master thesis evaluation

Instructions for the Thesis

• Thesis Workshop
• Thesis Guidance and Allocation of Responsibilities
• Research Ethics and Data Protection
• Sources of Thesis Guidelines
• Ideation, Selection, and Approval of Your Topic
• Project Plan or Research Plan
• Planning and Initiation of the Thesis
• Formats of a Thesis
• Writing the Theoretical Framework
• Selection and Description of the Method
• Guidelines for Reporting
• Citations and Creating a Reference List
• Language Guidance for the Thesis
• Plagiarism Check
• Guidelines for Theseus
• Maturity Test
• Instructions for the Final Stage of Master’s Thesis
• Evaluation of the Thesis
• Defining the search topic
• Evaluating the search results
• Choosing and using sources
• Finna search services
• Open access (OA)
• Google Scholar
• Evaluating online sources
• Good to know about search engines
• Databases and articles
• Other resources

Bachelor's thesis

Your thesis will be evaluated on a numerical scale of 1-5. The evaluation is based on several criteria, such as the choice of topic and novelty of the work, its usefulness and objectives, theoretical foundation, implementation, reporting and analysis of results, conclusions, reflections, process, and written presentation. These criteria are considered during the evaluation to assess the nature of the thesis. Your grade is determined by the overall assessment of these aspects, reflecting the quality of the entire process.

Your thesis can be evaluated once your supervising teacher grants permission for publication. The evaluation is conducted by the supervising teacher, who also considers the views of the possible commissioning party regarding the quality and practical applicability of the work. If the supervising teacher proposes a grade of 1 (satisfactory) or 5 (excellent), a second examiner is required.

In an excellent (5) thesis, the topic contributes to the development of the professional field and is relevant in that context. The theory and practical implementation of the research or project form a clear, logical, and high-quality entity. An excellent thesis also addresses the reliability of the work and its results (reliability requirement) as well as the suitability of the methods used (validity requirement). In an excellent research-oriented thesis, qualitative and/or quantitative research methods are applied skilfully, considering qualitative and/or statistical assessment. In an excellent project or project-type work, commendable expertise is demonstrated, and the methods and results used are evaluated. The references are of high academic quality, demonstrating the student's extensive understanding of the topic.

Master’s thesis:

An approved Master's thesis in a UAS (University of Applied Sciences) is evaluated on a scale of 1-5. The evaluation considers the topic selection, management of the research or project process, theoretical background, implementation, results, and reporting. The assessment criteria for a Master's degree in a UAS are based on the criteria of EQF level 7. In an excellent (5) thesis, the topic contributes to the development of the professional field and is relevant to it. The theory and practical implementation of the research or project form a clear, logical, and high-quality entity. An excellent thesis also addresses the reliability of the work and its results (reliability requirement) and the suitability of the methods used (validity requirement). If the supervising teacher proposes a grade of 5 (excellent) or 1 (weak) for the thesis, a second examiner is required.

You can find the thesis assessment criteria used at Vaasa University of Applied Sciences here:

• Thesis Assessment Criteria at VAMK, University of Applied Sciences
• Thesis Assesment Criteria for Master’s Thesis 
• << Previous: Instructions for the Final Stage of Master’s Thesis
• Next: Stages of Information Searching >>
• Last Updated: May 17, 2024 10:30 AM
• URL: https://vamk.libguides.com/instructions_thesis

Rules for evaluating a Master's thesis

The  Academic Regulations  (in French only) set out the general framework for evaluating Master's or Doctoral theses and mandate the dean of the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies (FESP) to establish and publicize the rules, standards, and procedures.

Body responsible for evaluation

FESP is responsible for the evaluation process; the dean has the authority to make the final decision in the event of a dispute. In order to guarantee the evaluation committee is independent, neutral, and objective, FESP coordinates all steps in the evaluation process.

• It officially appoints the Master's thesis examiners.
• It ensures that you, your program director, and your evaluation committee receive all required information (neither you nor your research supervisor have any contact with the examiners during the evaluation process).
• It transmits the approved version of the initial submission to the members of the committee.

FESP makes certain that the examiners have enough time to review the Master's thesis while also ensuring that you receive your evaluation in a timely manner for the pursuit of your studies or career goals.

Evaluation committee

An evaluation committee consists of ex-officio examiners (research supervisor and co-supervisor) and designated examiners selected on the basis of their expertise in the field to provide an outside perspective on your work. Master's thesis evaluation committees have a minimum of three members.

In cases where the research supervisor is also the program director, the vice dean of studies at the faculty in question assumes program director duties for the purposes of the Master's thesis.

If you have a co-supervisor, FESP recommends the appointment of a fourth examiner.

If there is a preliminary review, the reviewer is usually, but not necessarily, a member of the evaluation committee.

Examiner appointments are subject to the following conditions:

• Potential candidates must hold a master’s degree in the relevant field (or a related field).
• The potential candidate must have  no actual or potential conflict of interest  with you that could interfere with their evaluation.

The committee must include an examiner who is in a position to provide an outside perspective on yourMaster's thesis and has not participated or collaborated actively in your work (e.g., by having contributed to a paper included in the Master's thesis).

Approval for initial submission

The initial Master's thesis submission requires three additional approvals:

• The program director must certify that your file is complete and valid so that you can obtain your diploma once the evaluation process is complete.
• The supervisor has 4 weeks to approve the Master's thesis for submission or request corrections.
• FESP must confirm that the format of the document meets presentation and publication standards.

Individual report

Each examiner evaluates the Master's thesis independently, without consulting or discussing with the other committee members.

Review times vary depending on the evaluation start date:

• An additional delay is added from November 22, due to the Holiday season.
• Summer period: 8 weeks (May 15 to August 15)

Please note: An additional two weeks is added for  Master's theses  exceeding 500 pages, regardless of the time of the year.

Each examiner writes an evaluation report and grades the Master's thesis as follows:

• Final submission is recommended.  

Unacceptable

• If the examiner feels that you have the necessary abilities, you are invited to submit a new version of the Master's thesis for a second initial submission and a second evaluation by the same committee.
• The examiner recommends that the Master's thesis be rejected.

The examiner’s decision is considered final once their report is submitted to FESP. The report remains confidential until the committee’s decision is rendered and communicated to you.

Committee decision

Individual evaluations are compiled to determine whether the Master's thesis is accepted (invitation to proceed with final submission), returned to you for major revisions, or rejected.

Master's thesis is accepted

• FESP transmits the committee’s decision, forwards the examiners’ evaluation reports, and invites you to proceed with the final submission.
• You have 8 weeks to make final corrections to the document under the supervision of your supervisor.
• The research supervisor approves your Master's thesis for final submission.
• FESP issues final approval so that the master’s degree can be awarded.
• Master's theses that receive a unanimous grade of “excellent” (or “excellent” from three examiners and “very good” from the other examiners), are entered on the FESP Honour List.

The Master's thesis   is unacceptable in its current state, but the committee will allow you to submit a new version.

• The committee meets to determine requirements for the new version, which will undergo a second evaluation.
• Each of the requirements must be agreed to by at least two examiners.
• FESP informs you of the committee’s decision and forwards the examiners’ evaluation reports as well as the committee report, which gives a deadline, the list of corrections requested, and the name of the person responsible for supervising them.

If you don’t submit a new version of the Master's thesis by the committee’s deadline, a “fail” grade will be entered in your file.  

Master's thesis is rejected

• The evaluation committee may meet, if one of the examiners so requests, before FESP informs you of your result.
• FESP transmits the committee’s decision, forwards the examiners’ evaluation reports, and informs you that you have a right of appeal if you can show circumstances or make arguments that invalidate the evaluation process. The final decision of the committee cannot, in itself, be appealed (Academic Regulations 4.47).
• If you don’t exercise your right to appeal within 10 days, a “fail” grade will be entered in your file. 

In the event of a discrepancy between the French and English texts, the French version prevails.

Other topics

Ein Kaleidoskop von Lehre und E-Learning an der ETH, betreut von den Lehrspezialisten

Master Thesis Evaluation – a Web Tool

The problem.

Grades do not tell anything precise about the student’s abilities in the areas of scientific work, project management, critical thinking and social skills. And, in Switzerland especially, they do not offer any meaning to non-Swiss.

The solution

Additionally to the grade, we offer a report that describes the student’s abilities thoroughly. Since report writing is arduous, we developed a web tool MTE (Master Thesis Evaluation) that will calculate the grade and produce a report in a few clicks. You can still individualize the report afterwards, deleting and adding parts.

Further Advantages

• Compliance: Grade calculation and partition follow the study guidelines.
• Fairness: The professors all assess along the same criteria.
• Service to the student’s future: The report can be part of the student’s portfolio.

More info on MTE can be found in the moodle course “ Master Thesis Evaluation “.

Here is an fictive report:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Transdisciplinary Life Science Course Division of Life Science, Graduate School of Life Science, Hokkaido University

• Hokkaido University
• Graduate School of Life Science
• Contact / Access
• Transdisciplinary Life Science Course, Division of Life Science, Graduate School of Life Science, Hokkaido University
• Course Outline
• Admission Information
• Careers After Graduation
• Laboratories & Staffs

Evaluation Criteria for Master’s Thesis and Doctoral Dissertation

Evaluation criteria for master’s dissertations, division of life science, division of soft matter, graduate school of life science, hokkaido university, 1. fundamental requirements.

• A master’s dissertation must have sufficient academic value and a high level of originality, demonstrating that a master’s candidate has the academic skills, abilities, and qualities as required in the diploma policy of the Graduate School Division, Hokkaido University, and the diploma policy of the Graduate School of Life Science.
• In principle, a master’s dissertation must be written by a single author. It should not incorporate material from others’ dissertations or infringe on originalities and/or ideas presented in research publications.
• A master’s dissertation must not infringe on others’ rights under the law, such as author’s rights, portrait rights, etc.
• A master’s dissertation must be developed based on a comprehensive research conducted in accordance with the “Code of Conduct for Scientists at Hokkaido University.”

2. Structure of Dissertation

A master’s dissertation must fulfill the following requirements:

• Provide an adequate title.
• State research background and a research aim clearly.
• Describe the research methodology utilized in accordance with the aim.
• Show results with graphic charts.
• Develop a thorough discussion based on research results.
• Derive a result corresponding to an aim.
• Cite references properly.
• Structure chapters of the dissertation according to the items included in this section.

3. Contents

The following criteria shall be used to evaluate a master’s dissertation. In this regard, the evaluating committee is entrusted with valuing and adding items as needed.

• A dissertation must have sufficient academic value based on international standards in major fields.
• The content must be aligned with a selected theme, and the research methodology.
• The research must be described background clearly and cited references properly.
• Data must be collected and handled in accordance with an elective theme and corresponding research methodology.
• The research process must be described in detail.
• Data analyses associated with individual graphic charts must be described and interpreted precisely.
• A dissertation must have a consecutive structure.
• Contents must be presented logically and conclusions must be complete.

Evaluation Criteria for Doctoral Dissertations, Division of Life Science, Division of Soft Matter, Graduate School of Life Science, Hokkaido University

• A doctoral dissertation must have sufficient academic value and a high level of originality, demonstrating that a doctoral candidate has the academic skills, abilities, and qualities as required in the diploma policy of the Graduate School Division, Hokkaido University, and the diploma policy of the Graduate School of Life Science.
• In principle, a doctoral dissertation must be written by a single author. It should not incorporate material from others’ dissertations or infringe on originalities and/or ideas presented in research publications.
• A doctoral dissertation must not infringe on others’ rights under the law, such as author’s rights, portrait rights, etc.
• A doctoral dissertation must be developed based on a comprehensive research conducted in accordance with the “Code of Conduct for Scientists at Hokkaido University.”

A doctoral dissertation must fulfill the following requirements:

The following criteria shall be used to evaluate a doctoral dissertation. In this regard, the evaluating committee is entrusted with valuing and adding items as needed.

• A dissertation must have sufficient academic value based on international standards in major fields. Academic value indicates discovery of unknown things, new analytical methods, theoretical structures and developments, and new academic interpretations or the creation of concepts, which contribute to academic research in current fields.
• The content must be aligned with a selected theme, and the research methodology must be based on the theme in accordance with advanced research and a high level of originality.
• A dissertation must have a consecutive structure; content must be presented logically; and conclusions must be complete.

45+ SAMPLE Thesis Evaluation in PDF | MS Word

Thesis evaluation | ms word, 45+ sample thesis evaluation, what is a thesis evaluation, different types of thesis evaluation, benefits of writing a thesis evaluation, basic elements of a thesis evaluation, how to write a thesis evaluation, what are some examples of thesis, what is the purpose of a thesis evaluation, what are the essential steps in writing a thesis evaluation, how to write a good thesis introduction.

Master Thesis Written Evaluation Form

Honors Critical Thesis Evaluation

Thesis and Dissertation Award Evaluation Report Form

Undergraduate Thesis Supervisor Evaluation Assessment Form

Outstanding Thesis Dissertation External Examiner Evaluation

Senior Honors Thesis Defense Evaluation Criteria Form

PhD Thesis Supervisor Evaluation

Undergraduate Thesis Evaluation Sheet

Thesis Proposal Evaluation For Students

Bachelor Thesis Evaluation Form

Thesis Evaluation Form

Graduate Recital Analysis and Thesis Evaluation

Thesis Defense Evaluation

Thesis Evaluation of Examiners

Thesis Evaluation Report

Thesis Evaluation and Student Worksheet

Thesis Evaluation Status Form

Thesis Prospectus Evaluation Form

Thesis Evaluation Matrix

Department of Mathematics and Statistics Thesis Evaluation Form

Thesis Evaluation Form For Master of Science in Biology

Senior Thesis Evaluation

Basic Thesis Evaluation

Thesis Committee Evaluation

Faculty Thesis Final Evaluation

Thesis Evaluation in PDF

Thesis Dissertation Project Defense Evaluation

Master Thesis Defense Evaluation

Honors College Thesis Evaluation

Thesis Evaluation Plan

Thesis Proposal Evaluation Form

Doctoral Thesis Evaluation Form

Thesis Project Evaluation Form

Thesis Application and Evaluation

Humanities Exit Assessment Thesis Evaluation

Thesis Committee Meeting Evaluation

Master Thesis Evaluation Sheet

Senior Honors Thesis Evaluation Form

Master Thesis Evaluation and Score Assignment

Thesis Evaluation Example

Programmes Thesis Evaluation

Supervisor Thesis Evaluation

Master Thesis Preliminary Evaluation

Thesis Review Evaluation Form

Graduate Thesis Evaluation

Exams Thesis Evaluation Form

1. bachelor thesis evaluation, 2. master thesis evaluation, 3. doctoral thesis evaluation, 1. maintains a clear analysis of thesis work, 2. facilitates organized decision making, 3. aims on a student’s overall performance, 4. provides summative comments , step 3: search for possible errors in a balanced way, what are some examples of thesis evaluation , share this post on your network, you may also like these articles, 50+ sample internship evaluation in pdf | ms word.

Providing invaluable professional experience can be made through facilitating internships to potential individuals, allowing college and undergraduate students to test the concepts and theories that they learned throughout their…

39+ SAMPLE Probationary Evaluation in PDF | MS Word

It is hard to find a job these days. There is a 5.6% unemployment rate in the US this year. Though Trade Economics has predicted that it would go…

browse by categories

• Questionnaire
• Description
• Reconciliation
• Certificate
• Spreadsheet

Information

• privacy policy
• Terms & Conditions

• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• GE Service Center
• International Affairs Office
• Academic Affairs Office
• Degree Affairs Office
• Administration Office
• Discipline Affairs Office
• Admission Office (for domestic students)
• Campus Life
• International Graduate Programs Admission
• Scholarships for Degree Programs
• Financial Support for International Conferences
• Courses Enrollment
• Students Login

Forms Download

Thesis Defense

Thesis Review

Degree-granting

Disciplines

China Credentials Verification

• Miscellaneous

Master Thesis Evaluation ordinarily conducts one and a half months earlier than Thesis Defense. Review team should be composed by two professors or associate professors invited from related disciplines. (If the student applies for Degree Equivalent to Master, the review team should be composed by three related professors or associate professors, among which should include one expert invited from institutes outside of the university.) Meanwhile, the author will possibly be engaged in stochastic spot-check of the degree thesis quality at the given website. The engaged authors are required to submit their degree theses on time for Double Anonymous Assessment. (colloquially called “blind review”. The students who delay/advance their graduation dates, or apply for Degree Equivalent to Master are compulsorily engaged in the “blind review”.)

For required documents and process applying Thesis Evaluation, please reference to annex 1: Flowchart of Master Degree Thesis Review (including Professional Degree).

The affairs related to thesis delivery, review, results collection, and feedback should be arranged by the Thesis Defense Secretary assigned to the author. The author himself is not allowed to participate.

1. Time of Evaluation

The Master Thesis Evaluation should be finished with a month (start from the date of submission).

The authors who passed the evaluation or submitted their theses on time but didn’t receive their feedback yet, are allowed to apply for thesis defense. If the evaluation feedback is released after thesis defense but indicates objection, the students who have one unqualified item (the item in Grade “D” or “E”), should revise their thesis according to the feedback, but not need to re-apply the thesis defense. The student whose thesis is overall unqualified (the total score is below 60 points), is not only need to revise the thesis but also need to re-apply the thesis defense.

2. Objection Handling

(1) Reconsideration: The student who failed in Master Thesis Evaluation should apply and pass the reconsideration before graduation. The reconsideration should be no more than twice. Fee of reconsideration should be paid by students themselves. The students who didn’t apply in time or failed twice are not allowed to apply for thesis defense and degree.

(2) Appeal: The students who don’t agree with the evaluation results have the right to appeal to the Degree Evaluation Committee of related department within ten workdays.

Process of appeal:

a. The student submits the application to supervisor and department;

b. The supervisor and department review the application;

c. After the department review, Degree Affair Office of Graduate School organizes two experts outside of the university to review the dissertation of applicant;

d. After the feedback released, the degree evaluation committee of department shall organize no less than three experts to review the feedback as well as the reason of appeal. The review result will be sent to the degree evaluation committees of department for arbitration; and the arbitration result will be sent to degree evaluation committees of discipline, and of university for final review.

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Welcome to the Purdue Online Writing Lab

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

The Online Writing Lab (the Purdue OWL) at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service at Purdue. Students, members of the community, and users worldwide will find information to assist with many writing projects. Teachers and trainers may use this material for in-class and out-of-class instruction.

The On-Campus and Online versions of Purdue OWL assist clients in their development as writers—no matter what their skill level—with on-campus consultations, online participation, and community engagement. The Purdue OWL serves the Purdue West Lafayette and Indianapolis campuses and coordinates with local literacy initiatives. The Purdue OWL offers global support through online reference materials and services.

Social Media

Facebook twitter.