sct thesis dissertation policies and procedures a

7/22/2019 SCT Thesis Dissertation Policies and Procedures A

1/29

School of Consciousness and Transformation

Thesis and DissertationPolicies and Procedures

AY 2010-11


2/29

Office of the School of Consciousness and Transformation 2

THESISTable of Contents

Thesis Option 3

Thesis Proposal 3

Writing of the Proposal Draft 3

Repeated Enrollment in 6900: Proposal Completion 3

Formation of the Thesis Committee 3

Committee Approval Dissertation Paperwork 3

Composition and Responsibilities of the Thesis Committee 4

Thesis Committee Compensation 4

Academic Standards, Scholarly Expectations, and Demonstrating 4Satisfactory Academic Progress

Approval of the Proposal by the Thesis Committee 5

Criteria for Approval of the Proposal Draft 5

Human Research Review Committee (HRRC) 5

Maintaining Active Student Status 5

Time Limits for Degree Completion 6

Thesis Approval 6

Library/UMI 6

Thesis Format 6

Approved Thesis Styles by Program 7


3/29


Thesis Option

In programs offering a thesis option, interested students must consult their academicadvisor as this choice will affect their coursework and will likely extend the length of theirprogram. In some programs, students need to receive advisor or program approval before

they can begin the thesis process.

Thesis Proposal

Students who elect the thesis option are required to write a thesis proposal that must meetwith the approval of a specially selected thesis committee, the program director, and theAcademic Vice-President.

Writing of Proposal Draft

The student must complete a draft of the proposal following the procedures set by theirprogram. In some programs students will complete their proposal as part of a course,whereas in others, students must join a specific seminar whose objective is to supportproposal writing. Students must obtain a passing grade for the course within a semester orare required to repeat the course. A passing grade is given when an acceptable draft of the

thesis proposal is completed.

Repeated Enrollment in 6900: Proposal Completion

Students may enroll in 6900: Proposal Completion for multiple semesters as delineatedbelow by the specific programs;

ACSa maximum of two semester PCCa maximum of two semesters WSEa maximum of two semesters

If the proposal has not been completed and approved before the end of the allocated time,the student may petition the department chair/program director to enroll for an additionalsemester. The petition must include a plan and timeline for completion signed by both thestudent and the dissertation or thesis committee chair. A student who does not have a

completed and approved proposal by the end of the additional semester may be placed onprobation or dismissed from the program.

Formation of the Thesis Committee

When the proposal draft is completed, the student, in collaboration with the advisor and theprogram director, forms a thesis committee. At this stage, the student is required toregister under the flat fee basis and joins a Thesis/Dissertation Proposal Completion seminaroffered by an SCT core faculty member who will chair the committee. This gives the studentthe privilege to work with other faculty towards the approval of the proposal.

Committee Approval Dissertation Paperwork

When the committee is formed, the student should submit the Committee Approval(Internal) Form which should be signed by core CIIS faculty or approved adjuncts who serveas chair of the committee.When one of the two committee members is a non-core CIIS faculty (this includes CIISadjuncts as well as faculty from other universities), the student should also submit theExternal Member or Reviewer Form which should be signed by the external member of thecommittee. Both forms are available on pathway, http://pathway.ciis.edu .

Composition and Responsibilities of the Thesis Committee


4/29


Composition of the Committee

The Committee is composed of a minimum of two qualified members. One of the membersis designated as the Committee chair and should be a core faculty from the program inwhich the student is enrolled. The second member could be a core or adjunct faculty at CIISor drawn from a list of designated adjunct faculty for Theses. The credentials of External

Members or Reviewers on a thesis committee should be:(a) A recognized authority in the appropriate field(s), whether through the

possession of a Ph.D., some other relevant degree, or demonstrable qualifications thatestablish expertise.

(b) The CV must be submitted to illustrate the qualifications of the External Memberor Reviewer.

The composition of the committee must meet the approval of the program director and AVPDesignate. A Thesis Committee Approval form must be completed to this effect andsubmitted to the office of the Director of Graduate Studies.

Chair Responsibilities

The Thesis chair is the primary advisor and is responsible for approving the second member

of the committee and assisting the student in coordinating all theses related activities. TheChair has primary responsibility for ensuring that the thesis adheres to scholarly and ethicalguidelines accepted in the discipline in general, and at CIIS, in particular. The Chairoversees the final approval process.

Member ResponsibilitiesThe second committee member is responsible to read and comment on drafts and toappropriately guide the student through the production of the thesis. While the membershave direct communication with the candidates, they should keep the chair informed of anymajor sources of concern regarding students' progress or the quality of their work. Membersshould assist the Chair in determining the readiness of candidates to graduate.

Thesis Committee CompensationCIIS core faculty members who serve on thesis committees do so as part of their work loadcontracts. Adjunct faculty serving on the thesis committees receive an honorarium.Currently the amount available for honoraria is $600 for serving as member. The amountsare paid in two equal payments, half when the proposal is approved, half when the Thesis isapproved and all paperwork is filed, including if applicable, with the CIIS library.

Academic Standards, Scholarly Expectations, and Demonstrating Satisfactory

Academic Progress

At the end of each semester, the chair or the faculty leading the seminar for which thestudent is registered must evaluate whether or not the student is making satisfactoryacademic progress (indicated by a passing grade). Students must show progress in twoways:

1. The student must be able to document the steps being taken towards the executionof the thesis.

2. The student must be able to produce written sections of the thesis (or otherappropriate medium) which incorporate the feedback of committee members.

A student not showing satisfactory progress for a semester will be put on probation for thesubsequent semester.


5/29


Approval of the Proposal by the Thesis Committee

A draft of the proposal circulates among the members of the committee. The thesiscommittee may require additional changes, additions or clarifications to be made to thedraft. A, Internal Proposal Approval form must be signed by all members of the committeeand the Program Director and submitted to the office of the Registrar.

Under no circumstances can a student begin to conduct a study or undertake field workinvolving human participants without full approval of the proposal by the Human ResearchReview Committee.

Criteria for Approval of the Proposal Draft

The student should clearly identify a focus for the project or formulate a thesis statement,discuss the goals and objectives of the thesis, as well as the theoretical and practicalcontext (literature review), delineate the relevant methodological or logistical issues ifapplicable, including choice of method, design and procedures of the study; discuss theethical considerations if applicable (see also Human Research Review section), and finally,provide adequate references.

Human Research Review Committee (HRRC)If the Proposal involves research with human subjects, the student submits an applicationfor review and approval by HRRC. (Applications for approval are available outside theRegistrars Office or online at http://pathway.ciis.edu.) Some research activities involvinghuman subjects will qualify for a no-risk exempt status, and this status can be determinedby the committee Chair. Examples of research activities can be found in Appendix C.

The responsibility and authority of HRRC to review, approve, disapprove, or require changesto proposals is very important because in doing so it assures protection of the human rightsof participants in Institute sponsored research. It also assures that all research involvinghuman participants is done in an ethical manner and that CIIS complies with professional,scientific, and governmental standards for research using human subjects.

Students may not begin any of their research involving human participants, includingpiloting and fieldwork, until the research proposal has been approved by the HumanResearch Review Committee and the student has received the committees letter ofapproval.

Maintaining Active Student Status

During the writing phase students are required to maintain active student status. Eachsemester students should register under the chair of their committee for the flat fee, 7900:Thesis & Dissertation Seminar until the thesis is approved. Active student status allowsstudents to continue working with all committee members, have library privileges, andsatisfy the minimal requirements for financial aid. Students must show satisfactoryacademic progress each semester they are enrolled.

Time Limits for Degree Completion

M.A. students have 2 years to complete their thesis (seeCIIS Student Handbook). The timecount begins with the first semester that the student registers for the flat fee, 7900:Thesis& Dissertation Seminar.

Thesis Approval

Submission of thesis draft and feedback cycle(s)


6/29


Students expecting to graduate in a given semester should submit a complete draft of theirthesis as early as possible during the semester. Students should expect a minimum of fourweeks of reading time by faculty. Faculty will attempt to be prompt in giving writtenfeedback to the student once they have received a complete draft. The student is expectedto be prompt in making changes requested by Committee members. More than one cyclemay be necessary. When all committee members have read the Thesis and no major

changes are required, the committee is ready to fill in the Thesis Approval Certificate andthe Thesis Approval Tracking form.

Each student has the primary responsibility to assure the quality of the thesis. The studentis expected to work closely with the thesis committee as he or she undertakes the researchand writing for the thesis. After the student undertakes the research and writing for thesis,CIIS programs have established certain expectations for the formatting of theses. Studentsare expected to follow the formatting expectations of the Institute including therequirements for University Microfilms International (UMI) publication. Remember, UMI willreject theses that do not conform, making it even more important to assure that a thesisdoes not have technical problems.

Technical Review

Before submitting the final copy, the student must submit his or her manuscript to one ofthe approved external editors for technical review. Please see the following link for a currentlisting of CIIS approved Technical Editors:http://library.ciis.edu/information/dissertation.asp.

All editorial changes suggested by technical reviewers must be incorporated into the finalmanuscript before final submission to committee members. The students pay the hourly feeof $40 to the technical reviewer.

Students, in discussion with their Chair, must decide if their thesis will eventually be madepublic by submitting it to the CIIS library and to UMI. A set of precise guidelines is availablefrom the library that provides directives on format, presentation, and copyrights. During the

final approval stage, all submitted theses undergo a technical review.

Final Approval

The Thesis Approval Certificate must be signed when the final accepted draft has beenreceived by the committee. Before the final signatures are given, the student must make allrequired changes, and the Chair must review these changes. The committee membersofficially approve the final document when they sign the Thesis Approval Certificate and theFinal Approval Tracking Form, indicating that the thesis has been completed to their fullsatisfaction.

Library/UMI

Filing the Final Copy with the Library

It is the students responsibility to make sure that the final approved copy of the thesis isfiled with the library. When filing the manuscript with the library the student must makesure to provide:

The thesis manuscript (unbound) in publishable form The Final Approval Tracking form with all signatures The Approval Page with all signatures Two copies of the title page Two copies of the abstract


7/29


The UMI Dissertation Agreement form, UMI copyright registration form, and optionalorder form, found in the Publishing your Dissertation or Thesis pamphlet availableat CIIS, or online at: http://library.ciis.edu/information/umi.asp

Reprint permission letters, if applicable Multimedia component (if applicable)

The Library will not accept the theses without all of the necessary paperwork. A studenttechnically graduates when the final copy is accepted by the library.

Thesis Format

All Thesis proposals and Theses must adhere to the most recent standards of one of thefollowing style manuals: the American Psychological Association Publication Manual (APA),the University of Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Style Manual of the ModernLanguage Association (MLA), or the AAA Style Guide (American Anthropological Association;www.aaanet.org/pubs/style_guide.htm); students should check with their program aboutwhich of these style manuals is to be used. Manuals are available in the library and fromthe bookstore; detailed guidelines for all four acceptable formats are linked fromhttp://library.ciis.edu/information/dissertation.asp.

Approved Thesis Styles by ProgramStudents must use a style approved by their program.

East-West Psychology- APA or ChicagoPhilosophy and Religion, Asian and Comparative Studies- Chicago or MLAPhilosophy and Religion, Philosophy, Cosmology, and Consciousness- Chicago or otherstyles by permission of the programPhilosophy and Religion, Womens Spirituality-Chicago with FootnotesSocial and Cultural Anthropology- AAA only (note, Chicago not approved style)Transformative Inquiry- APA is the default style; Chicago or MLA by permission of theprogram (applies to TSD and TLC)


8/29


DISSERTATION

Table of Contents

1 THE PROPOSAL 9

Writing the Proposal 9Non-completion of the Proposal at the End of the Semester 10Repeated Enrollment in 6900: Proposal Completion 10Academic Quality in the Proposal 10Satisfactory Progress during the Proposal Writing Phase 10Formation of the Dissertation Committee 11Approval Process for the Proposal 11Towards the Final Draft 11Proposal Defense Meeting 11Human Research Review Committee (HRRC) 11

2 THE COMMITTEE 12Composition of the Committee 12

Approval of Dissertation Committee 12Chairs Responsibility 12Member Responsibilities 12External Committee Members and External Review 13Dissertation Committee Compensation 14

3 ADVANCEMENT TO CANDIDACY 15Requirements for Advancing to Candidacy 15

4 RESEARCH AND WRITING 16Keeping Active Student Status 16Styles and Formats 16Approved Dissertation Styles by Program 17Technical Review 17Ongoing Review of the Dissertation Draft 17Satisfactory Academic Progress during Research and Writing Phase 17Time Limits for Dissertation Research, Writing and Approval 17Requests for Extension 17Deadlines for Submissions 17

5 THE DISSERTATION APPROVAL AND DEFENSE 18Submission of Dissertation Completed Draft and Feedback 18Determination of Student Readiness for Defense 18Dissertation Defense 18Final Draft Approval (After the Defense) 18

Time Limits for Submittal of Final Approved Dissertation 20Filing the Final Copy with the Library 20Publishing the Dissertation 20

Appendices

A List of Forms Needed for Thesis/Dissertation Process 21B HRRC Categories 22C Dissertation Proposal Rubric 24


9/29


1. THE PROPOSAL

Doctoral students are required to write and defend a dissertation as the culminatingacademic activity in their degree program. In the dissertation the student is demonstratingthat s/he is able to design and complete an independent, original scholarly work. The

process begins by writing a paper (the Proposal) which proposes the topic, scope, andmethod of research. The intent behind the Proposal is that the student shows that s/he hascreated a project that has the potential to be a successful dissertation.

During the preparation of the Proposal, and through the final draft stage of its preparation,the student will search for a faculty member to chair the dissertation committee, and thenform the rest of the committee. Students should refer to individual program guidelines tolearn the procedure for proposal preparation.

WRITING THE PROPOSAL

Under the guidelines of the program, a student must first complete a draft of the proposal

following the course-based or mentorship procedures.

By course (unit based): Students enroll in a course whose objective is to support proposalwriting. The course title and name varies by program. Students must obtain a passinggrade for the course within a year or are required to repeat the course. A passing grade isgiven when a draft of the dissertation proposal is completed, pending committee edits andapproval. The following is a list of programs offering proposal writing classes and thecorresponding courses:

East-West Psychology EWP 8100: Research Colloquium, 1 unit

Social & Cultural Anthropology ANTH 9000: Ph.D. Specialization

Seminar, 0 unitsWomens Spirituality PARW 7809: Proposal Writing, 3 units

In the Transformative Studies Program, students enroll in two core course ComprehensiveExams in which they complete the Literature Review and Methodology chapters of theirproposal.

Transformative Studies TSD 9610: Comprehensive Exam: LiteratureReviewTSD 9611: Comprehensive Exam: ResearchMethodology

By mentorship (no units): Students work independently with their mentor the faculty

member who will chair their dissertation committee. Asian & Comparative Studies andPhilosophy, Cosmology, and Consciousness concentrations follow this model.

Asian & Comparative Studies PARA 6900: Thesis/Dissertation ProposalCompletion, 0 units

Philosophy, Cosmology, & Consciousness PARP 6900: Thesis/Dissertation ProposalCompletion, 0 units


10/29


Non-completion of the Proposal at the End of the Semester

If the student does not complete the proposal during the semester in which coursework orwork with the mentor is undertaken, s/he must register for and continue to register for oneof the following 0-unit, flat fee courses in subsequent semesters until the Proposal iscompleted.

HUMI6900, EWP6900, PARA6900, PARP6900, PARW6900, ANTH6900 and TSD6900: Thesis/Dissertation Proposal Completion

The faculty name on the Registration Form should be the proposed Chair of the committee.

Repeated Enrollment in 6900: Proposal Completion

Students may enroll in 6900: Proposal Completion for multiple semesters as delineatedbelow by the specific programs;

ACSa maximum of two semester EWPa maximum of two semesters PCCa maximum of two semesters IHLa maximum of two semesters SCAa maximum of three semesters TSDa maximum of two semesters WSEa maximum of two semesters

If the proposal has not been completed and approved before the end of the allocated time,the student may petition the department chair/program director to enroll for an additionalsemester. The petition must include a plan and timeline for completion signed by both thestudent and the dissertation or thesis committee chair. A student who does not have acompleted and approved proposal by the end of the additional semester may be placed onprobation or dismissed from the program.

Academic Quality in the Proposal

As the Proposal writing progresses, the student should keep in mind that committee

members will be evaluating the Proposal based on the following criteria:

clear identification of the research topic or formulation of a thesis statement discussion of the goals and objectives of the study and their significance clear statement of the scope and limits of the study provide a theoretical and empirical context for the study (review of literature) discussion of relevant methodological issues, including when applicable, choice of

method, design and procedures of the study, as well as ethical considerations provide adequate references

Satisfactory Progress during the Proposal Writing Phase

Students should show satisfactory progress in the completion of their proposal, and mustcomplete their proposal within the general time limit allowed for the completion of course

work. Additionally, the Proposal should be completed within one year (see programhandbook as guidelines differ). Doctoral students can expect to advance to candidacy whenthey have completed their course work, comprehensive exams, and dissertation proposal,and met any other requirements of the Program Agreement (Curriculum Contract). Thetime limit for completion of these activities is four years. Failure to meet the designatedtime limits may lead to academic probation.


11/29


Formation of the Dissertation Committee

When the draft of the proposal is nearing completion, students consult either with theiracademic advisor, mentor, and/or a dissertation chair to form a dissertation committee.Students must complete the Internal Committee Membership Approval Form as soon as allfaculty have agreed to work with them. Curriculum vitae of all proposed members andexternal reviewers who are not core CIIS faculty members must be attached to the form for

the Program Director to review. The Program Director and the Academic Vice Presidentmust approve the proposed Committee. Refer to the section two for membership criteriaand individual responsibilities.

APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE PROPOSAL

Towards the Final Draft

In the semester following enrollment in the proposal writing course or work with the mentorto write the proposal, the student registers for one of the 6900 courses in order tocontinue work with the Committee Chair, as well as other faculty, including the externalmember.

After consulting with the Chair, the student circulates the completed Proposal among all

members of the dissertation committee. The committee may require additional changes,additions or clarifications. Committee members may give their feedback directly to studentsor forward them through the Chair.

Proposal Defense MeetingThe dissertation Proposal is approved during a Proposal Defense Meeting which is convenedby the Chair and is attended by all committee members and the student. At the meeting,the Committee must reach consensus regarding dissertation topic, overall design, andadequacy of methodology. Should consensus not be reached, the student must resubmit arevised proposal and/or form a new committee, upon the recommendation of the Chair.

Human Research Review Committee (HRRC)

If the proposal involves research with human subjects, the student submits an applicationfor review and approval by HRRC. (Applications for approval are available outside theRegistrars Office or online at http://pathway.ciis.edu.) Some research activities involvinghuman subjects will qualify for a no-risk exempt status, and this status can be determinedby the committee Chair. Examples of research activities can be found in Appendix C.

The responsibility and authority of HRRC to review, approve, disapprove, or require changesto proposals is important because in doing so it assures protection of the human rights ofparticipants in Institute-sponsored research. It also assures that all research involvinghuman participants is done in an ethical manner and that CIIS complies with professional,scientific, and governmental standards for research using human subjects.

Students may not begin any of their research involving human participants, including

piloting and fieldwork, until the research proposal has been approved by the HumanResearch Review Committee and the student has received the committees letter ofapproval.


12/29


2. THE COMMITTEE

Composition of the Committee

The committee is composed of a minimum of three qualified members, two from CIIS andone external member. A dissertation committee should consist of three members andcannot exceed four members. No honorarium is offered to the 4th member.

The Chair of the committee should be a core faculty in the School of Consciousness andTransformation, preferably within the concentration of the student.

A second member can be either a core or adjunct faculty at CIIS, or drawn from a list ofdesignated adjunct faculty for dissertation. The second member should be experienced inmentoring research projects relevant to the dissertation.

The third member designated as the external member should not have current affiliationwith CIIS.

The credentials of both second and third committee members (Adjuncts, External Membersor Reviewers) on a dissertation committee should be:

(a) A recognized authority in the appropriate field(s), whether through thepossession of a Ph.D., some other terminal degree, or demonstrable qualifications,that establish relevant expertise.(b) The CV must be submitted to illustrate the qualifications of the External Memberor Reviewer.

Approval of Dissertation CommitteeThe composition of the committee must meet the approval of the Academic Vice-Presidentand the program director. Students should complete the Thesis/Dissertation Internal

Committee Membership Form and procure the necessary signatures.

Chairs ResponsibilitiesThe Chair is the primary advisor and is responsible for approving members of the committeeand assisting the student in coordinating all dissertation related activities. The Chair hasprimary responsibility for ensuring that the dissertation adheres to methodological andethical guidelines accepted in the discipline in general, and at CIIS, in particular. At a laterstage the Chair convenes the Dissertation defense and presides over its proceedings. TheChair is in charge of supervising post-defense incorporations of minor changes required bythe committee and forwards all appropriate documents to the Program Director who thenforwards all documents to the Library Director.

Member Responsibilities

The Dissertation Committee members are required to read and comment on drafts and toguide the student appropriately through research procedures and the production of thedissertation document. While the members have direct communication with the candidates,they should keep the Chair and other members informed of any major sources of concernregarding students' progress or the quality of their work. Members should assist the Chair indetermining the readiness of candidates to defend their work. Members must be present atthe defense and are expected to participate in the committee deliberations either in personor by phone.


13/29


External Committee Member/Reviewer

All CIIS dissertations require an external academic review, and therefore, each doctoralprogram requires an External Committee Member or Reviewer. The definition of the tworoles: External Committee Member or External Reviewer Only follows.

Committee Member. An External Committee member is required to read and comment on

drafts and to guide the student appropriately through research procedures and theproduction of the research document. While the members have direct communication withthe candidates, they should keep the Chair and other members informed of any majorsources of concern regarding the students progress or quality of work. Members shouldassist the Chair in determining the readiness of a candidate to defend his/her work.Members must be present at the defense and are expected to participate in the Committeedeliberations either in person or by phone.

Reviewer. An External Reviewer assesses, reviews, and comments on the students Thesis/Dissertation Proposal and the Final Draft only. If required, the Reviewer participates in theOral Defense.

The difference in the two roles is that the Committee Member is more involved in the

students process from proposal to final dissertation; whereas the Reviewer is onlyassessing the proposal and final dissertation. The compensation for both roles differs (seeDissertation Committee Compensation section).

Both roles have the responsibility to review the proposal according to eight key areas in theCIIS Dissertation Proposal Rubricdeveloped by the Faculty Research Committee in AY 2004-05. The review of the proposal focuses on eight key domains including:

Inquiry/Topic Research Question(s) Intellectual Context, Background & Support for Questions (Review of Literature) Methodology / Ways of Knowing Limitations Expected Outcomes / Results Organization and Form Style / Voice / Esthetics

The External Member or Reviewer also reviews the final draft of the dissertation for (a)soundness of the implementation of the quantitative and/or qualitative data analysis and (b)thoroughness and appropriateness of conclusions and interpretations in the discussionsection.

For selection of the External Committee Member or Reviewer, see specific programguidelines. External Members should receive the External Member or Reviewer Packetwhich contains their appropriate forms available at http://pathway.ciis.edu . Finally, see

program guidelines for a full description of the role of External Reviewer.

The qualifications for serving as an External Committee Member are as follows:

(a) A recognized authority in the appropriate field(s), whether through the possession of aPh.D., some other terminal degree, or demonstrable qualifications that establish relevantexpertise.(b) The CV must be submitted to illustrate the qualifications of the External Member orReviewer.


14/29


The External Committee Member or Reviewer has a minimum of four weeks to conduct areview of the proposal and submits the CIIS Dissertation Proposal Rubric. Comments on thefinal draft of the dissertation itself are submitted on the External Member or Reviewer,Review and Approval of the Thesis/Dissertation Final Draft form to the Committee Chairwho gives a copy to the student and the other committee members. If the Chair and other

committee members concur with all queries of the review from the External CommitteeMember, the Chair then contacts the student with the requirement to make these changesand notes the actions on the specific External Review and Approval of theThesis/Dissertation Final Draft form. If the Chair seeks clarification of the review, notationsare made on the original review report and are communicated to the External CommitteeMember. When the Chair is clear and satisfied with the points raised in response to queries,the Chair then communicates to the student what changes need to be made.

Dissertation Committee Compensation

Adjunct members and external members receive an honorarium, disbursed in two equalpayments, first paid upon the approval of the proposal and second, following the approval ofthe dissertation as a result of the defense. Honoraria are now set at $1200 for serving asChair, $600 for serving as members and $300 for serving as reviewers. CIIS peer members

do not receive honoraria.


15/29


3. ADVANCEMENT TO CANDIDACY

Requirements for Advancing to Candidacy

In order for students to be considered a Candidate for doctoral research and then to earnthe degree, the following conditions must be satisfied:

Course work in the program must be completed. Other requirements, if any, must be successfully completed (e.g., language

competency requirement).

The Comprehensive Exams must be successfully completed. The Dissertation Committee must be accepted by the program director and the

Academic Vice-President.

The Dissertation Proposal must be accepted by the students Committee. If the dissertation involves research with human subjects, the Dissertation Proposal

must be reviewed and approved by the Human Research Review Committee.

All forms associated with the above activities must be completed.

Once students have officially advanced to candidacy, they should register in 7900

Thesis/Dissertation Seminar each semester until they graduate. Reaching the advancement

to candidacy threshold permits students to apply for teaching positions at most colleges and

universities.


16/29


4. RESEARCH AND WRITING

Keeping Active Student Status

During the research and writing phase and until the dissertation is successfully completedand fully approved, students are required to register each semester for Thesis/DissertationSeminar offered by SCT Core faculty (usually the Chair of the committee). This is a 0-unit,flat fee course with the course number designation of 7900. Students who are eitherworking with their chairperson or intending to graduate during the summer semester mustregister for summer semester. Students who are not working with their chairperson orintending to graduate during the summer semester do not have to register.

Maintaining active student status in this way gives the student the right to work withcommittee members and to use the library and other CIIS facilities. Students must showsatisfactory progress each semester that they are enrolled.

Styles and FormatsCIIS doctoral programs have established certain expectations for the formatting ofdissertations. Students are expected to follow these expectations, including therequirements for UMI publication (University Microfilms Incorporated). All dissertationsshould follow only one of the following styles, as described in most recent edition of thesemanuals:

AAA - American Anthropological Association guidelines as published inhttp://www.aaanet.org/pubs/style_guide.pdf

APA Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association Chicago Chicago Manual of Style MLA - MLA Style Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing

Approved Dissertation Styles by ProgramStudents must use a style approved by their program.

East-West Psychology- APA or ChicagoPhilosophy and Religion, Asian and Comparative Studies- Chicago or MLAPhilosophy and Religion, Philosophy, Cosmology, and Consciousness- Chicago or otherstyles by permission of the programPhilosophy and Religion, Womens Spirituality-Chicago with FootnotesSocial and Cultural Anthropology- AAA only (note, Chicago not approved style)Transformative Inquiry- APA is the default style; Chicago or MLA by permission of theprogram (applies to TSD and TLC)

The style format provides guidelines for general organization of material, includingheadings, tables and figures, text citations, and references. Detailed information, CIISrequirements, and sample standard pages for each CIIS-approved style format are linkedto: http://library.ciis.edu/information/dissertation.asp.

Students are strongly encouraged to work closely with the most recent edition of theirchosen style manual, which are available in the CIIS library and bookstore.


17/29


Technical Review

Before the dissertation defense, the student must submit the manuscript to an externaltechnical reviewer approved by CIIS. The list of approved technical editors is available athttp://library.ciis.edu/information/dissertation.asp. All editorial changes suggested bytechnical reviewers must be incorporated into the final manuscript before final submission tocommittee members prior to the dissertation defense. Students can reduce the technical

review costs by adhering carefully to the format requirements. Technical editors on theInstitute list have agreed to charge $40/hr. The technical review can take as little as 3hours or more than 20 hours, depending on how carefully the dissertation has beenprepared. Students are responsible for these expenses, and pay the technical review editordirectly.If a dissertation requires more than a technical review, for example, if it needs basic editingor copy editing, the reviewer will contact the student to inform him/her of the additionalamount of time required for editing. The student may hire the technical review editor, acopyeditor, do the editing him or herself, or hire another editor.

Ongoing Review of the Dissertation Draft

The student should consult with the Chair to decide how the material should be submitted to

the committee members (e.g., in separate chapters or entire document). Committeemembers are encouraged to give feedback as promptly as possible to students, but certainlyno more than four weeks from the receipt of a chapter.

Satisfactory Academic Progress during Research and Writing PhasesAt the end of each semester, the Chair must evaluate satisfactory progress (indicated by apassing grade). Students must show progress in one of the following two ways:

1. Document steps taken towards implementation or conduct of a study, including butnot restricted to: library search and reading, translation, preparation of researchinstrument or questionnaire, securing the participation of research participants,fieldwork or data gathering (multiple forms), interview transcription, data analysis,

and validity check;

2. Production of written (or other appropriate medium) sections of the dissertationand/or incorporation of written feedback by committee members.

Students not showing satisfactory progress for two semesters will be put on probation forone semester during which they must show satisfactory progress.

Time Limits for Dissertation Research, Writing and Approval

Doctoral students have four years to complete all research, writing, and defense of thedissertation (seeCIIS Student Handbook). The time count begins with the first semesterthat the student registers for the flat fee 7900: Thesis & Dissertation Seminar.

Requests for ExtensionWith the approval of their Chair, students can apply to the Academic Vice President for anextension of time. The request should include a timeline for completion and an explanationof why the student needs one. Be aware there are financial aid implications for not keepingto the designated time limits and maintaining satisfactory academic progress.

Deadlines for Submissions

See each semesters published Class Schedule for applicable deadlines pertaining totechnical edits, oral defense, and Library submission and approval.


18/29


5. Dissertation Approval and Defense

Submission of Dissertation Completed Draft and Feedback Cycle(s)

As a general guideline, students expecting to graduate in a given semester should submit,

after consultation with their Chair, a complete final draft of their dissertation to allcommittee membersno later than the first week of class in that semester. Students shouldexpect a reading time of four weeks by faculty, including the External Committee Member.While individual chapters may have been separately reviewed, the entire document mayundergo a more comprehensive review.

Note: More than one cycle of feedback and corrections/additions is often necessary.

Determination of Student Readiness for Dissertation Defense

When all committee members have read the dissertation and no major changes arerequired, the Chair, in consultation with the committee, will determine whether or not thestudent is ready to defend. It is the responsibility of the Chair to make this determination.Although the Chair is sensitive to students logistical needs, determining the readiness for

the defense is based primarily on the satisfactory completion of the work. Students canstart preparation for defense scheduling only with the approval of the Chair, and studentsneed to be prepared to register for an additional semester if the committee determines thatthe document is not ready to defend.

Dissertation Defense

Each doctoral student must meet with her/his committee for a defense of the final researchdocument. This occurs after all members have agreed to a final draft of the dissertation withonly minor changes expected to be made. The defense takes place at CIIS except for onlineprograms (TSD). Should a committee member from out of town not be able to come toCIIS, the committee Chair may allow that member to attend the defense proceedings via aconference telephone call. If a committee member is unexpectedly absent, he/she must

submit a written report to the dissertation Chair.

No less than three weeks prior to the defense, the student must submit a DissertationDefense Scheduling Form (available from the Registrars Office or athttp://pathway.ciis.edu ). This form serves as notice to the program and also providesdocumentation. For those defenses occurring at CIIS, program staff members are availableto reserve a room for the committee at the appointed time. Interested persons are invitedto attend the defense; however, any visitors to the defense must remain respectfully silentduring the proceedings and may ask questions only at the invitation of the Chair.

The student must bring two forms to the defense:

The Dissertation Certificate of Approval Page (Signature Sheet) that becomes partof the finished dissertation. It must follow the CIIS format requirements, linked fromhttp://library.ciis.edu/information/dissertation/asp

External Member or Reviewer, Review and Approval of the Thesis/Dissertation FinalDraft

Final Draft Approval (After the Defense)

The Committee will make one of three judgments after the oral defense: (a) Full Approval-approval with no changes to the defended document required, (b) Provisional Approval-approval with only minor revisions required, or in the most unusual of circumstances (c)


19/29


Not Approved-no approval until significant revision(s) to the dissertation is completed.These assessments are documented at the defense on the Thesis/Dissertation FinalApproval Tracking Form. When appropriate, the Chair announces the Committeesjudgment regarding the dissertation, and whether the student will be awarded the title ofthe Ph.D. pending completion of the final reviews.

If there are no changes required by the committee, then the Certificate of Approval Pagewill be signed by all committee members and the Chair. S/he checks the appropriate box onthe Thesis/Dissertation Final Approval Tracking Form. The Chair and student provide asignature on the form verifying that both have agreed on this outcome. The Chair thensubmits the four items specified above directly to the Program Director.

Should changes at the level of minor revisions be required, committee members but notthe Chair will sign the Certificate of Approval Page. The Chair describes the nature of therequired revisions on the Thesis/Dissertation Final Approval Tracking Form. The student andChair sign this form verifying that both have agreed on this outcome. Only after the studenthas fulfilled the revision requirements will the Chair sign the Approval Page and the area ofthe Thesis/Dissertation Final Approval Tracking Form that verifies satisfactory completion ofthe dissertation. The Chair is then responsible for submitting the four documents specified

above to the Program Director.

If there are one or more areas of significant revision required of the student, then no one onthe committee will sign the Certificate of Approval Page at the defense. The Chair fills in theappropriate blanks on the Thesis/Dissertation Final Approval Tracking Form, includinginformation on the types of revisions required by the committee. The form specifies if thechanges to the dissertation are remedial or non-remedial. If the revisions are remedial, thestudent may continue in dissertation phase and may be asked to reapply for a seconddefense at a future time. If the changes required are non-remedial, the student may notapply to defend the same dissertation. The Chair and student both sign this form verifyingagreement to this outcome. Only after the student has fulfilled the revision requirementswill the Chair sign the appropriate approval section of the Thesis/Dissertation Final Approval

Tracking Form. The student is then responsible for securing committee member signatureson the Certificate of Approval Page. The Chair then personally submits the items specifiedabove to the Program Director, and the student submits one copy of the dissertation to theLibrary Director.

The Student is responsible for submitting the following items directly to the Chair: A final, approved copy of the dissertation The signed Final Approval Tracking Form The completed External Member or Reviewer Review and Approval of the

Thesis/Dissertation Final Draft

Then, the Chair is responsible for submitting these items to the Program Director.

The student is also responsible for submitting the following items to the Library Director: A final, approved copy of the dissertation The fully signed Certificate of Approval page

The Library Director has 2 weeks to submit feedback to the student, and the student hasanother 3 weeks to work with the Library Director to complete the edits and submit apublication ready copy to the Library. The Program Director gives feedback to the chair whocommunicates feedback to the student. If the student does not complete the changes by the


20/29


day before the beginning of the following semester, s/he must register for the nextsemester.

Time Limits for Submitting the Final Approved DissertationStudents need to maintain active student status during the semester/s in which theycomplete revisions to the dissertation. Deadlines are constructed to allow students 60 days

between the defense of the dissertation and the submission of the publication ready copy tothe Library. If revisions take longer than the end of the semester, the student will need toregister for the next semester.



It is the students responsibility to make sure that the final approved copy of thedissertation is filed with the library. When filing the manuscript with the library the studentmust make sure to provide:

The thesis/dissertation manuscript (unbound) in publishable form The Thesis/Dissertation Final Approval Tracking form with all signatures The Approval Page with all signatures Two copies of the title page Two copies of the abstract The UMI Dissertation Agreement form, UMI copyright registration form, and optional

order form, found in the Publishing your Dissertation or Thesis pamphlet availableat CIIS, or online at: http://library.ciis.edu/information/umi.asp

Reprint permission letters, if applicable Multimedia component, if applicable

The Library will not accept the dissertation without all of the necessary paperwork. Astudent technically graduates when the final copy is accepted by the library.

Publishing the Dissertation

The CIIS graduation fee includes the UMI publication cost and copyright registration cost, sono additional fees are due at this time. It also includes the cost of a copy of the publisheddissertation for the student, who may purchase additional copies (optional). Library staffwill send dissertations to ProQuest/UMI for publication.


21/29


APPENDIX A

CIIS Forms Associated with the Thesis/Dissertation Process

All forms are located outside the Registrars Office or online athttp://pathway.ciis.edu.

For Students

Inside the Thesis/Dissertation Forms Packet:

1. CIIS Thesis/Dissertation Internal Committee Membership Approval Form(For CIIS core faculty only)

2. CIIS Thesis/Dissertation Internal Proposal Approval Form(For CIIS core faculty only)

3. CIIS Dissertation Defense Scheduling Form (Ph.D. only)4. Thesis/Dissertation Final Approval Tracking Form

For External Committee Members or Reviewers

Inside the External Member or Reviewer Forms Packet:

1. Thesis/Dissertation External Member or Reviewer Form(For non CIIS core faculty including CIIS adjuncts)

2. External Review: CIIS Dissertation Proposal Rubric(For non CIIS core faculty including CIIS adjuncts)

3. External Member of Reviewer: Review and Approval of the Dissertation (Final Draft)(For non CIIS core faculty including CIIS adjuncts)

For Students

Other dissertation related forms:

1. Human Research Review Application

2. Application for Advancement to Candidacy (Ph.D. only)

3. UMI Publishing Your Dissertation Packet (available athttp://library.ciis.edu/information/dissertation.asp)


22/29


APPENDIX B

HRRC Categories

T h e f o ll o w i n g e x am p l e s a r e m e a n t t o a s si s t st u d e n t s a n d com m i t t e e ch a i r s in d e t e r m i n i n g

t h e n e e d t o h a v e s t u d e n t r e s e a r c h r e v i e w e d b y HRRC:

No Risk Exempt Review:To be reviewed by the HRRC Committee: The single review exception is in research that does notinvolve human subjects in any way. If this is case, the students research chair may make thisdetermination. All other cases must be reviewed by the HRRC.

A Pli-to-English translation of Puggalapannyati Atthakattha (Commentary on Human Types)Translation and commentary of a Buddhist text.

Nature and Application of Spiritual Care for the Dying: Perspectives from Mahayana Buddhism and TheWestern Hospice TraditionA dissertation focusing on the literature in the fields of hospice care, Mahayana Buddhism, andexistential psychology.

The Psychological Dimension of the Spiritual Heart in the Mystical Poetry of HafezA dissertation using the hermeneutic method to explain the spiritual transformation implicit in the Sufimystical poetry of Hafez.

How Transpersonal Consciousness Can Evolve Value Systems of Responsibility to Reduce Ethnic- andGender-based ViolenceA dissertation which analyzed data which has already been collected from Kosovar participants inthree development program evaluations.

A Textual Analysis of Reported Changes in Consciousness Induced by EntheogensA dissertation which analyzed archival data that were legally recorded in clinical setting by StanislavGrof at the Maryland Psychiatric Institute.

Low Risk Review:To be reviewed by the HRRC Committee: The students research involves human subjects andrequires an HRRC low risk review.

Stories of Forgiveness: Reweaving the Fabric of the HeartThis research used Organic Inquiry as the research methodology. The research participants werechosen based on their having consciously committed themselves to a journey of forgiveness due to aspecific incident of circumstance, on being well-known by the researcher, and living within a thirty-mile radius of the researchers home.

The Experience of Being Called and Following Ones CallingThis research used a qualitative combined biographical-case study methodology. Subjects werecontacted by the researcher because they were known by the researcher or they had in some waypublicly self identified as appropriate for the research topic.

The Emerging Role of the Laity Within the Catholic Church A Case StudyThe subjects interviewed, researched and evaluated consisted of initial participants and later recruitswho participated or were continuing to be engaged in the implementing phases of planning process asdetermined by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Oakland, CA.

A Control Mastery Application to Treating Chronic Depressive DisordersSubjects were chosen from the researchers clinical case load with strict guidelines for eligibility andconsent process.


23/29


Educating Soul Capacities: Empowering Waldorf Educators Through Transformative LearningThis research used qualitative inquiry as the methodology. Subjects were selected from a group ofteachers that were actively engaged in Waldorf Education at the current time of research.

High Risk Review:To be reviewed by the entire HRRC Committee: The students research involves human subjectsand requires an HRRC high risk review at one of the monthly HRRC meetings.

Effects of Touch Therapy on the Embodied Experience of Incest SurvivorsThe subjects were drawn from women volunteers who had been in psychotherapy for at least twoyears. They were self-identified and elected a course of touch therapy treatment during the course oftheir psychotherapy. Asking participants to speak about experiences which could trigger deep, painfulemotional responses indicated that a regular review of the proposal was necessary.

Psychobiographical Antecedents of the Ecologically Conscious and the Environmentally ConcernedA multiple case study which employed interviews of the subjects, direct observations of subjects, andarchival materials such as articles, diaries, letters, or photographs. The potential for triggeringunconscious psychological material in the interviewees indicated a regular review of the proposal was

necessary.

The Healing Power of the Curanderos Songs or Icaros: A Phenomenological StudyThe dissertation interviews individuals in ayahuasca circles about their healing experiences with thesongs in the rituals. The interviews had the potential for triggering painful psychological materialindicated a regular review of the proposal was necessary.

Suicidal Crisis and Life-threatening Illness A Narrative InquiryUsing face-to-face interviews, the dissertation explores psychological and emotional meanings asexpressed through story-telling, about experiences and perspectives concerning suicidal crises withinthe context of life-threatening illnesses. Given the depth and difficulty of the subject matter, and thepotential that participants could become overwhelmed or uncomfortable by way of various thoughtsand emotions which could emerge at any time during the interview process indicated a regular reviewof the proposal was necessary.

Toward a Deeper Understanding of the Aspects of Long-Term Practice of Ceremonial SexualityThe dissertation used face-to-face interview techniques and audio tape with practitioners ofceremonial sexuality to research the aspects and effects of long-term practice (minimum four years).As psychological issues around sexuality and intimacy could trigger deep emotions such as sadness oranger in the participant, a regular review of the proposal was necessary.


24/29


APPENDIX C

CIIS Faculty Research Committee February 2005

SCT Dissertation Proposal Rubric and Scholarly Expectations

Introduction

The School of Consciousness and Transformation supports and encourages a broad visionof scholarship, including the knowledge of existing research methodologies and/or thecreative development of new ones. We frame our scholarly expectations within anintegral view of education that strives to embody spirit, intellect and wisdom in service toindividuals, communities and the Earth.

We value excellence in scholarship. A dissertation proposal should demonstrate that thecandidate has both a broad and deep knowledge of the students field of study and is ableto state clearly and support a thesis and conduct a well-defined and meaningful study.

The dissertation should make an original contribution to the students area of scholarship.

We recognize that students undertaking a dissertation within integral perspectives mayface creative tensions pertaining to the relative importance of varying notions: e.g.,innovation and tradition; subjectivity and objectivity; creativity and rigor; disciplinaryfocus and interdisciplinary connectivity; intuitive insight and rational discourse; socialtransformation and knowledge for knowledges sake. We encourage students to reflectopenly and cogently on challenges as they emerge in their own work: philosophically,theoretically, methodologically and self-reflectively.

Attentive to the broader contexts that inform research at CIIS, the rubric is designed toserve as a guide and a learning tool for students. The rubric helps students and faculty

assess the quality of dissertation proposals, during proposal writing or at the point ofcompletion.


25/29


DISSERTATION PROPOSAL RUBRIC

Faculty Reviewer Name: ___________________________________________ Date____________________

Proposal Submitted by: ____________________________________________

Academic Expectations for Dissertation Proposals

INQUIRY/TOPIC

Excellent Acceptable Poor

Significant contribution. Makes a contribution. Contribution not clear.

Unique & creative. Original. Lacks originality.

Multiple levels of relevance. Academic relevance is apparent. Relevance not apparent.

Well-defined in multiple

contexts.

Well-defined. Ill-defined, fuzzy.

Comments:

RESEARCH QUESTION(S)


Question(s) is/are clearlyarticulated and thought-

provoking.

Clearly articulated andresearchable question(s).

Not clear; too broad; not feasiblefor solo project.

Provide(s) original insights to

issue.

Feasible/researchable. Scattered, incoherent, too many

disciplines.

Promise of contribution to

discipline(s) and/or communitiesis clear and compelling.

Obvious theoretical relevancy/

grounded in discipline(s).

Expected contribution not clear.

Advances the disciplinary and

professional discourse

(e.g., by constructing new

connections, knowledge,

theoretical and methodologicalframeworks).

Clearly connected to current

issues and approaches in

professional literature.

No coherent relationship with

existing literature and

(inter/trans-) disciplinary

perspectives.

Comments:

INTELLECTUAL CONTEXT, BACKGROUND & SUPPORT FOR QUESTIONS (REVIEW OF

LITERATURE)


Critical understanding of

literature is evident in style,organization and content.

Sufficient review of literature

relevant to questions and goals.

Insufficient or missing literature

section. Lists of annotations orsources without critical

commentaryor running argument.

Mastery of appropriate canon isevident. Sources cited are rich

and diverse.

A mix of primary sources andsecondary sources included as

appropriate.

Exclusive reliance on a restrictedset of secondary sources. Not

enough peer-reviewed journals,

dissertations or book length

studies cited.


26/29


Builds more powerful argument.

Articulates sophisticatedrelationship with the literature

(supporting, extending, refuting,

etc.).

Research literature is integrated

into a coherent context framingthe research

Research literature is only

sporadically sampled (e.g., onlysources that agree with the

author)

Comprehensive and sweeping

in scope. Multiple citations fromdiverse literatures are woven

together cogently.

Makes use of multiple sources:

literature sampled is sufficientlybroad

Insufficient scope (too narrow,

doesnt span the range of relevantsources).

Reframes existing controversies

or issues in the literature in novel

terms. Shows promise of beingcited by other scholars in the

future.

Depth: includes critical and

contrary sources, attends to gaps

(silences).Builds an argument in

conversation with sources.

Superficial or light engagement

with literature. Talks about

rather than with cited sources.

Clearly articulates rationale and

plan for completion of literature

review in dissertation.

Method of review apparent.

Makes distinction between core

literature for the proposal and

what the actual dissertation will

cover.

No clear direction or plan for

completion in dissertation. No

sense of what is done already and

what still must be done.

Comments:


27/29


METHODOLOGY/WAYS OF KNOWING


Methods are systematically suited

to the question and context.

Relevant; research design shows

promise of actually answering the

question(s).

No clear relationship between

question(s) and proposed

methods.

High level of critical thinking in

evidence; researcher able tobracket own assumptions and/or

mindfully question the

assumptions of the research

community.

Epistemological

bases/context/assumptionswell-articulated.

No or poor articulation of the

operating assumptions, biases andpositionality of the researcher.

Cogent, elegant and transparent

research design.

Sequence and nature of

procedures are clearly laid out.Explication of methods sufficient

to task.

No clear sense of proposed

procedures (i.e., what, where,when, who, how?).

Proposed research design

includes sufficient protection forhuman subjects.

Proposed research design

includes sufficient protection forhuman subjects.

Obvious or potential problems

with treatment of human subjects(likely not to pass HRRC review)

Comments:

LIMITATIONS

Excellent

Acceptable Poor

Elegant, transparent de-limitationof inquiry, expected results, etc.

at all levels and in all sections ofthe proposal.

Authors claims as to relevance,truth, significance, etc. are

appropriate ( i.e. neither toohumble nor too ambitious).

No or inadequate engagementwith the limits of what can

actually be discovered via theproposed study.

Mindful and consistent

engagement with the limits and

promises of the proposed researchtypical of what one might find in

a peer-reviewed journal article.

Parameters of research design are

explicitly addressed, in alignment

with recognized practice for astudy of this type (re: reliability,

validity, generalizability,

significance, etc.).

No or weak discrimination as to

what can actually be discovered

by the proposed method(s).

Comments:

EXPECTED OUTCOMES/ RESULTS

Excellent

Acceptable Poor

Study as proposed promises to

contribute significantly and

Explicit and coherent discussion

of expected results, findings

No or inadequate explanation of

expected results or intended


28/29


originally to at least one field of

inquiry or community-of-practice.

and/or outcomes sufficient to the

task.

outcomes.

Answers the So what? question

concisely and convincingly for

fields cited in the literature.

Sufficient attention to the larger

So what? for a study of this

type for at least one scholarly

audience.

No sense of why other scholars or

communities should care about

the expected results of the

proposed study.

Comments:

ORGANIZATION AND FORM

Excellent

Acceptable Poor

Characterized by lucid, mature,idiomatic prose. Sophisticated

transitions link well-crafted

sentences.

Sentences demonstrate theauthors control over a range of

structures appropriate to the task

Sentences are ungrammatical orlimited in complexity and variety.

Notable presence of

grammatical, lexical,

orthographic errors.

Adapts working definitions of

professional vocabulary critically

and masterfully.

Uses professional and other

vocabulary appropriately.

Inappropriate or non-use of

professional vocabulary. Limited

variety in word choice.

Document is cogently andelegantly constructed. Sections

adhere as a whole to tell acompelling story.

Document is complete andcoherent. Proceeds logically and

rationally through all requiredsections.

Document is disjointed,incomplete or incoherent.

Required sections are missing orinadequately developed.

Adheres to programs andInstitutes expectations re:

obligatory sections, format and

appropriate style (MLA, Chicago,

APA, etc

Adheres to programs andInstitutes expectations re:

obligatory sections, format and

appropriate style (MLA, Chicago,

APA, etc.).

Does not adhere to the programsand Institutes expectations re:

format and style.

Comments:

STYLE/VOICE/ESTHETICS

Excellent

Acceptable Poor

Compellingly engages multiplescholarly audiences and/or

communities-of-practice.

Engages at least one specificscholarly audience or

community-of-practice

effectively.

Inadequate or incoherentengagement with audience.


29/29

Strong evidence of a mature,

scholarly voice. Writing soundslike someone already writing in

the professional literature.

Clear evidence of a developing

scholarly voice or style. Showsgrasp of the functions and tropes

of the proposal genre.

No or little evidence of a

(developing) scholarly voice orstyle. Inadequate use of proposal

genre and register.

The proposal is exciting, novel

and/or beautiful on multiple

levels.

The proposal is interesting and/or

intriguing on some levels.

The proposal is not interesting or

notable in any significant respect.

Comments:

Meta-comments: How useful have these rubrics been in evaluating the proposal ?

sct thesis dissertation policies and procedures a

Documents