EVALUATION OF THE MASTER S THESIS FACULTY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Transcription

1 EVLUTION OF THE MSTER S THESIS FCULTY OF SCIENCE ND TECHNOLOGY Page 1 of 11 pages 1

2 1. General Information The examination regulations at the University of Stavanger, 12 examinations state that there shall be two assessors, of whom at least one external, in the evaluation of bachelor s and master s theses. When using two or more assessors, the external assessor, according to the regulations, decides the grade in case of disagreement. Deadlines for assessment, see Examination Regulations of the University of Stavanger, 12. Master thesis: 12 weeks after the submission deadline (Submission deadline is normally June 15.) Fees Remuneration to external assessors at the University of Stavanger is based on the State Salary Code, C-table. There are four main alternative fees: Professor, ssociate Professor, Senior Lecturer/Lecturer/University Teacher (for further information about salary scales and fees, see attached remuneration form). ssessors that have their main position within the higher education sector and whose salaries are higher than those quoted on the attached form can be offered a similar salary scale at UiS. Salary placement must be documented by attaching a copy of the assessors paycheck. ssessors who have not had their competence assessed for academic positions in the higher education sector will be given an internal competence assessment in accordance with the position s requirements for competence. Fee for master s theses of 30 credits is 10 hours per thesis Fee for master s theses of 60 credits is 15 hours per thesis Payment: Completed fee forms and contract received at the faculty payroll office during the first week of the month, will be paid out on the 12 th the month after. Forms and contracts received after the 12 th will not be paid until the 12 th two months later. Confidentiality We ask you to note that, as appointed external assessor at the University of Stavanger, the confidentiality obligation under the Public dministration ct 13 applies to: nyone who performs services or works for an agency is obliged to prevent others from gaining access to, or knowledge of, what s/he may learn in connection with the service or work: 1) Somebody s personal situation, or Page 2 of 11 pages 2

3 2) Technical devices and procedures as well as operational or business matters that it will be important for competitive reasons to keep secret in the interests of the parties concerned Some of the assignments at UiS are classified. This can be justified on the basis of business relationships that are important to keep secret or other factors that may have competitive significance. Whether an assignment is open or confidential is indicated on a) the front page of the paper red color, or b) stated on the attached assessment form. Contact Information: If you have any questions in connection with the information above, please do not hesitate to contact us by address: or by phone EVLUTION OF THE THESIS 2.1 Background In 2012 the National Faculty meeting for Sciences (NFmR) and the National Council for Technological Education (NRT), decided on new common grade descriptions for Master theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology subjects (MNT). These will apply to Master theses submitted as of spring semester The reason why this is being introduced is as follows: Statistics prepared by UHR show that grades and B are used in too large degree. Introduction of the qualifications framework for higher education in * NFmR and NRT are subject-strategic units in the Norwegian ssociation of Higher Education Institutions (UHR) Grade descriptions are now specific to both education level and subjects, such as MNT. In addition, the connection between learning outcomes and grading clarified helping supervisor and assessor. It is expected that these measures will lead to increased use of the entire grading scale. Grade descriptions are documented with the following forms: 1. Descriptions of grades for master s theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology 2. ssessor s assessment of master s theses 3. Supervisor s assessment of master s theses 4. Standardized assessment form In addition NFmR and NRT made a report on their work that is not attached here. Page 3 of 11 pages 3

4 SUPERVISOR S SSESSMENT of master s theses ttachment to Descriptions of grades for master s theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology For each criterion, the Supervisor is to assess the candidate s attainment of the following: Theoretical insight: Has the candidate generated important elements/issues relevant to the thesis? Does the candidate use relevant resources (databases, etc.) to acquire current and applicable literature and background material for the work? Skill level: Does the candidate master relevant methods and use these in the thesis in an applicable and integrated manner? Working methods: Does the candidate demonstrate the ability to work in a planned and methodical manner? Effort: Does the candidate demonstrate a high degree of effort and motivation? Degree of independence: Is the candidate able to work and use relevant methods in an independent manner, and conduct an independent piece of research or development under supervision? Does the candidate show personal initiative? What type of help and supervision has the candidate received during the different phases of the work? Is the candidate able to draw on the expertise of the research group and apply this to his/her own work? Project result: Does the work demonstrate creativity and/or contribute to new thinking/creativity? Does the work appear to be particularly extensive or comprehensive? Deadlines: pre-requisite for assessment is that the work is submitted within the defined deadline. Page 4 of 11 pages 4

5 Standardized assessment form ttachment to Descriptions of grades for master s theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology Main assessment criteria: Introduction and theory (max. 20 pt.) Methods and working practice (max. 25 pt.) Results and Discussion (max. 35 pt.) Sub-criteria: Comments Technical grounding: Theoretical insight: Goal description: Own contribution: Skill level: Working methods: Effort: Degree of independence: Project result: nalysis and discussion: Critical reflection: Own contribution / goal attainment: /S* + S S + S S S S + S Max. Score Preassessment Final points Comments Presentation (max. 15 pt.) Structure: Language: Form: Oral examination (max. 5 pt.) Presentation during final examination: + S SUM *ssessment provide primarily by ssessor or Supervisor maximum number of points is proposed for the main assessment criteria (which in total is not to exceed 100), whereas no maximum number of points is suggested for each of the sub-criteria (although they must have total 100). This is to accommodate different types of projects (theoretical / experimental, 30/60 credits etc.) that require certain sub-criteria to be weighted differently. Page 5 of 11 pages 5

6 Using the ssessment form Total scores: The Faculty / Institute / Department must set a maximum number of points for each criterion to that the sum total is 100. In the same way, a maximum total score must be decided for each sub-criterion so that the total for all the sub-criteria is 100. The maximum score for a criterion is to be equal to the sum of the maximum scores for its associated sub-criteria. Note that, since there are only 16 sub-criteria, and a total of at least 40 points is required to gain a pass, 1 point will rarely indicate an acceptable level of attainment (pass). The general rule is that the lower limit for acceptable achievement is 40% of the maximum score for that (sub-)criterion. In other words, if a sub-criterion, such as Technical grounding, has a maximum score of 5 points, the following scale will apply: 5 points near perfect 4 points very good, only minimal improvement possible 3 points good, but clear improvement possible 2 points just acceptable for master s degree standard 1 point some value, but insufficient for master s degree standard 0 points negligible value ssessment: The assessor and Supervisor carry out a pre-assessment and assign points according to the different criteria (marked and S). fter the oral examination and the assessment meeting, all scores may be adjusted apart from Presentation and Oral examination. Criteria are marked (ssessor) or S (Supervisor) according to who has overall responsibility for the assignment of points. Four criteria are marked + S meaning that the ssessor and Supervisor have joint responsibility for the assignment of points. Grade table: Grade Point interval : points B: points C: points D: points E: points F: 0 39 points Page 6 of 11 pages 6

7 Descriptions of grades for master s theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology: The grading of master s theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology is governed by the following descriptions of grades for students admitted to master s studies in the autumn semester 2012 or later. Each description covers these areas: general comments; theoretical overview, insight and choice of methods; manner of completion level, technical skills; extent, research and development; presentation. Grade / level Description n outstanding thesis which clearly demonstrates a talent for Excellent research and/or originality, in a national perspective. The candidate has very good insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field and has demonstrated scientific knowledge at a very high level. The objectives of the thesis are well defined and easy to understand. The candidate is able to select and apply relevant scientific methods convincingly, has all the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct very advanced experiments or computations without help, and works very independently. The thesis is considered very extensive and/or innovative. The analysis and discussion have an extremely good scientific foundation and justification, and are clearly linked to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates extremely good critical reflection and distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from other. The form, structure and language in the thesis are at an extremely high level. B Very good very good thesis that is clearly and positively distinguishable. The candidate has very good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are well defined and easy to understand. The candidate is able to select and apply relevant scientific methods soundly, has almost all the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct advanced experiments or computations without helt, and works very independently. The thesis is considered extensive and/or innovative. The analysis and discussion have a very good scientific foundation and justification, and are clearly linked to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates very good critical reflection and distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The form, structure and language in the thesis are at a very high level. Page 7 of 11 pages 7

8 C Good D Satisfactory good thesis The candidate has good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are generally well defined, but may contain some inexact formulations. The candidate uses the relevant scientific methods satisfactorily, has most of the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct quite advanced experiments or computations without help, and works independently. The thesis is considered good with elements that are creative. The analysis and discussion have a good scientific foundation and justification, and are linked to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates good critical reflection and usually distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The form, structure and language in the thesis are at a good level. satisfactory thesis. The candidate has quite good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are defined, but may contain some inexact formulations. The candidate is generally able to apply relevant scientific methods, has the main technical skills required for the work, and can plan and conduct experiments or computations without help. The candidate works independently to some extent, but needs quite close supervision to achieve satisfactory scientific progress. The candidate may have problems utilizing the research group s expertise in his/her own work. The thesis is considered satisfactory. The analysis and discussion have a satisfactory scientific foundation and justification, and are linked to the topic that is addressed, but there is room for improvement. The candidate demonstrates his/her ability for critical reflection, but has problems distinguishing clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The form, structure and language in the thesis are at an acceptable level. Page 8 of 11 pages 8

9 E Sufficient F Fail thesis that is acceptable and satisfies the minimum criteria. The candidate has sufficient scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are described, but are vague and imprecise. The candidate is able to apply some relevant scientific methods, has a minimum of technical skills required for the work, and can plan and conduct simple experiments or computations without help. The candidate achieves limited scientific progress without close supervision, and has problems utilizing the research group s expertise in his/her own work. The thesis is considered limited and somewhat fragmented. The analysis and discussion have an adequate scientific foundation and justification, but ought to have had a better link to the topic that is discussed. The candidate demonstrates sufficient critical reflection, but may have problems distinguishing between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The thesis is mostly acceptable, but has definite shortcomings with respect to form, structure and language. thesis that does not satisfy the minimum requirements. The candidate does not have sufficient scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are not clearly defined or are lacking. The candidate demonstrates a lack of competence in the use of scientific methods, does not have the required technical skills and independence for the work, and has scarcely utilized the research group s expertise in his/her own work. The thesis is considered very limited and fragmented. The analysis and discussion do not have an adequate scientific foundation and justification, and are loosely linked to the topic that is discussed. The candidate does not demonstrate sufficient critical reflection, and does not clearly distinguish between his/her contributions and the contributions from others. The thesis has major shortcomings with respect to form, structure, and language. Page 9 of 11 pages 9

10 ssessor s assessment of master s theses ttachment to Descriptions of grades for master s theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology For each criterion, the ssessor is to assess the candidate s attainment of the following. Technical grounding: Is the theoretical and technical foundation clearly described, enabling the work to be placed in the context of relevant international research? Theoretical insight: Does the work, in particular the introduction, demonstrate that the candidate has advanced knowledge of relevant theory and methods, and particular indepth insight into a specific field that is applicable to the thesis? Goal description: re the goals and/or hypotheses for the thesis presented in a clear and comprehensible manner? Skill level: Does the candidate master relevant methods and use these in the thesis in an applicable and integrated manner? Project result: Does the work demonstrate creativity and/or contribute to new thinking/creativity? Does the work appear to be particularly extensive or comprehensive? How do you rate the quality and value of the new knowledge/results generated by this work? Critical reflection: Does the candidate demonstrate a reasonable understanding of the value of the results? Does the candidate approach sources of information in a critical manner? Does the candidate consider and evaluate factors of uncertainty such as methodological errors, data errors, etc.? Does the candidate analyse relevant ethical questions related to technical, professional and research matters? Does the candidate make and justify reasonable suggestions for further developments or discuss the potential for such? Structure: Does the work demonstrate and organized structure 8normally IMRaD: Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion)? Is the work generally clear? Language: Is the candidate able to present issues and results with the necessary technical precision? Is the work easily comprehended and does it demonstrate a good command of the language used? Form: Page 10 of 11 pages 10

11 Is the style used for references, figures and tables consistent? Is the quality of figures and tables acceptable? Does the candidate have a good command of relevant specialist terminology? ssessing master s theses ttachment to Descriptions of grades for master s theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology During the academic year 2012/2013, new guidelines for grading master s theses in mathematics, natural sciences and technology came into effect. The new system applies to students who began a 2-year master s degree during autumn 2012, and students who started the last two years of a 5-year master s degree in autumn Using the new definitions of grade categories the whole grading scale will be used. The master s thesis itself, and how it is conducted, will not be affected. Why redefine the grading system? In 2003, a letter-based grading system was introduced. Statistics indicate that in grading master s theses, some of the grades in the scale are rarely used. This is the background for redefining the grading system on a national level. It is important that this change in the grading of theses will not have adverse consequences for students. Consequently, we will ensure that adequate information is distributed to potential employers and other educational institutions. ll certificates and diploma supplement documents will include and updated description of the grading system. ssessments by supervisors and assessors New guiedelines for supervisors and assessors will ensure a unified understanding of the grading system. These guiedelines provide detailed explanations and examples regarding the terminology used. Master s theses must be submitted before the allotted deadline in order to be eligible for assessment. This is include in guidelines for supervisors. Page 11 of 11 pages 11