Task

You need to apply what you have learned and prepare a convincing introduction for your master’s thesis.

During the course of the semester, you will go through the key stages of academic writing. These include finding a topic, writing a draft of the introduction to your master’s thesis, gathering feedback, revising your introduction and reflecting on the process.

You need to complete several deliverables as part of this process. These will be marked on an individual basis.

Deliverables

The portfolio exams consist of the following components:

The initial version of the introduction to your master thesis (template)
A round-table discussion (bonus points)
The reflection and revision of your introduction (template)

For dates and deadlines, please see the schedule

Grading

The deliverables are graded individually and determine the grade with the following weights:

20 points for the initial version of the introduction,
70 points for the reflection and revision
Bonus points for your contributions to the round-table discussions¹

Note: Compliance with formal requirements (see templates) and good scientific practice are critical pass criteria for all parts, means that in case of non-compliance the exam is automatically failed (e.g., plagiarism, even light forms).

Introduction

An introduction that fulfills expectations has the following characteristics

The introduction implements the structure discussed in class.
The introduction addresses a clear problem that is significant and interesting.
The research question (or research aim) is clearly stated and justified.
The references to the current literature are clearly shown.
The potential contributions of the thesis are getting clear.
The introduction tells a conclusive story that is well aligned to the audience and testifies professionalism.
The author shows sophisticated use of a well-chosen vocabulary relevant to the topic.
The writing style, tone and word choice is appropriate and consistent.
Rules and conventions concerning technical aspects of writing are fulfilled.

Revised introduction

A revision that fulfills expectations has the following characteristics

The research problem is sharpened and contextualized with stronger relevance.
The literature is used more effectively to support the problem context and relevance.
The overall narrative and structure are smoother, with improved logical flow and organization.
The writing demonstrates a more professional tone and style.
The revisions are clearly aligned with the feedback received and the choices explained in the reflection.
The revised introduction shows a notable overall improvement in clarity, readability, and scholarly quality compared to the original submission.

Reflection

A reflection that fulfills expectations has the following characteristics

The feedback is thoroughly synthesized and analyzed
The justification of improvements is comprehensible
The tool usage is well documented and critically evaluated
The introduction has improved significantly
The learning progress is thoroughly reflected (i.e., meta-reflection)

A note on grades

It is unlikely that every student will receive a very good grade, i.e. deliver an outstanding performance - see the meaning of grades. Instead, it is to be expected that the grades will spread across the spectrum.

Grade	Meaning
`1` — very good	A truly outstanding achievement that (not only) shows no deficiencies in the criteria mentioned, but also gives both the supervisor and external assessors an excellent impression.
`2` — good	Work that exceeds the average requirements/performance and is easily recognizable and presentable to the outside world as a “good performance”.
Note	2.5 is the average of passed assessments, i.e., an “average performance”
`3` — satisfactory	A performance that achieves the desired goal “to a satisfactory extent”; however, deficiencies can be identified here and there.
`4` — sufficient	A performance that “still adequately satisfies” the requirements, but deviates from the expectations placed on it in several ways.
`5` — not sufficient	A performance that does not meet several of the criteria mentioned.

Literature

Footnotes

The bonus points are assigned based on your engagement in the discussions (particularly the quality of your feedback). These can improve your performance by up to one grade increments (up to .7).↩︎