graduation thesis assessment and marking assessment aspects regarding approval of - assignment -plan...

GRADUATION THESIS ASSESSMENT AND MARKING

Assessment aspects regarding approval of

- Assignment

- Plan of Approach

- Paper (graduation thesis)


Assessment and approval of the assignment

Does the assignor (company, organization, authority, etc) provide services and / or products that are related to the field of study?

Does the assignment demand integrative thinking and acting (2 domains)?

Is the assignment related to a topical and realistic requirement / need?

Is the assignment sufficiently complex – the assignment should lead to improvement and/or innovation; new knowledge.


Assessment and approval of the assignment

Is the asssignment related to the student’s personal development plan?

Can the asssignment be rounded off within the set frame of time?

Is the assignment related to a strategic component that the assignor will benefit from?

DDs covered??


Assessment and approval of the Plan of Approach



Lay-out: title (+ subtitle if nec.) ;

Names, tel numbers, etc of everybody involved

Problem description and problem definition

Main question and sub-questions

Research borders

Strategic component



Research methods – account for methods that will be used to gather and assess data

- Quantative method (in desk and field research)

- Qualitative method (in desk and field research)

- Research must be related to cause and solution, and must be practical and empirical.


Assessment and approval and approval of the

Plan of Approach

Activities and products

risks that may jeopardize the research and its outcome


Assessment and approval of the Graduation Thesis

ASPECTS OF ASSESSMENT

- Lay out and format management review, explanation of abbr., no whites or blanks, relevant pictures and graphs, etc

Language Preferred language is English (use Dutch only if requested by principal). No spelling mistakes! Keep it simple! Dunglish! Paper should be a “reader’s report”, not a “writers report”.

- 30 – 40 pages Conciseness (refer to theories and publications -- reference page) or: “According to …….”

“This research has proven that ….”“He thinks/says/claims ….”“It has been indicated that …”

THESIS ASSESSMENT AND MARKING

Do not use “I” or “We” or “You” in a

report.

Do not use “I” or “We” or “You” in a

report.

Do not insert personal “emotions”, such as

“This was a very difficult task”, or

“We had to work very hard”.

Do not insert personal “emotions”, such as

“This was a very difficult task”, or

“We had to work very hard”.

Volgens de geïnterviewde directeur van KMR heeft de haven een oud en versleten imago, waardoor jongeren niet meer voor een beroep in haven kiezen. Rotterdam heeft volgens deze directeur wel genoeg jongeren, maar deze jongeren kennen de weg naar de haven nog niet. Andersom hebben de werkgevers de jeugd ook niet gevonden. De betreffende directeur vindt dat de Rotterdamse arbeidsmarkt sprake is van mismatch. De vraag binnen de haven is volgens deze directeur heel erg groot en deze vraag kan nu al niet gevuld worden door de mensen die uit het onderwijs doorstromen.Het is volgens de respondent daarom van belang om binnen het netwerk de activiteiten te stroomlijnen; door coördinatie van activiteiten kunnen bedrijven een beter resultaat halen.Zo hebben volgens de betreffende directeur alle betrokken partijen een eigen rol binnen hetnetwerk, maar omdat de bedrijven uiteindelijk met het probleem van de mismatch te maken gaankrijgen, zijn zij de belangrijkste actor. De directeur geeft aan dat alle betrokken partijen (3 O’s)Moeten samenwerken om de problematiek omtrent de mismatch op de arbeidsmarkt aan te pakken.

REFERENCES(Voorbeeld van verwijzend schrijven)


RESEARCH

Research was set up as follows:

- Problem description- Problem definition- Main question and sub questions- Research borders- Methodology in desk and field research (quantitative / qualitative / regulative)

GENERAL DEMANDSTHESIS ASSESSMENT AND MARKING

Research has been related to the following aspects:

- Practicality (as opposed to theoretical research)- Causality (what is the cause of the problem;

what is the solution)- Empirical approach (conclusions based on experience)- Relevance (usefulness)- Integration (different domains)- Strategy- Actuality - Improvement (knowledge-wise and managerial)- Continuity -- innovation


Problem description and definition

Research was aimed at solving a problem, and has led from an existing situation to a desired new situation. The outcome is innovative and creative; existing knowledge has been improved (new knowledge).

The problem description has led to the problem definition, which has led to a diagnosis of the actual cause(s) of the problem, which has led to the description of the final goal of the research, which has led to the implementation of solutions found, which has been properly evaluated.

ASPECTS OF ASSESSMENT ON CONTENTS

- Analyses, explanations, descriptions, cause(s), consequence(s), advantages, disadvantages, application(s), solutions, conclusion(s), recommendations (all in a strategic setting)

- CRITICAL ATTITUDE! question, disproving, verifications and falsifications of theories, results of other researches, statements and conclusions. Evaluation and critical reflection.

- Fraud Illegally acquired data, material, pieces of text, etc. is considered as fraud! This will lead to a rejection of the paper. Final reports will all be checked by anti-fraud software (EPHORUS)


“The flexibility and efficiency are the main advantages of the dual

fuel technology”.

“The flexibility and efficiency are the main advantages of the dual

fuel technology”.

“By using high viscous lubricants the

maintenance interval can be reduced considerably”.

“By using high viscous lubricants the

maintenance interval can be reduced considerably”.

“Low speed sailing reduces the amount of toxic waste into the environment and increases fuel

effectiveness”.

“Low speed sailing reduces the amount of toxic waste into the environment and increases fuel

effectiveness”.

Examples of unquestioned statements and conclusions from recent papers.


The following should be considered when assessing and marking a paper:

1 – has it been proven that sufficient theoretical knowledge about the topic is present; 2 – has it been proven that empirical knowledge about the topic is present; (by empirical knowledge is understood the knowledge that has been gained from experience). Assessment: 1 + 2 = 50% score (=5).

Empirical knowledge:“With hindsight, after all that was investigated, we have learned that ……”.

Empirical knowledge:“With hindsight, after all that was investigated, we have learned that ……”.


A higher score follows when analytical aspects are evident in the report, with critical views and reflections showing that data and findings have not been taken for granted.

The more you criticize, question or disprove, with a solid scientific basis, the higher the score.


An even higher score will be awarded when creativity and innovation are clearly present in the paper.


- No problem description and definition (note!!: a definition is not a question!)- No causality (you must find out what the cause of the problem is in order to find a solution!)- Report has been written for the writer (it should be written for the reader)- Models (e.g. SWOT, GAP, MAROF, STEP, 3Ps, PEST, etc) should be related to the solution to the problem!!- Only one domain- Strategic component missing- No references- No critical attitude and approach; you must verify and falsify! - Irrelevance- Language! (spelling, grammar (Dunglish), idioms, etc.)- Thesis defence: unexpected headwinds.

WHEN THINGS GO WRONG!:

WAT IS PROBLEEMDEFINITIE

WAT IS DE HOOFDVRAAG (RELATIE MET PROB DEF)

WAT ZIJN DEELVRAGEN (RELATIE MET PROB DEF EN HOOFDVRAAG)

WELKE DOMEINEN ZIJN BEHANDELDWELKE ONDERZOEKSMETHODEN

STRATEGISCHE COMPONENT (CONTINUATIEF / INNOVATIEF)

MODELLEN (SWOT/GAP/etc.): RELATIE MET PROBLEM DEFINITION?COMPLEXITEIT VAN DE CONTEXT: WIE ZIJN STAKEHOLDERS, PORIORITEIT BIJ OPDRACHTGEVER, TAAL – CULTUUR BARRIERES ASPECTEN MBT VERBETEREN, VERNIEUWEN VAN HET BEROEP MATE VAN ZELFSTANDIGHEID BIJ BEREIKEN VAN RESULTAAT

MIJN STANDAARDVRAGEN BIJ AFSTUDEREN:

BEOORDELING: ALGEMEEN (MBT BEIDE STUDENTEN)

IS HET ONDERZOEK CAUSAAL (WAT IS DE OORZAAK VAN EEN PROBLEEM, ER WORDT GEPOOGD EEN OPLOSSING TE VINDEN ), OF IS HET EEN BESCHRIJVEND ONDERZOEK (INFO VERZAMELING)

WORDT ER NIEUWE KENNIS ONTWIKKELD

IS DE BRONVERMELDING CORRECTWORDT ER GEBRUIK GEMAAKT VAN “VERWIJZEND SCHRIJVEN”.(VERSLAG DIENT BEKNOPT TE ZIJN – VERWIJZINGEN NAAR ANDERE AUTEURS DIENEN AANWEZIG TE ZIJN)

GAAT DE SCHRIJVEN “DISCUSSIEREND” TE WERK. (WORDEN ER VRAAGTEKENS GEZET, GAAT MEN KRITISCH TE WERK)

ZIJN ALLE RELEVANTE GEGEVENS AANWEZIG (50% SCORE)WORDT ER GEFALSIFISEERD? (60 – 70 % SCORE)


BEOORDELING: ALGEMEEN (MBT BEIDE STUDENTEN)

WORDT ER CREATIEF TE WERK GEGAAN (GEBRUIK VAN INZICHTEN UIT VERSCHILLENDE VAKGEBIEDEN

WORDEN BESTAANDE INZICHTEN AANGEPAST

WORDEN ER NIEUWE INZICHTEN BEDACHT (80 90 % SCORE)

PRIMAIRE GEGEVENS: AUTEUR VERZAMELT ZELF GEGEVENSSECUNDAIRE GEGEVENS: AUTEUR MAAKT GEBRUIK VAN BESTAANDE GEGEVENS


MBT INDIVIDUELE STUDENT

WAT IS JOUW SPECIFIEKE INBRENG GEWEEST

BEN JE TEVREDEN MET HET RESULTAAT? VERKLAAR

WAAR KON HET BETER (VERKLAAR)

IS HET ONDERZOEK BRUIKBAAR? VERKLAAR

TAAKVERDELING


graduation thesis assessment and marking assessment aspects regarding approval of - assignment -plan...

Documents