evaluation master-thesis faculty of archaeology, leiden ... · thesis evaluation research master...
TRANSCRIPT
Excie, 9-9-2014, Evaluation Research Master Thesis
Evaluation Research Master Thesis Faculty of Archaeology, Leiden University
Name and student number
Title of the thesis
Amount of ects 35 ec
Date of submission first version
Date of submission final version
Date of evaluation
Supervisor
Second reader
Requirements of thesis tutorial and presentation fulfilled?
Yes / No
Embargo (thesis repository) Yes / Yes until… / Public (agreed by student and supervisor)
Please, note that if the thesis does not match the criteria below, it will be returned!!
A: Technical form of the thesis
Are the references correct? Is the bibliography correct and complete? Norm is the faculty standard or an internationally authoritative scientific journal.
Is the general layout correct and clear? Title page, contents, correct use of notes, appendixes. Norm is the faculty standard or an internationally authoritative scientific journal.
Are figures and tables of good quality? Are the captions correct and clear?
Is the thesis written in an academic style; well formulated, with a clear line of argumentation, and to standards of publication in international scientific journals?
B: Organisation of the research
Is the problem definition clear and well founded in the scientific literature? Are the research questions clearly formulated?
Are the approach and methods explained and well-founded?
Is the problem orientation, approach and/or methodology innovative or original?
C: Data analysis
Is the description of the data clear and in line with standards of the research field?
Are the data analysed in depth and in a critical manner? Has the student demonstrated the ability to deal with complex and incomplete data?
Does the analysis and interpretation demonstrate profound and in-depth knowledge of the research field?
Has the student demonstrated the analytical competence to process new data from fieldwork and/or laboratory work?
Has the student demonstrated the ability to
Excie, 9-9-2014, Evaluation Research Master Thesis
transcend the own discipline, applying methods and theories in and from new and multidisciplinary context?
Have the implications of the own research been discussed in terms of ethical and/or social aspects, and from the perspective of current developments in international archaeology?
D: Synthesis / conclusions
Are the conclusions logically consistent, well-supported by the data presented, and discussed in terms of the problem orientation?
Does the student demonstrate the ability to apply methods and theories from and in new and multidisciplinary contexts?
Does the student discuss the implications of the research in terms of current developments in archaeology (theoretical, methodical and/or social)?
Does the research make a real contribution to knowledge and conceptualization in the discipline?
E: Level of independency
Did the student demonstrate the ability to plan, organise and execute the research autonomously (including e.g. fieldwork or laboratory work)?
Did the student execute the research within reasonable time limits?
Did the student demonstrate the ability to work in a research team and within academic networks?
E: Evaluation
Summary of the evaluation and conclusions (=justification of the mark given)
Benchmark = 7, that is: “this thesis is of good quality, more than basic in all aspects; the potential for original research is present, but has not been fully exploited” (See Appendix).
Marks (the total is not the mean of the two consistent parts)
Form: Content:
Total:
Date assessment Signature supervisor
Excie, 9-9-2014, Evaluation Research Master Thesis
Date approval 2nd reader Signature 2nd reader
Date approval examination committee Signature examination committee
Excie, 9-9-2014, Evaluation Research Master Thesis
Excie, 9-9-2014, Evaluation Research Master Thesis
Excie, 9-9-2014, Evaluation Research Master Thesis