QRDC 2025 · STUDENT CATEGORY 2
GUIDELINE – STUDENT CATEGORY 2: FULL QUALITATIVE RESEARCH DESIGN
Comprehensive structure, scoring rubric and awards for Student Category 2, focusing on a full qualitative research design suitable for mini thesis or dissertation proposal.
1. Purpose
Student Category 2 evaluates the ability of students to design a complete and rigorous qualitative research study, including clear problem, strong methodological justification, detailed sampling, data collection and analysis plans, as well as trustworthiness and ethics.
- Formulates a well-justified research problem and significance.
- Develops coherent aim, objectives and research questions.
- Selects and justifies an appropriate qualitative design and approach.
- Plans realistic sampling, data collection and analysis procedures.
- Addresses trustworthiness, ethics and potential contribution.
2. Writing Guideline (Full Qualitative Research Design)
A. Title, Background & Significance
- Focused title capturing the main phenomenon, group and context.
- Background explaining the broader context and key issues.
- Clear significance of the study for theory, practice, policy or community.
B. Problem Statement
- Concise and precise statement of the main research problem.
- Supported by relevant literature, practice-based evidence or preliminary observations.
- Shows a clear gap or need for qualitative exploration.
C. Aim, Objectives & Research Questions
- Overall aim describing what the study intends to achieve.
- 2–4 specific research objectives that break down the aim.
- 2–5 qualitative research questions clearly aligned with objectives and problem.
D. Theoretical / Conceptual Framework
- Relevant theories, models or key concepts guiding the study.
- Explanation of main constructs and proposed relationships (diagram encouraged).
- Clear link between framework, research questions and design.
E. Qualitative Research Design & Approach
- Specific qualitative design (e.g. case study, phenomenology, basic grounded theory, narrative, ethnography).
- Rationale for selecting this design in relation to the research questions.
- Philosophical/epistemological orientation (if appropriate, e.g. interpretivist/constructivist).
F. Research Context, Sampling Strategy & Participants
- Description of the setting (institution, community, organisation, etc.).
- Sampling strategy (purposive, criterion, snowball, maximum variation, etc.).
- Estimated sample size, inclusion/exclusion criteria and participant characteristics.
G. Data Collection Methods & Instruments
- Primary methods: interview, focus group, observation, document analysis (single or multiple).
- Instruments: interview protocol, FGD guide, observation checklist, document analysis matrix.
- Detailed procedure: sequence, duration, mode (online/face-to-face), language and logistics.
H. Data Analysis Plan
- Overall approach (e.g. thematic analysis, content analysis, narrative analysis).
- Step-by-step process: familiarisation, coding, categorising, theme development, interpretation.
- Organisation of data (use of software or manual methods, file naming, data management).
I. Trustworthiness & Ethics
- Trustworthiness: credibility, transferability, dependability, confirmability (with examples).
- Ethical considerations: consent, confidentiality, anonymity, data protection, approvals.
- Any potential risks and mitigation strategies.
J. Timeline & Expected Outputs
- Simple timeline of phases: preparation, data collection, analysis, writing.
- Expected outputs (thesis, dissertation, article, module, guideline, etc.).
- Potential impact or contribution of the finished study.
3. Assessment Rubric (100%)
| Component | Description | Excellent | Good | Basic | % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Background, Problem & Significance | Clarity of context, problem statement and rationale. | Very clear and strongly justified with relevant sources. | Clear with some justification. | Vague, generic or weak justification. | 15% |
| Aim, Objectives & Research Questions | Coherence and alignment between aim, objectives and questions. | Highly aligned, coherent and well-formulated. | Generally aligned with minor gaps. | Misaligned or unclear. | 15% |
| Design & Methodological Alignment | Appropriateness and justification of qualitative design and approach. | Very appropriate, strongly justified, clearly linked to questions. | Appropriate with some justification. | Poorly justified or not well linked. | 20% |
| Sampling & Context | Clarity and feasibility of context, sampling strategy and participants. | Very clear and realistic. | Reasonably clear. | Vague or unrealistic. | 10% |
| Data Collection & Instruments | Suitability and clarity of methods and tools. | Strong, well-described and appropriate. | Clear but may lack some detail. | Inadequate description or unsuitable. | 10% |
| Data Analysis Plan | Logic, detail and clarity of analysis procedures. | Very logical, systematic and detailed. | Generally clear and logical. | Superficial or unclear. | 10% |
| Trustworthiness & Ethics | Consideration of rigour strategies and ethical issues. | Comprehensive and clearly explained. | Moderate detail. | Minimal or weak. | 10% |
| Overall Coherence & Presentation | Structure, language, formatting and professional presentation. | Highly coherent and professional. | Generally clear and organised. | Disorganised or weak language. | 10% |
| Total | Overall Score | 100% |
4. Suggested Document Structure
- Title Page & Student Information.
- Background, Problem Statement & Significance.
- Research Aim, Objectives & Research Questions.
- Theoretical / Conceptual Framework.
- Qualitative Research Design & Approach.
- Research Context, Sampling Strategy & Participants.
- Data Collection Methods & Instruments.
- Data Analysis Plan.
- Trustworthiness & Ethical Considerations.
- Timeline & Expected Outputs.
- References.
5. Awards & Recognition (Student Category 2)
A. Certificates
All student participants will receive a QRDC 2025 Digital Certificate of Participation (Student Category 2).
B. Medal Tiers (Based on Final Score)
- Gold (Emas): 85% – 100%
- Silver (Perak): 70% – 84%
- Bronze (Gangsa): 50% – 69%
C. Best Full Qualitative Design – Student Category 2
Awarded to the highest-scoring Student Category 2 entry with 90% and above, based on panel evaluation.
D. Publication & Showcasing
- Top Gold entries may be highlighted on the official QRDC website.
- Selected students may be invited to present at the QRDC 2025 Student Showcase Session.
Designed as a premium reference and for A4 PDF export (Student Category 2).