<p>PROFORMA Final Pre-Submission Thesis Review</p><p>Purpose of the tool/learning outcomes:</p><p> Sharing experienced based practices in reviewing theses</p><p> Providing a suggested approach for thesis pre-submission reviewer /review panel to guide them in assessing whether a thesis is ready for submission.</p><p>Target audience: People with responsibility for reviewing whether a thesis is of sufficient quality to be able to be submitted for examination. </p><p>This tool is particularly suited to use in reviewing theses in the social science fields that are presented in the format of a traditional thesis. </p><p>Instructions for ideal implementation:</p><p>Pre-submission reviewers can use the checklist (format of the tool) to assist them in conducting an ‘arms length’ review of the thesis and its readiness for examination. The checklist focuses on the key areas of structure, conceptual development and argumentation and presentation that must be in order prior to submission. The areas of focus link to what research has highlighted as being important to examiners.</p><p>Materials and resources:</p><p>Holbrook, A., Bourke, S., Lovat, T. and Fairbairn, H. (2008) Consistency and Inconsistency in PhD Thesis Examination, Australian Journal of Education, 52/1: 36- 48.</p><p>Luca, j & Wolski, T (2012) Good Practice Framework for Research Training in Australia. Edith Cowan University – Dimension 9: Examination http://www.ddogs.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2011//2012/11/Draft-GPF-final-2012- pdf.pdf</p><p>Mullins, G. and Kiley, M. (2002) It’s a PhD, not a Nobel Prize’: How experienced examiners assess research theses, Studies in Higher Education, 27/4: 369-386.</p><p>Additionally </p><p>Some sage candidate-focussed advice in an accessible format: http://thesiswhisperer.com/2011/02/17/5-ways-to-fail-your-phd/</p><p>Measuring and evaluation of outcomes/objectives and outputs:</p><p>Pre-submission reviewers can evaluate this tool by the extent to which it aids in ensuring that a thesis is not submitted for examination before it is ready. Points to evaluate as measures of effectiveness might include: </p><p>1. Increased confidence and systematicity in the process of pre-submission review on the part of the reviewer/s</p><p>2. Improved examiner satisfaction with the quality of thesis presentation</p><p>3. Improved consistency in thesis appraisals.</p><p>Tool Creators:</p><p>Professor Helen Borland, Victoria University ([email protected]) </p><p>Associate Professor Tony Kruger, Victoria University ([email protected]</p>