In-depth Thesis and Journal Critiquing in Nigeria

Research is an indispensable tool in academics endeavor, business decisions, social and economic analysis, conducted in order to unveil certain problems and contributes to the body of knowledge in any particular discipline of study. This study examined an In-Depth thesis and Journal critiquing in Nigeria. An explorative, method of research was employed. This study was carried out to ensue originality and quality Students/Scholars work, in order to make significant contribution to knowledge in addition to satisfy the conditions of the awards of required certificate before embarking on the study. The reviewed literatures of this study include; the need for research thesis and journal, structural differences/similarities between a thesis and a journal articles, the exploration of research resources, Research Ethics, Components of a Critique Material, Assessor’s stake in critiquing Journal Publication. A well-deserved and outstanding research work needs the guidelines and details provided in this study imperatively.


Introduction
Research is a systematic investigation and careful search geared towards enriching knowledge about the existence of a problem and proffering solutions to them; through the provision of reliable and valid information [1]. Research is an indispensable tool in academics endeavour, business decisions, social and economic analysis, conducted in order to unveil certain problems and contributes to the body of knowledge in any particular discipline of study [2]. Research remains a problem-solving adventure and could be applied in solving business, academics and social problems. Most importantly, it is geared towards the advancement of frontiers of knowledge in any identified field of study; proffering solution to educational problems and challenges [3]. However, once the research work is completed, it is presented in a report format which could be in a book, seminars, conferences, article, Journal and thesis. But the scope of this paper is on Thesis and Journal.
The academics world is a hub of knowledge in which the university systems, constantly attracts ideas and desires for understanding of what is known and what is unknown through thesis writing or journal articles. Thesis is a research instrument, a systematic or logical investigation leading to increased sum of what we know or intends to know [4]. The purpose of thesis is therefore to produce an independent, yet, where applicable, generalized, planned original research report within a framework or research design [5]. Thesis must be appropriate and exhaustive study aimed at advancing theoretical and casual knowledge using methodological, ethical approaches, independent, coherent and sustained arguments, capable of evaluating an idea or work [5]. On the other hand, research paper (journal) simply means a summary of a research written with the intent of being published [4]. This could be either an opinion or empirical paper submitted for publication when needed. The table above provides an insight into the differences between a thesis and journal from a structural point of view. However, the researcher of any of the above mentioned, could adopt a similar procedure.

Exploration of Research Resources
Researchers should adopt different research resources in writing a research report. Accounting to the author, these include main sources used to find resources; open access, use technology tools and social media in research work, institutional provided or supported technology, using social media to collaborate sources of help with technology search for tool URL address [6].
Main Sources used to find Resources: The main sources used to find resources includes: Google, Scholar, internal library catalogue (own Institution), cross institutional library catalogue, search interface of E-journal, bibliographic database, website of an organization/person, abstract, indexes, subjects. i.e specific information gateway, citation database, guide to /catalogues of archival material, Wikipedia, browsed library shelves, and training search tools such as search tool URL address-  [6]. He affirmed that an open access is a free online access to scholarly works through the removal of price barriers to subscription fees and most permission barriers such as copyright and licensing restrictions, making them available with minimal author attribution only.
Apart from the above assertions, social media could also be an outstanding source in research work as it attracts the following benefits to the scholars: filtering of resources and comments, enables new kinds of research to be shared, gives feedback by submitting to journals and presenting conferences papers, raises the profile of one's work rapidly than conventional academics publishing allows, encourages the use of experience of other scholars in the area of techniques used, method and analysis. It gives room for a critique with other people from the same field. Other sources are; Directories i.e list of websites classified by topics, search engines such as Google, Hotpot, Lycos are used to find specific documents through keyword searches or menu choices; Sources of research resources could be categorized as primary and secondary data [7], The Primary data contains direct accounts of events or phenomena e.g. questionnaire, interviews, and observations. Primary data are more authoritative, relevant and are called the first order source. On the other hand, secondary source contains events, information, and phenomena by other people who did not witness or participate in the events directly. As a result of this, people may not be certain of how far the original information has been altered by their secondary authors. Secondary sources of information include almanacs, dictionary, textbooks, journal, encyclopedias, newspapers, magazines, yearbooks, projects, Thesis/Dissertations, Government publications and so on. These sources are expected to be embedded in research report.

Research Ethics
In any academic environment, there is need for both the students and lecturers (supervisors) to keep to the rules and regulations guiding the research ethics. Research ethics provides guidelines for the responsible conduct of biomedical research. In addition, it educates and monitors scientists conducting research to ensure a high ethical standard [8].
In order to protect the researchers, a list of ethical guidelines for the conduct of research was developed by the Nuemberg Code with the emphasis on biomedical reserach or within a clinical setting [8]. The Nuemberg Code outlined ten ethical principles backing a researcher as follows: research scholars must voluntarily consent to research participation, research must be based on sound theory and prior animal testing; and must avoid unnecessary physical and mental suffering; research should contribute to the good of society; no projects can go forward where serious injury and /or death are potential outcomes; the degree of risk taken with research participants cannot exceed anticipated benefits of results; proper environment and protection is necessary; experiments can be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons; human subjects must be allowed to discontinued their participation at any time, and lastly, scientists must be prepared to terminate the experiment if there is cause to believe that continuation will be harmful or resulted in injury or death.
Some ethical principles which the researcher must abide by while writing a research report were summarized as follows [ carefully and critically examine your own work and the work your peers. Keep good records of research activities, such as data collection, research design, and correspondence with agencies or journals. l. Respect for colleagues: Respect your colleagues and treat them fairly. m. Social Responsibility: Strive to promote social good and prevent or mitigate social harms through research, public education, and advocacy. n. Non-Discrimination: Avoid discrimination against colleagues or students on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity, or other factors that are not related to their scientific competence. Apart from the above ethical principles against research set up, there are other research misconducts that need government attention [8]. These attitudes are termed "other deviations" from accepted research practices. Although codes, policies and principles are very essential and useful, like any set of rules, they do not cover every situation; they often conflict, as they require justifiable interpretation. Therefore, this calls for the researchers to learn how to interpret, asses, and apply various research rules and how to make decisions and to act in various situations. For one to become a scholar there is need to avoid plagiarism of any kind.

Critiquing a Research Report
Critiquing a research report involves evaluation of another researcher's report; this is very common among students engaging in educational research since it assists them to develop competency in their research and reporting skills [7,11]. The assessor reads the report, articulates and formulates certain questions that probe the research work for validity. Apart from this, the research work is evaluated for worthiness and sufficiency of work done to justify the award of the academic certificate such as OND/B. Sc, M. Sc, Ph. D (that is, project/ thesis & dissertation respectively). Students/Scholars have been encouraged to ensure originality in their work, in order to make significant contribution to knowledge in addition to satisfy the conditions of the awards of required certificate. While evaluating or critiquing, the assessors consider research design; whether adequate or not, the objectivity and clarity in reporting the research findings, accuracy of the statistical analysis and inferences, and validity of the conclusions made.
In addition, evaluation of the journals for publication follows the same pattern as stated previously. Evaluation of a journal for publication follows a similar format to that Assessment of certificate award project work [11]. Hence a conference paper is subjected to assessment only establish agreement with the theme of conference. Tools used for evaluating research differ with the type and purpose of the report. This is the reason some assessors needs personal experience, expertise and initiative for making a fair assessment-knowing well that assessment is a tool used to determine students' progress in learning [12].

Guideline for Critiquing a Research Report
The following are the guideline for critiquing a research report, and thus it is divided into [2,7,11,[13][14][15][16] ii. Check whether they are supported or justified by the data presented and analyzed. iii. Check whether the researchers generalize appropriately or over concluded. iv. The parts of the report must properly related to one another. v. The research work must contribute to education knowledge. vi. There must be recommendations for further work to be done in future.

Components of a Critique Material
The journal for critique could be current research in a field of interest or assigned to do.
An assessor should look into the following components which make up the scores of the researcher. An evaluation of the article taking cognizance of followings: Relevance of the research questions and/or hypothesis 5 3 Utility of style and possibility, feasibility alternatives 5 4 Adequacy of review of related literature 10 5 Representativeness of sample to generalization made or implied 5 6 Data collection instrument (instrumentation) 10 7 Presentation and analysis of data 10 8 Good (quality) interpretation 10 9 General Summary of recommendations 10 10 Contribution of research to knowledge 5 11 References 10 Total 100%

Assessor's Stake in Critiquing Journal Publication
Editors (assessors) of scholarly journals use different methods for reviewing scientific papers submitted for publication. However, the following key elements in the structuring of the scientific paper: the title, author's address; abstract; introduction; materials and methods; results and discussion, conclusion, and references are assessed on a rating scale. An inexperienced researcher may be guided by the checklist below as possible items to be scrutinized by the reviewer. Table 3. Standard for Assessment of a scientific paper for Journal Publication.

Parameters
Maximum Score Score Obtained 1.
Appropriateness of the title of research 5 2.
Adequacy of the introduction and clear statement of Appropriateness of experimental design and adequacy of experimental techniques or procedures: If empirical, appropriateness of research questions / hypothesis, methodology and discussion or if a theoretical paper, adequacy of conceptual clarification and depth of technical coverage. Adequacy of presentation of results and soundness of the interpretation, discussion, recommendations and conclusion / implications 5 -

Parameters
Maximum Score Score Obtained 10.
Contribution of findings /opinions to learning and scholarship 5 11.
Adherence to current APA referencing style 12.
Conformity to style of journal for manuscript preparation 5 13.
Originality of research work 5 14.
Serious deficiencies of the research work and the way and extent to which the research findings could possibly have been affected 5 17. Quality of finished paper (typesetting, proofreading, size, and general organization of the paper 5 Maximum Score 100 It should be noted that all parameters listed above are not applicable to every paper. It is usual to have an evaluation sheet with a checklist of probing questions as an assessment guide for the reviewer or assessor. Such a guide adopted by a journal is shown below. Again, the assessor is requested to comment freely, in a space provided to allow room for flexibility in the evaluation. The authors are made anonymous to the reviewer. Similarly, the reviewers are made anonymous to the author. This removes elements of bias. of the following on the Journal/thesis: i. Publishable as it is. ii. Publishable with minor corrections by the author (s). iii. Publishable with major corrections. iv. Not publishable. n) Further recommendations to improve the quality of the paper. o) Signature ________ Date __________.

Conclusion
In writing a research report scholars are required to present a well written work free of any academic misconduct. Critiquing standard report writing will lead the scholars to be free from; publishing the same article to different journals without telling the editors, using an inappropriate statistical technique in order to enhance the significance of the paper work, stretching the truth on a grant application order to convince reviewers of the paper, sabotaging someone's work and making unauthorized copies of data, papers or computer, etc.

Recommendations
The following recommendations were made: 1. All scholars should be vast in experience and have special interest in research, especially in the areas of specialization. 2. Scholars should be able to differential between a school Thesis and journal structure and format. 3. A research scholar should be able to posses the following skills: technical, computing, writing skills and understanding of methodological procedures. 4. A researcher should have a good knowledge of the research area. 5. A scholar profile and publication should be well documented from time to time for easily accessibility and onward promotion exercise. 6. A researcher should be capable of consulting various research resources, social medias and technological tools. 7. Research aims should contribute to the good of society and as well be based on sound theory. 8. Any research report must be properly guided by the ethical principles guiding research writing. 9. A researcher should be very conversant with the copyright law. 10. Be mindful of plagiarism in literature review.