A thesis proposal is not a mini-thesis — it is a contract. You are telling your supervisor what you will study, why it matters, and how you will do it. Approvals stall when any one of five elements is weak.
First, a precise topic. 'The effect of social media on students' is not a topic; it is a theme. A defensible topic names the variables, the population, and often the place: 'Social media use and academic performance among second-year undergraduates at a public university in Nairobi.'
Second, a genuine gap. Your literature review should not summarise what everyone knows — it should show what nobody has answered. Supervisors approve proposals where the gap is visible on the page.
Third, objectives that match the methods. If your objective says 'determine the relationship', your design must be correlational and your analysis must produce a relationship statistic. Mismatches here are the most common reason proposals are returned.
Fourth, a feasible methodology. Sample sizes you can actually reach, instruments you can actually administer, and analysis you can actually defend at a viva.
Fifth, clean presentation. Correct referencing style, consistent formatting, and careful proofreading signal a student who will produce careful research. Sloppy proposals suggest sloppy fieldwork, fairly or not.