Information, instructions, and advice

About degree projects, and your expected learning outcomes

Your degree project is conducted under supervision. It can be entirely literature-based or include your own field studies or laboratory work. If you are doing a 60-credit thesis, the thesis project should be part of a larger research project led by your supervisor.

Degree project on Master's level, 30 or 60 credits

You can choose to do a 30 or 60 credits Master's thesis. Find out what you can or should prepare before starting your degree project.

1. Usually, you will come in contact with potential supervisors during the programme courses. Therefore, during your studies, take time to think about which topics and which supervisors seem suitable for you.
2. Apply to the course in good time! When the time for writing your thesis approaches, apply to the course, even if you do not know if, when, or how you will write your thesis. Last date to apply is 15 April for studies during the autumn semester and 15 October for the spring semester. Please note! International students apply through universityadmissions.se and have to apply earlier.
3. The department's web pages are a source of information, where you can find descriptions of research areas and potential supervisors.
4. Once you have found a person (supervisor) and a topic that seems interesting, contact that person.
5. You may, of course, have ideas of your own that you can present to a potential supervisor. Normally, you will develop these ideas together with the supervisor.
6. When you contact a potential supervisor, the supervisor may say no or offer you another project. If this happens, you can try with other potential supervisors.
7. A degree project of 30 credits can be done in an area of your own choice that fits within the framework of the main field of studies that you want to graduate in.
8. If you want to do a degree project of 60 credits, it should be part of a larger project that your supervisor is running.
9. If you have problems finding a suitable project and supervisor after having followed the points above, please contact the course coordinator for further help.
10. Once you have found a project and a supervisor, you will, together with the supervisor, write a project plan (including a detailed, weekly time schedule) of about two A4 pages in length.
11. The timetable should include 20 weeks for a 30-credit thesis, and 40 weeks for a 60-credit thesis.
12. It is important to formulate one or more testable hypotheses in the project plan. A hypothesis is a statement that can be answered with “yes” or “no” by using statistical tests.
13. Send your project plan to the course coordinator to get it approved, together with your completed form ‘Register template’ which you can find further down on this page.
14. Once your project plan has been approved, you will be registered and can start your degree project.

Good luck!

After completing the course, you should be able to plan, execute, and document an independent project, as well as present the results both in writing and orally. The thesis concludes with you presenting your work, followed by a thesis defence and questions from the audience.

Instructions and advice for authors

Use the instructions below to write your memos, take-home exam, lab reports, literature reviews, theses, or similar assignments in courses within EMG.

Part 1: Structure and content
Part II: Format
Part III: References

Tips for oral presentation and thesis defence

Instructions for presenting at thesis seminars 

You must present your completed degree project at a seminar – a thesis defence. The date of the seminar is stated on the schedule for the thesis course you are taking. Below is a general description of how the seminar is conducted.

1. The examiner opens the seminar by introducing the respondent (the author of the report, that is you, in this case), the peer reviewer, and the title of the thesis to be presented.
2. The respondent presents their work for a minimum of 15 and a maximum of 20 minutes.
   At the beginning of the presentation, any changes you intend to make to the report, such as additions, deletions, and corrections of significant nature, are addressed. The presentation then follows, highlighting the purpose, methodology, the most significant results, and conclusions. This can be done using various types of visual aids. It is crucial to thoroughly explain the methodology used. It is also recommended to conclude with a few words on how the work could be continued.
3. After the presentation, the peer reviewer has a minimum of 10 and a maximum of 15 minutes to present their views on the report. 
   The peer reviewer should discuss the content, method, results, and conclusions of the thesis with the author, encouraging the author to defend their work in areas perceived as weak or unjustified, clarify the thesis's merits, and explain aspects that are difficult to understand from the report and presentation. A central part of this is the logical precision of the report, that is, how the purpose, method, results, discussion, and conclusions are related to each other, and the communicative precision, that is, whether the presentation is clear and coherent and uses appropriate illustrations.
   
   The peer reviewer should not extensively comment on details such as typos or spelling errors during the oral opposition. Errors of this type should be given to the respondent after the seminar, preferably in written format. If typos affect the communicative precision, they should be pointed out during the oral opposition.
   
   It is important that the peer reviewer is constructive in their criticism and does not forget to highlight positive aspects. Remember that the thesis defence is very important for the author and can give both the author and the written work an additional boost.
   
   
4. After the peer reviewer has finished, other seminar participants have the opportunity to ask questions and express thoughts about the report being presented. This is also an opportunity to discuss more general questions and problems related to the subject area being presented.
5. After the seminar, you should revise your work based on the feedback from the peer reviewer, seminar participants, and examiner. This does not mean that you must follow the criticism from the peer reviewer and seminar participants. The criticism is to be considered as feedback that you should carefully consider and evaluate. However, please note that the examiner may require corrections or additions that must be made for the work to be approved.
6. A revised version should be submitted no later than two weeks after the seminar.

When you will be the peer reviewer 

Here are some tips on how to take your review further and start thinking critically:

• Remember that the criticism you give should be constructive.
• Justify your opinions – saying it is good or bad does not mean giving constructive criticism. Why is it good or bad?
• Provide suggestions for improvement – even well-written works can be improved!
• Focus on the whole rather than details such as typos (unless the typos make the text difficult to read or understand).
• During an oral thesis: ask questions and let the respondent explain and justify their reasoning, listen to the answers, and ask follow-up questions before presenting your suggestions for improvement.

Checklist of things you can consider when reading the work you are going to provide feedback on:

1. Is the title relevant and does it match the content of the work?
2. Is the problem statement (purpose and questions) clearly formulated?
3. Does the introduction generate interest and an understanding of the problem?
4. Is the content based on a scientific foundation?
5. Is there a logical order in the work, that is, is there a coherent and logical progression through the work, or is it structured in a way that confuses the reader?
6. Is the chosen method suitable for this type of questions?
7. How well has the author presented and justified their method?
8. Are the central results clear?
9. Are the results directed towards the questions, do they help to answer the questions?
10. Are any figures or tables clear and easy to understand, and do the figure or table explanations help to understand how the figure or table should be interpreted?
11. Are the results placed in a larger context, for example, by referring to established theories or previous knowledge in the field?
12. Are any conclusions drawn from the results?
13. Are the questions answered in the discussion?
14. How does the text flow? Is it easy or difficult to read, and easy or difficult to understand what the author means, etc.?
15. Are the references correctly written and the citations correctly placed?

Note that points 6 and 7 may primarily apply to works where the method has a more central role than in literature studies.

Forms 

Register template and project plan
Checklist for submission of written work