This study aimed at assessing the procedures followed in verifying the reliability and validity of the research instruments in master’s theses in the College of Education at Sultan Qaboos University (SQU- College of Education master’s theses). The sample of the study consisted of 260 master's theses in different majors in the College of Education. An analysis form was designed to collect primary data from the study sample. The findings of the study showed that more than two thirds of the graduate students in the College of Education at Sultan Qaboos University used only face validity to verify the validity of their research instruments and Cronbach's alpha coefficient to verify the reliability of their research instruments. The findings also revealed that (27%) of the total number of the master's theses used standardized or published research instruments. In addition, there were common mistakes in the verification procedures used in validating the reliability and validity of the research instruments. For example, in all the master’s theses, validity was verified before reliability, while it should be the other way around. In all master’s theses, the degree of consistency of the items in the instrument was not fully measured because the internal consistency of the instrument was excluded. The Kuder-Richardson formula was never used in the sample despite its importance in calculating the internal consistency of a test. (39%) of the MA theses used the test as one of their research tools. There was a disagreement in naming validity associated with content as some called it internal consistency validity despite the fact that internal consistency is one of the methods of checking reliability. Based on the findings, the study suggested a list of recommendations, one of which was to establish a center for statistical consultancy in the Faculty of Education at Sultan Qaboos University.