| name | uganda-academic-research |
| description | Use when drafting or reviewing a concept paper, proposal, dissertation, thesis, report, viva plan, or dissemination artifact against a named Ugandan university handbook; use research-design for method logic and never generalise one institution's rule to another without evidence. |
| metadata | {"portable":true,"compatible_with":["claude-code","codex"]} |
Uganda Academic Research
Use When
- A named Ugandan university handbook governs an academic research artifact.
Do Not Use When
- Do not generalise one institution's rules to another or replace research-design method logic.
Inputs
| Input | Source/provider | If absent |
|---|
| Named institution, artifact, programme/level, and current handbook | Student/supervisor and official institution source | Stop institution-specific claims and request the governing handbook. |
| Draft, research design, ethics status, and citation style | Author and project files | Return only the checks supported by available artifacts. |
Workflow
- Load evidence discipline and confirm the governing institution and handbook version.
- Select the matching artifact route and extract only traceable requirements.
- Compare the artifact to structure, ethics, citation, examination, and formatting rules.
- Stop on missing or conflicting institutional evidence; recover with a gap list.
- Revise only with authority and rerun the compliance check.
Outputs
| Artifact | Consumer | Acceptance condition |
|---|
| Institution-specific compliance review or revised artifact | Student, supervisor, or reviewer | Each requirement cites the governing handbook location; gaps and unassessed checks remain visible. |
Evidence Produced
| Category | Artifact | Acceptance condition |
|---|
| Correctness | Handbook compliance matrix | Every pass/fail maps to a real institutional source. |
Capability Contract
Review defaults to read-only. Editing a student's work requires explicit authority; submission, ethics approval, supervisor/examiner representation, or certification requires the responsible institution or person.
Degraded Mode
Without the current official handbook, return generic research guidance clearly labelled non-institutional and a source gap. Never claim university compliance.
Decision Rules
| Choice | Action | Failure/risk avoided |
|---|
| Official handbook conflicts with generic guidance | Follow the verified handbook | Institutional non-compliance |
| Institution or programme is unknown | Stop institution-specific review | False generalisation |
| Requirement cannot be traced | Mark a gap | Fabricated rule |
Quality Standards
Institutional claims are current, source-linked, programme-aware, and separated from generic academic advice.
Anti-Patterns
- Applying one university's format everywhere. Fix: identify the institution.
- Citing a handbook from memory. Fix: link the exact source.
- Calling a draft ethics-approved. Fix: distinguish review from approval.
- Treating supervisor preference as policy. Fix: label its authority.
- Hiding an unavailable handbook. Fix: mark a source gap.
Worked Example
For a proposal governed by a named university, verify the current official handbook, map each required section and ethics item, and leave any untraceable formatting claim as a gap.
References
Use this skill when an academic artefact must meet Ugandan university research-handbook expectations rather than generic international dissertation conventions.
Always load source-evaluation/references/evidence-discipline.md first. All handbook-derived requirements must remain traceable to references/uganda-handbook-standards.md.
Router
| Task | Load |
|---|
| Concept paper or topic note | references/uganda-handbook-standards.md sections "Concept papers" and "Source register" |
| Research proposal | references/uganda-handbook-standards.md sections "Proposal structure", "Formatting", "Ethics", "Citation" |
| Dissertation / thesis / report | references/uganda-handbook-standards.md sections "Final research document", "Chapter structures", "Viva and examination" |
| Viva / oral defence preparation | references/uganda-handbook-standards.md section "Viva and examination" + academic-reporting-standards/references/viva-defense-preparation.md |
| Research dissemination | references/uganda-handbook-standards.md sections "Busitema" and "Final research document" |
Operating Rules
- Identify the target institution first: Makerere, Busitema, UCU, or another Ugandan institution.
- Apply the exact institutional rule where the handbook provides one; do not merge conflicting institutional limits.
- If the institution is unknown, use the "Uganda default scaffold" from the reference and mark institution-specific format as a gap.
- Keep proposal tense future-oriented and final report/thesis tense past-oriented unless the discipline requires otherwise.
- Require a clear research problem, purpose/objectives, research questions or hypotheses, significance, scope, literature gap, methodology, ethics, work plan, budget where required, and references.
- For thesis/dissertation/report review, check both structure and examination readiness: contribution, literature depth, method fit, data analysis, discussion, conclusion, references, appendices, and viva defensibility.
- For health, human-subject, or sensitive research, require REC/ethics routing before data collection.
Companion Skills
academic-reporting-standards for examiner-defensible dissertation logic and reporting checklists.academic-writing for citation, paraphrase, plagiarism prevention, and academic register.research-design for research design document, method selection, and report-building.source-evaluation for source credibility and anti-hallucination discipline.
