Thesis grading criteria: what your examiner looks for
Every institution has its own grading rubric, and your guidelines always take precedence. In substance, though, the rubrics mostly ask about the same five things. Check your thesis against them yourself before someone else does.
1. Conceptual framework: question, common thread, theory
The foundation. If it is crooked, the best empirical work does not help, because it answers a question nobody asked.
- Can you state your research question in one sentence, and is it narrow enough to answer within your scope?
- Does every chapter visibly lead towards answering that question (the common thread)?
- Does your theory chapter supply the concepts you actually use in your empirical part, rather than a textbook overview?
- Does your conclusion answer exactly the question from your introduction?
Based on: Kornmeier (2024), Wissenschaftlich schreiben leicht gemacht · Karmasin & Ribing (2024), Die Gestaltung wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten
2. Methodology & integrity
This is where most theses lose points, because a method is described but not justified.
- Do you justify why this method fits your question, and why an obvious alternative does not?
- Is the selection of your sample or interviewees documented in a way others can follow?
- Could someone else retrace your analysis step by step?
- Do you name the limits of your approach yourself, before the examiner does?
Based on: Döring (2023), Forschungsmethoden und Evaluation · Helfferich (2022), Leitfadeninterviews · ÖAWI guidelines for good scientific practice
3. Structure & formatting
The usual structure is introduction, theory, methodology, empirical part, discussion, conclusion. Deviations are allowed if you justify them. The formal requirements (font, margins, citation style) are set by your guidelines alone: there is no single standard for all institutions.
- Are the chapters proportionate to their weight, or is the theory twice as long as the empirical part?
- Do you cleanly separate results (what you found) from discussion (what it means)?
- Do you meet the formal requirements of your guidelines, not those of a template from the internet?
Based on: Karmasin & Ribing (2024), Die Gestaltung wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten
4. Academic style
Academic means precise and supported, not complicated. The passive voice that is common in German academic writing is not a mistake.
- Is every claim that is not your own supported by a source?
- Do you avoid unsupported value judgements (“extremely important”, “as is well known”)?
- Do you guide your readers through the text, for example with transitions that say what the next chapter is for?
Based on: Esselborn-Krumbiegel (2022), Richtig wissenschaftlich schreiben · Hyland (2005), Metadiscourse
5. Practical relevance (FH) or research contribution (university)
Universities of applied sciences (FH) are committed to practice-oriented education, so the examiner report there asks what practitioners can do with your results. At universities, that question is replaced by the research gap and your scholarly contribution.
- FH: Do you derive concrete, actionable recommendations from your results?
- University: Do you name the research gap explicitly and say what your thesis contributes to closing it?
Based on: AQ Austria, FH Accreditation Regulation 2024 · Karmasin & Ribing, Die Gestaltung wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten
And the sources?
Working with sources feeds into all five pillars: a theory without literature does not hold, a method without methodological literature is not justified. How to check your citation style and bibliography is in the tutorial on citations.