W. Guidelines for Final Defenses

  1. External examiners are not allowed to change the title of the proposal during the final oral defense.
  2. Attached to the manuscript are the recommendations of the panel members during the proposal defense.
  3. Panel members are given the pre-oral assessment form to be accomplished and submitted to the CGS Director at least three days before the scheduled date of defense.
  4. External examiners must be oriented with AUP guidelines in the final defenses.

W.1. Procedures for Final Defenses

  1. Final defense for May graduates should be done not later than the last Thursday of March every school year. All defenses after March up to May will be considered intersemester graduates unless the student can submit the bound copy one week before graduation.
  2. Qualified students secure the application form for defense from the CGS secretary.
  3. Students accomplish and submit the application forms along with 6 copies of their manuscripts for masters' and seven (7) copies for doctoral students, ten (10) working days before the defense schedule.
  4. The Graduate Council approves the names of the candidates, the panel members, and the external examiners.
  5. The secretary distributes the manuscript and the pre-oral assessment forms to the panel members. They are given five (5) working days to submit to the CGS Director the pre-oral assessment form, after which, the date of the defense will be scheduled.
  6. The CGS Director reviews the pre-oral assessment of the panel members to certify that the manuscript is acceptable for defense.
  7. The Secretary checks the availability of the adviser and panel members. Then, the CGS Director confirms the schedule of the defense by sending each an appointment slip, the student’s manuscripts, and the pre-oral assessment forms.
  8. The CGS Secretary posts on the bulletin board the names of the candidates and their scheduled defense dates.
  9. During the defense, the CGS Director or his representative chairs the proceedings.
  10. During the defense, the adviser take notes of the deliberations page by page.
  11. The presentation lasts 15-20 minutes.  The question and answer portion takes 30 minutes for masters’ and 45 minutes for doctoral students.
  12. After the defense, the student is requested to leave the room while the executive session goes on.
  13. The panel members spend 15-30 minutes for the executive session (deliberations and summarizing the recommendations).The adviser is requested to leave the room while the panel members grade the student.
  14. After the executive session, the chair calls the student with the adviser and announces the grade and reads the recommendations of the panel.

W.2. Policy on Thesis/Dissertation Re-defense

The thesis/dissertation is the culmination of the student’s scholarship/scholarly achievement. The oral defense aims primarily to test the researcher’s mastery and comprehension of his Thesis/Dissertation through the scrutiny of the academic meritsand contributions of the work to the body of knowledge.

If after the cross examination and deliberations, the panel members votedNO or rejects the Thesis/Dissertation due to extensive revisions of the theoretical and methodological approach or interpretations, and the analysis and discussions of the results, the candidate is asked to do the revisions and undergoes evaluation and the defense process again.  The researcher follows the following process:

  1. Process an application form again.
  2. Rewrites the Thesis/Dissertation based on the written report of the chair.
  3. Submits the revised Thesis/Dissertation to the adviser.
  4. Upon the adviser’s approval, the student submits the revised Thesis/Dissertation to the panel members for re-evaluation through the CGS office.
  5. A new defense is held, if the result of the evaluation is favorable.
  6. The grade will either be PASSED OR FAILED.
  7. The student who applied for a re-defense will be disqualified for honors.

W.3. Grading the Final Oral Defense

  1. After the defense, the Panel of Oral Examiners grade the candidate.  The grading       system is as follows:

Excellent                             A         98-100

Very Satisfactory                  A-        95-97

Satisfactory                          B+       92-94

Pass with minor revision         B         89-91

Pass with major revision         B-        86-88

The researcher revises the manuscript as directed by the Panel of Examiners. After the corrections and amendments have been done, and after the bound copy has been submitted, the final grade, based from the Oral Defense, will be issued to him.

The final form of the thesis/dissertation must be submitted in four (4) hardbound copies: one (1) CD for the CHED in pdf format, one (1) CD for the URC in MS Word format, and these requirements serve as pre-requisite for graduation. 

FINAL DEFENSE GRADING CRITERIA (QUALITATIVE STUDY)

THE ORAL PRESENTATION - (40%)                                                                                                           

  1. The highlights of the research problems, methods, findings, conclusion and recommendations were clearly and scholarly presented. 10
  2. The researcher appropriately used visual aids. 5
  3. The researcher answered questions of the examination panel clearly, correctly and courteously. 15
  4. The researcher’s scholarship and mastery of his thesis/dissertation are evident. 10

THE MANUSCRIPT- (60%)                                                                                                                             

  1. The abstract highlights only the problem, methods and outstanding findings of the study. (4 points)
  2. The introduction highlights the general definition, the conceptual and epidemiologic background of the problem; and the focus and direction of the study. (2 points)
  3. There is adequate discussion of the limitations of the study. (2 points)
  4. The review of related literature is substantial, and identifies gaps of knowledge and research about the topic of interest. (4 points)
  5. The methods were strictly followed according to the specifications of the proposal. (4 points)
  6. The research design maximizes credibility, transparency, usefulness and analyzability. (4 points)
  7. The data collection tools are appropriate for the research objectives and enough to support rich and robust description of the observed event. (4 points)
  8. The assumptions and biases about the topic under study are identified. (2 points)
  9. The ethical issues are addressed and adequately discussed. (2 points)
  10. The tools and procedures for analyzing the date are described adequately (3 points)
  11. The data exactly support the answers to the research problems as evident in the findings. (3 points)
  12. The data are appropriately and clearly presented in tables, figures or graphs. (3 points)
  13. The discussion section clearly describes theoretical concepts, their relationships, and integration of relationships among meanings that emerged from the data.  (5 points)
  14. The findings contributed to theory development and future practice (3 points)
  15. The conclusion capsulates the findings of the study in the context of the main problem. (3 points)
  16. The recommendations are made based only on the findings and significance of the study. (3 points)
  17. The manuscript is well written and edited and with correct grammar, appropriate techniques, sound flow of though, and high readability and format. (6 points)
  18. The citations and references cited are consistent and follow the institutional and APA format. (3 points)

POINTS                  PERCENT                                    G R A DE              

95 – 100                  98 – 100                  A             Excellent

89 – 94                    95 –  97                   A-            Very Satisfactory

83 – 88                    92 –  94                   B+            Satisfactory

77 – 82                    89 –  91                   B              Pass

71 -- 76                   86 –  88                   B-            Pass with major corrections

70 and below           85 and below           Failed                                                                           

Note:  The oral defense aims primarily to test the researcher’s scholarship, mastery and comprehension of his  thesis/dissertation through scrutiny of the academic merits and contributions of the work to the body of knowledge. Thus, the members of the panel of examiners are given two rounds of asking questions appropriate to this aim in a professional atmosphere.  The adviser does not ask questions but supports the defense of the researcher by enlightening the panel when necessary.  The chair modulates the defense and directs agreement between the researcher and the panel members.  Suggestions for improving the manuscript can be made during the third round.