minor thesis 1

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• For authors
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 103, Issue 9
• How to do a postgraduate research project and write a minor thesis
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4637-1416 Trevor Duke 1 , 2 , 3
• 1 Centre for International Child Health , University of Melbourne , Melbourne , Victoria , Australia
• 2 School of Medicine and Health Sciences , University of Papua New Guinea , Port Moresby , Papua New Guinea
• 3 Paediatric Intensive Care Unit , Royal Children’s Hospital , Melbourne , Victoria , Australia
• Correspondence to Prof Trevor Duke, University of Melbourne Department of Paediatrics,Royal Children’s Hospital, Parkville, VIC 3052 ; trevor.duke{at}rch.org.au

Many universities and colleges in low-income and middle-income countries require a masters dissertation or thesis for as part of postgraduate training, and some colleges offer a 1-year to 2-year diploma of child health as a clinical qualification to enable skills in child health for generalists, or as part of the early phase of paediatric training. This paper describes the stages of doing a research project for such a masters or diploma, and describes in detail how to write a minor thesis. The paper is designed to provide a practical approach for junior researchers, and their supervisors. Colleges differ in their formal requirements of a minor thesis (word count, line spacing, referencing style), but this paper outlines the principles and practical issues rarely covered elsewhere.

• medical education
• paediatric training
• research training
• low and middle income countries

https://doi.org/10.1136/archdischild-2018-315340

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Introduction

What is a minor thesis and why do it.

A minor thesis is a written, systematic description of your project. It has a structure, and tells the story of your research: why you did it, how you did it, what you found and what it means.

The reasons to do a research project during your postgraduate training include to:

learn the basics of research theory and techniques, including epidemiology and biostatistics;

understand how to do a literature review, and how to appraise the literature to address questions;

explore an area of interest for you (develop some expertise and a deeper understanding of a topic);

give you tools to critically and thoughtfully appraise problems you are faced with every day;

learn to communicate scientific research in verbal presentations and written form.

Making a start on your project

Figure 1 shows many of the stages in conducting a research project. The order is not necessarily fixed, some steps, such as a literature search can be done early when considering a research question, or done later in the writing phase (often it is done in both phases). The literature review summarised in the thesis is usually focused on the research question, that is the question leads to the literature review (which is done in a systematic way). Learning about literature searching (through PubMed or Medline), learning about a reference manager database like EndNote and learning about databases and statistical analysis programs like Excel or SPSS can be done at any time, but best to start these early in the process. Not all steps are needed for some projects, such as a relatively simple clinical audit, but it is good to know what steps to consider.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Stages in a research project and writing a minor thesis.

Choosing a research topic

A diploma of child health (DCH) thesis should address a simple clinical or public health question. It could be an audit of a condition or practice which is of interest to you. A research project often starts with an idea that interests you, or a problem you have noticed. You may have 12 months for your DCH (realistically even less, about 10 months prior to exams). The project should ideally be able to be completed in 4–6 months. This is because the main part of DCH training is developing clinical competence in paediatrics, and being a good registrar.

A masters project is expected to be more involved, and should be planned early, ideally in the year before you begin collecting data. You usually have 18 months to 2 years. You should choose a topic of interest, explore what has already been written on the subject, what local research exists, in what context this has been done, talk to your supervisors and take time to identify clear research questions and choose a feasible and practical method for your study. But a masters project and thesis should not dominate your time, as the main task of postgraduate training is to develop the all-round skills to be a good paediatrician. This includes an understanding of child health epidemiology and research methods, but too much of a focus on research can detract from clinical responsibilities and clinical learning.

A clear research question

While many students find it easy to identify a theme or topic, it is often more difficult to define a research question or questions. A research question should be objective and answerable using a research methodology. Research questions can be quantitative, qualitative or a combination of both. Quantitative research questions generate data that are measures or values, which can be used for descriptive and inferential statistics (such as ‘what are the causes of anaemia in children presenting to Kimbe Hospital?’ ‘what is the prevalence of disability among children admitted to hospital in Vientiane?’ or what ‘what is the long-term outcome for very low birth weight neonates in Honiara?’ The questions may be general (‘what are the patient  characteristics of children with MDR TB?’) or specific (‘what is the success rate of outpatient treatment of moderate gastroenteritis?’ and ‘what proportion of newborns with PROM will need antibiotic treatment?’). Many questions will be objective/numerical (‘what is the case fatality rate for birth asphyxia at Goroka Hospital between 2011 and 2016?’); some will be categorical (‘what are the common types of seizures that children with epilepsy in Yogyakarta have?’).

Qualitative research generates broader understanding of opinions, or reasons, providing insight. It can help explain the reasons for quantitative results. Qualitative research questions may include perceptions of patients, parents or healthcare workers (‘what do adolescents with rheumatic heart disease understand about their condition?’ or ‘what are the greatest concerns of the parents of children with epilepsy?’ or ‘what are the perceptions and experiences of families of children with cancer?’). Such qualitative research may help explain, for example, why adolescents have low (or high) adherence rates with secondary prophylaxis with benzathine penicillin for rheumatic heart disease. But qualitative research helps us understand more deeply the reasons why things are as they are. 1 2

Many projects will have a mix of both quantitative and qualitative questions, and it is important to identify the differences early, so the right methodologies can be applied. Most research projects have more than one research question, and some research questions are not fully defined when you start a study, they develop along the way. However, it is important to have at least one clearly defined research question to begin.

Definition of terms and metrics of measurement

From an objective research question, the clear definition of terms and metrics of measurement are derived. For example, the population should be described in detail. A population descriptive could be as broad as ‘all children admitted to "X" hospital between March and July 2018’, or as focused as ‘infants with HIV as diagnosed by PCR testing’  box 1 .

Case example

Definition of terms: ‘what is the long-term outcome for very low birth weight (VLBW) neonates in Honiara ( the population )?’ The definition of terms might include:

Definition of population: VLBW 1000–1499 g, born in Honiara national referral hospital or born outside and referred to the special care nursery between January and December 2018.

Definition of outcomes and standardised methods of measurement:

Nutrition: z-scores weight for length and weight for age at 12 months. The proportion of children with moderate and severe malnutrition.

Motor outcomes: the proportion of children at 12 months with moderate or severe neurological deficit identified by a standardised developmental examination (such as the Bayley’s test).

Sensory outcomes: the proportion of children with impaired hearing based on autoacoustic screening.

Anaemia: the proportion of infants at 12 months with a haemoglobin <10 g/dL (WHO standardised definition).

Infectious disease morbidity: the number of hospital admissions from infections in the first 12 months, after initial hospital discharge: these could be subcategorised into acute respiratory infections, gastrointestinal infections, febrile illnesses, etc.

P—among children under 2 years of age with moderate-to-severe pneumonia or bronchiolitis presenting to an emergency department.

I—does nebulised hypertonic saline given in up to three doses over 2 hours?

C—compared with standard care including antibiotics, oxygen.

O—result in a lower respiratory distress score and fewer children requiring inpatient care.

T—over the first 12 hours.

Such a description of a study is not suitable to all studies that are not controlled intervention studies, and PICOT can rarely be used to describe all aspects of a study. However, if you read a journal article abstract of a randomised trial and cannot summarise it in terms of PICOT, then it is either a poorly written article, or poorly conducted study.

Choosing a valid methodology

Broadly, there are two major types of studies—descriptive and analytical. Descriptive studies describe a problem or outcome; analytical studies describe an association between exposures and outcomes. Descriptive study designs include case-reports, case series and descriptive epidemiology. Analytical study designs include randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, case-crossover studies, cross-sectional studies, pre-post studies and some observational studies.

What study design you use depends on many factors, including the research question being addressed, how common the condition is, whether the question is asking about short-term or long-term outcomes, how long you have to do the study, etc. You should discuss with your supervisor exactly what type of methodology is appropriate to answer the question(s) being addressed.

Basic steps to collecting, analysing and presenting qualitative descriptive information 2

Verbatim recording of responses from interviews, focus groups or observations.

Coding of this information, deidentifying where appropriate to ensure confidentiality.

Recording insights and reflections on the data.

Sorting through the data to identify similar phrases, themes, patterns, opinions and also identifying where these differ or diverge.

Gradually deciding on a small group of common themes that address the question, or generalisations (such as opinions or commonly reported practices) that hold true for the population studied.

Examine these generalisations in the light of existing knowledge and/or quantitative data.

Presenting the data according to themes, described in an objective way, with the verbatim responses from subjects as evidence for that generalisation. This helps to ensure that the analysis stays close to the informants’ points of view.

Developing your database: be clear about the metrics

An important element in successful research is the development of a data analysis plan. An analysis plan informs how you organise your data. It ensures your data collection form will have questions designed specifically to address your research questions, and that resultant databases are set up to answer your research questions. It is useful to develop a data analysis plan with your supervisor prior to designing any data collection tools, in order to ensure necessary questions are included in the most appropriate format, and that you understand the statistical tests you will be using.

With guidance from your data analysis plan, the data collection forms should will be designed to answer your research questions. The database should be developed early and checked by you and your supervisor to ensure it reflects the data collection forms, and that it is easy to enter data and analysable in order to answer these questions.

Some quantitative variables will have a numerator and denominator, and you should identify these. Identify the metrics clearly and early, and ensure you record them consistently (do not mix up metrics in your spreadsheet, such as recording some ages as months and some as years, or some weights in grams and others in kilograms). If there is more than one metric for an outcome—such as the definition of severe malnutrition, which may differ depending on age and tests done (weight-for-age / weight-for-height / mid-upper arm circumference / body mass index) then have four columns each labelled as the separate metric, and a ‘summary column’, which is binary 1/0 if severe malnutrition, based on whether the appropriate metric is present.

Ethics and funding

All studies should have ethics review. This is mandatory for publication in a peer-reviewed journal, and needed to fulfil the international standards of ethical research (Declaration of Helsinki 1964). Ethics approval is usually not required for a systematic review of previously published research, but most masters theses require an original research project with primary data collection. Research ethics is not meant to be a barrier, but an enabler of good research that is in the patients’ interests. There are a number of ethical principles that all researchers should adhere to, including consent, autonomy and human dignity, confidentiality, non-maleficence (doing no harm), beneficence (maximising good outcomes), justice and scientific integrity. 3 4 It is good to learn about ethics along the way, as this can help you be a good doctor and paediatrician, as well as a good researcher.

Set aside some time every week to do some work on your study and thesis

Begin to write your thesis early, just making a start is a big hurdle. You will have done a lot of work in the proposal stage, so use that document and expand on it. Organise your computer, with a separate folder for your study and thesis documents. Allocate time each week to work on your study or writing.

A masters study and thesis are best done over an extended period of time, and it is good to keep making some progress each week . Trainees sometimes have a writer’s block, or their study falters, or they become discouraged if they leave it for weeks or months. If you do something each week you maintain the threads of thought and keep others around you interested in your study, and it is good for your morale! Registrars who leave their project or writing to the end do not get as much out of their research experience as those who work steadily on it over 2 years, keeping clinical and research training requirements balanced.

Refer regularly back to the study questions

Each research project will have a number of questions, some major or primary outcomes and some supplementary or additional questions. They should be described clearly in the methods of the thesis and you should be able to identify them in your data collection form, your database and your thesis.

Keep your supervisor informed and interested in your study and thesis progress

Your supervisor is a busy person, with clinical, teaching and other responsibilities. But your supervisor should feel involved in your study, so keep them up to date on your progress, discuss problems with them early and listen to their feedback. Sometimes small research obstacles can be overcome easily if you discuss them, but if you keep them to yourself they become magnified in your mind. A problem shared is a problem halved! Communicate with your supervisor in person and by email, share your thesis writing with them. You should plan to meet your supervisor regularly; while some of these meetings will be to discuss clinical aspects of your training, set aside some time to focus on your project specifically. Sometimes your clinical supervisor will be different from the person who is supervising your research project. If you feel you are not getting the support you need from your supervisor, contact the masters coordinator or the professors to seek more assistance. Often this will be because your supervisor is busy, or may not be sure of how to help you—it is not because they do not want to! Do not let problems go unaddressed—always ask.

Documents and backup

Write one master document, which can be used for the initial technical and ethics proposal, then expanded during your study to form your thesis, or sometimes adapted as a report to a funding agency, and concisely revised as a journal article you may write after completion of the study. Some people use multiple documents for each of these purposes and have multiple thesis versions on their computer. That is OK if it works for you, but it can be inefficient and confusing. The advantage of using one master document is that when you update or revise it, add a table, figure or reference or correct an error, everything gets updated and you do not have ‘version confusion’. You will inevitably end up with a couple of versions: first the proposal, then use that document to expand to a thesis document, then a paper you might write that is based on your study. Clearly name (and date) each type of document and each version, for example, Audit of antibiotic use Masters project proposal Your Name February 10  2018.doc and Audit of antibiotic use Masters thesis Your Name May 6  2018.doc , or a file name that clearly indicates what the purpose of the document is and when it was written or revised. Discuss version control with your supervisor(s) early in your research project—ensure you all agree on a system. A good method might be for you to date each version, and when your supervisor(s) review or edit your work, they add their initials to the file name. This ensures it is clear who has worked on the document. Ask your supervisor to ‘track changes’ so any suggested edits are found easily.

Set up a folder that contains all the separate documents for your thesis, do not just have them randomly scattered in your computer.

Back up the latest version of all thesis and study documents regularly, and keep the backup flash-drive or external hard drive in a safe and secure place. On your backup drive, only have your project documents, and do not use it in other people’s computers to minimise the risk of viruses. Backing up your data and study documents on cloud storage can be useful if you have reliable internet access: Dropbox is an open-access program, which provides free (up to 2 GB) cloud storage ( https://www.dropbox.com ), Google Drive is another method for cloud storage of documents for security in case your computer malfunctions. Cloud storage also enables sharing of documents with your supervisor.

Writing style

In a thesis write in the past tense. A study proposal (ie, for a study not yet underway) is usually written in the future tense: " In this study we plan to recruit 30 children with asthma. Children with acute intermittent asthma and chronic persistent asthma will be eligible. Children with a past history of Tb or bronchiectasis will be excluded" . In a thesis the same information in the past tense reads: " In this study we recruited 30 children with asthma. Children with acute intermittent asthma and chronic persistent asthma were eligible. Children with a past history of Tb or bronchiectasis were excluded" .

Writing should be concise and clear. I find it useful to read sentences out aloud to myself and ask, is the meaning clear and unambiguous? It is useful to ask someone else to read over your thesis at the end; not necessarily a medical person who is familiar with the topic, but an educated person who writes well (such as a teacher or scientist in another field). A thesis should be written in language that people without specific knowledge of the subject can understand.

Thesis structure

There is no one right way to write a thesis, but there is a generally accepted structure which has a number of major parts. A thesis can be written with these major parts as chapters, or as one document like a journal article with major subheadings. The major parts are mentioned here in this article.

A very brief (total  250–300 words) overview of the whole minor thesis. It usually has a structure (introduction, method, results, conclusions), each part with just one or two sentences. The abstract should fit on one page. It should state clearly the research question, the study type, the main method, the primary results and a conclusion (one to two sentences) based on the primary result. The abstract does not need references.

Introduction should state why you did the study, why it is an important topic to research. This may only be three to four paragraphs, especially if you have a literature review which follows. The introduction provides contextual information as to why you did the study. The introduction can highlight the burden of the disease or condition, why it is an important one in your country or in the region or globally, why it is important for your specialty. Your introduction may outline whether the condition or topic has been well studied or neglected in terms of research or study, and identify the gap that will be addressed by your study. In a DCH thesis, you might just write about why you became interested in the topic because you cared for a patient with the condition, or you are seeing a lot of such problems in your ward or hospital, etc. In the introduction, you should state clearly the objectives of your study, and the research question(s) being addressed.

Literature review

Literature review is a summary of the existing knowledge of the research topic. It should be focused, on the general topic and specific research question being addressed. In doing a literature review, keep notes on the search terms you use and on the search engines used (eg, PubMed, Google Scholar). For accessing full-text articles, papers are increasingly published as open access and you can access these through these search engines, however if your university or hospital has registered for Hinari program set up by WHO ( http://www.who.int/hinari/en/ ), and you have good internet band speed you will have access to thousands of other journals and ebooks.

In the opening paragraph of your literature review state how you did the search, for example, " I searched the published literature using PubMed and Google Scholar using the terms ‘asthma’ ‘spacer device’ ‘salbutamol’ ‘treatment’ ‘metered dose inhaler’ ‘home-made’ and ‘developing country’ or ‘low and middle income country’" . While there are formal methods of searching for information using standardised key words, phrases and MESH terms, when you are starting out with literature searching, try to make the search reflect closely your research question, and record exactly the words you use in the search.

Usually a literature review is written from ‘general to very specific’; the opening paragraph outlines the previously published information on the burden of the condition or the magnitude and significance of the problem, then subsequent paragraphs focus more narrowly on the previous literature on your specific research question(s). A good literature review integrates existing research under themes or subheadings, rather than having a series of paragraphs which just state what previous studies have found. A literature review may be structured thematically and have subheadings to identify themes. For example, a literature review for a study of the role of home-made spacers for asthma could start with the literature on the burden/prevalence of asthma in the community, and a paragraph about overall treatments (beta-2 agonists, corticosteroids), another about mechanisms of drug delivery (oral, metered dose inhalers, nebulisation), one about the effectiveness of spacers and their availability in certain areas and then focus specifically on the existing literature about home-made spacer devices. It is not necessary to write everything about asthma, but focus the review on the question you are studying; start general and move to very specific. Sometimes there may not be much literature on the subject you are studying, that is OK, just summarise what exists and highlight the gaps. There is no need to ‘pad out’ the literature review with peripheral information, make it relevant, concise and informative.

See references and reference manager program (below) to plan how to organise and cite your references.

In most journal articles, the literature review is incorporated into the discussion (and a little by way of background in the introduction). This can be the case in a minor thesis, but it is up to you. Most people find it easier to have a separate section, which is the literature review at the beginning, but there are no fixed rules.

Methodology

Methodology is a detailed description of how you actually did the study. It should be reproducible, that is, be written in a way that would enable another investigator to reproduce the same methodology and arrive at the same result (or a different result in a different population). Write the methodology of your study early, while you are doing it. Details of the exact method can be missed if it is not written until the end of your study. You will have written a methodology for your study proposal, you should start with this, change the future to past tense and add any details that have changed. Often at the end of a study, the methodology is a little refined or different to that which was submitted as a proposal. In the methodology there are no results, or other literature, and the only references are for methodology, or statistical or analytical methods described by another researcher in the literature. The methodology should include:

the study population;

definitions of all terms, cases, conditions;

how the study was planned and carried out;

the exact data you collected;

how, when, how often and where it was collected;

how the data were managed (entered into a database);

what the database is;

the analytical tests you did;

ethics approval;

explain any methodological problems and how they were addressed.

Results are presented as narrative, tables, graphs and figures. There are no fixed rules, except the results should be organised and logical. Unless it is very important and central to your thesis, it is best not to duplicate the exact result in each medium of presentation (eg, the same information—such as the baseline characteristics of the study population presented in a figure, table and narrative). Tables can provide a lot of detail and be informative; if presented as a written narrative, this can make the results too long and be tedious. The narrative should highlight the main results, describing in detail the outcomes for the primary research question, important secondary outcomes and orientate the reader to the tables, graphs and figures: explain what they describe, their main findings (without describing every detail). Each table, figure or graph must be referenced in the narrative (eg, ‘see figure 2’) at the appropriate point in the narrative, or this can be written as ‘table 1 describes the baseline characteristics of the children with asthma’, then describe in narrative the key baseline characteristics, but other details can be left for the reader to discover from examining the tables.

It is often thought that the results cannot be written until the study is complete. While this is partly true, it is important to plan and organise the results section early. Put subheadings into your thesis document that will help guide your subsequent analysis and writing. Draw up ‘dummy tables’ that contain the variables you want to report even before you have analysed the data, but leave the cells which will contain the numerical result blank. You may add other variables later, but drawing up such tables as you do the study will help you organise the presentation of results.

There is no fixed limit to the number of tables a minor thesis can have, but avoid duplicating data in the tables and the figures, and avoid a figure or graph that describes an obscure or unimportant aspect of the study. You do not have to include every result or data point that you gathered in the results, this can make a thesis seem to be lacking perspective, you may not ‘see the wood for the trees’, that is, you may miss the really important points because of too much information being reported, and the reader will find it tedious to read.

In tables and the narrative, include numbers (%), not just percentages. Percentages give no indication of the spread or precision of the data. Saying that 33% of children with asthma have chronic symptoms tells us limited information, as it does not indicate precision. The CIs may be extremely wide depending on the number of subjects investigated: 3/10=30% (0.3; 95% CIs 0.06 to 0.65), which means the true proportion could be anything from 6% to 65% in a small sample of 10 children with asthma. If the sample that yielded 30% of children with asthma as having chronic symptoms was 100 children, that is, 30/100=30% (95% CIs 0.21 to 0.40), that is, the true proportion is somewhere between 21% and 40%, a much more precise result. So never just quote a % in the results without clarifying what ‘n’ is (the number with the characteristic/number studied), and ideally include a CI around such proportions. There are many programs that can calculate CIs around a simple proportion, one is: http://www.sample-size.net/confidence-interval-proportion/

The analyses of most diploma and masters studies involves primarily basic descriptive epidemiology , rather than the need for any complex analytical tests, like regression or p values. It is important to get the descriptive epidemiology right, describe the population or subjects in the study in a logical way, numbers, percentages or proportions, median or means, ranges, IQRs or CIs. Be clear about numerators and denominators. Denominators will sometimes be different depending on the variable being described, and the number of observations made. It is not useful to have p values for every statistic, and many good thesis can be written without p values at all! For some analytical tests, such as the comparison of two proportions to determine if they are different (5 of 83 children in grade 1–4 have asthma, whereas 9 of 206 children in grades 5–7 had asthma) a p value can be useful in indicating whether an observed difference is likely to have arisen by chance.

For the presentation of most analyses of a comparison between groups, CIs are much more informative than p values. Avoid the trap of reporting multiple p values and the mistaken view that finding a p value of <0.05 is ‘significant’. If you do enough statistical tests a p value of <0.05 will arise merely by chance, not because a real difference exists. A p value alone cannot determine that a hypothesis is ‘true’, or if results are important. Only report p values and other analytical tests on your primary and major secondary results if indicated. Avoid using p values to report minor post hoc results (findings from your study that you did not plan), these are often just chance findings that reflect unanticipated bias or confounding. Unanticipated post hoc results may be interesting and generate further hypotheses for another study, but they should not be interpreted as definitive or conclusive. Often inexperienced researchers or readers assume that a ‘significant p value’ is conclusive when it provides preliminary information only. So do not overinterpret your results or fill them with p values and obscure statistical tests, but describe the findings clearly and concisely in plain language. The results section of a minor thesis does not have to be long, it can be one to two pages of narrative, and can have subheadings for each of the relevant results.

Discussion is an interpretation of the results, what they mean. The discussion should return to the objectives and the primary research questions of the study and indicate whether they have been achieved. The discussion should be organised into thematic paragraphs or sections, and subheadings can be a good way to guide the reader. The first paragraph of the discussion should restate the main result(s) of the study in plain language (without statistical tests). The discussion should compare the results with previous studies or pre-existing knowledge of the subjects. It should not duplicate the literature review (but it can link to this), but the discussion should cite other research where the results can be compared or contrasted with your own. Other research may be in different contexts (different populations, different level of resources, different methodologies, different outcomes measured). It is important to understand why two different studies addressing the one problem may yield different results, it does not mean that one study is inferior or inadequate.

The primary outcome or question is usually addressed in the first few paragraphs (with comparisons with other research if appropriate) and then secondary outcomes discussed (with similar comparisons).

Write in ways that indicate you are scientifically open to unexpected outcomes, and understand the uncertainty of your study. Do not write, for example: "I did this study to prove that probiotics reduce the duration of watery diarrhoea", but rather ‘this study was done to evaluate whether probiotics would reduce the duration of watery diarrhoea’. Similarly, do not be too categorical or certain: ‘this study proves that steroids should be used to treat chronic otitis media’, rather ‘in this small study of school aged children with chronic serous otitis media, topical corticosteroids reduced the duration of purulent ear discharge’.

A discussion of the shortcomings or limitations of the study is appropriate. Every study ever done has some limitations, so it does not mean you have done a poor study, just because there are some limitations. You should be honest about the limitations, but do not overstate them either (ie, it is not necessary to make excuses for a study). This is especially the case for so-called ‘negative studies’, that is, studies that did not find a difference or a significant result in the primary outcome; such studies can be just as important as ‘positive studies’, so you should not feel such a study is unworthy. Furthermore, you should not try to highlight an obscure post hoc p value that is <0.05 in order to give your study ‘significance’. In the limitations section, try to identify if there are any systematic biases or confounding in your study; this will help you avoid overstating the results. In reading other papers for your literature review, and for your own research, beware of the risk of type II error; the finding that there is ‘no difference’ when this could be due to a small sample size (a study that is underpowered to find a statistical difference, even when one exists). Again, for a DCH or masters thesis, do not worry if your study seems ‘too small’, it is the quality of the work that is important, and this will not be judged solely on the number of patients recruited into a study.

No new results can be introduced in the discussion section; if in writing the discussion you find a new result that you want to include or comment on, you need to incorporate it in the results section first, and then you can make comment on it in the discussion.

Conclusions/recommendations

The conclusions should be brief. Return to the research questions and suggest whether they have been answered or solved, and what the main finding was. Return to the objectives of the study and suggest if they have been achieved. Indicate what has been learnt from the study and how it might be applied. And indicate any clear recommendations that you think can come out of your study, which may be a change in clinical practice, increased awareness of the topic or problem, the adoption of your research method into everyday practice or the need for further research to be conclusive about a finding.

Any important statement of fact in the thesis should have a reference; this is obvious in the literature review, but applies equally to the introduction and discussion. References are not usually included in the methods, unless you are referencing another investigator’s method that you have used, or a statistical test or program that you used. Appropriate references may be journal articles identified during your literature review, or books or websites. When referencing a fact or finding from a journal ideally go to the original research paper which identified the finding, not an opinion paper which just repeated the finding. Ideally, you should get a copy of the full-text (not just the abstract) of the article that contains the finding that you are reporting as a fact, to verify that the paper did indeed say that. This is a type of fact checking that is good to do.

There are many ways to reference a thesis, references can be cited in the text as numbers (eg, 3, 5 , or [3, 5]) or (authors name, year). It does not matter as long as it is consistent throughout the thesis. I find the (authors name, year) format can make it hard to read the text if there are many references interspersed throughout the paragraphs. The numerical citations are more acceptable for the vast majority of journal styles, so it is best to do it this way, so it is easier to revise your thesis into a journal article.

There are various standards for referencing, including the Harvard Referencing Standard. There is no source document for Harvard style, but many universities have their own guidelines based on the Harvard style, such as Adelaide University: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/writingcentre/referencing_guides/harvardStyleGuide.pdf.

It is best to have a reference manager program , which can make reference lists in a particular journal style for you after you input the references from your literature search. There are many such programs now, including EndNote ( www.endnote.org ), which is used by a lot of scientists and clinical researchers. Using EndNote you can import citations directly from Google Scholar and PubMed searches, and you can download the full-text article if it is Open Access. EndNote is a commercial product, but other reference manager programs are freely available. Zotero is a free, open-source reference manager with cloud backup into which you can manually insert citations or extract citations from internet search engines ( https://www.zotero.org/download/ ). Other programs include Mendelay ( https://www.mendeley.com/ ) and ‘Cite This For Me’ ( http://www.citethisforme.com/harvard-referencing ).

It takes a bit of work learning how to use EndNote or Zotera and how it links to Pubmed and Google Scholar and to learn how to insert references into such a program, but it is well worth it.

When referencing a website, you should state the title of the website, the title of the web page, the exact URL and the date you accessed it.

If in your thesis you include or adapt tables or figures from another source (such as a website), you need to reference these.

Journals have different styles as to the number of authors listed in a reference. Some, if a reference has six authors or less include all their names. If a reference has seven or more authors just include six names, then ‘ et al ’.

Thesis order and length

The order of the pages of a thesis.

The full title of the thesis.

The full name of the candidate.

The name of the school associated with the research.

The year the thesis was submitted.

Declaration

Except where acknowledgement has been made, the work is your own.

The work has not been submitted previously, in whole or in part, to qualify for another degree or assessment.

Acknowledgements

Table of contents

Lists of tables, figures and diagrams

Main body of the thesis (as described above)

Introduction—including objectives and specific research question(s);

Literature review;

Discussions;

Conclusions and recommendations;

Reference list.

Appendices—these are not mandatory in every thesis, but appendices can be helpful in enabling the reader to see what research tools you used or exactly how you gathered the data. Appendices may include:

Tables of raw data if appropriate, they have to be well formatted and not identify any patient by name or place of origin (confidentiality);

Ethics approval document;

Consent form used in the study;

Data collection form used in the study;

Any educational material used in the study.

Anything included in the appendices should be cited in the text of the main thesis, so the reader understands why they are included, for example, "We used a survey form that included basic demographic information, questions on frequency of asthma, asthma severity, previous hospitalisations, medication use, whether the child has an asthma action plan and what method the child used for taking Ventolin (see appendix 2)”. The reader can then refer to appendix 2 to see exactly what questions were asked.

Avoid plagiarism

It is really important that a postgraduate diploma or masters thesis be all your own work. It is too tempting these days to cut-and-paste information from Wikipedia, journal articles found online or other internet sites, but this is plagiarism and it is unacceptable and a form of cheating. Sometimes plagiarism occurs inadvertently if you are unsure of what the university standard is, or sometimes it occurs when people are under stress of deadlines. Regardless, it is always unacceptable. If you start only writing in your own words you will not fall into the trap of plagiarism. Do not directly copy anything from another source, but write it completely in your own words and add the original source as a reference. Many universities use programs like Turnitin to check for plagiarism. Another good program is Grammarly, which is both a Grammar and Plagiarism check. It is available at https://www.grammarly.com/1.

Writing up a paper for publication

It often takes several rounds of revisions to get a paper in shape for submission, but you should aim to write your thesis in a format where the most important or original data are publishable. You may not be able to include all the results or text in a journal publication. Brevity is important, and often ‘less is more’. Ask your supervisor about writing up your thesis for submission to a journal.

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Professor Mike English (Kenya Medical Research Institute), Eleanor Neal, Dr Jocelyn Chan, Dr Hamish Graham (University of Melbourne) and Dr Bob Phillips for very helpful comments, and to the postgraduate students for their inspiration and examples. This paper drew on a number of sources, including ‘Minor thesis and research report structure’, from the Study and Learning Centre, RMIT University: http://mams.rmit.edu.au/8zbeww6e1n3i.pdf (accessed 11 February 2017). There is a book by Paul Gruber and Justin Zobel from University of Melbourne, which the author could not access, but this may be a useful reference. ‘How to write a better minor thesis’ Melbourne University Press, 2014 ( https://www.mup.com.au/items/135100).

• Taylor SJ ,
• Neergaard MA ,
• Andersen RS , et al
• Munyaradzi M ,

Funding The author gratefully acknowledges the RE Ross Trust for support to child health research training in Papua New Guinea and the Pacific, which is the basis of this work.

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Minor Thesis

The Minor Thesis (MT) is a substantial piece of writing (16,000 words) that can be taken as a component of a number of postgraduate awards, including a Masters by coursework degree (for example, Master of Theological Studies or Master of Divinity) and some Graduate Diplomas, and is the core component of the Graduate Certificate in Research Methodology.

The MT is an important entry point into a Higher Degree by Research award (Masters or Doctorate). To meet the admission requirements for a research degree you need to achieve a mark of 75% or above for the MT.

The MT is examined by two people who have not been your supervisors for the project. This means that there is an independent evaluation of the quality of the research conducted. Achieving 75% or above demonstrates that you have the necessary skills for a more sustained research project.

To get the most out of the Minor Thesis (MT) experience you should be preparing well in advance, and it is recommended that you speak to the Academic Dean or Research Coordinator in your home College at least one semester ahead of time to make sure you have planned for this in your schedule.

Preparing for a Minor Thesis

To get the most out of the Minor Thesis experience, you should prepare well in advance. Consult our guide for information on how to get started.

Featured Links

Human Research Ethics

The unit code and title for the Minor Thesis is  RQ9748M Minor Thesis .

Minor Thesis Policy

Minor Thesis Approval Form

Minor Thesis Grading Criteria

Minor Thesis Submission Form

Minor Thesis Examination Report Form

Glossary of terms related to Higher Degrees by Research

• Available now
• New eBook additions
• Most popular
• Try something different
• Top eBook Fiction
• Top Nonfiction eBooks
• New audiobook additions
• All Audiobook Fiction

How to Write a Better Minor Thesis

Description.

What is expected? What should the thesis consist of? How can the whole process be made a bit easier? How to achieve the best possible result? Working within strict time limits, and under pressure right from the start, what does the student need to do to ensure that the thesis is finished? In How to Write a Better Minor Thesis , experienced advisors Dr Paul Gruba and Professor Justin Zobel lay out step-by-step guidelines for writing a minor thesis. Based on decades of working with students undertaking their first piece of research, they take novice researchers through the process of completing a minor thesis from initial steps to final on-time submission. Written in a friendly manner, this concise book—a companion to their senior text on the challenges of research writing, How To Write A Better Thesis —will help you to successfully tackle this fresh challenge. How to Write a Better Minor Thesis contains sections of condensed material from How To Write A Better Thesis , complementing the entirely new material written for minor thesis students.

• Paul Gruba - Author
• Justin Zobel - Author

OverDrive Read

• ISBN: 9780522866100
• File size: 471 KB
• Release date: July 1, 2014

OverDrive Read EPUB ebook

Education Reference Nonfiction

Publisher: Melbourne University Publishing

OverDrive Read ISBN: 9780522866100 File size: 471 KB Release date: July 1, 2014

EPUB ebook ISBN: 9780522866100 File size: 471 KB Release date: July 1, 2014

• Formats OverDrive Read EPUB ebook
• Languages English

Why is availability limited?

Availability can change throughout the month based on the library's budget. You can still place a hold on the title, and your hold will be automatically filled as soon as the title is available again.

The Kindle Book format for this title is not supported on:

Read-along ebook.

The OverDrive Read format of this ebook has professional narration that plays while you read in your browser. Learn more here.

Session expired

Your session has expired. Please sign in again so you can continue to borrow titles and access your Loans, Wish list, and Holds pages.

If you're still having trouble, follow these steps to sign in.

Add a library card to your account to borrow titles, place holds, and add titles to your wish list.

Have a card? Add it now to start borrowing from the collection.

The library card you previously added can't be used to complete this action. Please add your card again, or add a different card. If you receive an error message, please contact your library for help.

• MSDx_2020_Summer
• Thesis Studios, Subjects and Research
• Urban Planning

Minor Thesis Parts 1 and 2

Coordinator: professor nicholas phelps.

The Minor Thesis is a capstone subject for postgraduate students undertaking the Master of Urban Planning. The thesis is intended to train students in the conception, design and execution of research. It is intended to demonstrate independent research skills, sound understanding of your chosen topic, and excellent communication skills. The completion of a thesis marks the possession of advanced knowledge in a specialised field.

The 3MT pitch presentation is an internationally recognized thesis presentation competition, that was originally started at the University of Queensland. Presenting in a 3MT competition encourages students to increase their capacity to effectively explain their research in just three minutes, in a language appropriate to a non-specialist audience. Different from the mid-way research proposal presentations in Minor Thesis (Part 1), it provides an opportunity for students completing their Minor Thesis (Part 2) to tell the story of their research in a short accessible and highly impactful way.

The 3MT presentations were judged by three members of staff from the urban planning discipline with students also voting for their student’s choice. Included here for the MSDx are the first prize winner Yoong Wai Chong, runner up, Ariana Dickey and student’s choice Paul Vassiliadis.

Image: Chong Yoong Wai

3MT Presentations

Yoong wai chong.

The Upfield Transport Alliance. Supervisor: Dr Crystal Legacy

Ariana Dickey

Yarra's Waste Revolution. Supervisor: Dr Judy Bush

Paul Vassiliadis

The #Instatravel City. Supervisor: Associate Professor David Nichols

• MSDx Winter 2021
• MSDx Summer 2020
• MSDx Winter 2020
• Search MSDx
• Current Students

Minor Thesis (Full-Time)

In this unit, students independently conduct research which demonstrates their ability to define a problem, undertake a detailed literature search and review the relevant theoretical and practical literature. Students develop a methodology and apply it to an appropriate problem or situation. They also demonstrate good data selection, collection and analysis skills to inform their problem or situation, and the capacity to respond to academic feedback. Developing the minor thesis, or negotiated alternative, involves a high standard of written communication skills. Each student has a supervisor who provides individual support.

Learning Outcomes

On successful completion of this unit, students will be able to:

• Work collaboratively and ethically in conducting research and communicating research outcomes;
• Conduct a substantial independent research project under supervision with a high level of personal autonomy and accountability;
• Critically review relevant and current principal scholarly literature/s relating to the thesis topic;
• Interrogate and challenge complex information, and synthesise a range of conceptual and empirical materials to draw defensible conclusions;
• Authoritatively and effectively communicate structured, coherent ideas in a sustained written composition (or a negotiated alternative if choosing a creative work option) at a standard acceptable for academic peer review.

For Melbourne campuses

Assessment type: thesis, grade: 100%.

Students are required to submit a research proposal to the supervisor and receive an approval. Where applicable submission of ethics application and receipt ethics approval.

The minor thesis will be a paper of no less than 15,000 or more than 20,000 words (or a negotiated alternative if choosing a creative work option). Examination of the minor thesis will be conducted by one external examiner and one internal examiner. The supervisor will not be the examiner. The examiners will mark and grade the minor thesis report. The final mark will be determined as average between the two marks. In the case of 30 points or above discrepancy in the examiners' marking, a third examiner will be appointed to determine the final mark.

Required reading

To be advised by Coordinator or Supervisor as relevant.

As part of a course

This unit is not compulsory for any specific course. Depending on the course you study, this unit may be taken as an elective.

Search for units, majors & minors

• New releases
• Politics and Society
• Design & Lifestyle
• Memoirs & Biographies
• Submissions

How to Write a Better Minor Thesis

• Ebook Buy Adding… Checkout → $12.99 $12.99 $12.99 $12.99 $12.99

1 July 2014

9780522866094

Dr Paul Gruba is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Languages and Linguistics, University of Melbourne. Originally trained as a journalist, Paul now focuses his research on the role of new media in language learning. He teaches, and supervises, on a range of topics in the area of applied linguistics.

Justin Zobel

Professor Justin Zobel is Head of the University of Melbourne's Department of Computing and Information Systems. In the research community, Professor Zobel is best known for his role in the development of algorithms for efficient text search; other areas of activity include bioinformatics and algorithmics. He is an author of two books on postgraduate study and research methods ( Writing for Computer Science and How To Write A Better Thesis ), has supervised around 100…

David Evans

David Evans was Reader and Associate Professor in the Faculty of Architecture Building and Planning, University of Melbourne. Among his many books and articles is Restoring the Land (MUP).

More great books

@MUPublishing

Upcoming events.

Sun 20 October at 10:00am ∙ Tathra, NSW

Sat 26 October at 4:00pm ∙ Queenscliffe, VIC

Mailing list

Subscribe to receive event invitations, special offers and the latest press releases in our email newsletter:

Melbourne University Publishing seeks to reflect its place in Victoria, Australia, and South-East Asia through the books we publish.

We acknowledge the traditional owners of the lands on which Melbourne University Publishing stands and we pay our respect.

• Miegunyah Press
• Custom Books
• Request a Book
• Rights and Permissions
• Booksellers
• Your account
• Order history
• Past purchases
• Refunds and Returns policy
• Shopping online
• Privacy policy

Transition to Your First Thesis

• First Online: 25 August 2017

Cite this chapter

• Paul Gruba 3 &
• Justin Zobel 4  

6806 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Languages & Linguistics, University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3010, Victoria, Australia

School of Computing & Information Systems, University of Melbourne, Parkville, 3010, Victoria, Australia

Justin Zobel

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Paul Gruba or Justin Zobel .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Gruba, P., Zobel, J. (2017). Transition to Your First Thesis. In: How To Write Your First Thesis. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61854-8_1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61854-8_1

Published : 25 August 2017

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-61853-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-61854-8

eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Melbourne Law School
• MLS Students
• MLM Students

Minor Thesis option

The Master of Laws (LLM) includes a Minor Thesis option. To undertake this option students complete four subjects drawn from the subjects prescribed by the Law School as part of the coursework program and a minor thesis (50 points of study) on a topic approved by the Law School.

Upon successful completion of four coursework subjects with a minimum of 75% in each, and having completed at least one research paper of 8,000 words or more, candidates admitted to the Master of Laws can seek approval to enrol in the minor thesis.

Candidates are required to submit a thesis topic and outline and seek an appropriate supervisor before final approval can be granted. The Law School can give no assurance it can provide a supervisor, and this may mean that students will need to select another topic for the minor thesis or not enrol in the minor thesis.

Handbook details

• LAWS70003 (Part-time)
• LAWS70015 (Full-time)

Format of the Minor Thesis

The minor thesis comprises a dissertation of 20,000 to 35,000 words. With the approval of the Law School, it may also take the form of two major articles of 10,000 to 15,000 words each, suitable for publication in a learned legal journal. Where any work from previous studies is incorporated in the minor thesis, the candidate must indicate the nature and extent of that incorporation and resubmit copies of the relevant papers together with the minor thesis.

Part-time students have up to twelve months and full-time students have up to six months to complete and submit the minor thesis.

Due dates for part-time students

• Beginning in Semester 1: 31 December of the same year
• Beginning in Semester 2: 30 June of the following year

Due dates for full-time students

• Beginning in Semester 1: 30 June of the same year
• Beginning in Semester 2: 31 December of the same year

How to apply

Candidates for the minor thesis must have their thesis topic approved and a supervisor appointed before enrolment.

Be admitted to the Master of Laws (LLM)

If you are not admitted to the Master of Laws (LLM) you will need to submit an application to transfer into the LLM at the same time.

Read about & apply for course transfer

You must also meet the Master of Laws entry requirements . If your Minor Thesis application is successful, you will be enrolled into the Minor Thesis in the semester following your fourth subject.

View LLM entry requirements

Prepare a minor thesis topic proposal

When you have completed your third coursework subject, you should begin to seriously consider the topic for your minor thesis. When you are undertaking or have completed your fourth subject, it becomes critical that you formulate and submit a proposal to seek approval to enrol in the Minor Thesis.

Ideally, your proposal should be submitted for approval while you are completing your fourth subject, and certainly no later than mid-May for a Semester 2 commencement, or mid-November for Semester 1 commencement.

The proposal should be approximately 1,000 words in length and provide:

• Information on the proposed title
• A summary of the subject of the research
• Proposed direction or aim of the thesis
• Proposed research sources and methodology
• Proposed schedule for research and completion.

Thesis proposals will not necessarily include all of these.

Candidates may contact a member of academic staff whose research interest covers the proposed topic for assistance with the proposal.

Experience has shown that candidates who do not have topics approved at an early stage often fail to complete a satisfactory thesis in the time allowed. Also, the later you leave your submission, the more difficult it becomes to appoint an appropriate supervisor who has the time available for supervision.

Getting a supervisor for your Minor Thesis

It is useful to contact a member of academic staff whose research interests are in your area of interest to discuss the development of a proposal and possible supervision.

In many cases, students have potential supervisors in mind based on the coursework subjects they have taken, if not you may be able to identify staff with interests in the area of your proposed topic via the list of MLM teachers and their profiles . Most staff are happy to take initial inquiries in person or via email, particularly if they know you from other subjects. Supervisors external to the Melbourne Law School are not usually permitted. You should note, however, that the academic you speak with about your proposal will not necessarily be willing or able to take on supervision of your minor thesis, as they may have other commitments, such as research projects or leave arrangements, that coincide with the period of supervision required.

If you do have difficulty identifying a potential supervisor, the Assistant Dean (Teaching & Learning), will liaise with the relevant Director of Studies and/or the Associate Dean (MLM) to attempt to identify an appropriate supervisor during the topic approval process.

Well thought out and formulated proposals are more likely to be approved in the first instance, and will be more attractive to potential supervisors.

Please contact the Associate Dean, Teaching & Learning , if you have any difficulties with your proposal.

Submit application to enrol

Apply for the Minor Thesis

Other information

Finalising approval.

Once a topic has been approved, the appointment of an appropriate supervisor will be confirmed.

Enrolment in the Minor Thesis is not possible if no suitable supervisor is available.

Submission formatting

Submission of a thesis must be in accordance with the instructions provided via the Learning Management System (LMS) for MLM assessments.

Examination process

The examination consists of an evaluation of the thesis by the examiners. The examiners may, if they see fit, also examine the candidate orally or in writing on the subject of the thesis.

Appointment of examiners

There shall be a panel of two examiners who are, or have been within the five years previous to their appointment, actively associated with a University institution of higher learning or a research institution.

The panel must be approved for the purpose of this section by the Academic Board. At least one of these examiners must be external to the University.

Resubmission permission

Resubmission of a rejected thesis requires permission of the Law School, which would not be given except on recommendation of the examiners.

Resubmission fees

Students who are required to resubmit a thesis will be required to re-enrol and pay further fees.

Submission extensions

Candidates seeking an extension of time for the submission of their thesis must apply to the Academic Support Office via [email protected] .

Candidates are required to indicate the reasons for late completion, the program of work proposed over the extension period and the expected completion date. This application must be accompanied by supporting documentation from the supervisor endorsing the request.

A first request will be granted if the supervisor and the Assistant Dean, Teaching and Learning agree. Any further requests must receive the recommendation of the supervisor and the Assistant Dean, Teaching and Learning, in light of the candidate's performance to date.

Leave of Absence

Candidates who are unable to proceed with their studies for any period of time should apply for a leave of absence .

Withdrawal from candidature

A candidate who is forced to break off studies for more than one year, or whose period of candidature has expired, may make special application for permission to withdraw for the time being and to re-apply for admission at a later date. In the case of failure to complete within the maximum period, candidates will be considered for re-admission for a limited period if, in the opinion of the Law School, the work is close to submission. The application for further limited period of candidature will be considered by the Assistant Dean, Teaching and Learning.

Application for readmission

Candidates interested in pursuing readmission for a further limited period should make a written application to this effect (via [email protected] ) and discuss the matter with the Assistant Dean, Teaching and Learning.

Handbook home

• Search the Handbook
• Undergraduate courses
• Graduate courses
• Research courses
• Undergraduate subjects
• Graduate subjects
• Research subjects
• Breadth Tracks
• CAPS Login - Staff only
• Minor Thesis Part 1

Minor Thesis Part 1 (NURS90108)

Graduate coursework Points: 25 On Campus (Parkville)

View full page

About this subject

Contact information.

[email protected]

Students work with a research supervisor on a small research project (Minor Thesis). The minor thesis should demonstrate the student’s achievement of foundational research skills.

Intended learning outcomes

At the completion of this subject, the student should be able to demonstrate:

• an ability to initiate a self-contained research project and to formulate a viable research question;
• a capacity to conduct and report research on a small-scale, closely-defined project;
• an ability to evaluate and synthesize research and professional literature in the student&#39;s field of research;
• well-developed problem solving skills;
• an ability to manage research information effectively and efficiently in the application of computer systems and software;
• a capacity to articulate their research in written presentations;
• an appreciation of the design, conduct and reporting of research;
• a respect for intellectual integrity and for the ethics of research and scholarship;
• an appreciation of the ways in which research equips the student to offer leadership in a particular area.

Generic skills

At the completion of this subject, students should be able to demonstrate:

• the capacity for information seeking, retrieval and evaluation
• critical thinking and analytical skills
• an openness to new ideas
• planning and time management skills
• the ability to communicate knowledge through classroom and web-based discussions and written material

Last updated: 3 November 2022

Three Minute Thesis competition provides lasting impact for graduate students

Levon Esters, dean of the Fox Graduate School at Penn State, with the 2024 Three Minute Thesis finalists.   Credit: Jillian Wesner / The Fox Graduate School at Penn State . All Rights Reserved .

October 9, 2024

UNIVERSITY PARK, Pa. — In the final round of the first Penn State Three Minute Thesis competition in March 2024, 11 graduate students took the stage at the Penn Stater Hotel & Conference Center to show off their research, represent themselves, and compete for both prize money and the opportunity to compete in a regional 3MT competition. Coming from disciplines ranging from engineering to psychology, nursing, anthropology, food science and civil engineering, these students only needed three minutes to convey months and years of challenging research and scholarship in front of an in-person and online audience.  

For Aditya Sapre, a doctoral student studying chemical engineering, and the first-place award recipient in the final round, the word “exciting” was how he described the event.  

“It’s such a wide variety of topics and it’s very exciting to see how everyone else is so excited to talk about their research,” he said. “I’m very surprised I got the award because everyone was so on point.” 

Sapre’s presentation focused on one of the foremost challenges in drug discovery, pinpointing the specific target protein that can bind with the correct drug. 

Other presentations covered topics ranging from bacterial diversity in farming and the thought process behind determining if a hot dog is a sandwich, to irritable bowel syndrome, the impact of messaging at airport curbside performance, leveraging duckweed as fertilizer, and the need for supporting nurses providing end-of-life care to their patients, among others.  

The first two of those topics were covered by the other two award recipients on the day, Auja Bywater, a doctoral student in food science and technology, who took home second place, and Paul Distefano, a doctoral student in cognitive psychology, who was awarded the People’s Choice Award sponsored by the Graduate and Professional Student Association.  

In her presentation, Bywater shared about her longitudinal study that assessed microbial load of nutrient solution in different hydroponic farming systems. DiStefano provided an overview of a novel measure he developed that is designed to assess over-inclusive thinking.     

Both students echoed many of Sapre’s thoughts on what it meant to be recognized among the impressive group, the support that got them there, and what it was like to be part of the entire event. 

“It’s always a goal as a graduate student and a researcher to be able to spread your research to other people,” Bywater said. “This recognition is great, I’m really honored. I’m so grateful for all the people that helped me get here — my adviser, my labmates, my husband — I couldn’t have done it without them.” 

DiStefano said he appreciated the chance to be surrounded by students from all different programs.  

“It is inspiring to see the other work the other Penn Staters are doing. Obviously, there is a lot of diverse research that is going on here and to see how passionate everyone is and how well everyone can communicate that, it’s something I can take back to my own field and apply that passion to what I do,” he said. 

Other finalists echoed DiStefano, adding how much they enjoyed hearing each other present. 

“As grad students, I often feel we are so focused on our own world we don't branch out into other fields,” said Makenna Lenover, a doctoral student in anthropology, whose topic covered the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome. “I loved hearing about work across the University. It may not be a journal I read or a field I follow closely, but learning about discoveries in engineering or psychology was very exciting, since I am a student at heart and love to learn.” 

“I really enjoyed being able to hear other students’ passions, their stories, their projects that they’re working on,” added Kaléi Kowalchik, a doctoral student in nursing who presented on supporting nurses providing end-of-life care to their patients. “I don’t get to see what other students are doing often unless it’s published or connecting at an event like the Graduate Exhibition, so this event was really inspiring to see other students who are at different levels of their programs and seeing the work that they’re doing.” 

For Kowalchik, sharing research gave her the chance to represent her college in a way that doesn’t always happen.  

“In health care, we’re trying to get away from being siloed, specifically in nursing,” she said. “It was a big honor to be able to represent the college and show some of the amazing work that nurses can do, not just at the bedside, but beyond as well.” 

As the finalists thought back on the event, it allowed them to find new ways to share topics they are passionate about.  

“One of my biggest takeaways from the event was the value of an elevator pitch-style presentation of your research,” Lenover said. “I had never actually sat down and got to the core of my research in such a concise manner, and it really proved to be a useful tool to conceptualize my project, and to present it to others who may not be experts like I am.” 

“My biggest takeaway was regardless of what your project is, what populations you’re studying, there are so many ways to disseminate your data with people beyond your college and discipline,” Kowalchik added. “That was the most meaningful part to me, to be able to share my work and its importance with people from many different disciplines and backgrounds.”   

Looking ahead, the finalists said they would recommend that other students take a chance and apply for the Three Minute Thesis in 2025. 

DiStefano and Lenover both recognized how this opportunity will help them long after the competition, with DiStefano highlighting his improved communication skills and how he plans to apply again for 2025. For Bywater, there were nerves going in, but she said it was well worth it in the end.  

“I was a little nervous,” Bywater said. “I didn’t know if I was going to submit something or not, but I’m so glad I did, and I’d encourage everyone to just go for it. You never know what could happen.” 

Registration is open now for the 2024-25 Penn State Three Minute Thesis competition. Those who are interested in applying for this year’s competition, either as a competitor or a judge, can learn more at the Fox Graduate School’s website .  

Liam Jackson

• [email protected]
• Cell Phone: 814-863-4356
• Student Success
• Faculty and Staff
• University Park
• Agricultural Sciences
• Engineering
• Liberal Arts
• Nese College of Nursing
• Fox Graduate School

Get the news by email

• Calendar Policies
• Virtual Events
• Other Calendars
• Login & Submit an Event
• Directories

Quick Links

• Directories Home
• Colleges, Schools, and Departments
• Administrative Units
• Research Centers and Institutes
• Resources and Services
• Employee Directory
• Contact UNLV
• Social Media Directory
• UNLV Mobile Apps

Rebel Grad Slam: 3-Minute Thesis Competition - Semi-Final Rounds

Recurring dates.

• Nov. 7, 2024, 9am to 3pm

Campus Location

Office/remote location, description.

The Rebel Grad Slam challenges students to deliver a 3-minute, 1-slide presentation that showcases their research in a condensed and compelling way. Participants will be evaluated on how well they communicate the most significant aspects of their scholarship or research.

Students that advance to the Semi-Finals will participate in one of the following sessions:

• Thursday Session A, November 7, 2024, 9 - 10:30 a.m.
• Thursday Session B, November 7, 2024, 11 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
• Thursday Session C, November 7, 2024, 1:30 - 3 p.m.

Admission Information

This event is free and open to the public. Join us in-person or watch the Livestream:

• Thursday Session A
• Thursday Session B
• Thursday Session C

Contact Information

More info on this event, external sponsor.

Graduate College

JFrog: Exaggerated Stock Decline From 1% Guidance Adjustment

• JFrog's stock decline after a minor 1% revision to its full-year growth outlook may present a buying opportunity, with long-term growth still targeted at 20+%.
• Q2 results showed 22% YoY revenue growth, with strong cloud and Enterprise+ subscription performance.
• Strategic partnerships and expansions into AI and MLOps, including a collaboration with GitHub, are expected to drive future growth.
• Despite the stock's reaction, JFrog remains a long-term investment with potential for increased profitability and a reasonable valuation based on non-GAAP metrics.

Investment thesis

JFrog’s ( NASDAQ: FROG ) stock price declined from about $40 to less than $30 after announcing a 1% revision to its full-year growth outlook, while maintaining its long-term model for 2027 which implies continued growth in the low-20s. This means the investment

This article was written by

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of FROG either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Recommended For You

About frog stock.

More on FROG

Related stocks.

Trending Analysis

Trending news.