THESIS WRITING GUIDE
___________________
San Beda College
GRADUATE SCHOOL OF LAW
Mendiola
THESIS WRITING GUIDE
FR. RANHILIO CALLANGAN AQUINO, PhD, JD, JSD
Dean
The Thesis Requirement
Graduate studies have characteristically culminated in the presentation of a thesis
that achieves three: first, it allows the proponent to make a contribution to the field
of study; second, it shares with the academic community – not only of the institution
but of institutions world-wide as well – the output of one’s research; third, it
provides the Graduate School Faculty a chance of assessing the competence of a
student at independent research and at articulating his mature reflections in a field
of study.
The cardinal rule of thesis writing therefore is that the proponent must select a topic
that truly interests her.
The key criteria for the selection of a research topic are:
1. Does the topic interest me?
2. Does it enjoy currency or relevance?
3. Are primary sources readily available?
4. Is there a moderator on the Faculty capable of guiding research in the area?
In sum, to be worthwhile, the thesis should not be perfunctorily written!
Is there a minimum page requirement for a thesis? The general answer is “none.”
Having thus responded, however, one must hasten to add that when a graduate
theme can be disposed of in less than hundred pages then one wonders whether or
not the theme was of sufficient magnitude or seriousness to warrant graduate
investigation and to merit a graduate degree.
It must be noted parenthetically that in other institutions there is a minimum page
requirement for master’s theses and doctoral dissertations. We do not adopt that
policy here, except to provide that theses of inordinate brevity suggest a study of
insufficient seriousness or magnitude.
The Peculiarity of the Law Thesis
Law theses hardly have need of statistics. They are not empirical, and there is
limited room for hypothesis-testing.
Theses in law can center on:
1. The proposal of a new legal theory
Example: In tort cases, Philippine Law has traditionally focused on the issue of
“liability.” One might wish to propose approaching the issue of torts from the
perspective rather of allocating risks in an economically sustainable manner.
2. A critical evaluation of accepted doctrine
Example: In the light of the realities of present day contract-formation (with parties
in many cases never even having met each other) one might criticize the “mirrorimage” rule in regard to contracts and propose a plausible alternative.
3. Tracing the historical development of a legal provision or doctrine.
Example: If one chooses to do a history of the doctrine of the “free exercise” and
“non-establishment” clauses relating to religion in the Constitution, one may go
through the constitutional history of the provision in the American constitution, the
jurisprudential development in American law, the history of the provision in the
Philippine constitution, and jurisprudential development in the Philippine law. The
thesis, quite importantly, should conclude with what the researcher believe she can
infer from the historical review.
4. Comparative Jurisprudence
Example: One can study the rule on filiations or paternity in common law and in civil
law systems. For this, one can choose the laws of the common law jurisdiction
(should generally be a prominent legal system, e.g., UK law) and the laws of a civil
law system (e.g., Spain). One can also study the rules filiation only within different
civil law systems (e.g. Quebec’s civil law system, Louisiana’s civil law system, etc.)
and then compare the results of one’s study with what one finds in the Philippines
taking care to point out advantages and disadvantages.
5. Expository
Studies of this sort can be admitted only when there is a mass of conflicting or
difficult-to-reconcile doctrine, or when no expository studies on the subject have as
yet been done.
Example: the Anti-Money Laundering Law and its implementing rules and
regulations are new. An expository study would be helpful. The study examines the
background of the law, the circumstances it was meant to address, international
precedent, foreign models, and foreign jurisprudence (since there is no Philippine
jurisprudence yet).
The graduate student of law will readily see that there is marked difference between
theses proposed in the other fields of study – such as education and the empirical
sciences – where statistics, measurements and hypotheses weigh considerably.
The Thesis Proposal
Submitting the thesis proposal is the first stage in the writing of the thesis. It is this
stage that the student proposes to the Faculty of the Graduate School the thesis he
would like to write on and secures it approval.
No student should proceed to write the thesis without the prior approval of the
Thesis Proposal and the appointment of a Thesis Moderator. The Moderator guides
but does not write for the student! He evaluates the research done, but does not do
research for the proponent!
Parts of the Proposal
1. Introduction
The writer introduces his topic or theme of investigation. She points out the
circumstances that make it relevant or that lend it currency. He attempts to elicit
the reader’s interest in the subject.
2. Statement of the Problem
This is a most crucial part of the proposal. The proponent must be able to articulate
the problem of the thesis in interrogative form. The success (or failure) of a study
depends in great measure on the degree of clarity with which the problem is
formulated. Surely, when the student himself is not clear about what it is he is
inquiring into, there is hardly any reason to expect a felicitous outcome for the
research.
2.1. A thesis can have only one main problem. A thesis with more than one problem
is a monstrosity. It is fulfilling this requirement that provides focus to the entire
study.
Sample Formulation
1. How effective are the rules on summary procedure in expediting the disposition
cases?
This formulation is DEFECTIVE, because “effective” is a very troublesome term (How
does one measure efficacy?) unless one can provide a plausible operational
definition for “effective.”
On the other hand:
2. Are the provision of the Tariffs and Customs Code of the Philippines consistent
with the provisions of GATT?
This is reasonably clear and focused, and there is no mistaking the intendment of
the thesis-writer.
When the problem is lucidly and clearly formulated, it provides the proponent with a
guide towards its own resolution. Thus, if one makes the second problem her thesis
thesis problem, one obvious way to resolve the problem is by studying the
Philippine Tariffs and Custom Code in parallel with the relevant GATT documents and
determining consistency (or inconsistency).
The main problem is analyzed into sub-problems. If the problem selected is
sufficiently serious to warrant the investigation of a graduate student, then it cannot
be dealt with in one sweep. It will therefore be necessary to analyze it (= break it
down) into sub-problems.
Example:
MAIN PROBLEM:
Is the definition of Philippine territory embodied in Article 1 of the Constitution of
1987 consistent with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea?
SUB-PROBLEMS:
1. How does the Constitution define the waters enclosed by the archipelagic baselines?
2. How did the drafters of the Constitution understand this provision? What does a
study of the history of the Philippine constitution in this regard reveal?
3. How does UNCLOS define “archipelagic waters” and what is the concept of
“archipelagic waters” in international law?
4. What are the principal points of divergence between our Constitutional provisions
and the concept of archipelagic waters embodied in UNCLOS?
5. Is there a way of dealing the inconsistency?
One then sees that each sub-problem constitutes a separate chapter of the thesis
that is to be written. When all sub-problems are competently answered, the mainproblem is also disposed of.
3. Objective and Significance of the study:
This need not be an unduly extended portion of the proposal. It responds to the
question. What does the researcher wish to be undertaking the study? Both
theoretical and practical objectives are acceptable. One may wish to point out
inconsistencies, or in contrast, show continuities. One may also wish to criticize and
propose alternatives. One may wish to provide a historical explanation. One may
wish to contribute towards the enrichment of received doctrine or jurisprudence by
adverting comparative jurisprudence.
4. Limitations of the study
Here one acknowledges the parameters or confines of one’s study. One, for
example, can choose to study only the Constitution of 1987, or the Rule for the
Examination of the Child Witness.
If one uses foreign sources, that one depends on translation and not the original
languages is itself a limitation that must be acknowledged in this portion of the
proposal.
If one confines one’s study to a certain period – one examines the doctrines of the
Supreme Court on locus standi from 1990 to 2000 – that is a period limitation, as
there may have been jurisprudence before or after the period markedly different
from that of the period studies.
5. Definition of Terms
This is among the most misunderstood of sections in thesis-writing. This section IS
NOT MEANT to provide a glossary. Still less definitions come from a dictionary. It
functions in the same way that the section on definition of terms in a statute works.
It provides operational definitions of terms used in a SPECIAL or TECHNICAL manner
in the study.
Example:
1. By “child” in this study will be understood one who is below 16 years old.
While this may not be the definition of “child” in R.A. 7610, the reader will know that
when the writer uses the word “child” in the thesis, this is what he means.
2. By “negotiable instrument” in this study, the researcher only refers to commercial
checks.
Again, negotiable instruments may be both notes and bills of exchange, but there is
nothing to prevent the researcher from confining his study to commercial checks
and from using the terms “negotiable instrument” restrictively.
In other words, this section alerts the reader to special uses of terms for the
purposes of this study. This is the reason that definitions SHOULD NOT COME from
the dictionary, not even a law dictionary.
6. Conceptual framework
Once more, unless properly understood, this section can turn out to be a mélange of
unrelated and incoherent propositions!
The conceptual framework for purposes of a thesis in law is the legal theory one is
working with, or that one presupposes.
Example:
One writing a thesis in the area of criminal law for example can acknowledge that
he works within the “classical framework” of criminal liability, and by this is meant
that he accepts as premise of his duty the doctrine that every person is capable of
making a decision about being law-abiding or law-transgressing, and that should
one make the latter decision, then should be punished in proportion to the offense.
This, of course, is not the only conceptual framework possible in criminal law. One
can also take as one’s framework the view that criminal liability is merely a way of
maintaining social equilibrium or order and has nothing or very little to do with
personal guilt.
One must then write the entire thesis within the framework one chooses. This is the
most theoretical part or the study, as one must be able to identify the theory one is
working on, and working with.
Another example:
If one writes a thesis comparing bank secrecy laws in the Philippines and in
Switzerland, then one’s conceptual framework must develop the theme of the
reasons for bank secrecy laws and the purpose such laws serve.
This section calls for good and sound research not into legal provisions ut into legal
policy, legal philosophy, and jurisprudence.
7. Review of Related Literature
This section of the proposal informs the reader of the present status of academic
research subject.
What literature should be reviewed? Books or treatises in law, articles in law
journals or law anthologies or monographs, as well as masteral and doctoral theses
are studies. These are considered related if they treat of the same subject as the
thesis, or of a related subject. The sources one will use – such as one’s references or
case authorities – are not related literature.
Example:
For one writing a thesis on Letters of Credit, any journal article, book, treatise, web
publication (provided it is from a reputable source), thesis or dissertation on letters
of credit, commercial paper, transnational business, international credit
transactions, and related topics will all be related literature.
This section proceeds in the following states:
a. Summarize the book, the article, or the thesis reviewed
b. Identify its key features or the contribution it makes to the field of study
c. Show how your own study will not be a mere repetition of studies already made.
8. Methodology and Procedure
Graduate students have a penchant for using pretentious terms to describe their
method and procedure: “critico-analytic”, “expository-comparative.” All this is crap!
All that is asked is that the student answer the following questions in seriatim:
a. How does one intend to resolve the thesis problem?
b. What sources will one use? Legal texts? Congressional records? Travaux
preparations? Judicial decisions?
c. How will one treat the source? Analyze? Compare? Criticize? Do a historical
review? Do hermeneutics?
d. What will one then do with the data one obtains? Tabulate, synthesize? Analyze?
Arrangement of the Proposal
I. The Problem
1. Introduction
2. Statement of the Problem
3. Definition of Terms
4. Objectives and Significance of the Study
5. Scope and Limitation
II. Review of Related Literature
1. Review of related studies
2. Conceptual Framework
III. Methodology and Procedure
These three principal parts then constitute the thesis proposal. As soon as this
proposal is completed, the proponent must submit it to the Dean who either
approves, disapproves or suggests modifications. With the approval comes the
appointment of the thesis moderator.
Writing the Thesis
The moment the proposal is approved – with particular focus on the main problem
and its sub-problems – the student goes ahead by:
1. Studying his sources: the constitutions, treaties, statutes, regulations, books,
treatises, articles that constitute his sources.
2. Proceed to answer each sub-problem. Each sub-problem is treated in a separate
chapter of the thesis.
3. When all sub-problems are answered, one writes the concluding part of the thesis
entitled “Conclusions of the Study.” This includes:
a. Drawing inferences from the answer one has given to the sub-problems.
b. Inferences are not summaries. They are reasoned conclusions.
Example:
If one concludes that there is difference between the UNCLOS provisions on
archipelagic waters and our Constitution’s definition of “internal waters,” then one
might with to draw the inference that we might be in breach of our obligations
under UNCLOS, and one might go further to suggest what can be done.
One’s bibliography is an indication of the seriousness (or lack of it) with which the
research has been accomplished. Defective bibliography can then be a basis for the
rejection of the thesis.
NEVER INCLUDE IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHY books, articles or theses that you yourself
have not read. Your bluff can easily be uncovered and land you in a great deal of
embarrassment and inconvenience.
Arrange your bibliography in the following manner:
1. Primary sources:
a. Constitutions
b. Statutes
c. Treaties
d. Administrative Regulations or Court Rules
e. Court Decisions
2. Secondary sources:
a. Books of the subject by legal authorities
b. Articles in law journals or law publications
c. Entries in legal encyclopedias
d. Web-page sources