the major structure of analysis?
Primary, Secondary data, or both? The generation of primary data is not essential. Existing
(secondary) data can be used, providing it is critically assessed in terms of reliability and validity. It
may well be that you utilise both (either is fine). The key is that any data (primary of secondary)
you interrogate must be pertinent to the literature you have reviewed (or your analysis will be
inadequate) and deemed ethically sound before you start to gather your data. MIHEs Research
Committee will review any ethical issues, which arise which cannot be resolved with your
supervisor.
Finally, it is important to note that the validity of any subsequent analysis and interpretation of the
data collected will depend critically not only on the nature and characteristics of that data but also
on the very method of collection that was employed.
What were the major findings of the study? How much do they fulfil the objectives of the study?
8

However, you should be aware that under MIHEs Ethical Approval procedures, you must receive
prior consent from your supervisor before embarking on any research programme that entails
interaction with any other persons, i.e. whether that is in terms of personal interviews or
questionnaires.
In order to assist you with the issue of research methodologies, the following useful general texts
can be consulted, although you could also consult your designated supervisor for advice on all
such issues:

Allison, B. (2004) The student's guide to preparing dissertations and theses. 2nd ed. London: Routledge
Falmer.
Ball, S. (2012) The complete guide to writing your dissertation: advice, techniques and insights to help you
enhance your grades. Oxford: How To Books.
Biggam, J. (2011) Succeeding with your masters dissertation: a step-by-step handbook. 2nd ed. Maidenhead:
Open University Press.
Bryman, A. (2012) Social research methods. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cottrell, S. (2014) Dissertations and project reports: a step by step guide. Basingstoke: Palgave Macmillan.
Creswell, J. W. (2014) Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. 4th ed.
London: SAGE.
Davies, M. B. (2014) Doing a successful research project: using qualitative or quantitative methods. 2nd ed.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jesson, J. (2011) Doing your literature review : traditional and systematic techniques. London: SAGE.
Kumar, R. (2014) Research methodology: a step-by-step guide for beginners. 4th ed. Lost Angeles: SAGE
Machi, L. & McEvoy, B. (2012) The literature review. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks : Corwin.
Oliver, P. (2012) Succeeding with your literature review: a handbook for students. Maidenhead: Open
University Press.
Ridley, D. (2012) The literature review: a step-by-step guide for students. London
Schostak, J. F. & Schostak, J. (2013) Writing research critically: developing the power to make a difference.
Abingdon: Routledge.

Subject-specific guides
Business
W Blumberg, B. et al. (2014) Business research methods. 4th ed. London: McGraw-Hill Education

W Collis, J . & Hussey, R. (2014) Business research: a practical guide for undergraduates and postgraduate
students. 4th ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Education
Arthur, J. (2012) Research methods and methodologies in education. London: SAGE

Bell, J. (2010) Doing your research project: a guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social
science. 5th ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2011) Research methods in education. 7th ed. London: Routledge.
370.72 COH & e-book

Cresswell, J. (2012) Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative
research. 4th ed. London: Pearson.

Johnson, B. & Christensen, L. B. (2014) Educational research: quantitative, qualitative and mixed approaches.
5th ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Thomas, G. (2013) How to do your research project: a guide for students in education and applied social
sciences. 2nd ed. London: SAGE

History
Abbott, M. (ed) (2009) History skills: a student's handbook. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.

Law

Salter, M. & Mason, J. (2007) Writing law dissertations: an introduction and guide to the conduct of legal
research. Harlow: Pearson.

Watkins, D. & Burton, M. (2013) Research methods in Law. London: Routledge.

Politics
Burnham, P. (et al) (2008) Research methods in politics. 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Silbergh, D. M. (2001) Doing dissertations in politics: a student guide. London; New York : Routledge.

Social Science
Bell, J. (2010) Doing your research project: a guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social
science. 5th ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Best, S (2012) Understanding and doing successful research: data collection and analysis for the social
sciences. Harlow: Pearson.

Bryman, A. (2012) Social research methods. 4th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Hart, C. (2001) Doing a literature search: a comprehensive guide for the social sciences. London: Sage.

Hart, C. (2005) Doing your masters dissertation: realizing your potential as a social scientist. London: SAGE.

Jesson, J. (2011) Doing your literature review: traditional and systematic techniques. London: SAGE.

Ormston, R. et al. (2014) Qualitative research practice: a guide for social science students and researchers.
2nd ed. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Electronic Resources
The best way of finding useful journal articles is do a keyword search on the online database:
EBSCO online Journals. You can also consult other sources such as the following (for Islamic
Studies)

Academic Info Religion: www.academicinfo.net/relgindex.html

Sacred texts: www.sacred-texts.com/index.html
Multi Faith Net: www.multifaith.net.org
Religion online: http//religion-online.org
Religious Studies: www.clas.ufl.edu/usres/gthursby/rel

Ethical procedures for the conduct and approval of research

Ethical considerations relating to the conduct of research
Students engage in research within their programmes at all levels and such research is an essential
and vital part of teaching and learning. Much is literature-based using books, journals, periodicals
and web-based material while some research may be outside this framework and will involve
engagement with organisations and people. In such cases, there is a fundamental requirement
that you conduct research so as not to interfere with or harm the subjects physical or
psychological well-being, nor create a situation of vulnerability, either for the subject of the
research, or for the person conducting the research. You are required to limit, as far as possible,
any disruption to an individual or organisation when conducting research. Such considerations are
referred to as ethical considerations, where the term ethical refers to the rules or codes of
conduct of research, notably their rigorous and consistent application by the researcher. MIHE
considers that rules/codes of conduct should be firmly upheld so as to facilitate the research
process within a context of sensitivity to, and respect for, the subject of the research, and to
ensure the researchers own professional integrity.
10

Ethical Guidelines
When undertaking any form of research involving engagement and interaction with organisations
and people, it is imperative that you rigorously and consistently apply the following Ethical
Guidelines (codes of conduct):
Students should:
not conduct research that could be intrusive, sensitive or could cause psychological harm or
suffering to others, i.e. research where the subject is vulnerable in relation to the method
and/or content of the research at all times be sensitive to, and respectful of, the subject with
which they are engaging for purposes of research, be it an organisation, an individual or a
group;
conduct research with integrity and with respect and consideration for any guidelines or
conditions indicated by the subject of the research.
not access records or sources which are confidential without obtaining written permission from
the persons/organisations involved;
be cognisant of any impact on or repercussions for any third party (that is a party other than
the subject or the researcher);
be aware of their own physical and psychological situation and seek to minimise any risk to
themselves, or others, arising from the research process; and discuss any research methods
involving organisations or people, with their (module) tutors, if there is any doubt about their
ability to apply any of the above guidelines.
Ethical Categories and Approval
Ethical approval is the process by a research programme, which involves contact and interaction
with organisations and people, is endorsed formally by the MIHEs Research Committee. Students
cannot proceed with their Dissertation if Ethical Approval has not been granted by the supervisor
(or the Research Committee in case of dispute). MIHEs policy is that research for dissertations
involving contact and interaction with organisations and people must be formally approved before
any research is embarked upon.
Research projects (including those undertaken via the Dissertation, Research Project and
Organisational Consultancy Project modules) that may involve human subjects will require ethical
approval. The degree of interference with human subjects will determine the processes involved in
gaining approval to proceed with the dissertation or project. Dissertations and projects which may
involve human subjects are categorised as either A or B.
Category A Projects: Category A dissertations and projects are ones where there is either no
significant interference with the subjects physical or psychological well-being as a consequence of
primary research, or the investigation is based on secondary sources and involves no primary
research. Accordingly no human subject(s) is considered vulnerable as consequence of the design
of the proposed dissertation or project investigation. Dissertations and projects may involve
access to confidential records provided that the investigators access to these is part of their
normal professional duties and they confirm they have gained organisational approval for the use
of these records in the dissertation or project proposal. If a dissertation or project is deemed to
be in Category A the investigation can proceed.
11

Category B Projects: Category B dissertations and projects are ones that may be intrusive,
sensitive, or could cause psychological harm, or suffering to human subjects. The subject is
vulnerable in relation to the method and/or content of the dissertation or project. If a dissertation
or project is deemed to be in Category B the investigation cannot proceed. Accordingly students
are required to prepare and submit a substantially revised proposed dissertation or project
investigation, based on the Topic Registered and designed to meet the Category A criteria.
Category B proposals include the use of any procedure (including administering of questionnaires
or interviews on sensitive issues) that could cause psychological harm or suffering to the subjects.
Normally dissertations for Islamic studies, banking and finance, management and education do
not fall under this category.
If research does happen to come under this category, the subjects vulnerability is determined in
relation to the methods and content of the research project rather than by an assumption of being
at risk. Category B research includes:

Any research involving covert procedures.

Research that may be offensive. Also, research that is contentious in the sense that it may
bring the university into disrepute.
Research that requires access to, or creates, data about individuals of a highly confidential
nature.
Research involving participants who, within the context of the study to be undertaken, are
considered to be vulnerable. Projects with vulnerable individuals may be designated
category A if it is clear that the vulnerability of the individual is likely to be unaffected by
participation in the study.
Research that requires the administration of certain substances.
Research that requires the approval of another ethics committee will usually be designated
category B. Similarly, research requiring data collections abroad, especially if the supervisor
remains in the UK, will usually require scrutiny by a school ethics committee.

General Ethical Principles for the Conduct of Dissertations and Research Projects
Following submission and acceptance of a Topic Registration, students preparing a dissertation
studies should submit the Ethical Approval with their Proposal. This is part of the dissertation
topic registration form.

The dissertation Proposal should clarify what, if any, primary research activity is intended.
While literature search and reference to secondary sources will be integral to the process of
preparing the Proposal, students should not undertake survey work, administer
questionnaires, make enquiries, conduct interviews, or engage in any form of primary research
without completing an ethical approval form and gaining approval to proceed from their
supervisor.

Students should not undertake any interviews, administer any questionnaires, or apply any
primary research methods which are intrusive, sensitive or could cause psychological harm or
suffering to others.

Students should not access records that are confidential without obtaining written permission
from the persons/organisations involved.
12

Students should ensure that their dissertation or project investigation is carried out in
accordance with contemporary ethical standards for business and management research.

MIHEs Procedures for Ethical Approval

All students will submit the Registration Proposal Form. The Registration Proposal Form
should provide details of the research title, topic area outline, the research methods to be
used, the subjects to be investigated (in the case of primary research), and will identify if
consent has been gained from the subject (individuals or organisations) to be investigated if
needed.

The assigned supervisor then considers the Registration Proposal Form. The Research
Committee is informed if there are any areas of concern. Mostly, students would only have to
modify their mode of data collection, so this should not be allowed to prevent work on the
literature review.

Where projects are clearly Category A, then the supervisor will sign the Registration Proposal
Form and forward this to the Dissertation Administrator.

The supervisor also then informs the student that he/she can proceed with their research.

Where a project is designated as Category B by the supervisor, the student will be unable to
proceed without modification. This should be discussed with the supervisor. In case of dispute
the Research committees decision on the status of a project is final.

13

The role of a dissertation supervisor

The following notes apply to all undergraduate and postgraduate dissertations and their
supervision. It is acknowledged that the emphasis of the relationship between supervisor and
student will vary dependent upon a number of issues, including the confidence, ability and
requirement of the student. Some agreement over operation may usefully be agreed upon at the
first meeting of both parties using these notes as a basis for discussion. Both individuals will want
to ensure that satisfactory progress is being achieved throughout the process. The listings below
are neither exhaustive nor prescriptive, but identify a number of important issues to be
considered.

The role of a dissertation supervisor

to offer general guidance on the dissertation process

to encourage the student to produce the best effort

they can

to provide a sounding board for student ideas and to

offer honest, objective comment and advise

to discuss progress (this might include providing full

feedback at the proposal stage, after the drafting of the
first three chapters, and once the dissertation writing up
is nearing completion).

to assist the student in clarifying the focus of the chosen

topic

to help the student formulate appropriate research

questions, etc. and viable ideas for themselves

to direct the student to relevant information, literature

sources and specialised help

to comment on the appropriateness of chosen

methodologies/techniques

to alert student to referencing style errors and the

problem of plagiarism and other forms of academic
misconduct

to offer guidance on the proposed dissertation structure

to offer feedback on chapter drafts - not to edit work

and correct spelling errors. (Students requiring
assistance with this aspect of their work should be
encouraged to seek appropriate assistance from the
MIHE study skills advisor).

to keep a written record of the opportunities for formal

contact offered to the student and the occurrences of
that contact

to ensure the student is made aware of inadequate

progress and standards of work below the expected
level

to participate in the ultimate assessment, grading and

feedback on the submitted final dissertation including
liaison with the second supervisor, the module leader
and the external examiner

The role of a dissertation student

to take ownership of the process by managing the

relationship with the supervisor, maintaining
contact and meeting key deadlines

to discuss with the supervisor the type of

guidance and comment that would be most
beneficial

to agree a schedule of meetings with the

supervisor for briefings on progress and general
discussions

to take responsibility for ensuring that

satisfactory progress is being achieved and that
any deadlines and target dates are met

to maximise the benefit of having a supervisor by

taking the initiative in discussing any problems
the work, and asking questions that matter most

to maintain a set of working papers which include

a schedule of activities, journal articles used in the
work , data collected, working notes and details of
engagement with the dissertation supervisor, etc.

to prepare for meetings with the supervisor,

(without working papers and draft work these will
not be effective use of time), simple questions or
a point to check should be cleared by email rather
than waiting for a meeting

to be familiar with dissertation requirements

(including the ethical code and the requirement
to avoid academic misconduct) and deadlines
to reflect on honest constructive criticisms of
work by the supervisor (this is not a criticism of
you, or of your ability)

14

Presenting the Dissertation

The Format of the Dissertation
Please note the following rules relating to the format of your dissertation:

the maximum length for the body text of the dissertation (i.e. excluding any appendices) is
15,000 words (including your assessed literature review) with a maximum of 10% above this as
the cut of point.

You will be submitting two copies of your dissertation. One electronically through Moodle (or
otherwise directed) and two printed copies (handed in as directed).

a margin of 30mm must be left on the left-hand side of the page for binding;

each page must be consecutively numbered;

each figure, table or diagram used should also be numbered consecutively;

it is vital that the source be quoted at the bottom of each figure;

footnotes should be placed at the bottom of the relevant page, at the end of the relevant
chapter, or at the end of the dissertation, as long as there is continuity of treatment;

any quotations used must be explicitly acknowledged, presented in "quotation marks" and
fully referenced in the following style: authors name and initials, the year of publication and
page number(s);

the front cover of your dissertation should look something like what is show in Appendix 1

On the second page the following statement (Please read it first) must be included:
This work or any part thereof has not previously been presented in any form to MIHE or to
any other institutional body whether for assessment or other purposes. Save for any
express acknowledgements, references and/or bibliographies cited in the work, I confirm
that the intellectual content is the result of my own efforts and no other person.
I acknowledge and agree that the assessor of this assignment may, for the purposes of
assessing this assignment:
o Reproduce this assignment and provide a copy to another academic staff member; and/or
communicate a copy of this assignment to a plagiarism-checking service. This web-based
service will retain a copy of this work for subsequent plagiarism checking, but has a legal
agreement with the MIHE that it will not share or reproduce it in any form.
o It is acknowledged that the author of any project work shall own the copyright. However,
by submitting such copyright work for assessment, the author grants to MIHE a perpetual
royalty-free licence to do all or any of those things referred to in section 16(i) of the
Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 (viz. to copy work, to broadcast the work or to
make an adaptation of the work)."
I have retained a copy of this assignment for my own records

If appropriate, the third page can comprise acknowledgements which should be limited solely
to individuals or organisations who may have provided material assistance with your research
programme;
15

the Table of Contents will follow on the next page and should include the chapter number, the
chapter heading and the page number of the beginning of the chapter;

on successive pages (but beginning on a new page) the list of appendices, list of figures and
list of tables will be given, using the same layout as for the Table of Contents;

all appendices which contain information considered valuable but peripheral to the order and
content of the dissertation should be placed at the end of the dissertation and be
consecutively numbered. They should include copies of any surveys/questionnaires used and
additional data if referred to in the body of the text;

the bibliography containing all references used should be included at the end of the project
following a standard Citation System,

one hard copy must be bound before submission.

Guidelines on Plagiarism and Collusion

Plagiarism and collusion constitute a form of academic cheating or misconduct and are therefore
treated as extremely serious offences by MIHE. Full details of MIHEs regulations and procedures
concerning cheating, plagiarism and collusion can be consulted in the Students Handbook which is
available on the Moodle.
Submitting the Dissertation
Two copies of the finalised dissertation (i.e at the end point) are submitted, one being a bound
copy, as directed by the Dissertation coordinator, while an electronic copy is submitted through
Moodle.
Confidentiality
It is in your interest to ensure that any confidential information acquired during your research will
only be disclosed in your dissertation in order to protect the anonymity of the source. The failure
to do so may result in vital but confidential information being rendered unavailable in the future
see also the Ethical Procedures advice above which cover all such instances.
Mode of Assessment
The dissertation will be assessed internally both by your supervisor and a second internal marker
and then passed on to the appropriate External Examiner for confirmation or review of the grade
assigned to it. There will also be provision for viva voce examinations to take place where
requested by either the internal or external examiners.
You should note that MIHEs Academic Regulations demand that the dissertation must be
submitted by the due deadline, and that to successfully complete the module, you are required to
gain a minimum mark of 50%.
However, where a fail is awarded, you will be required to retake the entire dissertation, which
means in practice that you must submit details of either an entirely new project with different
aims and objectives or, alternatively, a re-working of your original topic, i.e. a new version which
provides a clear, substantive and demonstrable improvement to the original methodology, data
collection/analysis and/or academic content.
Assessment Criteria
Your dissertation will be assessed on the basis of the following criteria:
16

the standard of presentation and structure;

the validity and scope of your research;

the extent to which you illuminate the issue/problem;

the appropriateness of the theoretical framework;

the extent to which the material is applicable to current business-related issues/problems;

the effective analysis of relevant data and use of primary/secondary resource materials;

an in-depth appreciation of the issues involved in the area; and

the thorough and consistent referencing of materials and provision of a detailed bibliography.

17

Appendix 1: Sample Dissertation Cover Sheet

On the front cover of your dissertation you should include the following:

Markfield Institute of Higher Education

(Validated by Newman University)
Masters Level Dissertation
TITLE OF YOUR DISSERTATION

Dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment if the requirements for the degree of

[insert your course title) at the Markfield Institute of Higher Education,
Validated by Newman University

Student: [insert your name]

Supervisor: [insert your supervisors name]

DATE

18

Appendix 2: Sample letter to Study Site/Organisation.

Name, title/position and address of receiver

(Note: MIHEs rather than personal contact details should be included)

Dear
As part of my course at the Markfield Institute of Higher Education, I am proposing to
conduct a research project into To do this I require your support/help with. If you
agree to take part this will involve The potential benefits of this research include ..
I am therefore writing to seek you permission to conduct this study in .. (state where) with
.. (state whom) and enclose a copy of the research protocol for your information.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours sincerely
Researchers signature

19

Appendix 3: Sample Letter to participants.

Note: We believe it is most important to respect participants right to refuse and that regardless of
the aims of the project, especially as many research participants participate for reasons of charity
and kindness to the researcher. The letter below is an example of the tone you should use in
your letter.
Name, title/position and address of receiver
(Note: MIHEs rather than personal contact details should be included)

Dear .
I am writing to invite you to participate in a research project, which I am conducting as part of a
. course in at the Markfield Institute of Higher Education. I enclose an information sheet,
which explains the title and aims of the project and what taking part will involve.
Some examples
If you are willing to be interviewed, the interview would take between 45 and 60 minutes. Anything
you say would be totally confidential and any notes made as a result of the interview would be
destroyed afterwards. The interview would take place (State location) at a time that is
convenient to yourself. A report will be written of the findings and numbers will replace all names
so that you cannot be identified.
If you feel that you would like to be interviewed please indicate on the attached sheet and hand the
letter to the district nurse next time she visits you. If you would prefer not to be involved, please
destroy/ignore this letter. If you decide not to be involved I would like to assure you that your care
will not be affected in any way.
Yours sincerely,
Signed

20

Appendix 4: General consent form and right to withdraw

Below is an example of a consent form. You may wish to develop your own. The example can be used as
templates but must be adapted so they are appropriate for your study.

CONSENT FORM
Title of Project:
Name of Researcher:
Please initial boxes
1.
I confirm that I have read and understand the information sheet dated
.(version 1, 2 etc.) for the above study and have had
the opportunity to ask questions.
2.
I understand that my participation is voluntary and that I am free
to withdraw at any time/up until commencement of data analysis,
without giving any reason.
3.
I understand that my data will be stored securely and confidentially
I will not be identifiable in any report or publication

and that

4.
I understand that the researcher may wish to publish this study
and any results found, for which I give my permission
5.
I agree for my interview to be tape recorded and for the data to be
used for the purpose of this study.
6.

I agree to take part in the above study.

..
Name

..
Date

Signature

..
..
Name of person taking
Date
consent (if different from researcher, state position)

Signature

.
Researcher

Signature

.
Date

21

Appendix 5: Dissertation Check List

Criterion 1: Introduction
1.1

Has the rationale for the issues/problems/research topic to be investigated been provided? Has the
relevance/significance of the issues to be pursued been clearly established?

1.2

Have satisfactory working hypotheses been formulated OR have the research questions and objectives
been clearly articulated?

1.3

Does the Introduction adequately present the context; describe the scope, identify the beneficiaries of
the findings and signpost the direction of the research?

Criterion 2 Literature Review

2.1

Is the review comprehensive and coherently presented?

2.2

Does the work clarify the key concepts related to the research questions/objectives and include the
latest research findings/thinking on the topic area

2.3

Has the student demonstrated the ability to critically evaluate the literature?
Has the key findings from the literature review been clearly presented and its implications discussed for
the current study?

2.4

Is the review well written (fluent English, composition, referenced correctly, etc.) and not reliant on
simple cut & paste?

Criterion 3 Methodologies employed

3.1

Has a rationale been provided for the choice of the research methodology and methods that have been
adopted? Has the research design and methods been appropriate?

3.2

Have the methods of investigation been employed rigorously?

3.3

Have appropriate methods of data analysis been employed?

3.4

Have these been applied rigorously?

3.5

Has the rationale for using particular methods been justified?

Criterion 4: Discussion of findings and conclusions

4.1

Does the work have a clear focus and direction? Is the work sufficiently focused to give depth?

4.2

Has the findings been discussed in light of the research questions/objectives

4.3

Is the validity of the conclusions, drawn in relation to the theoretical introduction, the research question
and the data analysis, apparent in the dissertation?

4.4

Is it clear how the dissertation builds upon existing work?

4.5

Have the implications of the findings been explained (i.e. the theoretical and practical/policy implications
of the findings)?

4.6

Have relevant areas for future investigation (building on this work) been identified?

Criterion 5: Overall Presentation

5.1

Does it demonstrate development and show previous supervisory feedback has been incorporated?

5.2

Is the work properly and appropriately referenced?

5.3

Is the bibliography relevant, appropriate, up to date and comprehensive?

5.4

Is the dissertation well planned, logically structured and appropriately formatted?

5.5

Concise and clear overall argument within, or no more than, 10% in excess of the word limit?

22

Level 7 Dissertation Feedback Form

Student Name:

Student
No.

Supervisor:
Module Code

Date:

Provisional Marks:
Module Title

Subject Area
Generic Academic Outcomes
Using information: Demonstrate an ability to collect and use primary and/or secondary material in a scholarly manner.
Analysis: Display an ability to identify, compare, justify, and employ appropriate methodologies.
Critical thinking: Show evidence of independent and critical thought (clearly differentiated from that of others).
Synthesis: Distil key arguments and conclusions, and assess their implications for theory and practice in an articulate and concise manner.

100 - 70

Assessment Criteria

60 - 69

59- 50

49 - below

Introduction and/or theoretical background.

Conceptual analysis and literature review.
Methodology
Results
Discussion, conclusions and recommendations
Presentation

Specific Criteria/Overall Comments

Supervisor Signature:
Name (Please print)

Date:
___________________________________

23

Second Marker Comment

Second Marker Signature:

Name (Please print)

Date:
__________________________________

External Examiner Comment (if appropriate)

External Examiner Signature: __________________________________

Name (Please print)

Date: _______________________

__________________________________

24

Level 7 Dissertation PERFORMANCE DESCRIPTORS

Supervisors will use the categories below to form a grade profile of the dissertation. The overall grade arrived at is a
JUDGEMENT guided by this profile

CRITERION 1. INTRODUCTION AND/OR THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

70-100%
Distinctio
n

Excellent Introduction & background; synopsis of relevant literature clearly delineated; research problem stated, research aims,
objectives and primary questions clearly stated, appropriate and aligned. Methods and research approach appropriately stated.

60-69%
Merit

Clear Introduction & background; synopsis of relevant literature delineated; research problem stated, research aims, objectives
and primary questions mostly appropriate and aligned. Methods and research approach appropriately stated.

50-59%
Pass

Good introduction & background; synopsis of relevant literature has gaps; research problem unclear, research aims, objectives
and primary questions mostly show some misaligned. Methods and research approach appropriately stated.

40-49%
Fail

Introduction & background wholly descriptive; synopsis of relevant literature absent; research problem, research aims,
objectives and primary questions misaligned. Methods and research approach inappropriately.

0-39%
Fail

The focus, purpose and method of the project are not made clear to the reader.

Grade
Tick 1
Box

CRITERION 2. LITERATURE REVIEW & CONCEPTUAL ANALYSIS

70-100%
Distinctio
n

Authoritative selection of material from comprehensive array of relevant sources; attention to both scholarly and practitioner
dimensions, with excellent evidence of originality; argument is logical, systematic and persuasive; shows high degree of critical
awareness of linkage between literature and aims

60-69%
Merit

Substantial range of apposite sources consulted; attention to both scholarly and practitioner dimensions, with small omissions
with respect to the argument; generally systematic and persuasive narrative; shows evidence of critical awareness of linkage
between literature and aims

50-59%
Pass

Limitations in variety and depth of sources; reasonable grasp of those consulted and with relevance to the argument; no
particular originality; some unevenness in presentation; narrative is mostly descriptive; modest awareness of linkage between
literature and aims

40-49%
Fail

Obvious omissions of relevant sources; some misunderstanding; argument not following a particularly clear thread, or not
particularly convincing; narrative is wholly descriptive; little awareness of linkage between literature and aims

0-39%
Fail

Key sources obviously omitted, much misunderstanding; little if any argument; lack of a critical stance chapter is just an
incomplete list of authors, taken mainly from basic texts. No evident link to research being undertaken. Overall, the author
appears to have read little and understood less

Grade
Tick 1
Box

Grade
Tick 1
Box

CRITERION 3. METHODOLOGY

70-100%
Distinctio
n

Clearly articulates and justifies the methodological approach to be adopted e.g. deductive/inductive; provides a rationale that
fits the approach chosen; describes the relation between the research aims/objectives and the approach chosen; states the
research hypothesis(es) and link to selection of approach; describes clearly the method and explanation (rationale) of
observation/data collection qualitative and/or quantitative; primary and secondary data collection; methods for analysing
research material; identifies and critically comments on the sampling, piloting and ethic aspects; shows understanding of and
demonstrates validity and reliability of data instruments

25

60-69%
Merit

50-59%
Pass
40-49%
Fail
0-39%
Fail

Methodology generally sound, articulates and justifies the methodological approach to be adopted e.g. deductive/inductive;
provides a rationale that fits the approach chosen; describes the relation between the research aims/objectives and the
approach chosen; states the research hypothesis(es) and link to selection of approach; describes clearly the method and
explanation (rationale) of observation/data collection qualitative and/or quantitative; primary and secondary data collection;
methods for analysing research material; identifies and critically comments on the sampling, piloting and ethic aspects; shows
understanding of and demonstrates validity and reliability of data instruments
Methodology discussed though with incomplete awareness of several aspects and/or omissions. Methods described but key
areas hazy and lacking in justification and complete information.
Methodology confused with description of methods and techniques; unaware of or confused about research design; methods
and techniques taken for granted; errors in sampling, which may be incomplete
Insufficient discussion of methodology, little awareness of its importance; unaware of research design; methods and techniques
inappropriate or incomplete; sampling unconsidered as an issue
CRITERION 4. RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

70-100%
Distinctio
n

60-69%
Merit

50-59%
Pass

40-49%
Fail

0-39%
Fail

Grade
Tick 1
Box

Very reliable data. Triangulated results drive the argument onwards, completely and fairly; contrary findings used to illuminate
or extend the argument. Library-based projects provide crystal clear rationale using published sources to support the argument
seamlessly. Has explained and linked (signposted) the findings to appendices (if primary / secondary data). Clear links to
literature in the discussion; analysis uses techniques appropriate to data. Use is made of appropriate tables, graphs, and other
illustrations. A strong synopsis of findings ends the chapter
Reliable data. Results substantiate the argument, some triangulation attempted, contrary findings highlighted to illuminate or
extend the argument. Library-based projects provide clear rationale using published sources to support the argument. Has
signposted the findings to appendices (if primary / secondary data). Clear links to literature in the discussion; analysis uses
techniques appropriate to data. Use is made of appropriate tables, graphs, and other illustrations. A strong synopsis of findings
ends the chapter
Mostly reliable data. Results substantiate the argument, some triangulation attempted, contrary findings to illuminate or extend
the argument are weak. Library-based projects provide some rationale using published sources to support the argument. Has
signposted the findings to appendices (if primary / secondary data). Some attempt to link literature in the discussion; analysis
uses techniques appropriate to data. Use is made of appropriate tables, graphs, and other illustrations. Synopsis of findings ends
the chapter
Some doubts about data reliability. Results do not substantiate the argument, no triangulation attempted, no contrary findings
to illuminate or extend the argument. Use of secondary data for library-based projects is narrow and not justified. Some
signposting the findings to appendices (if primary / secondary data). Insufficient attempt to link literature in the discussion;
analysis techniques inappropriate to data or not explained. Use of appropriate tables, graphs, and other illustrations is lacking
thought. No synopsis of findings ends the chapter
Little clear argument, reliability of data in serious doubt; no contrary findings to illuminate or extend the argument. Use of
secondary data for library-based projects is insufficient or unsubstantial. No signposting the findings to appendices (if primary /
secondary data). No attempt to link literature in the discussion; analysis techniques inappropriate to data or not explained or
incorrectly used. Use of tables, graphs, and other illustrations is scrappy. No synopsis of findings to speak of

CRITERION 5. CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

70-100%
Distinctio
n

Well-organised, logical, fully supported by evidence, conclusions clear and arise from results/discussion; implications critically
considered for all stakeholders; practical and feasible, with clear consideration of budget issues (if appropriate).
Recommendations driven by conclusions and again explicit for stakeholders

60-69%
Merit

Well-organised, logical, supported by evidence, conclusions fairly clear and arise from results & discussion; implications critically
considered for all stakeholders; practical and feasible, with clear consideration of budget issues (if appropriate)
Recommendations driven by conclusions and again explicit for stakeholders

50-59%
Pass

Reasonably well-organised, logical, generally supported by evidence, conclusions fairly clear and arise from results & discussion;
implications considered for all stakeholders but criticality weak; practical and feasible, with un clear or weak consideration of
budget issues (if appropriate). Recommendations not always driven by conclusions and not for all stakeholders

40-49%
Fail

Grade
Tick 1
Box

Poor organisation; gaps in reasoning; some obvious conclusions omitted for the list; other conclusions not especially driven by
the findings but from common sense. No real implications and recommendation considered for stakeholders

26

0-39%
Fail

Assertions little related to evidence, frequently illogical or arbitrary; conclusions if presented are disorganised; alternatives not
considered; no real understanding of the need to draw conclusions, implications and recommendations from results

CRITERION 6. PRESENTATION.

70-100%
Distinctio
n
60-69%
Merit

50-59%
Pass

40-49%
Fail

0-39%
Fail

Grade
Tick 1
Box

Fully documented and styled according to the brief; written in attractive, engaging, and compelling language; ; text free from
spelling and grammatical solecisms; vocabulary appropriate; specialist terms defined; tables and illustrations beautifully
prepared; excellent allocation of material to main body of text, and appendices. Fully conforms to Harvard Referencing style.
Wordage, binding and related appearance meets requirements
Well documented and styled according to the brief; written in attractive, engaging, and compelling language; ; apart from a few
instance, text free from spelling and grammatical solecisms; vocabulary appropriate; specialist terms defined; tables and
illustrations well prepared; very good allocation of material to main body of text, and appendices. Fully conforms to Harvard
Referencing style. Wordage, binding and related appearance meets requirements
Reasonably well documented and styled according to the brief; written in engaging language; ; text not wholly free
from spelling and grammatical solecisms; vocabulary appropriate; specialist terms defined; tables and illustrations well prepared;
good allocation of material to main body of text, and appendices. Mostly conforms to Harvard Referencing style. Wordage,
binding and related appearance meets requirements
Some incompleteness of documentation and styled according to the brief; written language fails to meet postgraduate standard;
text not wholly free from spelling and grammatical solecisms; vocabulary appropriate; specialist terms defined; tables and
illustrations well prepared; good allocation of material to main body of text, and appendices. Mostly conforms to Harvard
Referencing style. Wordage, binding and related appearance meets requirements
Documentation seriously at fault: missing, misplaced, difficult to find ones way around; persistent errors in spelling and
grammar, solecisms or occasional failure in conveying meaning; typescript messy with uncorrected errors and missing or
incomplete illustrations, tables. Charts.. Referencing and formatting errors widespread

27