General Information
For the lower university degree, the student must complete a Bachelor's thesis as part of the intermediate studies in their major subject. The thesis is a small-scale academic research project that follows the scientific principles of the relevant discipline. It may be completed either individually or as a pair, in accordance with the practices agreed upon within the academic subject. In joint theses, each student’s individual contribution must be clearly identifiable and assessable. In the Philosophical Faculty, collaboration between students
may also be demonstrated during the supervision process.
As a rule, the Bachelor's thesis is written in the language of the degree programme or in the language specified in the curriculum. The right to use another language in the thesis is granted by the head of education of the department or school. (Education Regulations, Section 26.)
The title page of the thesis must include the author’s name, the title of the thesis, the place and date of publication, and the type of thesis. Abstracts are placed immediately after the title page. More detailed information on the language of the thesis, abstract, and maturity test is provided in the section Language of the Maturity Test in the Philosophical Faculty in this guide. The recommended length of the abstract is 300 words.
The thesis and its details, including the title, are recorded in the student register as part of the completed study attainment.
Submission and Assessment of the Bachelor’s Thesis
The student has the opportunity to revise the thesis based on the feedback and suggested corrections received. Once the Bachelor's thesis is finalized, the student submits it for plagiarism detection and then forwards the same version to the supervisor for review. NB!
The submitted version may no longer be modified.
The thesis is stored for two years either in paper format or electronically, as determined by
the department/school.
The assessment of theses are governed by the Education Regulations, particularly Sections 35 and 37, and the rectification procedure is described in Section 44.
Learning Outcomes and Assessment of the Bachelor’s Thesis
Learning Outcomes
Upon completing the Bachelor’s thesis, the student:
• demonstrates familiarity with key literature and previous research related to the topic;
• has mastered the fundamentals of scientific thinking and the research process in accordance with the practices of their discipline;
• is able to report the research process and findings in writing, following the conventions of their field, and
• is able to assess the reliability and limitations of their own research and is familiar with the ethical principles of scientific research.
The assessment criteria are presented in a table in the accordion section Assessment Matrix for Bachelor’s Theses in the Philosophical Faculty in this guide.
The grading scale for the Bachelor’s thesis is: 0=Fail, 1=Sufficient, 2=Satisfactory, 3=Good, 4=Very Good, 5=Excellent. The assessment scale includes seven criteria that are considered when determining the final grade. The final grade is not necessarily the rounded average of the individual criteria. The assessment also takes into account factors such as the level of difficulty of the topic or other aspects that may significantly influence the grade either upwards or downwards. If any individual criterion is assessed with a grade of 0, the thesis cannot be approved.
| Assessment area | 1 Sufficient | 2 Satisfactory | 3 Good | 4 Very good | 5 Excellent |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Familiarity with the research area, selection and application of literature This criterion assesses the student's command of the discipline and its application: whether the theoretical approach and use of concepts are appropriate and relevant from the perspective of the topic. It also evaluates the quantity and relevance of sources, source criticism, and the ability to engage in dialogue with and between sources. | The theoretical approach and key concepts are poorly aligned with the research task. The literature is presented inadequately. The use of literature is limited or relies heavily on secondary sources. | The theoretical approach and key concepts are loosely connected to the topic. Literature is mainly summarized. The number of sources is moderate. | The theoretical approach and key concepts are appropriate and described adequately. The use of sources demonstrates sufficient familiarity with the literature. | The theoretical approach and key concepts form a coherent whole and are presented skillfully. Sources are critically assessed and successfully related to each other. The use of literature shows broad familiarity with the topic area. | The theoretical approach is commendable and consistent. Conceptual mastery is excellent and analytical. The ability to engage in dialogue with and between sources is outstanding. The use of literature demonstrates deep understanding of the research topic. |
| 2 Research task and delimitation This criterion assesses the clarity and appropriateness of the research task, as well as the definition and delimitation of the thesis’s purpose and objectives. The thesis must be connected to previous research. | The formulation of the research task is incomplete or unstructured. The presentation of the research task and the justification for choices are weak. | The formulation of the research task is appropriate, but the connection to previous research is minimal. The objectives of the thesis remain partly general. | The theoretical approach and key concepts are appropriate and described adequately. The use of sources demonstrates sufficient familiarity with the literature. The research task is appropriately justified and delimited. The research task is consistently connected to previous research. | The research task is successfully justified and clearly delimited. The research task demonstrates good command of the research area. | The research task is insightfully justified and delimited. The research task demonstrates excellent command of the research area. |
| 3 Research material and data analysis methods This criterion assesses methodological choices, including the acquisition, adequacy, and relevance of the research material. It also assesses whether the use of the method of analysis is appropriate, justified, and professionally applied. In empirical theses, this is a particularly important area of assessment. | The methodological choices are modest and disconnected from the research task. The use of the method of analysis is inconsistent. There are serious shortcomings in the acquisition, adequacy, or relevance of the material collected by the student. | The methodological choices are somewhat unstructured in relation to the research task. The use of the method of analysis is mostly consistent. There are deficiencies in the acquisition, adequacy, or relevance of the material collected by the student. | The methodological choices are appropriate in relation to the research task and are justified. The use of the method of analysis is appropriate. The material collected by the student is sufficient and well suited to answering the research task. | The methodological choices are logically justified in relation to the research task. The use of the method of analysis is appropriate and well justified. The material collected by the student is of high quality and enables in-depth analysis. | The methodological choices are logically and commendably justified in relation to the research task. The use of the method of analysis is appropriate, excellently justified, and professionally applied. The material collected by the student is insightfully gathered and excellently suited to the purpose of the research. |
| 4 Results and their analysis This criterion assesses the adequacy, appropriateness, and technical execution of reporting the results, as well as their relevance to the theoretical framework and the research task | The presentation of research results is unclear and illogical. The connection between the results and the theoretical framework, as well as the response to the research task and its questions or problems, is insufficient. | The research results are presented appropriately. The connection between the results and the theoretical framework, and the response to the research task and its questions or problems, remains superficial. | The research results are presented logically and illustrated appropriately. The results are connected to the theoretical framework and respond to the research task and its questions or problems. | The research results are presented precisely and illustrated successfully. The results are logically related to the theoretical framework and respond accurately to the research task and its questions or problems. | The presentation of research results is precise, diverse, and skillfully illustrated using the data. The results are expertly connected to the theoretical framework and respond accurately and convincingly to the research task and its questions or problems. |
| 5 Conclusions and reflection This criterion assesses the argumentation and coherence of the conclusions and reflections drawn from the results, as well as their connection to the theoretical framework and findings. It also evaluates the reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of the thesis and its reliability. | The conclusions are presented in a fragmented and incomplete manner. Argumentation is weak. The reflection of research results in relation to the theoretical framework and previous research is minimal. Reflection on the research process and the reliability of the thesis is weak or absent. | The conclusions are presented somewhat coherently, but argumentation is insufficient. The research results are reflected in a fragmented manner in relation to the theoretical framework and previous research. The research process and the reliability of the thesis are reflected upon superficially. | The conclusions are presented coherently and with appropriate argumentation. The research results are appropriately reflected in relation to the theoretical framework and previous research. The research process and the reliability of the thesis are appropriately reflected upon. | The conclusions are presented coherently and with well-developed argumentation. The research results are successfully reflected in relation to the theoretical framework and previous research. The research process and the reliability of the thesis are reflected upon in a diverse and critical manner. | The conclusions are presented insightfully and with skillful argumentation. The research results are commendably reflected in relation to the theoretical framework and previous research. The research process, reliability, and applicability of the thesis are reflected upon in a diverse, professional, and critical manner. |
| 6 Presentation This criterion assesses the language and fluency of the text, as well as adherence to academic conventions within the discipline. | The language contains numerous errors. There are clear deficiencies and inconsistencies in citations and the reference list. The careless structure of the text hinders comprehension. The text is formulated contrary to academic conventions. The structure of the thesis does not fully comply with academic standards. | The language contains errors. There are minor deficiencies and inconsistencies in citations and the reference list. The text is at times carelessly structured and partly formulated contrary to academic conventions. The structure of the thesis mostly complies with academic standards. | The language is mostly good. Citations and the reference list follow academic conventions and are nearly error-free. The text is well-structured and adheres to academic conventions. The structure of the thesis complies with academic standards. | The language is good. Citations and the reference list follow academic conventions and are error-free. The text is well-structured, precise, and adheres to academic conventions. The structure of the thesis complies with academic standards. | The language is excellent. Citations and the reference list are error-free and precisely follow academic conventions. The text is excellently structured, precise, and convincing, and adheres to academic conventions. The structure of the thesis excellently complies with academic standards. |
7 Ethical principles
The research must be ethically sound in all respects. The planning, implementation, and reporting of the research must adhere to the ethical principles of research.