This article on “evaluative thesis” might seem technical to some. Still, if you patiently and meticulously read through it just once, you will understand the message being passed on the subject matter.

To start with, let’s look at the main subject of discussion;

An evaluative thesis is best referred to as a sort of statement of argument or criticism that a researcher makes in a research paper about the write-ups that has been included in the paper, sometimes literatures by other authors on the quality of facts highlighted in similar or related works and to prove that the highlighted aspects are either fit for further study or should be abandoned based on its lags in quality and relevance at some point. It is mostly referred to as an academic judgement on research works produced by others on specific subjects within a discipline.

The evaluative thesis is different from descriptive or explanatory theses in that it expresses a statement of position that is, a question of value and usually that something is effective, inadequate, exemplary, flawed, or better than the others.

It tries to portray a picture of a study in an analytical manner that is embedded in a well-couched statement.

It is often met in fields such as literature, media studies, education, political science, and applied sciences, where the subjective analysis should be mixed with some objective evidence and objective criticism at some point.

This form of research requires more than just the opinion of a person. A good evaluative thesis has to base its judgment on academic or subjective standards and justify its judgment using a reasoned research-approved structure, a reasoned data and an understanding of opposing views in research. Evaluating these also involves the students or researchers keeping up a balance between critical distance and analytical commitment to provide a text that is both persuasive and academic at the same time.

What Makes an Evaluative Thesis in Research

An evaluative thesis has three basic parts and they are:

(1) The subject matter of the evaluation, (2) the criteria of evaluation and (3) the judgment or the evaluating statement. All these elements must be well-defined and verified throughout the research work.

Let’s now go a bit further to explain each part:

The Subject:

This can be a policy program, a piece of literature, a health program, a technology revolution, a piece of legislation, or an approach to leadership. The choice of the subject must either be defensible based on relevance, timeliness or based on scholarly interest.

The Criteria:

These are the criteria or benchmarks against which the value or performance of the subject could be measured. These can come in the form of literary work, company policies, theories, or work practices. Criteria should consider relevant factors befitting the field, and the basis of judgment should be clear enough to enable the reader to know the ground of the verdict.

The Judgment:

This is the assessment or assertion of the writer, which is in the form of a statement of thesis. Neither should it merely describe, but evaluate, claiming the inadequacy of a certain method, the artistic coherency of a film, the failure of a government policy to achieve the aims of its intended beneficiaries, or the efficiency of a curriculum innovation to the pedagogical best practices.

A common evaluative thesis would be:

Although commonly used, the competency-based model of curriculum in secondary school education in Nigeria has shown lack of instructional coherence needed to enhance long-term success in learning due to limited training of teachers, poor assessment instruments and irregular implementation of policies, as signaled in limited training of teachers, poor testing mechanisms, and inconsistent policies.

In this case, the subject is the curriculum model, the criteria are instructional coherence, teacher training, assessment, and policy implementation, and the verdict is that the model is inadequately effective.

Structure of Evaluative Thesis

The structure of an evaluative thesis is usually deliberated and formal, and tends to include the following subheadings:

Introduction:

This section mentions the topic, the importance of the subject, the criteria used to evaluate it and says the main judgment (the thesis).

Background:

This contains the background needed about the topic, such as its origin, intended use, its range of use, or issues on any controversy on the topic.

Criteria Justification:

This describes the chosen criteria that will be used to review the page, usually mentioning the source of such choice, either scholarly literature or other professional standards.

Evaluation Sections:

In this section, every criterion is turned into a body section. The author provides evidence concerning such a criterion and evaluates the performance of the subject under consideration, and formulates a sub-conclusion.

Counterarguments:

This consists of a separate part of the argument, where the need to take into account and address the objections or contrasting judgments is stated.

Conclusion:

This restates the judgment and reflects on the consequences of the findings and, where necessary, makes recommendations or hints about the area of additional research.

This also makes the work logically connected and the evaluation step-by-step, so that the readers can observe the stream of rationality behind the conclusive judgment.

For help, don’t fail to reach out to us today.

Join our WhatsApp Channel for updates