Description of grades for master thesis

Extended description of grades for master's thesis in

  • Mathematics, Natural Sciences and Technology
  • Master programs (2 years) at Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
  • Natural Science with Teacher Education

For other disciplines, please go to Grading Scale

Norsk versjon: Karakterbeskrivelse for masteroppgaver

Looking for something else? Topic page about exam | Pages labeled with grades  | General description of grades

Description of grades

These descriptions must naturally be adjusted to the scope of the master’s thesis in terms of the number of credits.

 
Symbol Level Description
 A  Excellent
  • Excellent work which is outstanding.
  • The candidate has very good insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field and has demonstrated scientific knowledge at a very high level. The objectives of the thesis are well defined and easy to understand.
  • The candidate is able to select and apply relevant scientific methods convincingly, has all the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct  advanced experiments or computations and works very independently in cooperation with a supervisor.
  • The thesis is very thorough and contains new knowledge and is an  innovative contribution. The analysis and discussion have an extremely good scientific foundation and justification and are clearly relevant to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates extremely good critical reflection and distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others.
  • The form, structure and language in the thesis are at an extremely high level.
 B Very good
  • Very good work that is clearly distinguishable.
  • The candidate has very good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are well defined and easy to understand.
  • The candidate is able to select and apply relevant scientific methods soundly, has almost all the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct experiments or computations very well and works independently in cooperation with a supervisor.
  • The thesis is thorough and contains some new knowledge and some innovative contributions. The analysis and discussion have a very good scientific foundation and justification and are clearly relevant to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates very good critical reflection and distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others.
  • The form, structure and language in the thesis are at a very high level.
 C  Good
  • A good piece of work.
  • The candidate has good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are generally well defined, but may contain some unclear formulations.
  • The candidate uses the relevant scientific methods satisfactorily, has most of the technical skills required for the work, can plan and conduct experiments or computations well.
  • The thesis is considered good with elements that are creative. The analysis and discussion have a good scientific foundation and justification and are relevant to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates good critical reflection and usually distinguishes clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others.
  • The form, structure and language in the thesis are at a good level.
 D  Satisfactory
  • A clearly acceptable piece of work.
  • The candidate has quite good scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are defined, but contain some inexact formulations.
  • The candidate is generally able to apply relevant scientific methods, has the main technical skills required for the work, and can plan and conduct experiments or computations without help. The candidate works independently to some extent, but needs quite close supervision to achieve satisfactory scientific progress.
  • The thesis is considered satisfactory. The analysis and discussion have a satisfactory scientific foundation and justification, and are relevant to the topic that is addressed, but there is room for improvement. The candidate demonstrates his/her ability for critical reflection, but has problems
  • distinguishing clearly between his/her contributions and the contributions from others.
  • The form, structure and language in the thesis are at an acceptable level.
 E  Sufficient
  • A piece of work that is acceptable and satisfies the minimum criteria.
  • The candidate has sufficient scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are described, but are vague and imprecise.
  • The candidate is able to apply some relevant scientific methods, has a minimum of technical skills required for the work, and can plan and conduct experiments or computations generally without help but achieves limited scientific progress unless there is close supervision.
  • The thesis is considered limited and somewhat fragmented. The analysis and discussion have an adequate scientific foundation and justification, but ought to have had a better relevance to the topic that is addressed. The candidate demonstrates sufficient critical reflection, but has problems distinguishing between his/her contributions and the contributions from others.
  • The thesis is generally acceptable, but has definite shortcomings with respect to form, structure and language.
 F  Fail
  • A piece of work that does not satisfy the minimum requirements.
  • The candidate does not have sufficient scientific knowledge and insight into the scientific theory and methods in his/her field. The objectives of the thesis are unclearly defined or lacking.
  • The candidate demonstrates a lack of competence in the use of scientific methods, does not have the required technical skills and achieves very limited scientific progress, even with close supervision.
  • The thesis is considered very limited and fragmented. The analysis and discussion do not have an adequate scientific foundation and justification, and are only partly relevant to the topic that is addressed. The candidate does not demonstrate the necessary critical reflection, and does not distinguish between his/her contributions and the contributions from others.
  • The thesis has major shortcomings with respect to form, structure, and language.

 

0 Vedlegg
18569 Visninger
Gjennomsnitt (0 Stemmer)