Approved by the 04.10.16 decision of the supervisory board of the Tallinn University School of Governance, Law and Society Amended by the 19.11.19 decision of the supervisory board of the Tallinn University School of Governance, Law and Society Tallinn University School of Governance, Law and Society Law Study Area GUIDE TO WRITING AND DEFENDING PAPERS AND THESES Tallinn 2019
48
Embed
GUIDE TO WRITING AND DEFENDING PAPERS AND THESESœTI/Dokumendid/Law_papers and...may write in a personal style, use manners of expression characteristic to a journalistic and literary
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Approved
by the 04.10.16 decision of the supervisory board of the Tallinn University School of
Governance, Law and Society
Amended
by the 19.11.19 decision of the supervisory board of the Tallinn University School of
Planned time of defence:…………………………….....................………................................
Specified time of defence:……………………………………….............…............................
Thesis submission deadline:
autumn term ...................; spring term ......................
Part I – fill in for each contact separately, adding rows
No. Date of
contact
Form of contact (e-
mail, telephone call,
meeting, etc.)
Short content of contact*
Supervisor’s signature:
Supervised student’s signature:
* Examples of the short content of contact: specifying the topic, specifying the schedule of the
work, discussing the original plan of the work, discussing the relevant literature, discussing a
36
completed chapter, discussing the initial version of the work, discussing the final version of
the work etc.
Part II – Student’s and supervisor’s rights and obligations
Student Supervisor
¤ must be active;
¤ contact the supervisor to arrange consultation
appointments;
¤ prepare materials and questions;
¤ regularly submit interim versions of the work to
the supervisor for examination.
¤ as a rule must give the student their contact
details (as a rule the supervisor can be contacted
via e-mail);
¤ does not have to disclose their personal mobile
phone or home telephone number;
¤ does not have to seek contact with the student
themselves or require the submission of
materials.
¤ cannot presume that the supervisor is able to
respond to their inquiry immediately;
¤ may turn to the study counsellor or head of
studies if has not received feedback from the
supervisor within a week;
¤ may turn to the curriculum curator if it is
impossible to get in touch with the supervisor on
several occasions or feedback is systematically late.
¤ must give the student feedback within one
week from the student’s inquiry. In exceptional
cases (e.g. foreign secondment, illness, etc.) a
longer feedback deadline is agreed;
¤ must consider the volume of supervision – at
least 30 hours for a BA thesis, at least 50 hours
for an MA thesis
¤ before submitting the work or its part to the
supervisor must check the conformity of
orthography and grammar;
¤ is responsible for the orthography and style of the
final text;
¤ knows that an abundance of orthographic errors
or poor legibility of the text or inadequate style is a
certain reason for lowering the grade.
¤ does not have to correct orthographical and
grammatical errors, but draw the student’s
attention to potential stylistic errors in the text
and if necessary give recommendations for
improving the legibility of the text.
¤ to ease the supervisor’s work, must mark
amendments and additions that have been made in
comparison with the previous version when
submitting the next version of the text.
¤ may refuse feedback if the amendments and
additions in the next (in comparison with the
already annotated version) have not been
marked by the student.
¤ in exceptional cases may change supervisors
and/or topics within a reasonable time, submitting a
new reasoned application to the curriculum curator
for the approval of the new topic and/or supervisor.
¤ may stop cooperation with the student, making
a proposal to the curriculum curator concerning
this if the supervised student has not been in
contact within a month from the approval of the
topic and supervisor or submitted any materials.
¤ must submit the final version of the work
(unbound) to the supervisor at least 1 week before
the deadline for the submission of works noted in
the Tallinn University academic calendar.
¤ may not allow a work to the defence if the
final version has not been submitted to them 1
week before the designated deadline for the
submission of works;
¤ cannot allow a work to the defence, if they
have not examined the work or ensured that the
work corresponds with the requirements for a
thesis.
¤ must introduce an external supervisor the rules
and documents for the theses of the Tallinn
University School of Governance, Law and Society
¤ must have examined the requirements for the
theses of the Tallinn University School of
Governance, Law and Society and rely on them
37
if necessary. for supervision.
¤ is responsible for preparing the work
independently, avoiding plagiarism;
¤ knows the consequences of plagiarism.
¤ must use a plagiarism recognition programme
or other means to discover plagiarism in the
submitted work.
38
ANNEX 5. Thesis supervisor’s opinion example
Tallinn University
School of Governance, Law and Society
Law Study Area
Thesis supervisor’s opinion (student submits with thesis)
Thesis author
Thesis title
Supervisor’s name, personal identification code (necessary for entering into ÕIS), research degree and
position
1. Mark the suitable option with X
Actuality of the topic
very current
relatively current
ordinary
no actuality
Author’s ability to express the research problem
excellent
good
satisfactory
poor
unsatisfactory
Expediency of used research method(s)
very expedient
appropriate
questionable
unsuitable
Appropriateness of used literature
very appropriate
suitable
somewhat questionable
unsuitable
Credibility of research outcome(s) (consider the used academic literature, number of cases, etc.)
very credible
above average
credibility
average credibility
below average
credibility
not credible
Strength of analytic skills
very strong
above average
average
below average
very weak
39
Balance and connection of the structural parts of the work
optimum
acceptable
somewhat problematic
unclear
Compliance with the Guide to preparing, formatting and defending student works
complies fully
mostly complies
average
mostly does not
comply does not comply
at all
2. SUPERVISOR’S ASSESSMENT OF THE THESIS
The supervisor will highlight the strengths and weaknesses of the work, incl. actuality,
purpose, research questions, comparison states, connection with practice, author’s
contribution and suggestions, incl. especially de lege ferenda, etc.
NB! The supervisor suggests no grade
[text]
3. SUPERVISOR’S ASSESSMENT TO COOPERATION WITH THE STUDENT
[text]
………………………………… supervisor’s signature
…..……………………..……... date
40
Annex 6. Thesis review sample
Tallinn University
School of Governance, Law and Society
Law
Review of a student’s thesis
Submit the review to the study counsellor and specialist electronically via e-mail signed in
one copy to the academic unit three working days before the defence at the latest,
defence will take place ………………20.......
Thesis author
Thesis title
Reviewer’s name, personal identification code (necessary for entering on ÕIS), research degree, position
1. We ask for a short reasoning for the chosen assessment (write text in box)
Actuality of the topic
very current
somewhat current
ordinary
no actuality
Author’s ability to determine the research problem
very good
good satisfactory
poor
unsatisfactory
Expediency of the used research method(s)
very expedient
appropriate
questionable
unsuitable
Appropriateness of the used literature
very appropriate
suitable
somewhat
questionable
unsuitable
Credibility of the research outcome(s) (consider the used academic literature, number of cases etc.)
very credible
above average
credibility
average
credibility
below average
credibility
unreliable
41
Strength of analytical skills
very strong
above average
average
below average
very weak
Balance and connection of the structural parts of the work
optimum
acceptable
sometimes problematic
unclear
Compliance with the Guide to preparing, formatting and defending student works (the guide is
available under the documents of the Tallinn University School of Governance, Law and Society)
complies fully
mostly complies
average
mostly does not
comply
does not comply
at all
2. Strengths and weaknesses of the work to highlight specifically:
[text] NB! The reviewer suggests no grade
3. Questions to the author of the work: 1.
2.
3.
………………………………… reviewer’s signature
…..……………………..……... date
42
Annex 7. School of Governance, Law and Society
BACHELOR’S THESIS (RESEARCH PAPER) GRADING CRITERIA F – the work is plagiarism and/or is not related to the curriculum. Connection with the curriculum is a general requirement
that is not separately mentioned with the grades.
A B C D E Definition of the
problem The problem is
current, reasoned
and significant
for the purposes
of the specific
field, develops
earlier works or
offers a practical
solution. The
problem and
research
questions have
been clearly
worded,
specifically
delimited and
correspond to
the purpose of
the research
paper in an
excellent
manner.
The problem is
current and
significant. The
problem and
research
questions are
logically
connected and
correspond to
the purpose of
the research
paper very well.
The actuality
and significance
of the problem
is worded. The
problem and
research
question are
clear and well
connected.
The actuality and
significance of the
problem have not
been provided
convincingly. The
problem and research
questions are
interlinked on a
general level but
there are some
questions.
The problem and
research questions
are unfocused and
only connected with
the topic of the
research paper to a
small extent.
Theoretical part Relevant
academic
literature has
been used, which
covers important
sources from the
position of the
work and creates
connections
between
different authors
and approaches.
The author has
synthesised the
important
sources of the
field. The
connection
between the
problem, theory
and empiricism
is clear and
theory has been
systematically
applied in the
empirical
analysis. The
work offers a
new contribution
to the current
knowledge in a
theoretical and
empirical sense.
Even if this
contribution is
modest, the
student can
highlight and
justify it in the
work.
Relevant
academic
literature has
been used. The
perspectives that
are significant
and relevant for
the work are
covered. The
author has
critically
analysed and
synthesised the
sources related
to the problem of
the work. The
connection
between theory,
empiricism and
research
questions is clear
and the student
has been able to
apply theoretical
knowledge in the
empirical
analysis.
Relevant
academic
literature has
been used and
the perspectives
that are
significant and
relevant for the
work are
covered. The
author has
critically
analysed and
synthesised the
sources related
to the problem
of the work to a
small extent and
the work
contains
thematic
transitional
texts created by
the author. The
connection
between the
problem, theory
and empiricism
is
understandable,
theoretical
knowledge has
been applied in
empirical
analysis but few
connections
have been
created.
Relevant academic
literature has been
used, which mostly
covers theoretical
considerations that
are relevant from the
perspective of the
work. The author has
critically analysed the
theory related to the
problem of the work
to a small extent and
the work contains
few thematic
transitions created by
the author. The
connection between
the problem, theory
and empiricism can
be identified, the
student has tried to
apply theoretical
knowledge in
empirical analysis
later but making the
connections is
sometimes
insufficient.
The theory part is
based on a limited
number of academic
sources and covers
the theoretical
positions relevant
from the perspective
of the work in the
least amount that is
necessary. The theory
part of the work is
declarative. Theory,
empiricism and
research questions
are interlinked in
general terms. The
connection between
theory and empirical
analysis is weak.
43
Empirical part1 The method for
collecting
empirical data is
suitable for
responding to
the research
questions and
the choice of
method is well
reasoned based
on the sources
and the area of
research
delimited. The
data collection
and analysis
methods have
been applied
correctly in all
stages of the
work. All key
definitions of
data collection
and analysis
have been
defined pursuant
to sources. The
author
understands and
describes their
role as an
investigator. The
sample or data
set is suitable for
responding to
research
questions.
Presentation of
the results is
clear and
comprehensive
and follows best
practices of the
method. The
sample,
procedure for
carrying out the
study and data
analysis has
been thoroughly
described.
The method for
collecting
empirical data is
suitable for
responding to
the research
questions and
the choice of
method is
reasoned and the
area of research
delimited. The
data collection
and analysis
methods have
been applied
correctly in all
stages of the
work. The
majority of data
collection and
analysis key
definitions have
been defined
pursuant to
sources. The
sample or data
set is suitable for
responding to
the research
questions. The
author
understands and
has mentioned
its role as an
investigator.
Presentation of
the results is
clear and
comprehensive.
The sample,
procedure for
carrying out the
study and data
analysis has
been thoroughly
described.
The method for
collecting
empirical data is
suitable for
responding to
the research
questions and
solving the
research
problem, but the
reasoning for
the choice of
method is not
sufficient. The
author has a
generally good
command of the
used method,
even though
there may be
smaller
questionable
matters. The
majority of data
collection and
analysis key
definitions have
been defined
pursuant to
sources. The
amount and
quality of
empirical data is
sufficient and
enables to
respond to
research
questions. The
results have
been presented
in a
comprehensive
manner. The
sample,
procedure for
carrying out the
study and data
analysis has
been
sufficiently
described.
The method for
collecting empirical
data is generally
suitable for
responding to the
research questions
and solving the
research problem.
The reasoning for the
choice of method is
not sufficient. The
author has a
command of the
chosen data
collection methods
with some problems.
All presented
empirical data is
significant for the
work and is in some
way related to the
research question. At
the same time there is
data, the analysis of
which is inadequate.
The amount and
quality of empirical
data may not be
sufficient, but still
enables to respond to
the research
questions to a certain
extent. The
presentation of
results is uneven. The
description of the
sample, procedure for
carrying out the study
and data analysis is
sometimes
inadequate.
The suitability of the
method for collecting
empirical data for
responding to the
research questions
and the reasoning for
this choice are
questionable. The
selected research
method is described
in a very general
manner, errors have
been made in its
application. The
empirical data
presented in the work
is not all appropriate
i.e. are not
sufficiently
connected to the
research questions.
The presentation of
results, description of
the sample, procedure
for carrying out the
study is inadequate.
Conclusions and
recommendatio
ns
All research
questions have
received a
thorough and
argued response.
The conclusions
that are related
to empiricism
and the
theoretical part
are clear and
presented in an
analytically clear
manner. The
conclusions have
novel
approaches or
connections,
which have been
All research
questions have
received an
argued response.
The conclusions
of the work are
connected with
empiricism and
the theoretical
part. The results
have been
discussed
analytically,
opening various
problems and
placing the
results in a
broader
theoretical/social
All research
questions have
received a clear
response. The
conclusions
discuss the
results, but the
discussion is
superficial and
analytically
mediocre. The
conclusions
have been
placed in a
broader context,
but the
discussion in
analytically
weak. Single
All research
questions have
received a response,
but with a different
level of
argumentation. The
reasoning for
reaching the results
can be identified. The
conclusions are
general and
empirically/analytical
ly poorly reasoned.
Discussing the
conclusions and
placing them in a
broader context is
scarce and
analytically weak.
The main research
question has received
a response, even
though the
conclusions arising
from it are general
and
empirically/analytical
ly poorly reasoned.
The conclusions arise
from prior analysis,
but are presented in a
simplified manner
and a mechanical
summary has been
made, which merely
states the results.
There are no
recommendations and
44
set in a broader
theoretical/social
context.
Recommendatio
ns and further
research
opportunities
and the research
limitation of the
chosen approach
have been
clearly
highlighted in
the work.
context.
Recommendatio
ns and further
research
opportunities
have been
highlighted in
the work.
recommendatio
ns or further
research
opportunities
have been
highlighted in
the work.
Single
recommendations or
references to further
research
opportunities are
highlighted in the
work.
further research
opportunities in the
work.
Formatting The formatting
of the work
corresponds to
the
requirements.
The text is
prepared in an
academic style,
linguistically and
grammatically
correct in every
way. References
are correct.
The formatting
of the work
corresponds to
the
requirements.
The text is
prepared in an
academic style,
linguistically and
grammatically
correct. There
are single typing
errors.
References are
correct.
The formatting
of the work
largely
corresponds to
the
requirements.
There are no
fundamental
errors in
referencing.
There are some
errors in the
formatting of
reference
entries. The
work is
generally in
academic
language, even
though there
may be some
irregularities
and/or typing
errors in the
orthography.
The work
corresponds to the
formatting
requirements in part.
There are errors in
referencing that are
not fundamental.*
There is journalistic
or colloquial use of
language and errors
of orthography and/or
typing in the use of
language.
The work
corresponds to the
formatting
requirements in part.
Regardless of
referencing errors the
sources can still be
identified. The ability
to follow the author’s
though is difficult,
there may be some
linguistic errors.
There may be several
formatting ** and
also some
fundamental errors in
referencing, but no
plagiarism. There is
no overwhelming
academic use of
language: there is
journalistic and
colloquial use of
language in several
parts of the work.
There are several
orthography and/or
typing errors, which
still do not preclude
understanding the
text. Defence Presentation that
is formatted and
set out in an
exemplary
manner and
presented within
the time limit.
Outstanding
defence speech
(i.e. creating an
interest for the
topic and content
of the work).
Excellent
command of the
theoretical
material and
overview of the
results of the
work. Very good
arguments in the
presentation of
the author’s own
opinion and
Performance of
the presentation
prepared in a
correct manner.
Competent
presentation of
the defence
speech. When
responding to
questions the
student can
reason and
argument the
responses.
Presentation
that has a clear
structure, which
has some
inaccuracies.
Competent
defence speech.
Responses to
questions are
argued in part.
There are some
inaccuracies in the
performance of the
presentation. The
defence speech is
competent, but there
are also faults in the
structure and manner
of performance of the
speech. There are
difficulties with
reasoning their
positions.
There are
contradictions, errors
and inaccuracies in
the performance of
the presentation. The
defence speech is
sometimes unclear.
No command of the
material or
disregarding the time.
The responses to
questions are not
argued and/or are
somewhat unclear.
45
ability to express
oneself.
Coherence of the
introduction and
summary.
Responding to
questions is
precise and
exhaustive.
*Fundamental error in referencing: there source is not referenced; using the source is unnecessary from the
position of the work or there are discrepancies between references in the text and the literature used; parts of
reference entries are presented in an order that is wrong and confusing; the source cannot be identified.
**Formatting error in referencing: insufficient and irregular following of the reference systems established with
the rules of the thesis; formatting inaccuracies in reference entries and textual references.
_______________________________________________ 1. In the field of law the empirical part is not mandatory, therefore these criteria do not apply to works without an
empirical part.
School of Governance, Law and Society
MASTER’S THESIS (RESEARCH PAPER) GRADING CRITERIA F – the work is plagiarism and/or is not related to the curriculum/study discipline of the field.
A B C D E
Definition
of the
problem
In approaching the
problem, the author
has considered the
opinions of other
authors and earlier
literature from the
field. The author has
presented a discussion
that approaches the
problem from a novel
angle.
The research problem
and questions are
clearly worded and
reflect the set problem
in a multifaceted
manner, whereas the
author’s contribution
to a more thorough
elaboration is evident.
The author manages
to position and justify
their approach in the
context of the field’s
research tradition and
choose a
methodological
paradigm.
The research
questions reflect the
set problem in a
multifaceted manner.
In approaching the
problem, the author
has considered the
opinions of other
authors and earlier
literature from the
field and the approach
is supported by
discussion.
The author manages
to position and justify
their approach in the
context of the field’s
research tradition and
choose a
methodological
paradigm.
The author has proven
the actuality of the
problem.
The research questions
reflect the multifaceted
nature of the research
problem as well as the
relations between the
facets.
The author supports the
problem with the
opinions of other
authors and earlier
literature from the field,
however, the discussion
is lacking. The author
manages to determine
their approach in the
context of the research
tradition in the field and
choose a
methodological
paradigm.
The problem is
connected to the field,
however, the actuality
of the question has been
proven by the author to
a lacking extent.
The research problem is
banal and superficial.
The research problem
and questions are
interlinked. The author
has supported the
problem with the
opinions of other
authors and earlier
literature from the field,
however, there is no
discussion. The author
can determine their
approach in the context
of the research tradition
in the field and names a
methodological
paradigm.
The problem is
connected to the
field, however, the
author has not
proven its
actuality. The
author has
supported the
problem with the
opinions of other
authors, however,
there is no
discussion. The
set problem is
supported by
earlier literature in
the field, however,
the problem is not
novel.
The research
problem and
questions are
interlinked to a
small extent. The
research questions
are unfocused.
The author names
a methodological
paradigm.
Theoretical
part
The theoretical point
of departure covers
numerous approaches
to the research
problem, out of which
an argumented choice
has been made. The
author demonstrates
wide knowledge about
the disciplinary
research problem,
The theoretical point
of departure covers
several approaches to
the research problem,
pointing out the most
important among
them. Literature
related to the topic has
been used. The author
demonstrates
knowledge about the
The theoretical point of
departure covers
approaches to the
research problem to a
sufficient extent,
pointing out the most
important among them.
Literature related to the
topic has been used. The
author demonstrates
moderate knowledge
The thesis has a
theoretical point of
departure, which
elaborates on the work’s
central terminology and
gives the research
questions a suitable
analytical frame,
covering the most
important theoretical
approaches from the
Literature related
to the topic has
been used, but it
leaves the
theoretical frame
of the work too
narrow. The
author has created
a few links
between different
approaches and
46
which is positioned in
a wider discussion
context.
The presentation of
the theories is
analytical, critical of
the sources, and
presents a synthesis.
Theoretical
knowledge has been
implemented
systematically and
creatively in the
empirical analysis.
The division of the
theoretical part into
chapters and
subchapters is well
justified and logical.
The chapters and
subchapters of the
theoretical part are
connected to the
research problem/
questions and have
contentual titles. The
terms used and their
relations have been
explained.
disciplinary research
problem, as positioned
in a wider disciplinary
context.
The presentation of
the theories is
analytical and critical
of the sources.
Theoretical
knowledge has been
implemented
systematically in the
empirical analysis.
The division of the
theoretical part into
chapters and
subchapters is
justified and logical.
The chapters and
subchapters of the
theoretical part are
connected to the
research problem/
questions and have
contentual titles. Most
of the terms used and
their relations have
been explained.
about the disciplinary
research problem, as
positioned in a wider
disciplinary context.
The presentation of the
theories is analytical and
the author also presents
his or her own opinions.
The theoretical
framework is related to
the empirical part of the
work. The structure of
the theoretical part is
comprehensible, but
some aspects are not
reflected; some of the
(sub)chapters are
inexplicably long or
short and/or have titles
that have not been
sufficiently clearly or
suitably formulated.
point of view of the
thesis. The author has
created connections
between various
approaches and
presented his or her own
opinions. Literature
related to the topic has
been used.
The relation between
theory and empirics is
clearly discernable: the
theoretical knowledge
has been implemented
in the empirical
analysis, but
inconsistently. The
structure of the
theoretical part is
comprehensible, but
some aspects are not
reflected; some of the
(sub)chapters are
inexplicably long or
short and/or have titles
that have not been
sufficiently clearly or
suitably formulated.
presented his or
her own
approaches, but
the argumentation
is lacking. The
connection
between the
problem, the
theory and
empirics is at
times hard to
understand. The
theoretical part is
separate from the
rest of the
research parts and
its division into
chapters and
subchapters has
been poorly
justified. Not all
of the terminology
used as well as the
interrelations have
not been
explained.
Empirical
part 1
The data collection
method is suitable for
answering the
research question and
solving the research
problem. The method
of data collection and
analysis as well as the
data set used has been
convincingly justified,
with supporting
material from other
authors, and including
discussion about other
methodological
possibilities. The data
collection and analysis
process has been
clearly described.
In case of qualitative
research, several data
analysis methods have
been used, incl. multi-
dimensional analysis;
each method’s
benefits and limits
have been reflected;
the results of different
types of analyses have
been presented in a
connected way; the
empirical analysis and
presentation of results
is flawless and offers
innovative and multi-
faceted knowledge
about the research
opportunities of the
field; the data set and
The data collection
method is suitable for
answering the
research question and
solving the research
problem. The method
of data collection and
analysis as well as the
data set used has been
justified, with
supporting material
from other authors,
and including
discussion about other
methodological
possibilities. The data
collection and analysis
process has been
clearly described.
In case of qualitative
research, several data
analysis methods have
been used, incl. multi-
dimensional analysis;
the results of different
types of analyses have
been presented in a
connected way; the
empirical analysis and
presentation of results
is thorough and offers
multi-faceted
knowledge about the
research opportunities
of the field.
In case of qualitative
research: the empirical
analysis and result
presentation offers
The data collection
method is suitable for
answering the research
question and solving the
research problem. The
method of data
collection and analysis
as well as the data set
used has been
convincingly justified,
with supporting material
from other authors.
The data collection and
analysis process has
been described.
In case of qualitative
research, one method at
an advanced level or
several analysis
methods have been
used, their joint usage
has been argumented;
there are a few mistakes
in implementing the
method(s).
In case of qualitative
analysis: the data
collection and analysis
methods have been
chosen considering the
research questions, and
the choices have been
explained in the work;
analysis is systematic,
the analysis process has
been described; the
results are interpreted,
based on the research
question; the author
The data collection
method is suitable for
answering the research
question and solving the
research problem. The
data collection method
and data set are
generally justified,
using other authors for
support.
The data collection and
analysis process has
been described, but
insufficiently.
In case of qualitative
research, one analysis
method has been used
and one data set at a low
level of complication
and there are no flaws in
the implementation.
The author understands
and describes his or her
role as a researcher and
analyses their role as an
influencer of the results.
The data set, the
research procedures and
data analysis description
in the work is sufficient
for answering the main
research questions. The
presentation of results is
generally correct and
offers knowledge about
the research
opportunities in the
field.
In case of qualitative
The data
collection method
is suitable for
answering the
research question
and solving the
research problem.
The used data
allows giving
single, fragmented
assessments to the
research problem.
There is an
attempt at
describing the
data collection
and analysis
process.
The analysis
method is simple.
The author
understands and
describes his or
her role as a
researcher. Not all
empirical data
presented in the
work is relevant
for the work, i.e.
doesn’t relate
enough to the
research
questions. The
presentation of
results, the data
set, the research
procedure and
data analysis
description in the
47
used data have
allowed for content
rich generalisations
and give thorough
evaluations of the
different facets of the
research object or
phenomena.
In case of qualitative
analysis: the data
collection and analysis
methods have been
chosen considering
the research questions,
and the choices have
been explained in the
work; analysis is
thorough and
systematic, the
analysis process has
been thoroughly
described. The results
are interpreted, their
presentation is
logically structured
and follows the
presentation style of
the chosen method.
novel information
about the research
opportunities in the
field; the data set and
used data have
allowed for contentual
generalisations and for
thorough evaluations
of the research object
or phenomenon.
In case of qualitative
analysis: the data
collection and analysis
methods have been
chosen considering
the research questions,
the choices have been
explained in the work;
analysis is thorough
and systematic, the
analysis process has
been thoroughly
described. The results
are interpreted, their
presentation is
logically structured
and follows the
presentation style of the chosen method.
understands and
describes his or her role
as a researcher and
analyses their role as an
influencer of the results.
The description of the
data set, the research
procedures and data
analysis is sufficient.
The presentation of
results is correct and
offers novel information
about the research
opportunities in the
field. Theoretic
knowledge has been
repeatedly used in the
empirical analysis.
and mixed methods, the
student’s independent,
high volume and quality
work in collecting data
and/or independently
developing a research
instrument can
compensate for lacking
elements in the
empirical analysis or
theoretical part of the
work.
work is sufficient
for answering the
main research
questions.
In case of
qualitative and
mixed methods,
the student’s
independent, high
volume and
quality work in
collecting data
and/or
independently
developing a
research
instrument can
compensate for
lacking elements
in the empirical
analysis or
theoretical part of
the work.
Conclusion
s and
recommen
dations
Conclusions are
related to the
empirical and
theoretical part of the
work.
All research questions
have been answered in
a thoroughly
argumented manner.
The conclusions of the
work are novel and
open up new research
opportunities. The
conclusions are
discussive, they
contain the author’s
evaluation of earlier
research, their own
methodological choice
and the limitations of
the work.
Conclusions are
related to the
empirical and
theoretical part of the
work.
All research questions
have been answered in
a thoroughly
argumented manner.
The conclusions are
discussive and reflect
the author’s position
in relation to earlier
research and theories.
The author’s
contribution to the
elaboration and
solution of the
problem has been
presented in a clear
and argumented
manner.
Recommendations,
future research
opportunities, work
limitations and
contributions have
been clearly
presented.
The conclusions are
discussive, reflect the
multifaceted nature of
the research problem
and relate the results to
earlier research or
theories.
All research questions
have been thoroughly
answered.
Recommendations and
future research
opportunities and the
work’s limitations and
contributions have been
sufficiently presented.
The conclusions are a
result of the preceding
analysis, but remain
relatively mechanical.
The research questions
have been answered, but
to a varying degree of
thoroughness. The
discussion related the
research questions to
each other, but results
aren’t positioned in a
wider context.
Recommendations,
future research
opportunities, the
work’s limitations and
contributions have been
presented, but to a small
extent.
Results are based
on preceding
analysis. The
research questions
have been
answered, but
discussion is
minimal and
declarative.
Recommendations
, work limitations
and contributions
have been
presented
minimally.
Formatting Formatting of the
work is in line with
requirements. The text
is in an academic
style, linguistically
Formatting of the
work is in line with
requirements.
The text is in an
academic style,
Formatting of the work
is mostly in line with
requirements.
There are no mistakes in
citation in principle*.
Formatting of the work
is partially in line with
requirements.
There are mistakes in
citation that are not
Formatting of the
work is partially
in line with
requirements.
The sources used
48
and grammatically
correct.
Citation is correct.
linguistically and
grammatically correct.
There are some typing
errors.
Citation is correct.
There are some mistakes
in the formatting of
references.
The work is mostly in
academic language, but
there might be some
grammatical errors
and/or typing errors.
principal*. The
language used is
generally academic,
however, in parts there
might be journalese or
slang, as well as
grammatical errors
and/or typing errors.
have been cited.
The text is
comprehensible,
but there might be
some grammatical
errors.
There might be
some formatting
errors ** in
citation and some
principal errors,
but no plagiarism.
Academic
language is
prevalent, but in
several parts of
the work there is
journalese or
colloquial
language and/or
officialese. There
are several
grammar mistakes
and/or typing
errors that,
nonetheless, don’t
obstruct
comprehension of
the text.
Defence An appropriate and
content rich
presentation has been
prepared for the
defence. The student
presents the most
important parts of
their work and keeps
to the time limit. The
presentation is
interesting,
informative and in a
suitable style for an
academic context. The
student has thorough
knowledge of the
topic and can
competently answer
questions that may
even depart from the
limitations of the
research.
An appropriate and
content rich
presentation has been
prepared for the
defence. The student
presents the most
important parts of
their work and keeps
to the time limit. The
presentation is
interesting,
informative and in a
suitable style for an
academic context.
The student has
thorough knowledge
of the topic and can
competently answer
questions belonging to
the field of the work.
The defence is
thoughtfully prepared.
The student gives a
good overview of his or
her work, but does not
focus on the most
important and/or
exceeds the set time
limit. The presentation
is a bit hesitant, but
suitably of an academic
style. The student is
sufficiently
knowledgeable on the
subject, but can only
competently answers
directly related to the
work.
The defence has been
prepared, but does not
focus on the most
important an/or exceeds
the set time limit. The
presentation is a bit
hesitant or at time is not
in line with an academic
style. The student is
knowledgeable about
the topic, but can
competently answer
only questions directly
related to the work.
The defence has
been prepared, but
is unfocused and
doesn’t give a
clear overview of
the work and the
results. The
presentation is
hesitant. There is
some style that is
not suitable for the
academic context.
The student is
generally
knowledgeable
about the topic,
but does not have
an adequate
answer to some
questions.
Fundamental error in referencing: there source is not referenced; using the source is unnecessary from the position of the
work or there are discrepancies between references in the text and the literature used; parts of reference entries are presented
in an order that is wrong and confusing; the source cannot be identified.
**Formatting error in referencing: insufficient and irregular following of the reference systems established with the rules of
the thesis; formatting inaccuracies in reference entries and textual references.