CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1 : GENERAL GUIDELINES 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Definition of Terms 1.3 Thesis Student 1.4 Thesis Adviser 1.5 Thesis Panel Member 1.6 Thesis Subject Teacher 1.7 Thesis Coordinator 1.8 Undergraduate Thesis Council 1.9 Creation of Pool of Adviser 1.10 Selection of Thesis Adviser and Thesis co-Adviser 1.11 Selection and Notification of Thesis Panel Members 1.12 Thesis Grammar Editing 1.13 Thesis Statistician 1.14 Oral Presentation Attire 1.15 Intellectual Property Policy 1.16 Undergraduate Thesis Presentation and Publication
PART 2 : ENGINEERING 2.1 Coverage 2.2 Conduct of Oral Defense 2.2.1 Proposal Defense 2.2.1.1 Before Oral Presentation 2.2.1.2 During Oral Presentation 2.2.1.3 After Oral Presentation 2.2.2 Final Defense 2.2.2.1 Before Oral Presentation 2.2.2.1 During Oral Presentation 2.2.2.3 After Oral Presentation 2.3 Result of Oral Defense Evaluation and Grading System 2.4 Redefense 2.5 Thesis Record Book 2.6 Academic Calendar Schedule of Undergraduate Research Related Activities 2.7 Thesis Fee 2.8 Engineering Manuscript Content
3 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
3.5 Conduct of Architectural Design Oral Presentations 3.5.1 Title Defense 3.5.1.1 Before Oral Presentation 3.5.1.2 During Oral Presentation 3.5.1.3 After Oral Presentation 3.5.2 Project Defense 3.5.2.1 Before Oral Presentation 3.5.2.2 During Oral Presentation 3.5.2.3 After Oral Presentation 3.5.3 Site Defense 3.5.3.1 Before Oral Presentation 3.5.3.2 During Oral Presentation 3.5.3.3 After Oral Presentation 3.5.4 Final Defense 3.5.4.1 Before Oral Presentation 3.5.4.2 During Oral Presentation 3.5.4.3 After Oral Presentation 3.6 Ban Rules 3.7 Grading System
PART 4: MANUSCRIPT CONTENT AND FORMAT 4.1 General Instruction in Manuscript Preparation 4.2 Hardbound and Electronic Copies of Thesis 4.2.1 Bookbinding of Manuscript 4.2.2 Electronic Copy of Thesis Manuscript 4.3 Title Page Format 4.4 Table of Contents Format 4.5 List of Tables Format 4.6 List of Figures Format 4.7 Preliminaries 4.7.1 Acknowledgment 4.7.2 Abstract 4.8 Acknowledgment Format 4.9 Abstract Format 4.10 Body of Manuscript 4.10.1 Chapter 1: Introduction 4.10.2 Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature 4.10.3 Chapter 3: Methodology 4.10.4 Chapter 4: Results and Discussion 4.10.5 Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation 4.11 Sample Body of Manuscript
4 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
PART 5 : FORMS 5.1 Conforme 5.2 Thesis Proposal Approval Sheet 5.2 Approval Sheet 5.3 Oral Defense Form 5.6 Advisers Acceptance Form 5.5 Application for Changing Thesis Adviser 5.6 Schedule Form for the Undergraduate Thesis Defense 5.7 Routing Slip
PART 7 : SELECTION OF BEST UNDERGRADUATE THESIS 7.1 Best Undergraduate Thesis Award Selection Process 7.2 Best Undergraduate Thesis Award Application Form 7.3 Best Undergraduate Thesis Award Review Form 7.4 Journal Type Thesis Paper Format
5 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
1.1 INTRODUCTION
Most of the programs in the College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology (CEAT) require their students to prepare Thesis, Design Project, Research Paper or Case Study. These are output of research activities in subjects that aim not only to put the theories and principles into a tangible application but to enhance also their writing skills.
In addition to the existing Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing of our University, this guideline is to provide information and guidance to CEAT students who are officially enrolled in Engineering Thesis 1 (Methods of Research), Engineering Thesis 2 (Thesis Writing and Reporting), Architecture Thesis 1 (Architectural Design 9) and Architecture Thesis 2 (Architectural Design 10) subjects. This will assist students in writing thesis proposal and preparing in an oral defense. The guideline will also avoid recurrent revisions of the students in their manuscript due to uncertainty of formats use in different programs of the College. It will also help in resolving research related issues that arise during the completion of the course. Most importantly, this manual aims to prepare the students to enhance their writing skills and go in with competition to other research outputs of national and international institutions.
This policy manual is divided into seven (7) parts that was completed after a series of meetings and consultations to CEAT Research Committee, Thesis Subject Teachers, Program Coordinator, Department Chairs and CEAT Administrators.
6 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
1.2 DEFINITION OFTERMS
Engineering Thesis 1 A subject of Engineering Students also called Methods of Research.
Engineering Thesis 2 A subject of Engineering Students also called Thesis Writing and Reporting.
Architectural Thesis 1 A subject of Architectural Students also called Architectural Design 9 (Arch 511).
Architectural Thesis 2 A subject of Architectural Students also called Architectural Design 10 (Arch 521).
Thesis Student Or Student is an Engineering Student who is officially enrolled in Thesis 1 and Thesis 2 subjects.
Proponent Or Student, is an Architectural Student who is officially enrolled in Architectural Design 9 and Design 10 subjects.
Thesis Adviser Or Adviser is a faculty member of the Department responsible to oversee the overall preparation and presentation of thesis or design project.
Thesis Co-Adviser Or co-adviser is a faculty member of DLSU-D responsible to assist Thesis Adviser in guiding Thesis Student or Proponent on area that is not the specialization of Adviser.
Thesis Panel Members Or Panel Members, a body composed of CEAT faculty members task to evaluate Engineering Thesis 1, Engineering Thesis 2, Architectural Design 9 and Architectural Design 10 research output.
Thesis Subject Teacher Or Subject Teacher, is a faculty member assigned by the Department Chair or Program Coordinator to handle Thesis1 and Thesis 2 subjects in Engineering Department or Design 9 and Design 10 in Architectural Department. In Architecture Department, Subject Teacher is used synonymously to Thesis Coordinator.
7 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Thesis Coordinator Or Coordinator is a faculty member appointed by the Department Chair responsible in setting the departmental academic calendar schedule and other undergraduate research related activities.
Thesis Council Or Council is composed of faculty members of the department that will deal on complaints, grievances and other thesis concerns coming from the Thesis Students, his parents/guardians, his Thesis Adviser and panel members, other students and faculty members.
Oral Presentation This refers to the Thesis Presentation made by Thesis Students and Proponent at the end of Thesis 1, Thesis 2, Architectural Design 9 and Architectural Design 10 subjects.
Deliberation This refers to a meeting where in Thesis Adviser, Thesis Panel Members and Subject Teacher evaluates the Thesis Student after his Oral Presentation.
8 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
1.3 THESIS STUDENT / PROPONENT
A. Coverage An individual or a group of students with a maximum of three (3) members, responsible for writing their thesis manuscript, presenting their study during oral presentation/defense and submitting the academic requirements of Thesis 1, Thesis 2, Architectural Design 9 and Architectural Design 10.
B. Qualifications Thesis Students Qualification for Thesis 1/Architectural Design 9: 1. He must be in regular status and has no subjects left in his previous semesters. 2. He must be officially enrolled in Thesis 1 (Engineering) or Architectural Design 9 (Architecture) . Thesis Students Qualification for Thesis 2: 1. He must be at least in 5 th year regular status and has no subjects left in his previous semesters. 2. He passed the Thesis 1/Architectural Design 9 subject. 3. He must be officially enrolled in Thesis 2/Architectural Design 10.
C. Responsibilities 1. He shall read and fully understand the contents of the DLSUD and CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing.
2. He shall be responsible to initially formulate a research proposal topic and select a Thesis Adviser as early as the proposal writing stage.
3. He shall coordinate with his prospect thesis adviser and accomplish the Thesis Acceptance Form.*
4. He shall be obliged to attend regular meetings and lectures of their respective Thesis Subject Teacher. Students who exceeded the maximum number of absences in Thesis 1,
9 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Thesis 2, Architectural Design 9 and Architectural Design 10 shall be automatically dropped from the course.
5. He shall be required to attend consultations with their appointed Adviser. Failure to comply with the minimum number of consultation hours or agreed number of meetings may disallow the students to present his thesis or project.
6. He shall submit copies of his draft manuscript to his Thesis Adviser and Panel Members, one (1) week prior to schedule of oral presentation.
7. He shall be required to submit various submittals on schedule throughout the course. Thesis Student bears the ultimate responsibility for meeting all the requirements on time, necessary for completing the course.
8. He shall be responsible to check on the department bulletin boards for any announcements regarding the course.
9. He shall be responsible to check on the originality of his thesis/project. Mere duplications of previous thesis projects shall not be allowed. He shall consider the legal and academic rules on plagiarism in writing the thesis. However, if the thesis passed the proposal stage and later was found out that it was a duplication of a submitted thesis in DLSU-D or any institution, then the Thesis Student shall have to be dropped from the course.
10. All communications regarding thesis proceedings from the Student and his parents shall be properly coursed thru to the Subject Teacher, Thesis Coordinator and the respective Adviser.
11. He shall defend his thesis/project and submit the final manuscript as requirements of Thesis 1, Thesis 2, Architectural Design 9 and Architectural Design 10. *
12. He shall revise and submit on schedule the corrected manuscript to his Thesis Adviser and to the University.
10 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
13. He shall settle his Thesis Fee at a time set by the Thesis Coordinator. He shall submit the official receipt of the defense fee to the Subject Teacher on or before the schedule oral defense.
14. He shall shoulder expenses related to the conduct of research which include, editors fee, statisticians fee, binding and photocopying fee, transportation, and the like.*
15. He shall be responsible to coordinate with the Subject Teacher and Thesis Panel Members for any changes made in the objectives and scope and limitations of the study, if only theres a permission given by the Thesis Adviser.
16. He shall sign and submit to Subject Teacher the Conformed signifying his understanding to CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing.
1.4 THESIS ADVISER A. Qualifications 1. He is a CEAT faculty member of De La Salle University-Dasmarias and preferably in a full time status employment. 2. He must be at least a Masters degree holder or enrolled in a Masters program with credited units at the time of his appointment as Adviser. 3. He must have finished the Research Methods in his graduate studies at the time of his appointment. 4. His name is listed on the official Pool of Thesis Adviser of the current school year. 5. He shall have expertise and competency on the thesis topic of the students. 6. He is not currently handling more than five (5) groups of Thesis Students in a school year. If there is an immediate need for a Thesis Adviser to handle more than five (5) thesis groups, this matter shall be discussed and arranged with the Thesis Subject Teacher, Program Coordinator/Department Chair.
11 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
7. He is a Philippine Regulatory Commissioned registered professional (ie. licensed engineer or architect), if required in his profession by law. 8. He is not one of the Thesis Panel Members of the same student he handles as Thesis Adviser.
B. Responsibilities 1. He shall direct the Students in their overall research activities. The participation of the Adviser starts at the proposal stage in Thesis 1/Architectural Design 9 up to the submission of the final manuscript in Thesis 2/Architectural Design 10.* 2. He shall regularly meet his Students in a minimum of one (1) hour every week for thesis consultation. The schedule of weekly consultation will be agreed by Students and Thesis Adviser. 3. He shall review, comment and approve thesis manuscript prior to deliberations. He shall report any similarities or possible duplications with previous thesis projects. 4. He shall check errors and make corrections on the submitted manuscript. Checking or errors is limited to technical details such as: definition and inclusion of variables, formulation of conceptual framework, development of the hypotheses, methods of analysis, statistical methods, interpretation of statistical process, discussion of data and results. * 5. He shall verify the completeness of the work of his Students prior to the deliberations. He has the prerogative to discontinue the presentation if he knows the Student is not ready, incomplete or late arriving at the appointed schedule. 6. He must be present during the proposal and final defense schedule. He shall take note of the comments and suggestion of the Thesis Panelist during deliberation. He cannot interfere during the defense unless the Thesis Panel members address the questions to the concern adviser. * 7. He shall evaluate the manuscript prior to oral defense. He has the final recommendation to endorse the manuscript for deliberation. 8. He shall maintain close coordination with advisees until the submission of the revised final manuscript.*
12 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
9. He shall accomplish the Routing Slip Form every time the manuscript comes in and out of his responsibility.* 10. He shall participate in the grading and evaluation of Student during Thesis1/Architectural Design 9 and Thesis 2/Architectural Design 10 oral deliberations. 11. When a decision was already rendered, announced and acknowledged by the Panel Chair, the Adviser cannot force any member of the Panel to change the result. Moreover, the Adviser is not allowed to influence the decision of any member of the Panel. 12. If the Advisee cannot or will not accept the result of the defense and wanted to raise a complaint, the Adviser is the first person obligated to study the complaint. If he does not find any merit at all in the complaint, he must direct the Advisee to accept the verdict.
1.5 THESIS PANEL MEMBER A. Qualifications 1. He is a CEAT fulltime and part time faculty members of De La Salle University- Dasmarias. 2. He must be at least a Masters degree holder or enrolled in a Masters program with credited units at the time of his appointment as Thesis Panel Member. 3. He must have finished the Research Methods subject in his graduate studies at the time of his appointment. 4. He has expertise and competency on the thesis topic of students. 5. He is a registered professional (ie. licensed engineer or architect), if required in his profession by law. 6. He is not the current Thesis Adviser of the students.
13 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
B. Composition 1. There shall be three (3) panel members with one member sitting as Chair of the panel. The Chair must be a faculty member from the same program and department of the Student. 2. Panel members shall be composed of members from the same or different Department or College that has capability to evaluate the thesis manuscript. 3. They shall be selected based on their expertise and specialization on thesis topic by Subject Teacher and Program Coordinator / Department Chair.
C. Responsibilities 1. He shall receive and evaluate the draft manuscript at least one (1) week prior to the thesis defense schedule. * 2. He shall attend and make himself available during the scheduled thesis defense. 3. He shall affix his signature on the Schedule Form for the Undergraduate Thesis to signify his availability on proposal and final defense. 4. He shall tactfully give his comments and suggestions during proposal and final defense.* 5. He shall participate in the grading and evaluation of Thesis Student during proposal and final defense. 6. He shall accomplish the Oral Defense Form and affix his signature during deliberation. 7. Every Member of the Panel must render thorough evaluation of the Students thesis manuscript after the oral presentation. This should manifest in the comment sheet or Oral Defense Form handed to him during the Defense. The Student must be able to understand clearly the reason for their decision, especially when the Student fails it. 8. He shall accomplish the Routing Slip every time the manuscript comes in and out of his responsibility.* 9. The Chair of the Panel Member shall summarize the comments and suggestions of other members of the panel. He shall also announce the final result of deliberation to Students.
14 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
1.6 THESIS SUBJECT TEACHER A. Qualifications 1. He is a CEAT faculty member of De La Salle University -Dasmarias and preferably in a full time status employment. 2. He must be at least a Masters degree holder or enrolled in a Masters program with credited units at the time of his appointment as Thesis Subject Teacher. 3. He must have finished the Research Methods in his graduate studies at the time of his appointment. 4. He is a registered professional (ie. licensed engineer or architect), if required in his profession by law. 5. The Subject Teacher is the Thesis Coordinator in Architecture Department B. Responsibilities 1. He shall be the faculty member assign to deliver the contents of Thesis 1/Architecture Design 9 and Thesis 2/Architecture Design 10 course syllabi, DLSUD Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing and CEAT Thesis Guideline. 2. He shall be the prime enforcer of the provisions set on the policy manual on undergraduate thesis writing of the university and college. 3. Together with the Thesis Coordinator, he shall set and arrange schedule of thesis manuscript submission, proposal and final deliberation and other research related activities for his class.* 4. He shall arrange the venue of proposal and final defense. 5. He shall initiate the selection of thesis adviser during Thesis 1/Architecture Design 9 course.* 6. He shall direct the overall advisers and advisees research activities for the school year.* 7. He shall accomplish the Routing Slip every time the manuscript comes in and out of his responsibility. *
15 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
8. He shall make corrections on the research manuscript which may not be limited to formatting. * 9. He shall consolidate the grades of Students. 10. He shall coordinate with the Program Coordinator/ Department Chair relative to the selection of Thesis Panel Members. 11. He shall act as facilitator during the proposal defense, final defense and deliberation. If faculty member(s) and student(s) get into an argument on something related or unrelated to students topic but not advancing the defense, he may decide what measure is needed so as to avoid fester resentment between parties. 12. He shall consolidate the accomplished Oral Defense Form of thesis panelists during oral deliberation. 13. He shall collect, check and review all thesis manuscripts submitted by Students prior to their application for graduation. 14. He shall collect the official receipt of thesis payment from student and prepare the Payment Request Form (PRF)
1.7 THESIS COORDINATOR A. Qualifications 1. He is a CEAT fulltime and part time faculty members of his Department at De La Salle University-Dasmarias. 2. He must be at least a Masters degree holder or enrolled in a Masters program with credited units at the time of his appointment as Thesis Coordinator. 3. He must have finished the Research Methods in his graduate studies at the time of his appointment. 4. He is a registered professional (ie. licensed engineer or architect), if required in his profession by law. 5. He is appointed by the Department Chair.
16 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
B. Responsibilities 1. He shall set the departmental academic calendar schedule of undergraduate research related activities such as but not limited to, schedule of proposal and final defense and submission of thesis proposal and final manuscript 3. He shall assist the Department Chair on the creation of Pool of Thesis Adviser.
1.8 UNDERGRADUATE THESIS COUNCIL A. Composition Each department of CEAT shall create their Undergraduate Thesis Council and it shall be composed of the Department Chair, Program Coordinator/Head, College Research Committee Head and Members, Thesis Coordinator, current and former Subject Teachers of Thesis 1/Architectural Design 9 and Thesis 2/Architectural Design 10. The committee may invite other CEAT faculty members that may assist the Council in the deliberations of certain unresolved issues related to undergraduate thesis in a Program or Department. The Presiding Officer in all the meetings and deliberations is always the Department Research Coordinator (DRC) or the Department Representative in Research Committee. If in case that the DRC has a direct involvement on the issues to be settled, the Program Coordinator, Department Chair and /or the Dean of College will preside over the Undergraduate Thesis Council. B. Responsibilities 1. He shall review and evaluate the current and newly implemented policies and guidelines on research of the university. 2. He shall approve the schedule and communications related to undergraduate research prior to implementation to respective departments. 3. He shall act and decide on complaints, grievances and other concerns coming from the Thesis Students, his parents/guardians, his Thesis Adviser and Thesis Panel Members, other students and faculty members.
17 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4. He shall be involved in the amendment or enhancement of the existing undergraduate research policies and guidelines if necessary. This include areas on selection of adviser, selection of Panel Members , deliberation schedule and others.
1.9 CREATION OF POOL OF ADVISER A pool of thesis adviser is created annually by the Department Chair. It is a list containing names of full time and part time CEAT faculty members who are qualified to handle Thesis Students and act as their Thesis Adviser for the school year. The research interests and specializations of each of the faculty members are also included in the list. This document will be given to all CEAT Subject Teachers of Thesis 1 and 2 and Thesis Students.
1.10 SELECTION OF ADVISER AND co-ADVISER Initiated by the Subject Teacher, the Thesis Student/Proponent shall choose their Thesis Adviser based on the qualifications listed in this guideline. Students may choose their Adviser from the pool under the same program or department (for Architecture Students) where they enrolled. The Students will submit the name of their prospect Adviser to the Subject Teacher whom they will only communicate and present their study for a specific time. This is to avoid conflict with other faculty members having the same specialization. Students shall approach this faculty member and present the contents of their Chapter 1. The prospect Adviser may ask and request for additional data related to the thesis topic during the consultation. If the prospect adviser agrees on their thesis topic and determines the feasibility of the study, he will sign the Thesis Acceptance Form. Otherwise, he needs to inform the students to seek the technical assistance of other faculty members. Thesis Student/Proponent must inform their Subject Teacher of the outcome of their consultation. The Thesis Student/Proponent may also opt to request and select for one (1) co-adviser during the course of their thesis study. The selected co adviser will have the responsibilities and remuneration similar to the Thesis Adviser. The co-adviser may come from other Departments and Colleges of DLSU-D. However, having a co adviser must be in coordination with the Subject Teacher and with the Program Coordinator/Department Chair. This is to
18 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
consider the limited number of faculty members in each program listed in the Pool of Thesis Adviser.
1.11 SELECTION AND NOTIFICATION OF THESIS PANEL MEMBERS Initiated by the Subject Teacher, the selection of two (2) Thesis Panel Members and the Chair of Panel Member will be conducted in coordination with the Program Coordinator / Department Chair. Likewise, Panel Members will be selected based on the qualifications listed in this guideline. The Subject Teacher will inform the selected faculty members on the schedule dates of proposal and final defense. An Oral Defense Form, initially signed and approved by Thesis Adviser will be accomplished by the Thesis Students to inform the final schedule (date, time and room) of defense. Each of the panel members will affix his signature to signify willingness and availability to attend the defense schedule.
1.12 THESIS GRAMMAR EDITING Generally, all text in the manuscript must be written in standard American English language except for words that cannot be translated or words does not have an exact meaning with the language, such words are: scientific names, technical terms, trade names , brand names and others. Thesis Students must use words that are acceptable in technical writing. Good technical writing is simple, clear and direct. They must also follow the thesis format prescribed by this guideline and observe the American Psychological Association (APA) style in thesis writing. Prior to endorsement of manuscript to Languages and Literature Department, Thesis Students must revise the suggestions made in their manuscript by their Thesis Adviser and Thesis Panel Members during the final oral defense. Thesis Adviser and Panel members shall affix their signature in the Approval Sheet form only if Thesis Students comply with the requirements of oral deliberation. The endorsement letter must be signed by the Subject Teacher.
19 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
The English Editor is any faculty member from the LLD of De La Salle University Dasmarinas. The English Editor is responsible for checking of grammatical errors in the manuscript and observance of the American Psychological Association (APA) format or any other format / style prescribed by the college*. Once the manuscript has been edited, the English Editor shall affix his signature in a certification of English Editor declaring that the paper has satisfactorily complied with the grammatical requirements of a thesis manuscript. Should the English Editor feel that the requirements, as suggested by him were not met, the same may refuse to sign the certification. LLD are the sole providers of thesis editing*. In the event, that English grammar editing of manuscript is needed as early as Thesis 1/Architectural Design 9 as advised by their Thesis Adviser or Subject Teacher, the College allow Thesis Students to consult with the professionals offering English Editing services. Certification and the credentials of thesis editor showing that he is an English Major graduate must be presented to the subject teacher.
1.13 THESIS STATISTICIAN The Thesis Students through the guidance of their Adviser, may opt to request for a Statistician from Mathematics Department or from Pool of Statistician created by the College of DLSU-Dasmarias. They shall be charged a rate as set by the Mathematics department or the college.
1.14 ORAL PRESENTATION ATTIRE The attire of Thesis Students for the oral defense is corporate. Men should wear slacks, long sleeve with necktie and leather shoes, while ladies should wear skirt, blouse (with or without blazers) and leather shoes. *
1.15 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY The college shall follow the DLSUDs Intellectual Property Policy and its Implementing Rules and Regulation.
20 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
1.16 UNDERGRADUATE THESIS PRESENTATION AND PUBLICATION
The College shall follow the existing guideline of University Research Office of DLSUD on research presentation and publication of undergraduate thesis in institutional, regional, national and international fora.
21 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
PART II : ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
22 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2.1 COVERAGE Engineering Thesis covers Engineering Thesis 1 Methods of Research and Engineering Thesis 2 - Thesis Writing and Reporting courses. Engineering Thesis 1 and Engineering Thesis 2 shall both cover one (1) oral presentation , the proposal defense and final defense.
2.2 CONDUCT OF ORAL DEFENSE On the day of oral defense, the following shall be observed by the Thesis Students, Thesis Adviser, Thesis Panel Members and Subject Teacher.
2.2.1 PROPOSAL DEFENSE
2.2.1.1 Before Oral Presentation 1. Thesis Students are expected to be at their assigned room 30 minutes before their schedule. They are expected to prepare the room and set up the equipment. Thesis Students shall ensure that multimedia devices are available during their Oral Defense schedule. 2. Thesis Students have accomplished the following forms: Conforme, Thesis Advisers Acceptance Form, Schedule Form for Undergraduate Thesis Defense and Thesis Fee Endorsement Form. 3. The official receipt for thesis payment shall be handed over by the Thesis Student to the Subject Teacher. 4. Oral Defense Forms shall be distributed to Thesis Adviser, Subject Teacher and Panel Members. 5. Copies of Thesis Proposal Manuscripts were already distributed to Panel Members at least one (1) week prior to the day of oral presentation. 6. The oral defense will proceed only if complete attendance of Thesis Students, Thesis Adviser, Thesis Panel Members and Subject Teacher is observed. Otherwise, Thesis Students are required to request for a new schedule and accomplish another Schedule Form for the Undergraduate Thesis Defense. Together with this form, is a letter
23 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
stating reason for the request of new schedule. Approval of this request and identification of new schedule shall be decided by Subject Teacher, Thesis Panel Members and Program Coordinator.
2.2.1.2 During Oral Presentation
1. Each individual group will be given a chance to present one (1) thesis proposal. 2. The duration of the entire exercise should be at most two hours which will in the order of 20- 30 minutes of presentation, 30-60 minutes of question and answer and 10 30 minutes of thesis deliberation. 3. For consistency among the thesis groups, the following parts of the thesis shall be presented within the 20-30 minutes period.
4. A sample programme is shown in this guideline to observe complete conduct of oral defense. 5. Oral defense form shall be filled up by Thesis Panel Members. 6. Each of the Panel Members will be given a chance to ask questions during the 30-60 minutes of question and answer. 7. The Thesis Adviser cannot interfere during the defense, in particular during the question and answer part, unless the Thesis Panel Members directly address the question to the concern Adviser. The Adviser shall take note of the comments and suggestions of the Thesis Panel Members.*
24 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
8. Thesis deliberation shall be conducted in the presence of Thesis Subject Teacher, Thesis Adviser and Thesis Panel Members. Only one decision shall be made by the Thesis Panel Members. The majority evaluation of the Thesis Panel Members shall be the one to announce by the Chair. Majority means, either getting a unanimous or two-thirds approval from the panel members. 9. When a decision was already rendered, announced and acknowledged by the Subject Teacher, the Adviser cannot force any members of the Thesis Panel to change his decision thereby altering the result. Moreover, the Adviser is not allowed to influence the decision of any member of the Panel Members.
10. Everyone involve during oral presentation are expected to review the section on Result of Oral Deliberation. 11. Thesis Panel Members shall submit the grades of Thesis Student to Subject Teacher.
2.2.1.3 After Oral Presentation
1. Thesis Student shall act based on the result of oral deliberation. See guidelines on the Result of Oral Deliberation. 2. Thesis Student who receives a grade of Passed or Passed with Minor Revision shall accomplish the Thesis Proposal Approval Sheet. 3. Thesis Student who receives a grade of Conditional has a chance to request for a redefense. The intention to apply for redefense shall be expressed by Thesis Students, upon approval of their Thesis Adviser, immediately after the Announcement of Result. Thesis Panel Members in coordination with the Subject Teacher and Program Coordinator shall decide whether or not to grant the request by changing the objectives of the study or the entire topic. 4. The approved Thesis Proposal manuscript, Thesis Proposal Approval Sheet and Accomplished Oral Defense Forms shall be in softbound. Thesis Adviser and Subject Teacher shall be individually given a copy of this manuscript not later than the final examination week.
25 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2.2.2 FINAL DEFENSE
2.2.2.1 Before Oral Presentation
1. Thesis Students are expected to be at their assigned room 30 minutes before their schedule. They are expected to prepare the room and set up the equipment. Thesis Students shall ensure that multimedia devices are available during their Oral Defense schedule. 2. Thesis Students have accomplished the following forms: Schedule Form for Undergraduate Thesis Defense and Thesis Fee Endorsement Form.
3. The official receipt for thesis payment shall be handed over by the Thesis Student to the Subject Teacher. 4. Oral Defense Forms shall be distributed to Thesis Adviser, Subject Teacher and Panel Members. 5. Copies of Thesis Final Manuscripts were already distributed to Panel Members at least one (1) week prior to the day of oral presentation. 6. Subject Teacher shall handover the softbound copy of Thesis Proposal Manuscript to Chair of Panel Member. 7. The oral defense will proceed only if complete attendance of Thesis Students, Thesis Adviser, Thesis Panel Members and Subject Teacher is observed. Otherwise, Thesis Students are required to request for a new schedule and accomplish another Schedule Form for the Undergraduate Thesis Defense. Together with this form, is a letter stating reason for the request of new schedule. Approval of this request and identification of new schedule will be decided by Subject Teacher, Thesis Panel Members and Program Coordinator. 8. The composition of Thesis Panel Members during proposal defense must be the same in the final defense. If for some valid reason, that a change of Thesis Panel Members is needed, Subject Teacher shall coordinate with the Program Coordinator.
26 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2.2.2.2 During Oral Presentation
1. The duration of the entire exercise shall be at most two hours which will in the order of 20- 30 minutes of presentation, 30-60 minutes of question and answer and 10 30 minutes of thesis deliberation. 2. For consistency among the thesis groups, the following parts of the thesis shall be presented within the 20-30 minutes period.
3. A sample Programme is shown in this guideline to observe complete conduct of oral defense. 4. Oral defense form shall be filled up by Thesis Panel Members. 5. Each of the Thesis Panel Members shall be given a chance to ask question during the 30-60 minutes question and answer part. 6. The Thesis Adviser cannot interfere during the defense, in particular during the question and answer part, unless the Thesis Panel Members directly address the question to the concern Adviser. The Adviser shall take note of the comments and suggestions of the Thesis Panel Members.* 7. Thesis deliberation shall be conducted in the presence of Thesis Subject Teacher, Thesis Adviser and Thesis Panel Members. Only one decision will be made by the Thesis Panel Members. The majority evaluation of the Thesis Panel Members will be the one to announce by the Chair. Majority means, either getting a unanimous or two-thirds approval from the panel members.
27 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
8. When a decision was already rendered, announced and acknowledged by the Subject Teacher, the Adviser cannot force any members of the Thesis Panel to change his decision thereby altering the result. Moreover, the Adviser is not allowed to influence the decision of any member of the Panel Members. 9. Everyone involve during oral presentation are expected to review the section on Result of Oral Deliberation. 10. Thesis Panel Members shall submit the grades of Thesis Student to Subject Teacher.
2.2.2.3 After Oral Presentation
1. Thesis Student shall act based on the result of oral deliberation. See guidelines on the Result of Oral Deliberation. 2. Thesis Students who receive a grade of Passed or Passed with Minor Revision shall accomplish the Approval Sheet. 3. Thesis Student who receives a grade of Conditional has a chance to request for a redefense. The intention to apply for redefense shall be expressed by Thesis Students, upon approval of their Thesis Adviser, immediately after the Announcement of Result. Thesis Panel Members in coordination with Subject Teacher and Program Coordinator shall decide whether or not to grant the request. 4. The Thesis Final manuscript, Approval Sheet, Abstract and Appendices shall be in hardbound and to be submitted not later than the Final Examination Week
28 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY - DASMARINAS College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
O R A L D E F E N S E P R O G R A M M E
Part Activity Person Responsible
I Opening Prayer Thesis Student
II Greetings and Introduction Subject Teacher Presentation of Thesis Students Presentation of Thesis Adviser Presentation of Panel Members
III Brief Introduction of CEAT Thesis Guidelines Subject Teacher
IV Presentation of Thesis Study Thesis Student
V Question and Answer Thesis Panel Members, Thesis Student and Subject Teacher
VI Thesis Deliberation Thesis Panel Member, Subject Teacher and Thesis Adviser
VII Announcement of Result Chair of Panel Members
VIII Clarification Thesis Panel Members, Thesis Student and Subject Teacher
29 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2.3 RESULT OF ORAL DELIBERATION & GRADING SYSTEM Thesis Student shall be able to receive a remark of Passed, Passed with Minor Revision, Conditional and Failed during oral deliberation. A grade of Passed means the Thesis Student has successfully answered all the questions of Thesis Panel Members during oral deliberation, satisfied all requirements of Thesis 1 or Thesis 2 subjects and no other revisions will be made on the context of his manuscript. A grade of Passed with Minor Revision means the student passed the oral defense however, required to revise and accomplish the list of suggestions and requirements made by Thesis Panel Members one (1) week after the oral deliberation. A grade of Conditional means the Student has not successfully answered all the questions during the oral deliberation however, may request for reconsideration and retake the oral defense within two (2) weeks. The Students request for reconsideration must be approved by all Thesis Panel Members. If there is no request made, a grade of failed will be given to the Students. Thesis Students are allowed for a maximum of two oral defense presentations in one semester. A grade of Failed means the students failed to meet any of the following (1) carried out research objectives of the study, (2) answered questions of Thesis Panel Members during the oral deliberation (3) completed the requirements of Thesis 1 or Thesis 2 subjects. He will be given a grade of 0.0 in the subject and will be advised to re enroll the subject on the succeeding semesters. If a student receives a grade of Passed or Passed with Minor Revision from Thesis Panel Members, his final grade will then be computed based on the suggested grading system in this guideline or on the course syllabus set by the Department.
30 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Student who receives a grade of Conditional and fails to present on the current semester will receive a grade of 0.0 in Thesis 1 or Thesis 2 subject.
2.4 REDEFENSE Thesis Student shall be given only one (1) chance to present again his proposal or final presentation on the current semester upon approval of his request for redefense by Thesis Subject Teacher, Thesis Panel Members and Program Coordinator. Likewise, failure to comply in one (1) of the following conditions will result into a grade of 0.0 of Thesis Student. a. The Thesis Student arrived late or failed to show up on his scheduled oral presentation. b. The Thesis Student violated ethical standards (i. e. plagiarism) in research writing. c. The Thesis Student received a failing grade in one of his Thesis Panel Members during redefense. d. The Panel as a body failed to get a consensus.
2.5 THESIS RECORD BOOK All research related activities, accomplishments and progress reports shall be documented daily by Thesis Student in a Thesis Record book. The weekly thesis plan of Thesis Student shall be presented to Thesis Adviser and must be signed to signify approval. The Subject Teacher shall check weekly the Thesis Record Book of Thesis Students.
31 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2.6 ACADEMIC CALENDAR SCHEDULE OF UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH RELATED ACTIVITIES
Activity Persons Involve Schedule THESIS 1 Submission of Draft Chapter 1 Thesis Student Subject Teacher 1 st wk 5 th wk of Prelim Term Period Deadline for Submission of Thesis Adviser Acceptance Form Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Subject Teacher Prelim Exam Week Payment of Thesis 1/ Submission of Official Receipt to Subject Teacher Thesis Student Subject Teacher Prelim Exam Week Submission of Revised Chapter 1 to Subject Teacher Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Subject Teacher 1 st wk of Midterm Period Submission of draft Chapter 2 to Subject Teacher and Thesis Adviser Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Subject Teacher 3 rd wk of Midterm Period Submission of draft Chapter 3 to Subject Teacher and Thesis Adviser Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Subject Teacher 5 th wk of Midterm Period Deadline for Submission of Accomplished Schedule Form for the Undergraduate Thesis Proposal Defense
Submission of Thesis Proposal Manuscript ( 5 copies , each to be given to the following (2) panel members (1) chair of panel member (1) thesis adviser and (1) subject teacher) Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Thesis Panel Members Subject Teacher Midterm Exam Week Proposal Defense Schedule Week Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Thesis Panel Members Subject Teacher 2 nd week of Final Term Period Submission of Revised Chapters 1-3 to Subject Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Final Exam Week
32 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Teacher and Thesis Adviser Subject Teacher
THESIS 2
Submission of Draft Chapter 4 and Chapter 5 to Subject Teacher and Thesis Adviser
Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Subject Teacher Midterm Exam Week Payment of Thesis 1/ Submission of Official Receipt to Subject Teacher Thesis Student Subject Teacher Midterm Exam Week Deadline for Submission of Accomplished Schedule Form for the Undergraduate Thesis Final Defense
Submission of Thesis Manuscript ( 5 copies , each to be given to the following (2) panel members (1) chair of panel member (1) thesis adviser and (1) subject teacher)
Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Thesis Panel Members Subject Teacher Midterm Exam Week Final Defense Schedule Week Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Thesis Panel Members Subject Teacher 2 nd week of Final Term Period English Grammar Editing Thesis Student Thesis Editor 3 rd week of Final Term Period Schedule of Redefense Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Thesis Panel Members Subject Teacher 4 th week of Final Term Period Submission of Hardbound Manuscript Thesis Student Thesis Adviser Subject Teacher 5 th week of Final Term Period
Reminder: 1. Oral defense shall be scheduled at least a month before the deadline of grades submission of the University Registrar. 2. Thesis Students are only allowed to deliver oral defense upon accomplishment of Schedule Form for the Undergraduate Thesis.
33 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2.7 THESIS FEE The individual or group of Thesis Students enrolled in Thesis 1 or Thesis 2 subject shall pay an additional amount of Php. 2,000.00 every semester to the Accounting Office. This amount is the remunerations of the following individual: 1. Thesis Adviser - Php. 1,000.00 /semester 2. Thesis Panel Member - Php. 300.00 / semester 3. Chair of Thesis Panel Member - Php. 400.00 / semester
The remuneration of the English Editor, Statistician or any other persons(s) outside the university is not covered by the provisions of this guideline. This will be handled directly by the students.
34 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2.8 ENGINEERING MANUCSCRIPT CONTENT
TITLE PAGE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ABSTRACT TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF APPENDIX
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study 1.2 Objectives of the Study 1.3 Significance of the Study 1.4 Scope and Limitation 1.5 Conceptual Framework 1.6 Definition of Terms
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 3.1 Methodological Framework 3.2 Gathering of Data 3.3 Preparation of Sample 3.4 Schematic Diagram 3.5 Procedure 3.6 Instrumentation 3.6 Statistical Analysis
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDICES
35 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
PART III : ARCHITECTURE DEPARTMENT
36 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
3.1 Guiding Principles 1. The Architectural Thesis is the culminating stage of an Architecture students extensive five year training. Here, he must be able to prove he already possesses the knowledge, the skills and the qualified professionalism to pass the course and to eventually graduate from the Architecture program. 2. The Thesis Presentation is the highlight of the Architectural Thesis. This is a privilege given to the student after complying with all the requirements given him. He and his work must be the centerpiece of the deliberations. 3. The student is an aspiring professional and he must be treated with constructive scrutiny as such by everyone involved in the Architectural Thesis. 4. Utmost objectivity of the results is desired by everyone involved in the Architectural Thesis especially in the deliberations. 5. The Architectural Thesis deliberations must be well documented before and after the presentation. This is to ensure the integrity of the endeavor. 6. Whatever is decided upon by the Thesis Panel Members (grade, content of thesis, etc.) in every deliberation phase shall be final and shall be free of further scrutiny. 7. As an aspiring architect, the students Architectural Thesis must present a building (or a complex of buildings) to ensure the applicability of the prepared rubrics for every presentation. However, if the student opts for a research type of Architectural Thesis, the Council must convene to approve/disapprove it. If approved, the rubrics for such must be created in advance by the Thesis Council.
3.2 Coverage Architectural Thesis covers Architectural Design 9 ARCH 511 (1 unit Lecture & 5 units studio) and Architectural Design 10 ARCH 521 (1 unit Lecture & 5 units Studio) courses. Architectural Design 9 shall cover three (3) deliberations namely the Title Defense, the Proposal Defense and lastly the Site Defense. Architectural Design 10
37 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
shall include the design translation only of the approved research output from Architectural Design 9.
3.3 Architectural Design Oral Presentations Architectural Design 9 covers three (3) Oral Presentations namely: 1. TITLE SELECTION DEFENSE This is intended to establish a Proponents Project Proposal with the help of selected members of the Faculty. 2. PROJECT DEFENSE Here, the Proponent has already determined his Project Proposal, his Adviser already known and Chapters 1 to 3 of his manuscript is ready for evaluation by the Thesis Panel Members. 3. SITE DEFENSE Here, the Proponent sets the Criteria for Site selection and bases the chosen site from such criteria. The Thesis Panel Members will evaluate the completeness, correctness and acceptability of the chosen site for the Project Proposal. See Procedures for further clarification. Architectural Design 10 covers only one (1) Oral Presentation and this is called the FINAL DEFENSE. After this, the Proponent shall have submitted all the requirements religiously as scheduled, orally defended his Thesis and accepted the verdict of the Thesis Panel Members.
3.4 Requirements on Architectural Design Oral Presentations 1. TITLE DEFENSE Accomplished Project Proposal Sheet with related literatures and projects attached. Summary of Proposed Project Titles Visual presentation (electronic or otherwise). Proponent may decide on the medium. 2. PROJECT DEFENSE Accomplished manuscript Advisers endorsement Project Defense Rubric
38 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Visual presentation (electronic or otherwise). Proponent may decide on the medium. Other supporting documents the Proponent has seen vital to his defense.
3. SITE DEFENSE Accomplished and edited manuscript Advisers endorsement Site Defense Rubric Visual presentation (electronic or otherwise). Proponent may decide on the medium. Other supporting documents the Proponent has seen vital to his defense.
4. FINAL DEFENSE Accomplished and edited manuscript Advisers endorsement Final defense rubric Other supporting documents the Proponent has seen vital to his defense. Concept Board (which includes design guides to be adopted) Site Development Plan Floor Plan/s of Major Buildings/s Elevation/s of Major Buildings/s Architectural and Structural Bay Sections Perspective of Major Building/s Interior Perspectives of Major Area/s General rules for the Final Defense 1. Presentation boards must be accomplished manually. Adviser shall bar the Proponent from presenting if electronic means are used for the presentation boards. 2. The Proponent must have submitted these boards exactly one (1) week prior to his Defense. Failure to do so subjects his slot to forfeiture and a grade of 0.00 for the entire course. 3. These presentation boards shall be stored in one safe place by the Coordinator. They can only be taken out by the proponent during the schedule of his deliberation or another time decided upon by the Coordinator.
39 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4. The Proponent may opt to use electronic means only after the Defense and he has obtained a passing grade.
3.5 Conduct of Architectural Design Oral Presentations 3.5.1 TITLE DEFENSE 3.5.1.1 Before Oral Presentation 1. Proponent must report to the Coordinator and provide a photocopy of his registration form as proof of his enrolment in the course. 2. All Proponents are strictly required to attend the first general meeting to be conducted by the Coordinator. Full awareness of these guidelines shall enable the Proponent to start searching for potential titles. 3. Proponent must be the first to verify if his potential title is not listed among the banned titles in the department. See Ban Rules. 4. Proponent will prepare three (3) potential titles and each will be documented as Proposal Sheet (see form no. x). Clippings for each respective potential title must be attached with the Proposal Sheet. Incomplete Proposal Sheets will not be accepted during the Title Defense. 5. Proponent will inform the Coordinator of his readiness for the Title Defense and will get his slot. There the slots will be on a First-Come-First-Served Basis. 6. Coordinator shall request selected members of the Faculty to act as Title Selection Committee members. All are expected to become Advisers and/or Panel members. They will pledge their schedule as well. 3.5.1.2 During Oral Presentation 1. The Title Selection Committee will take their seats. A five member panel is the most ideal while three can be considered a quorum. 2. Each deliberation day will start with a prayer. 3. One Proponent will distribute his Proposal sheet among the panel members. Each shall have a copy. Proponent will be holding a Title Approval Sheet.
40 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4. Panel members will be given a maximum of ten (10) minutes to browse the Proposal Sheets. 5. The first panel member to finish browsing the Proposal Sheets may ask the first question or to comment. The panel may require the Proponent to further explain his titles using his laptop or any other means. The panel must write comments and suggestions on the Proposal Sheet handed to them. 6. The panel member must sign on the Approval Sheet the Proponent is holding across the title he believes the Proponent must pursue. Getting a minimum of three (3) signatures on a potential title means that is the approved title of the Proponent. 7. The panel may edit the approved title only upon consensus but without altering the overall intent of the Proponent. 8. The Coordinator shall jot this immediately in his notes. 9. If the Proponent got two or more of his potential titles approved by the panel he automatically gets the privilege to select from among these. However, he must decide after a maximum of five (5) minutes only or he loses the privilege. The panel in turn will decide for him. 10. If the Proponent fails to gather three (3) signatures in any of his potential titles he may request for another Title Defense Schedule which the Coordinator will determine. 11. When the Title Defense is over and the Proponent still failed to get approval in any potential titles, he has a week left to pursue this. He will present to any member of the panel personally on their official Consultation hours only in order to get his potential titles approved. After this, the Coordinator shall recommend that the Proponent drop himself from the course. 3.5.1.3 After Oral Presentation 1. The Proponent will check if his approved title is registered by the Coordinator in the manifest.
41 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
2. He must retrieve the Proposal sheets and take note of the comments written therein. 3. He may suggest to the Coordinator his preferred Adviser for reference purposes only. 4. Proponent prepares Chapters 1 to 3 of his manuscript. 3.5.2 PROJECT DEFENSE 3.5.2.1 Before Oral Presentation 1. Proponent must report to the Coordinator for the formal selection of his Adviser. Coordinator has the power to apply a system for this. 2. Proponent must accomplish the Advisers Acceptance form after knowing his Adviser. He must personally approach the faculty member to get his approval. If the faculty member rejected the selection he must state the reason by writing it on the space provided for in the Advisers Acceptance form. Proponent will inform the Coordinator immediately afterwards for another selection. 3. The Thesis Panel Member must receive the manuscript at least one (1) week prior to the oral defense schedule. 4. Proponent shall settle the Thesis Fee two weeks prior to the Project Defense week. He cannot obligate the Coordinator to give him a slot in the deliberations if he fails to do so. 5. Adviser shall accomplish the Endorsement form and will submit it personally to the Coordinator for further update on the deliberation schedule. 3.5.2.2 During Oral Presentation 1. Each deliberation day will start with scripture reading and a prayer. 2. Proponent must arrive at the deliberation room thirty (30) minutes before his slot. No excuses will be entertained. The Proponent still has the liability of losing his slot if he doesnt comply or worse, he arrives late.
42 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
3. The Proponent will distribute his manuscript, Project Defense rubric among the panel members. Each shall have a copy. Proponent must avoid delays in these because the time allotted for him is very limited. 4. When everyone is set the Adviser will introduce the Proponent to the panel. 5. The Proponent shall be given a total of 60 minutes in his slot. Ten (10) minutes shall be allowed for preparation, twenty (20) minutes for the presentation proper and thirty (30) minutes for the evaluation, comments and decision by the Thesis Panel Members. 6. The decision shall be announced by the Panel Chair. Afterwards, he will hand the Coordinator the decision rendered for documentation. 7. The Proponent will collect the comment sheets from the Panel and will file these for reference purposes. This is regardless of the result of his Defense. 8. If the Proponents work is disapproved he may request for a re-defense through his Adviser. The panel needs a consensus among them if a re-defense has merits. Without a consensus, the Proponent will have to accept the failing grade. 9. If a re-defense is approved by the Panel, it must happen within the reasonable time frame the Panel has set in agreement with the Adviser and the Coordinator. 10. The following are reasons for no re-defense: The Panel as a body failed to get a consensus; The Proponent arrived late at his slot; The Proponent did not arrive at all; The Proponent violated ethical standards (i. e. plagiarism) in research writing and was notified by any of the panel members; 3.5.2.3 After Oral Presentation 1. The Proponent will report to his Adviser again for the preparation to the Site Defense. 2. If the Proponent fails the deliberation he will not be expected anymore to settle the Thesis Fee for the Site Defense.
43 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
3. Proponent prepares Chapters 3 to 4 of his manuscript. He must edit the manuscript as prescribed by the Thesis Panel Members.
3.5.3 SITE DEFENSE 3.5.3.1 Before Oral Presentation 1. Proponent shall settle the Thesis Fee two weeks prior to the Site Defense week. He cannot obligate the Coordinator to give him a slot in the deliberations if he fails to do so or was delayed in doing so. 2. Adviser shall accomplish the Endorsement form and will submit it personally to the Coordinator for further update on the deliberation schedule. 3. The Thesis Panel Members must receive the manuscript (Chapters 1 to 4) at least one (1) week prior to the oral presentation. 3.5.3.2 During Oral Presentation 1. Each deliberation day will start with scripture reading and a prayer. 2. Proponent must arrive at the deliberation room thirty (30) minutes before his scheduled oral presentation. No excuses will be entertained. The Proponent still has the liability of losing his slot if he doesnt comply or worse, he arrives late. 3. The Proponent will distribute his manuscript, Site Defense rubric and Comment sheets to the panel members. Each shall have a copy. Proponent must avoid delays in these because the time allotted for him is very limited. 4. When everyone is set the Adviser will introduce the Proponent to the panel. 5. The Proponent shall be given a total of 60 minutes in his slot. Ten (10) minutes shall be allowed for preparation, twenty (20) minutes for the presentation proper and thirty (30) minutes for the evaluation, comments and decision by the Thesis Panel Members. 6. The decision shall be announced by the Panel Chair. Afterwards, he will hand the Coordinator the decision rendered for documentation.
44 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
7. The Proponent will collect the comment sheets from the Panel and will file these for reference purposes. This is regardless of the result of his Defense. 8. If the Proponents work is disapproved he may request for a re-defense through his Adviser. The panel needs a consensus among them if a re-defense has merits. Without a consensus, the Proponent will have to accept the failing grade. 9. If a re-defense is approved by the Panel, it must happen within the reasonable time frame the Panel has set in agreement with the Adviser and the Coordinator. 10. The following are reasons for no re-defense: The Panel as a body failed to get a consensus; The Proponent arrived late at his scheduled redefense The Proponent did not arrive at all; The Proponent violated ethical standards (i. e. plagiarism) in research writing and was notified by any of the panel members; The Proponent failed to observe etiquette during and after the defense. 3.5.3.3 After Oral Presentation 1. The Proponent will report to his Adviser again for the final editing of the manuscript. 2. The Coordinator will post the result of the deliberations to the bulletin board.
3.5.4 FINAL DEFENSE 3.5.4.1 Before Oral Presentation 1. Proponent must consult with his Adviser periodically. 2. Proponent shall settle the Thesis Fee two weeks after class opening. He cannot obligate the Coordinator to give him a slot in the deliberations if he fails to do so. 3. Presentation boards must be accomplished manually. Adviser shall bar the Proponent from presenting if electronic means are used for the presentation boards.
45 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4. These presentation boards shall be stored in one safe place by the Coordinator. They can only be taken out by the proponent during the schedule of his deliberation or another time decided upon by the Coordinator. 5. Adviser shall accomplish the Endorsement form and will submit it personally to the Coordinator for further update on the deliberation schedule. 6. Proponent must submit the requirements (see list) one week before his slot. The Thesis Panel Members must receive the manuscript at least one (1) week prior to the slot. 3.5.4.2 During Oral Presentation 1. Each deliberation day will start with scripture reading and a prayer. 2. Proponent must arrive at the deliberation room thirty (30) minutes before his slot. No excuses will be entertained. The Proponent still has the liability of losing his slot if he doesnt comply or worse, he arrives late. 3. The Proponent will distribute his manuscript, Final Defense rubric among the panel members. Each shall have a copy. Proponent must avoid delays in these because the time allotted for him is very limited. 4. When everyone is set the Adviser will introduce the Proponent to the panel. 5. The Proponent shall be given a total of 60 minutes in his slot. Ten (10) minutes shall be allowed for preparation, twenty (20) minutes for the presentation proper and thirty (30) minutes for the evaluation, comments and decision by the Thesis Panel Members. 6. The decision shall be announced by the Panel Chair. Afterwards, he will hand the Coordinator the decision rendered for documentation. 7. The Proponent will collect the comment sheets from the Panel and will file these for reference purposes. This is regardless of the result of his Defense. 8. There shall be no re-defense for this deliberation.
46 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
3.5.4.3 After Oral Presentation 1. The Proponent will report to his Adviser again for the preparation of the final manuscript. 2. The Coordinator will convene with those who passed the Final Defense for the Thesis Exhibit. They may opt to use electronic means for the presentation boards 3. Proponent prepares will submit his manuscript to qualified faculty members of the School for proof reading. 4. He will submit the edited book to all signatories of the Approval Sheet prior to the bookbinding. 5. Proponent will submit his Thesis to the Faculty and the AEA.
3.6 Ban Rules These rules govern the pre qualifications of the candidate proposals forwarded by the proponents in the Title Selection Defense. It is important for the proponent to check on these prior to seeking project proposals. If the candidate proposal is discovered to be among the Banned projects during any deliberations or even belatedly, the proposal shall immediately be disapproved by the Thesis Panel Members. The main purpose of these Ban Rules is to ensure the originality of the approved project proposals. Permanently banned project proposals: 1. Those bearing the name, building occupancy and site same with a project proposal submitted to the Faculty and the Aklatang Emilio Aguinaldo. 2. Those totally absurd, ludicrous and unremarkable. 3. Those considerably purely theoretical and unquantifiable. Temporarily banned project proposals: The time period for this ban covers a span of two academic years. Those temporarily banned are those bearing building occupancy similar with a project proposal submitted to the Faculty and the Aklatang Emilio Aguinaldo and using the same exact site.
47 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
3.7 Grading System
1. The Coordinator will upload grades for Arch 511 & Arch 521 only on the Finals period. 2. The following breakdown of the final grades for Arch 511 & Arch 521 shall only be applicable if the Proponent passes each subject.
3. The Thesis Panel Members shall evaluate the proponent based on the respective rubrics (see appendix) given to them. 4. The proponent shall pass the deliberation if the Panel voted unanimously or majority (two out of three) to approve his work (passed or passed with minor revisions). Likewise, the proponent shall fail the deliberation if the Panel voted unanimously or majority (two out of three) to disapprove his work. This is applicable to the Project Defense, Site Defense and Final Defense. 5. Numerical evaluations will be implemented only on the Site and Final Defense. 6. The following will be rendered irrelevant in case the Proponent is barred from presenting his Thesis or had failed the deliberation: Advisers grade Coordinators grade
48 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
The Manuscript Title Page Certificate of Originality Approval Sheet Abstract Dedication Acknowledgment Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures and Illustrations List of Appendices CHAPTER 1. The Problem and Its Setting 1.1 Introduction a. Rationale of the Project b. Background of the Project c. Project Goals and Objectives d. Significance and the Expected Output e. Scope and Delimitation CHAPTER 2. Theoretical Framework 2.1 Review of Related Literature 2.2 Conceptual Framework/Paradigm 2.3 Methodology CHAPTER 3. Site Justification 3.1 Site and Project Development Criteria 3.2 Macro and Micro Site Analysis CHAPTER 4. Architectural Design Development and Architectural Engineering 4.1 Site Planning and Site Programming 4.2 Building Space Program 4.3 Design Conceptualization 4.4 Project Technical Requirements End of Architectural Design 9
49 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
CHAPTER 5. Architectural Design Translation 5.1 Project Title 5.2 Design Philosophy 5.3 Design Theories and Design Paradigm, 5.4 Design Concept, Structural Concept, Material Concept, Site Concept, Building Plan Concept, Utility Concept 5.5 Space and Form Evolution and Synthesis (explanation of your doodles from design diary) 5.6 Design Objectives 5.7 Design Considerations (Summary of Chapter 3) 5.8 Presentation of Drawings Appendices Related Documents/ Attachments Thesis Panel Member Comments Endorsement Forms Letters Certificates Actual Photo of Deliberation Others References Biographical Sketch End of Architectural Design 10
50 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
PART 4 : MANUSCRIPT CONTENT AND FORMAT
51 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTION IN MANUSCRIPT PREPARATION
A. Paper 8 x 11 , white bond paper
B. Typeface Tahoma, pt 12, regular
C. Margins
Top : 1.0 inch Bottom : 1.0 inch Right : 1.0 inch Left : 1.25 inch
D. Spacing Before 0 pt , after 0 pt single space : for table titles and headings, figure captions, references 1.5 space : body of manuscript Double space : after chapter titles, before major subheadings, and before and after tables in the text. : after the last sentences and another paragraph
E. Pagination number all pages, except the artwork for figure and preliminary pages
preliminary pages usually carry lowercase roman numerals and only shown in table of contents
Introduction (Chapter 1) Arabic numerals
page numbers continue throughout the appendix
Bottom right corner of page
Font Tahoma , Italics size 9
F. Tabs 0.75 G. Paragraph Body : Justified alignment
Titles : Left alignment for major headings / subheadings
(Separate page for Part Title and Appendices only) Left alignment for subheadings
52 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
H. Figures and Figure Captions small figures may appear on a page with some text
large figures are placed on a separate page immediately after the page on which figure is first mentioned
Figure number is italics; text of the caption is not italicized; capitalize only the first word and any proper nouns; figure captions are typed below the figure; Minimum size 8 pt, maximum size 14 pt
Figure 2.1 : Title (Format : Figure <chapter no.> . <no of table>) Source: (eg. title of book)
I. Tables and Table Captions short tables may appear on a page with some text
long tables are placed on a separate page immediately after the page on which the table is first mentioned
Table number is italics; text of the caption is not italicized; capitalize only the first word and any proper nouns; table captions are typed above the table; Minimum size 8 pt, maximum size 14 pt
(Format : Table <chapter no.> . <no of table>) Table 2.1: Title 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr East West North
53 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Label Label Label Label
Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Source: (eg. title of book)
Thick line -1.5 pt, Thin line 1.0 pt Line Spacing single Space before: 0 pt Space after : 0 pt
J. Indentations Indent the first line of every paragraph.
Bibliography has a hanging indent format (first line is set flush left and the subsequent lines are indented)
K. Paper Orientation For engineering department : portrait except for figures and tables needed in landscape orientation
For Architecture department : Landscape with two columns for general text
Size A4 (210 mm x 297 mm) for general text
Size A3 (297 mm x 420 mm) for drawings
L. Editing Style American Psychological Association (APA) style
4.2 HARDBOUND AND ELECTRONIC COPIES OF THESIS
4.2.1 Bookbinding of Manuscript
The final Thesis Manuscript shall be hardbound and follow the prescribed format:
A. Color Engineering : maroon cover and gold letter markings
Architecture : black cover and gold letter markings
54 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
B. Label Content of Title Page
C. Size
Engineering : 8.5 x 11
Architecture : A4 ( landscape orientation) D. No of Copies 1 copy for AEA Library 1 copy for Department 1 copy for Thesis Adviser 1 copy each for Thesis Student
Side Title
4.2.2 Electronic Copy of Thesis Manuscript
The Thesis Paper and final oral presentation shall be saved in pdf file using a high quality Compact Disc Recordable. This will be submitted together with the hard bound thesis manuscript.
A. Label Each CD R shall labeled with a white sticker (approximately : 1.5 x 2) and has the following information :
Title of Thesis Study Name of Thesis Student Name of Thesis Adviser Month and Year of Completion
B. No of Copies 1 copy for AEA Library 1 copy for Department 1 copy for Thesis Adviser 1 copy each for Thesis Student
Month and Year of Completion Title of Thesis SURNAME/S OF THESIS STUDENT/GROUP
55 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Title of the Study } } } } } } } } A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of <Program or Department> College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology De La Salle University Dasmarias Dasmarinas, City } } } } } } } } In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Bachelor of Science in <Program or Department> } } } } } } } } <Name of Thesis Student 1> <Name of Thesis Student 2> <Name of Thesis Student 3> } } } } } } } } <Month>, <Year of Graduation>
8 spaces 8 spaces 8 spaces 8 spaces
56 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
TABLE OF CONTENTS } } TITLE PAGE i ACKNOWLEDGMENT . ii ABSTRACT . iii TABLE OF CONTENTS . iv LIST OF TABLES .. v LIST OF FIGURES vi } CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background of the Study . # 1.2 Objectives of the Study .. # 1.3 Significance of the Study ..... # 1.3 Scope and Limitation . # 1.4 Conceptual Framework # 1.5 Definition of Terms # } CHAPTER 2 : REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 2.1 Heading No. 1 . # 2.1.1 Heading No. 2 # 2.1.1.1 Heading No. 3 ... # 2.2 Heading No. 4 .. # . . . } CHAPTER 3 : REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 3.1 Heading No. 5 .. # 3.1.1 Heading No. 6 .. # 3.1.1.1 Heading No. 7 .. # . . } CHAPTER 4 : RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Heading No. 9 .. # 4.1.1 Heading No. 10 .. # 4.1.1.1 Heading No. 11 ..... # } CHAPTER 5 : CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION } BIBLIOGRAPHY .... # } APPENDICES...... #
2 spaces 1 space 1 space 1 space 1 space 1 space centered, Tahoma, size 12, bold font style Tahoma, size 12 1 space 1 space
57 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
LIST OF TABLES } } Table 1.1: Title .. # Table 1.2: Title .. # Table 2.1: Title .. # Table 2.2: Title .. #
LIST OF FIGURES } } Figure 1.1: Title .. # Figure 1.2: Title .. # Figure 2.1: Title .. # Figure 2.2: Title .. #
Centered, Tahoma, size 12, bold font style space before: 0 pt; space after: 0 pt
2 spaces Centered, Tahoma, size 12, bold font style space before: 0 pt; space after: 0 pt
2 spaces
58 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4.7 PRELIMINARIES
4.7.1 Acknowledgment
1. The word acknowledgment is all capitalized, bold font style and with center page alignment.
2. It is a one page containing expression of appreciation for the assistance and guidance provided by the Thesis Adviser, Thesis Panel Members , Subject Teacher , Technical Critic, selected faculty members and staff, classmates, friends and family.
4.7.2 Abstract 1. The word abstract is all capitalized, bold font style and with center page alignment
2. The information in abstract gives the reader an overview of the study, based on information from the other sections of the manuscript.
3. It is one paragraph of about 150- 300 words.
4. The typical information elements included in an abstract are as follows: (a) some background or general information on the study (b) the main topic (or purpose) of the study and its scope (c) some information on how the study was conducted or the methodology used in the study (d) the most important findings of the study and (e) statement of conclusion
5. A maximum of five keywords are listed on the page of abstract. Each key word is separated by a comma
59 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
61 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4.10 BODY OF MANUSCRIPT 4.10.1 Chapter 1: Introduction 1. Generally this chapter contains the following sections: (a) background of the study, (b) objectives of the study, (c) significance of the study, (d) scope and limitation, (e) conceptual framework and (f) definition of terms.
2. Background of the study: This 2-3 pages sub section of Chapter 1 presents a generalization on a certain issue. It discusses the current situation of a location having an unsatisfactory condition and needs a solution by conducting a research. The historical background and some underlying technical principles and rationale of the study is also discuss. Furthermore, basic discoveries, differences of opinion or disagreements that led you to propose further investigation is clearly stated.
3. Objectives of the study: This section discusses the main goal of the study. There should be 1 general objective followed by 3-5 specific objectives of the study. The general objective is a statement of the broad target, while the specific objectives are statement of the definite inquiries which are expected to achieve in the study. This section must not list the step by step procedure to be conducted.
4. Significance of the study: This section answers the question: who are to be benefited and how they are going to be benefited? It must be shown in this section the individuals, groups, or communities who may be placed in advantageous position on account of the study.
5. Scope and Limitation of the Study: This section describes the extent of the study and its weaknesses beyond the control of the researcher.
6. Conceptual Framework: This section is compose of three parts: input, process and output that will provide the basis of formulation for research hypothesis. It will serves as a guide in conducting investigation.
7. Definition of Terms: This section list technical terms that needs to be defined. These are terms that are not common.
62 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4.4.2 Chapter 2: Review of Related Literature 1. This chapter contains an evaluated, organized, and synthesized collection of citations to other studies (NOT a MERE listing of previous studies), which are related or somewhat related to the researchers own specific research problem. 2. This chapter is a summary of writings of recognized authorities of previous research from the following materials: books, reports, thesis and dissertations, journals, conference proceeding and internet for free and updated information. 3. This chapter serves three important functions. (a) It continues the process started in the introduction of giving the readers background information needed to understand your study. (b) It assures the readers that you are knowledgeable about the significant research that has been done in your area of investigation and (c) It establishes your study as one link in a chain of research that is developing and enlarging knowledge in your field of research interest.
4.10.3 Chapter 3: Methodology 1. It is generally a guideline system for solving a problem, with specific components such as phases, tasks, methods, techniques and tools.
2. This chapter contains the following subsections but not limited to (a) gathering of data (b) methods of research / procedure (c) instrumentation (d) method of presentation and interpretation of data (e) mathematical treatment of data, (f) equations and models (g) statistical method and schematic diagram (properly labeled and numbered).
4.10.4 Chapter 4: Results and Discussion
1. This section presents the data collected from the study on this major aspect of your research problem, followed by extensive comments on or interpretation of the findings of the study
63 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4.10.5 Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendation 1. Conclusion: This section addresses the objective(s) pertaining to the major aspect of your research problem. 2. Recommendation: This section indicates statements that suggest the need for further studies. It answers questions, what else can be done relevant to your research problem and what other related problems should be addressed?
64 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4.11 SAMPLE BODY OF MANUSCRIPT Chapter 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The line spacing is double space. The paragraph indention is 1.50 cm. The alignment is justified. The line spacing between the first level heading and the body: 1- double space. The line spacing in the body: double space. No extra space will be given after the last sentence and another paragraph two spaces between period and another sentence. <Second Level Heading>
Only the first letters are capitalized except for articles and prepositions, bold font style, left justified alignment. <Third level heading> Only the first letter of the first word is capitalized, bold font style, left justified alignment. <Fourth Level Heading> Only the first letters are capitalized except for articles and prepositions, regular font style, left justified alignment. <Fifth Level Heading> Only the first letters are capitalized except for articles and prepositions, regular font style, underlined, left justified alignment.
65 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
PART 5 : FORMS
66 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarinas, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
Conforme :
______________________ Date
To Whom It May Concern:
This is to certify that we have read and fully understood the CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing and agreed to comply with the said requirements.
________________________ ________________________ Students Name and Signature Parents Name and Signature
________________________ Course / Year / Section
67 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarinas, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
The undergraduate thesis proposal entitled <Title of thesis>prepared and presented by <name of Thesis Students> on an Oral Defense last <date of oral defense>has been examined and is recommended for approval and acceptance in Thesis 2 (Title of Subject )
_______________________________ <Name of Thesis Adviser>
_______________________________ <Chair of Panel Members>
_______________________________ _______________________________ < Name of Panel Member> < Name of Panel Member>
_______________________________ <Name of Program Coordinator or Department Chair> Program Coordinator or Department Chair, < Name of the Program or Department>
68 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
APPROVAL SHEET } } This thesis hereto entitled } Title of the research project } Prepared and submitted by <Thesis Students> in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in _____________________ and is recommended for acceptance and approval for ORAL EXAMINATION. } } __________________________________ <Name of Adviser> ADVISER } } Approved by the Committee on Oral Examination with a grade of _____ on ________, 20__. } } _____________________________ <Name of Chair of Panel Member> CHAIR } }
_____________________________ _____________________________ <Name of Panel Member1> <Name of Panel Member2> MEMBER MEMBER } } Accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science in_______________________ } } } _____________________________ <Name of Department Chair> CHAIR, <DEPARTMENT > } } } _____________________________ <Name of College Dean> DEAN, <NAME OF COLLEGE> 2 spaces 1 space 1 space 2 spaces 2 spaces 2 spaces 2 spaces 2 spaces 3 spaces 3 spaces
69 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarinas, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
ORAL DEFENSE FORM (Proposal Defense)
_______________ (date) I. General Information a. Name of Thesis Student(s): 1._______________________ 2._______________________ 3._______________________
b. Name of Thesis Adviser and co Adviser : 1._______________________ 2._______________________
c. Title of Thesis: _____________________________________________________________________________
d. Name of the Thesis Panelist: ______________________________
II. Summary of Reviews: (Please attach additional sheet if necessary) 1.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 2.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 3.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 4.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 5.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 6.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 7.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 8.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 9.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________
70 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
III. Evaluation:
Criteria for Evaluation Equivalent Points Grade I. Content of Manuscript (60%) a. The thesis study has a high quality of research methodology. It refers to the appropriateness of the procedure and methods used. It also includes the suitability of tools and equipment.
25 b. The thesis study has a significant beneficial impact to community.
20 c. The thesis study is novel and original. It is new and has not recently published in scientific journals, books, magazines, periodicals, pamphlets, newspapers, academic publications and like.
20 d. The thesis study has presented sufficient literature review to support his hypothesis. 10 II. Oral Presentation (40%) a. The student displayed thorough mastery of the study. 10 b. The student answered all questions raised by the examination committee well. 10 c. The student presented well-prepared visuals to facilitate the discussions of the study. 5 d. The student was able to communicate the report to the examination committee effectively. 5 III. Additional Requirements (software, model, prototype, etc.) This is optional. Please specify the equivalent points if applicable.
TOTAL SCORE OF PANEL MEMBER * (%) *Passing score is 60%
IV. Result of Evaluation: (please check one) PASSED (Average Grade of Panel Members is 60% . No revisions required.) PASSED WITH MINOR REVISION (Average Grade of Panel Members is 60%. Revisions will be reflected in the final thesis paper) CONDTIONAL (Average Grade of Panel Members is < 60% Revised thesis paper must be submitted in writing and needs re-approval by the examination committee in an oral presentation on current semester.) FAILED (Average Grade of Panel Members is < 60% . Revised thesis paper must be submitted in writing and needs re-approval by the examination committee in an oral presentation on next semester.)
Noted by: (Please affix your signature over printed name)
____________________ ____________________ _________________ Chair, Panel Member Panel Member Panel Member
71 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarinas, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
ORAL DEFENSE FORM (Final Defense)
_______________ (date) I. General Information a. Name of Thesis Student(s): 1._______________________ 2._______________________ 3._______________________
b. Name of Thesis Adviser and co Adviser : 1._______________________ 2._______________________
c. Title of Thesis: _____________________________________________________________________________
d. Name of the Thesis Panelist: ______________________________
II. Summary of Reviews: (Please attach additional sheet if necessary) 1.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 2.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 3.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 4.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 5.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 6.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 7.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 8.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________ 9.____________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________
72 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
III. Evaluation:
Criteria for Evaluation Equivalent Points Grade I. Content of Manuscript (70%) A. Sufficient results were presented to derive reasonable conclusions addressing the stated objectives of the study. 20 B. The student interpreted the results of the study correctly. 20 C. The conclusions address the stated objectives of the study. 20 D. Recommendations for further studies based on the study were sufficiently and clearly listed. 10 II. Oral Presentation (30%) A. The student displayed thorough mastery of the study. 10 B. The student answered all questions raised by the examination committee well. 10 C. The student presented well-prepared visuals to facilitate the discussions of the study. 5 D. The student was able to communicate the report to the examination committee effectively. 5 III. Additional Requirements (software, model, prototype, etc.) This is optional. Please specify the equivalent points if applicable.
TOTAL SCORE OF PANEL MEMBER* (%) *Passing score is 60%
IV. Result of Evaluation: (please check one)
PASSED (Average Grade of Panel Members is 60% . No revisions required.) PASSED WITH MINOR REVISION (Average Grade of Panel Members is 60%. Revisions will be reflected in the final thesis paper) CONDTIONAL (Average Grade of Panel Members is < 60% Revised thesis paper must be submitted in writing and needs re-approval by the examination committee in an oral presentation on current semester.) FAILED (Average Grade of Panel Members is < 60% . Revised thesis paper must be submitted in writing and needs re-approval by the examination committee in an oral presentation on next semester.)
Noted by: (Please affix your signature over printed name)
____________________ ____________________ _________________ Chair, Panel Member Panel Member Panel Member
73 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarinas, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
ADVISER S ACCEPTANCE FORM To : _____________________ <Thesis Subject Teacher >
Hereby accepts the Thesis Students: 1. <Name of Thesis Student 1> 2. <Name of Thesis Student 2> 3. <Name of Thesis Student 3>
As thesis advisees for their study entitled; <Title of thesis study> for the school year ___________ Conforme :
_________________________ printed name over signature <Name of Thesis coAdviser> THESIS co ADVISER
_________________________ printed name over signature <Name of Thesis Adviser> THESIS ADVISER
_________________________ printed name over signature <Name of Subject Teacher> SUBJECT TEACHER
Note: Copies of this form shall be kept by Thesis Students, Thesis Adviser and Subject Teacher.
74 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarinas, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
APPLICATION FOR CHANGING THESIS ADVISER
I. Student Information: a. Name of Thesis Student(s): 1._________________________ 2. _______________________ 3. __________________________
b. Reason(s) for Changing Thesis Adviser: _____________________________________________________________________________________
c. Please attach an update of your ongoing research and research plan upon submission of this application to the new thesis adviser.
II. Instruction to the New Thesis Adviser: Please sign below to indicate that you are willing to serve as the thesis adviser. Advisers Signature: __________________________________ Date: ____________ Co-Advisers Signature: _______________________________ Date: ____________
III. Instruction to the Initial Thesis Adviser: (if still connected with DLSU-D) Please sign below to acknowledge that you are aware of the request to change thesis adviser. Advisers Signature: __________________________________ Date: ____________ Co-Advisers Signature: _______________________________ Date: ____________
IV. Instruction to the Student: Please sign below and return the form to the thesis subject teacher. Thesis Student 1: ____________________________________ Date: ___________ Thesis Student 2: ___________________________________ Date: ___________ Thesis Student 3: ____________________________________ Date: ___________
Approved by:
_____________________________________________________ <Name of Department Undergraduate Research Committee Head> Undergraduate Research Committee Head, <Department>
Noted by:
________________________________ ________________________________ <Name of Program Head/Coordinator> <Name of Department Chair> Program Coordinator, <Name of Program> Chair, <Name of Department>
Note: Copies of this form shall be kept by Thesis Students, previous Thesis Adviser, new Thesis Adviser and Subject Teacher.
75 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarinas, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
SCHEDULE FORM FOR THE UNDERGRADUATE THESIS DEFENSE proposal defense final defense
I. General Information a. Name of Thesis Student(s): 1._______________________ 2._______________________ 3._______________________
b. Name of Thesis Adviser and co Adviser: 1._______________________ 2._______________________
c. Title of Thesis: _____________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________
d. Date of Defense: _______________________ e. Time of Defense: _______________________ f. Place of Defense: _______________________
II. Approval to Schedule of Oral Defense :
Name Signature Thesis Student 1 __________________ __________________
No. Date In Received by Action Taken Remarks Date Out Signature
Note : Routing slip must be signed every time the manuscript comes in and out of the responsibility of Thesis Student, Subject Teacher, Thesis Adviser and Panel Members
77 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarinas, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology A R C H I T E C T U R E D E P A R T M E N T P R O P O S A L F O R M Proponents Name: __________________________ 1 of X Date submitted: __________________________ BACKGROUND OF THE PROJECT < Summarize the clippings gathered for this. State the Background from the most general premise to the specific. The final sentence or paragraph must clarify the type of project to be pursued.> ITEM FOR EVALUATION Remarks Proposed Project Title Type of Occupancy Expected Client Project Beneficiaries Tentative Objectives List of attachments: <the attachments listed here must be actually at the back of this sheet and must be cataloged and easy to find>
Is it architectural? yes maybe no Isnt it banned? yes maybe no Is it novel? yes maybe no Is it acceptable as an Architectural Project Proposal? yes maybe no
78 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY DASMARINAS Dasmarias, Cavite College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology A R C H I T E C T U R E D E P A R T M E N T
P R O P O N E N T S A P P R O V A L S H E E T C A N D I D A T E P R O P O S A L # 1 Proposed Title: ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ Revisions (if any): ____________________________________________________
____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist ____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist
____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist C A N D I D A T E P R O P O S A L # 2 Proposed Title: ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ Revisions (if any): ____________________________________________________
____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist ____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist
____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist C A N D I D A T E P R O P O S A L # 3 Proposed Title: ____________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________ Revisions (if any): ____________________________________________________
____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist ____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist
____________________________ Printed Name & Signature of Panelist
_____________________________ (Printed Name under Signature/Date) THESIS COORDINATOR PROPONENTS NAME : ______________ SCHEDULE OF DEFENSE : ______________
79 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
80 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
PART 6 : CITATION
6.1 REFERENCE CITATION
81 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Some of the general features of APA style: 1. The first line of each citation begins flush left, and the second and subsequent lines are indented five spaces. (This is called a "hanging indent.") . 2. Only initials are used for authors' first and middle names. Names are inverted: Miller, J. K 3. Single spaces separate each element. 4. Citations are arranged alphabetically by authors' last names; works by the same author are in alphabetical order. If the author is unknown, alphabetization is by the first word of the title. 5. Only the first letter of the first word of the title of books and articles is capitalized, with the exception of proper nouns. The first word of subtitles (after a colon) is also capitalized. 6.1.1 Books 1. The city and state in which the publisher is located are included, using United States postal codes to abbreviate states. However, the state (and/or country) is omitted for major cities and for university presses that include the name of the state. If more than one location is listed, the first is used. 2. Book titles are italicized. No author
Manual of legal rights. (1984). Quezon City : Asian Social Institute Communication Center One author Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline : the art and practice of the learning organization. New York : Currency Doubleday. Two or more authors (up to six authors) Snodgrass, M., & Wallace, L. T. (1980). Agriculture, economics and resource management. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. : Prentice-Hall. After the 6th author, "et al." is used. (, Peters, L. R., et al. (1984). )
Book other than first Simmons, J. V. (1995). Science and the beauty business: the beauty salon and its equipment (2nd ed.). Australia:
82 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
edition Thomson/Learning. Other abbreviations include: 1st ed., 2nd ed, etc.
Society, association, or institution as author and publisher Science Education Center, University of the Philippines. (1996). Plants of the Philippines (2nd ed). Manila, Philippines : Pundasyon sa Pagpapaunlad ng Kaalaman sa Pagtuturo ng Agham.
Edited Book
Ubalde, A. (ed.) (1996). Filipino American architecture, design, and planning issues. [S. l.] : Flipside Press. For multiple editors, use abbreviation, Eds.
Article or chapter in an edited book
Sanchez, L. J. A. (2000). Ilang Halaw mula sa kathang "Sa mga aninong ligaw." In Barrios, J. & Tolentino, R. (Eds.), Ang Aklat Likhaan ng Tula at Maikling Kuwento 2000 (pp. 252-260). (S.l. : s.n.). 6.1.2 Periodical Articles 1. The title of the periodical is italicized, but the title of the article is not. 2. The first letter of each word of the periodical title is capitalized (except for prepositions and articles). 3. The volume number of the periodical is italicized. Scholarly journal that numbers pages continuously throughout the annual volume
DeRoma, V. M. (2003). The relationship between tolerance for ambiguity and need for course structure. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 30, 574-576. Scholarly Turow, J. (1994). Hidden conflicts and journalistic norms: The case of
83 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
journal that paginates each issue separately
self- coverage. Journal of Communication, 44 (2), 12-31.
Magazine article (in contrast to an article in a scholarly journal) King, R. D. (1997, April). Should English be the law? Atlantic Monthly, 279, 55-64. Island of trouble. (1988, March 12). The Economist, 306, 53-54. Newspaper article
Oliva, E. G. (2006, November 23). Global warming could wipe out most birds, WWF says. Manila Bulletin, pp. B1-B7.
Encyclopedia Articles Signed article
Tracy, J. D. (1993). Erasmus. In The new encyclopedia Britannica (Vol. 18, pp. 489-491). Chicago: Encyclopedia Britannica.
Unsigned article
Right of asylum. (1995). In Academic American Encyclopedia (Vol. 16, p. 222). Danbury, CT: Grolier.
6.1.4 Audiovisual Materials 1. Persons primarily responsible for the item are named; their roles are identified in parentheses after their names. 2. The medium, placed in brackets, is supplied after the title. Media designations include [Audio recording], [CD] (for music CD), and [Motion picture] for both film and videotape. Example: Fields, F. (Producer), Zwick, E. (Director) (1989). Glory [videodisc]. Culver City, California : Tristar.
6.1.5 Audio recording Example:
84 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
British Broadcasting Corporation. (Producer). (1982). BID for Power [sound recording]. London, England : British Broadcasting Corporation.
6.1.6 Electronic Publications For the most current information, check Electronic Reference Formats Recommended by the APA at http://www.apa.org/journals/webref.html 1. To the extent possible, information is provided as for a printed source. 2. Information identifying the electronic source is placed at the end. 3. Date of retrieval is included. 4. Periods are omitted at the end of an Internet address, if that is the last element in the citation. Electronic Book
Humm, M. (1997). Feminism and film. Bloomington, IN: Edinburgh University Press. Retrieved October 20, 2001 from University of Wisconsin-Parkside Library, netLibrary Web site: http://www.netlibrary.com
Article from an Internet journal based on a print source (exact duplicate with same page numbers)
Killingbeck, D. (2001). The role of television news in the construction of school violence as "moral panic" [Electronic Version]. Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 8, 186-202. Article from an Internet journal based on a print source (format differs or page numbers are not indicated)
Killingbeck, D. (2001). The role of television news in the construction of school violence as "moral panic." Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 8, 186-202. Retrieved October 30, 2001, from http://www.albany.edu/ scj/jcjpc/vol8is3/killingbeck .html Daily newspaper article, electronic version available by search
Carcamo, D. (2009, August 4). Foreign dignitaries pay homage to Cory. The Philippine Star. Retrieved August 4, 2009, from http://www.philstar.com
85 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Article from Internet-only magazine
Saletan, W. (2001, October 17). The power of negative thinking. Slate. Retrieved October 20, 2001, from http://slate.msn.com/framegame/entries/01-10- 17_117527.asp Periodical article retrieved from periodical database
Adhikari, S., Pati, A., Chakrabarty, I., & Choudhury, B. (2007, August). Hybrid Quantum Cloning Machine. Quantum Information Processing, 6(4), 197- 219. Retrieved August 4, 2009, doi:10.1007/s11128-007-0053-6
6.2 IN-TEXT PARENTHETICAL CITATIONS It is required by the APA style that all authors cited in the text must appear in the references list, and all authors listed must be cited in the text. Basic form: Include author's surname (if not already mentioned in the text), and the date: Example : Ching (2004) found that chemical reaction... A recent study of chemical reaction (Ching, 2004) found... Quotation Author lastname, year, and page number included: Baym (1993) concludes that journalists "must speak in a voice that is both institutional and representational, hierarchical as well as relational" (p. 111).
Two authors Use both: ... (Wellek & Warren, 1992)...
Three to five authors: Include all authors the first time mentioned. In subsequent entries include the first author only, followed by et al.: Wasserstein et al. (1994) found... Six or more authors: As Miller et al. (2001) demonstrated
86 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Corporate author: Use full name the first time; abbreviate later: (National Institute of Mental Health [NIMH], 1991) ... No author Punctuate the first title words as in the reference list: on free care ("Study finds," 1982, p.115) ... the book College Bound Seniors (1979)
Multiple works:
Several studies (Balda, 1980; Kamil, 1988; Pepperbert & Funk, 1990) ... Multiple works by an author in one year Assign letters to each citation to distinguish them. (The letters must also be used in the reference list.): ...(Johnson, 1991a, 1991b, 1991c)...
Specific pages (Cheek and Buss, 1981, p. 332; Shimamura, 1989, chap. 3) Secondary source citing a primary source Include both: Seidenberg and McClelland's study (as cited in Coltheart, Curtis, Atkins, & Haller, 1993)... (Include Coltheart, not Seidenberg, in reference list)
World Wide Web site (but not a specific document) Provide the address (for example, http://www.apa.org) in the text. No reference entry is needed
87 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
PART 7 : SELECTION OF BEST UNDERGRADUATE THESIS
De La Salle University Dasmarinas College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
BEST UNDERGRADUATE THESIS AWARD SELECTION PROCESS
1. ELIGIBILITY:
88 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Every year, the Architecture Department and programs of Engineering Department shall conduct nomination and individually select their Best Undergraduate Thesis of the Year awardees. This competition is open to all College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology students who had completed their undergraduate thesis and passed the Oral Defense from their respective department or program during the current school year.
Department and/or programs having a single entry may still be considered in the selection process on condition that it meets the minimum standard entry grade of 80%.
2. UNDERGRADUATE THESIS COMMITTEE MEMBER: Dean, CEAT Associate Dean , CEAT Chair, Engineering Chair, Architecture Program Coordinators, Engineering Research Committee Head (CEAT) Research Committee Representative (Engineering) Research Committee Representative (Architecture) Research Committee Representative (Technology) IP Representative, CEAT
The committee members shall nominate the overall chair annually.
3. THE OVERALL CHAIR 3.1 Qualification 3.1.1 He is a CEAT faculty member of De La Salle University- Dasmarias and preferably in a full time status employment. 3.1.2 He must be at least a Masters degree holder. 3.1.3 He must have experienced in advising Thesis Students. 3.2 Responsibilities 3.2.1 He shall be in charge of setting the timetable of selection and evaluation process. 3.2.2 He shall coordinate with the Dean and Associate Dean with regards to the selection of internal evaluators. Three internal evaluators will be selected 3.2.3 He shall oversee the completion of submitted application forms of students. 3.2.4 He shall summarize the results of evaluation.
4. THE INTERNAL EVALUATOR 4.1 Qualification 4.1.1 He is a CEAT fulltime and part time faculty members of De La Salle University Dasmarias. 4.1.2 He must be at least a Masters degree holder or enrolled in a Masters program with credited units at the time of his appointment as Internal Evaluator.
89 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
4.1.3 He must have finished the Research Methods subject in his graduate studies at the time of his appointment. 4.1.4 He has expertise and competency on the thesis topic of the students. 4.1.5 He is not the current thesis adviser of the students. 4.1.6 He is not the current overall chair.
4.2 Responsibilities 4.2.1 He shall evaluate the thesis paper based on the criteria presented under Section 5. 4.2.2 He shall submit the result of his evaluation at least a week prior to the announcement of Best Undergraduate Thesis of the Year
5. APPLICATION Through the initiative of the program coordinator to encourage their Thesis Students to participate, the individual/group of Thesis Students shall apply and accomplish the application form of Best Undergraduate Thesis Award of the Program/Department and submit their journal type research paper to their respective Engineering Program Coordinator or Architecture Department Chair.
6. EVALUATION AND CRITERIA The Program Coordinators and Chairperson shall shortlist three (3) thesis studies in their respective engineering programs and architecture department respectively. The selected thesis groups shall submit additional 3 copies of journal type research paper for internal evaluators. Entrees shall be graded based on the following criteria:
(a) Novelty / Originality - 25 % (b) Impact / Significance of - 30 % Research Work to Community (c) Quality of Research Methodology - 30 % (d) Quality of Written Research Work - 15 %
7. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AWARD The Thesis Students that receive the highest grade based on the above mentioned criteria will be awarded as Best Undergraduate Thesis of the Year for (SPECIFY THE PROGRAM OR DEPARTMENT) during the annual CEAT Recognition Day.
90 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing De La Salle University Dasmarinas College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
BEST UNDERGRADUATE THESIS AWARD APPLICATION FORM
I. Department /Program : ___________________________________________________
II. Title of Thesis : ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________
III. Name of Students : 1. _________________________________ 2. _________________________________ 3. _________________________________
IV. Name of Thesis Adviser : __________________________
V. Time of Completion (Semester / School Year): __________
VI. Questions :
1. State the significant results of your research study. ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ 2. How will your study benefit the community and our country? ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ 3. What makes your thesis study outstanding? ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________
4. Attach your journal type research paper.
Endorsed by :
_________________________ (signature over printed name) Thesis Adviser, <Name of Thesis Adviser>
91 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
Figure 1: Summary of Evaluation Process for the Selection of Best Undergraduate Thesis
Submission of Application Form by Qualified CEAT Students Evaluation and Selection of Three (3) Qualified Thesis Studies by Engineering Program Coordinators or Architecture Department Chair Evaluation of Three Selected Internal Evaluators
Computation of Grades by Undergraduate Research Committee Overall Chair
Approval of CEAT Associate Dean and CEAT Dean Announcement of Result on Recognition Day
92 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing
De La Salle University Dasmarinas College of Engineering, Architecture and Technology
BEST UNDERGRADUATE THESIS AWARD REVIEW FORM
I. Department /Program : _________________________________________________
II. Title of Thesis : ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________
III. Name of Students : 4. ___________________________ 2._______________________________ 3. ___________________________
IV. Evaluation : CRITERIA SCORE
a. Novelty / Originality (The result of thesis study is new and has not recently published in scientific journals, books, magazines , periodicals , pamphlets, newspapers , academic publications and like). (25%)
b. Impact / Significance of Research Work to Community (The thesis topic is included in the research areas presented in Cavite Development Research Program De LaSalle University Dasmarinas and University Research Thrust of De LaSalle University-Dasmarinas). (30%)
c. Quality of Research Methodology (It refers to the appropriateness of the procedure and methods used in the study. It also includes the suitability of tools and equipment). (30%)
d. Quality of Written Research Work (The thesis presented a clear, grammatical and logical argument to answer the research question. It follows the prescribed journal type research paper format). (15%)
TOTAL
V. Comment: _____________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________ Evaluated by: _________________________________________ (signature over printed name)
Title of Thesis Study 1Student Surname, Name , 2Student Surname, Name, 3Student Surname, Name and Thesis Adviser Surname , Name
Name of Engineering Program College of Engineering Architecture and Technology De La Salle University Dasmarinas Dasmarinas, Cavite
Abstract Prepare your 1-2 pages journal type research paper using this format. Once your research is shortlisted by your program coordinator, submit this together with the application form in 3 multiple copies to the research committee overall chair. The college is using the APA style in intext citation and references. Page margins are 1.0 top and down; 1.5 left and 1.0 right. The abstract gives the reader an overview of the study. It includes (a) the background or general information on the study (b) the main topic (or purpose) of the study and its scope (c) the methodology used in the study (d) the most important findings of the study and (e) statement of conclusion. Limit your abstract to 300 500 words.
Keywords: This section shows at least five words that identify the field or area of research conducted. These words must be alphabetically arranged.
I. Introduction The introduction gives an overview of the thesis / practicum or research report, giving the reader background or basis of the problem to be reported. It can be divided into six parts, as follows: (1) the setting or context or frame of reference -This part gives general statement(s) about a field of research to provide the reader with a preview of the problem to be reported. (2) The review of previous research - This part continues the contextual setting or frame of reference by including more statements about the general aspects of the problem already investigated by other researchers.(3) The gap or missing information - This part refers to the statement(s) that indicate the need for the study or the need for more investigation. (4) The statement of purpose - This part gives very specific statement(s) pertaining to the objective(s) of the study. (5) The statement of value This part refers to statement(s) that give the significance of carrying out the study and
6) The scope and limitation - This part indicates what the study covers and what it does not or fails to cover.
II. Methodology This section describes the procedural steps used in conducting this major aspect of your study and the materials or any equipment used at each step. It includes all mathematical treatment of data as well as equations or models used. It is useful to readers who want to know how the methodology of your study may have influenced your results. The procedure should be stated in as much detail as possible so that readers who are interested in replicating or extending your study could follow the steps as they read your work. Schematic diagram (properly labeled and numbered) must accompany the text whenever possible.
III. Results and Discussion This section presents the data collected from the study on this major aspect of your research problem, followed by extensive comments on or interpretation of the findings of the study.
IV. Conclusion This section addresses the objective(s) pertaining to the major aspect of your research problem. V. References Author, A.A., B. B. Author and C. C. Author (year).Full title of article.Name of the journal, Volume (number), pages.
94 CEAT Policy Manual on Undergraduate Thesis Writing