guidelines for preparing an msc-thesis -...

Guidelines for preparing an MSc-thesis at the Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group Wageningen University Table of contents

1. Preface 2 2. Introduction 2

2.1. MSc-thesis: the crown of higher academic education 2 2.2. What is a “scientific” masterpiece? 3 2.3. Basic requirements and necessary skills 4 2.4. Supervision 5

3. Steps in the MSc-thesis preparation 6 3.1. Selection of topic and supervisor 6 3.2. Preparation of research proposal 7 3.3. Go- or No-go decision 10 3.4. Carrying out the research 11 3.5. Giving a work-in-progress colloquium 11 3.6. Writing the thesis report 12 3.7. Final examination talk 13 3.8. Giving a final presentation 14

4. Administrative issues and grading 15 4.1. MSc-thesis contract 15 4.2. Costs associated with carrying out the MSc research 15 4.3. Printing costs of thesis 15 4.4. Thesis evaluation form 15 4.5. Grading 16 4.6. Completing the administrative requirements 16 4.7. Copyright 17

5. Literature and other relevant information sources 18 5.1. Literature at FNP-group 18 5.2. Introduction into social science 18 5.3. Methodology in social science 19

6. Annexes 6.1. Annex A Checklist of actions and responsibilities 20 6.2. Annex B Thesis contract form 21 6.3. Annex C: Work-in-progress colloquium 26 6.4. Annex D: FNP thesis path schedule 29 6.5. Annex E: Thesis evaluation sheet 30

Version January 2012

WU Forest and Nature Conservation Policy

MSc-thesis guidelines

WU Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group of 31

1 Preface These guidelines have been written for students who plan to carry out a MSc thesis research at the Forest and Nature Conservation Policy Group. As will hopefully become clear in the following text: these guidelines do not intend to replace the many excellent textbooks providing an introduction into science or the writing of research proposals. Rather they should serve the student as an orientation during her or his scientific training period with the Forest and Na-ture Conservation Policy (FNP) Group at Wageningen University to take the best out of this period for her or his further career.

2 Introduction

2.1 MSc-thesis: the crown of higher academic education

Many people see the writing of an MSc-thesis as the coronation of higher ac-ademic education. And indeed, the importance of the thesis work is also re-flected by the prominent role it takes within the whole MSc-programme. After completing introductory and specific courses in the educational program the MSc-thesis offers the challenge to set up and to carry out a scientific research project in an almost fully, self-responsible manner. This challenge includes: assuring the adequate delineation and definition of the research topic, building a sound theoretical framework for orientation of the research, collecting data in a systematic and verifiable manner, as well as analyzing the data critically, presenting the results comprehensibly, drawing sound conclusions based on a comprehensive discussion of the

results, and potentially showing the possible contribution of the research to the process of theory

building as well as policy advice. A soccer player and his/her coach A great deal of independence is expected from the student in preparing the MSc-thesis. The role of the supervisor is limited mainly to guide the learning process and less to provide specific knowledge. In this respect the relation between the student and the supervisor can be compared to those of a soc-cer player and his coach: it is the player who scores, but is the coach who regularly provides the player with hints and tactics. In contrast to soccer, not only the goals but also the training progress itself is central part of the game. The grading of the MSc thesis at the end is thus not a characterization of the student's qualities as a scientist, but rather a feedback on his or her scientific training progress and the quality of the thesis report. Given the intensive training process it is important that the expectations of both parties involved, the student as well as the supervisor, are made clear from the beginning, finally resulting in unambiguous agreements. In order to avoid disappointments on both sides these agreements are laid down in writ-ten form in the so-called ‘thesis contract’ at the very beginning of the training process (see appendix; copies of the thesis contract can be downloaded at http://www.fnp.wur.nl/UK/Education/Education_Master+thesis). Copies of the thesis contract go to the student and the responsible study coordinator, the original remains with the administration of the responsible chair group (see chapter “administrative issues”).

http://www.fnp.wur.nl/UK/Education/Education_Master+thesis



In the following this guideline informs about the regular steps and procedures for preparing a MSc-thesis with the Forest and Nature Conservation Policy group (FNP). It takes its departure from the general information and terms of references for preparing a MSc-thesis at Wageningen University (see study handbook). Under certain conditions (e.g., carrying out research in the trop-ics, participating in larger projects) it might be necessary to come to specific arrangements departing from the regular procedures. In these cases please contact your supervisor and your study coordinator early enough for the nec-essary arrangements. The rest of this chapter deals with the basic scientific and administrative pre-conditions to start with the preparation of the MSc-thesis. In chapter 2 the dif-ferent phases in preparation of a MSc-thesis are described. Finally, chapter 3 touches on the necessary content-wise, organizational, as well as administra-tive procedures for the successful completion of the MSc-thesis.

2.2 What is a “scientific” masterpiece?

Most MSc-candidates have already some experience in carrying out re-search, e.g., in doing experiments during their practical periods. But, in work-ing on their MSc-thesis they are faced, usually for the first time, with the re-quirement that the thesis has to be “scientific work”. What this exactly means is mostly not clear from the start. Science and research A major question that is often troubling students starting with their thesis is the difference between ‘science’ and ‘research’. These terms are used some-times synonymously, sometimes complementary, or even contradictory. In general it can be argued, that science and research both aim at a deeper un-derstanding, or enlightenment, of phenomena in the real world, but that they differ in respect to the type of understanding. Research aims at empirically accessing and depicting the real world phenomena in a systematic, consistent and comprehensive manner. Research questions are therefore mainly formu-lated as “what”-, “who”-, and “how”-questions (e.g., “what conflict resolution mechanisms do forest owners prefer?”, “who is participating in collaborative management approaches?”, “how many farmers depend with their income on forest use?”). Science aims at enlightening real world phenomena through a process of theoretical reconstruction of the phenomena at stake. Scientific questions are therefore first and foremost “Why”-questions, searching for ex-planations for the empirical reality (e.g., why do people enjoy recreating in forest landscapes?). However, also within its process of theoretical recon-struction science relays to a variable degree on research. “Why”-questions are therefore supported or – in case of explorative studies – even replaced by “what”-questions (e.g., how many people are visiting forests per year?), with the intention to contribute to the process of theoretical reconstruction of the topic. In writing a PhD-thesis, as well as in all following steps in a scientific career, the theoretical reconstruction of the phenomena and the eventual develop-ment of methods and theories stand central. In contrast, the work at a MSc-thesis is characterized by the adequate application of existing methods and theories to a real world phenomenon, this is the problem at stake. Whereas MSc-thesis can be science-focused, they should have at least a sound re-search approach in order to fulfill the requirements for an MSc-thesis. In both cases scientific standards have to be followed.



Scientific standards

Independent from which understanding of science and research has been chosen, broad agreement exists on major scientific standards. Therefore the-se scientific standards also have to be applied (and to be proven) by the stu-dent in his MSc-thesis: The thesis must be theory-based. Theories in this respect can be under-

stood as sets of explanation systems for observable phenomena in the real world. The student’s departure in enlightening real world phenomena has to be taken from existing theoretical literature. The student is further-more expected to discuss and to reflect his or her findings against the ex-isting theoretical literature as well as empirical literature. Theoretical liter-ature claims to contain explanation systems for real world phenomena, where as empirical literature is characterized by its descriptive focus of cases and situations.

The thesis must be verifiable. This is only possible if a clear line of argu-mentation through the existing theoretical and empirical literature is given, and the underlying assumptions are made explicit. Ideally, also the origi-nal data should be included in the work (usually as an appendix) to allow the reader to verify the drawn conclusions. It is a matter of course that science is always at least partial subjective, as science in itself is a social activity carried out by social beings. However, this fact should never lead to the rejection of the call for scientific objectivity. Scientific objectivity thereby does not result out of a fictive unconditional assumption, but out of the clear exemplification and reflection of the conditions and assump-tions underlying the research process.

The thesis must be in principle replicable. It should (at least in principle) be possible to repeat the empirical part, thereby leading to similar results and conclusions. This is only possible if the methods for data collection and for data analysis are clearly described, and if the work process is as much as unbiased/reflective as possible.

2.3 Basic requirements and necessary skills

For the successful completion of an MSc-thesis certain knowledge levels as well as mastering certain skills are basic requirements. This means that stu-dents normally should start to work on their MSc-thesis only after they have obtained at least 20 study points within the MSc-program, with an adequate coverage of relevant courses in Forest and Nature Conservation Policy. In any case it is highly recommended to follow a course on methodological aspects of socio-empirical research before starting of the MSc-thesis work. Sound knowledge of methods and tools for data collection as well as data analysis will be assumed as basis at the beginning of the thesis work and will not be touched upon during the supervision. Furthermore, sound skills in applying modern text-, databases-, spread-sheets-, and drawing software are expected from the beginning. Special at-tention should be given to statistical data analysis packages, such as SPSS. It is in the student’s own responsibility to acquire the necessary knowledge and skills timely enough before starting with an MSc-thesis. In case these skills have to be acquired during the thesis work, extra time should be planned which, however, cannot be rewarded with extra credit points from the FNP group. It is recommendable that the student delivers upon the first meet-ing with his or her supervisor a summary of research and presentation skills



obtained so far to avoid disappointments on both sides in the course of the training period.

2.4 Supervision

As has been mentioned already, the role of the supervisor is focused mainly on guiding the learning process and lesser to providing specific knowledge on the thesis topic. Students can therefore not expect the supervisor to provide them with more than background information on the topic and some start lit-erature. Finding relevant literature, working out a good problem statement, defining objectives and research questions, and elaborating a sound concep-tual as well as methodological framework is already one of the core-issues of scientific work and has therefore to be carried out by the student as much as possible independent from the supervisor. It is an important learning experi-ence to find out that science is much more than just the “blood-and sweat”-part of data collection and analysis! Nevertheless, the supervisor will be ready to assist the students in all phases, if requested. The supervisor is the person that provides feedback at the different stages throughout the process of preparing the MSc-thesis as well as controlling the process itself, including the contractual agreements. No general rules on the frequency of supervision meetings do exist – instead the frequency depends on the individual agreements between the student and the supervisor. It is the student’s responsibility to signal the need for meetings with the supervisor timely in advance. If for any reason the student is not satisfied with his or her supervision, the examinator should be contacted directly by the student.



3 Steps in the MSc-thesis preparation

3.1 Selection of topic and supervisor

The first step in working on MSc-thesis is the selection of a topic and a super-visor. There are in principle three different ways to find a topic: Topics offered by the FNP group. The FNP group organizes each study

year an information meetings for students being interested in carrying out their thesis work within the broad field of forest and nature conservation policy. During these information meetings student can select a topic out of the up-dated list of thesis-topics on a first come-first serve basis or dis-cuss possible own suggestions. The information meeting is held around mid of January. The exact dates for the information meetings will be an-nounced on the FNP internet pages and through e-mail. The topics of-fered are originating from within the FNP group, mainly related to ongoing or planned larger research projects of the chair group that are carried out by staff, post-doc researchers and PhD students. Furthermore topics are offered in co-operation with other WU chair groups, Alterra or organiza-tions in the field of forests and nature conservation policy, such as Staatsbosbeheer, Bosschap, Natuurmonumenten, and Tropenbos. Stu-dents interested in such a topic should contact the respective supervisor.

Topics are brought up by the student himself/herself: It is possible that a student suggests a topic for thesis research him/herself. In this case the student discusses the feasibility and relevance of the topic first with a su-pervisor from the FNP group. The following supervisors should be con-tacted for theses in the field of: Economic aspects and business management, decision making and

organizational aspects of forest and nature conservation: Dr. Marjan-ke Hoogstra

Policy analysis, international policy processes on forest and nature conservation: Dr. Esther Turnhout or Dr. Ingrid Visseren-Hamakers

Community based forest and nature conservation, social forestry, ru-ral development: Dr. Wolfram Dressler

Forest and nature recreation, landscape aesthetics: Dr. Birgit Elands or Dr. Arjen Buijs.

In case the student is not certain which supervisor should be contacted as regards the suggested topic, she or he is required to discuss the topic suggestion with the FNP-thesis coordinator. The final decision to accept an MSc-thesis is in any case taken by the head of the chair group after consultation with the supervisor. A first hint on adequate topics can be derived by taking a look at earlier MSc theses carried out within the FNP group in the library.

Topics are worked out on initiative of other chair groups or research or-ganizations: The student probably prefers to work out a topic in co-operation with or on initiative of other chair groups or Alterra/LEI. The FNP group welcomes all initiatives for co-operation and is very open for interdisciplinary approaches. However, before a decision is taken to regis-ter the project as an official FNP-thesis, the student needs to find the agreement of one of the FNP supervisors or the FNP-thesis coordinator.



In some cases it might be helpful to combine the MSc-thesis work with a prac-tical period. This holds particularly true for all MSc-research, which is done outside the Netherlands. In case the MSc-research is carried out abroad, ad-equate scientific supervision must be guaranteed in the respective country (in most cases by selecting a second supervisor from a local university) or within the respective organization. Possibilities to carry out an MSc-thesis abroad in different European countries do also exist within the LLP-Erasmus program (see: http://www.wageningenuniversity.nl/UK/informationfor/Current+students/Study+Abroad+for+WU+students/) All arrangements must be settled by the student in time before the start of the thesis work, and must be agreed upon by the supervisor at the Forest and Nature Conservation Policy group.

NOTE: It is in principle possible to start an MSc-thesis any time of the year. However it is recommended to start a thesis after completion of the MSc courses at the end of the first year of MSc study (around June) or the beginning of the second year of MSc study (September). It is ob-ligatory that before starting the thesis work, a student has followed the research methodology course and a MSc course dealing with the topic of research.

3.2 Preparation of a research proposal

After the selection of a topic the next step in the thesis work is the preparation of a consistent and comprehensive research proposal. The thesis proposal is a product of the process of preparatory research around the theme that will be developed. Students must become familiar with the theoretical problems, the historical context and the empirical specificities of the theme to be able to define, in precise terms, what it is that will be studied and how it will be stud-ied. As many researchers have shown, “80% of the problem of research is to correctly define the scientific questions.” In other words, it is necessary to un-derstand and incorporate existing social-scientific knowledge, departing from the concrete problem, to be able to advance scientific knowledge. Given its importance, this step might very well require about 20 percent of the total the-sis preparation time. The research proposal consists out of the following parts: Problem statement: giving the motivation for the selection of the topic

and a clear delineation of the problem field, finally resulting in a concise problem statement. If done in a sound way, this implicitly and explicitly reflects the social and scientific relevance of the selected research topic. To be able to develop a clear problem statement, a preliminary investiga-tion must be carried out to establish a sufficiently profound knowledge base to pose the concrete problems that will be researched. This includes a review of the theoretical and empirical literature, which is most relevant to the topic, which also ensures that the topic has not already been ex-hausted by other researchers.

Research objective(s) and research questions: stating clearly the sci-

entific objectives of the research. Given the fact that scientific research aims at the process of theoretical reconstruction of the topic at stake (in the sense of providing explanation systems), scientific objectives are very often expressed with terms like ‘to enlighten’, 'to understand’, ‘to explore’, 'to determine’, ‘to highlight’, ‘to verify’ etc. It is important that the objec-tives of the research (1) are strictly related to the research topic, that is, that they do not change the focus by introducing elements not already

http://www.wageningenuniversity.nl/UK/informationfor/Current+students/Study+Abroad+for+WU+students/

http://www.wageningenuniversity.nl/UK/informationfor/Current+students/Study+Abroad+for+WU+students/



implicit in the topic, and (2) that they exhaust the topic completely, that is, they do not leave out any object or relation already posited.

The research objectives are on the one hand determined by the chal-lenge to deepen theoretical knowledge, analytical capacities and tech-niques and methods of social research, and, on the other hand, by prag-matic reasons, such as available time, actual research conditions (e.g., availability of resource persons, harvest seasons, hazards, political events), and the capacity of the student. Subsequently, the research objective(s) should be translated into re-search questions, that is, stating the questions, which need to be an-swered in order to fulfill the research objective(s). In this respect, the re-search questions are an operationalization of the research topic. Howev-er, the research questions should not be mixed up with the operationali-zation of the research topic in a methodologically coherent manner for da-ta collection (e.g., the questions in a questionnaire or in a structured in-terview) in the later stage of the research process (see step “carrying out the research”).

Theoretical framework: The theoretical framework acts as a partial

guide for the selection of the phenomena, which will come under study. It is a matter of fact that different theoretical frameworks emphasize differ-ent phenomena as those, which are most important, thereby giving direc-tion to the overall thesis work. In other words, the theoretical framework guides the student in his or her approach to the theoretical reconstruction of the topic. To be qualified as scientific research, theoretical categories are used which demarcate the research within a specific discipline and school of thought or paradigm. In the exposition of the theoretical framework, the main theoretical categories/concepts should be described, along with their relations to the substantive areas under investigation. It is important to keep in mind that the theoretical framework should be an argumenta-tion of the student through existing theories and concepts, finally resulting in the student’s own conceptual model (mostly additionally summarized in form of a graphic at the end of the theoretical framework). Working out the theoretical framework is therefore a creative act, rather than a de-scriptive exercise through existing literature. The arguing along and with existing theories and theoretical concepts in developing the theoretical framework should always be done against the background of the research objective(s) and research questions. Even though almost everything seems to be connected with each other, the re-search objective(s) and research questions help in determining which theories and concepts are relevant for the student’s thesis research and which not. And at the same time it becomes clear that developing a re-search proposal is not so much a strict linear, chronological, but rather an iterative process (in the sense of a dialectical movement between con-crete reality and theory) with several “working” versions before finally writ-ing the definitive proposal. A comprehensive review on existing theoreti-cal and empirical literature thereby forms the indispensable basis to come from the pre-scientific understanding (on which the selection of the topic was based) to a deeper theoretical understanding of the topic (which is needed to actually start writing the real thesis proposal). As has been said: developing the theoretical framework is a creative act, rather than a descriptive exercise. If there are debates around the defini-tion of concepts or their application, the major insights in the debate should be laid out, showing the differences and similarities and finally,



how the student will incorporate them into his/her research. Also if the di-rect application of concepts and theories is not possible to the chosen topic (e.g., because the theory is about decision-making in organizations, whereas the focus of the work might lay on individual decision-making), it should be pointed out how they have been adapted by the student re-spectively. The theoretical framework, and its condensed expression in form of the conceptual model, acts as a “map” to identify those concepts in the em-pirical complexity of the real world, which have been found to be relevant so far by theoretical and empirical literature. It is obvious that the theoret-ical framework is the ‘business card’ of the student as regards the first scientific standard and determines to a large extent how easy the soccer player can “score” afterwards. Investing time and energy in preparing a good, and analytically sharp theoretical framework is therefore always worth it, and can help to save a lot “blood and sweat” afterwards.

Methodology: With the theoretical framework the student indicates which concepts are important to be looked at in answering the research questions. In this part of the proposal it should be explained how these concepts will be identified and assessed empirically. Methodology in general is then nothing else but the science about methods and instru-ments for the assessment of the real world, or more technically, the gen-eration of data. The function of the methodology part within the research proposal (and later in the thesis report) is to specify reliability, validity and principle replicability. The methodology part therefore completes the stu-dent’s ‘business card’ as regards scientific standards. Setting up a sound methodological framework requires arguing about the following points: Identify the character of the thesis work: is it an explorative, or

comparative, or interpretative, or analytical, or historical study? Is a case study approach chosen to exemplify a certain real world phe-nomena or does the thesis work aim at being representative for them? It is obvious that with the selection of the topic and the formu-lation of the problem statement the student already implicitly provided answers to many of these questions. However, only in making them explicit, the student allows for the discussion of his work, as the stu-dent’s assumptions and logical framework can be empathized.

Design the data collection: this step requires arguing about and

providing an answer to the following questions: (1) What is seen as data and from which sources of information (e.g., pictures, texts, individuals, groups) will be they be derived? Data can take on the quality of primary data (that is, generated by the re-searcher) as well as that of secondary data (new analysis of data generated by earlier research). (2) What are the criteria for determining and delineating the sources of information (e.g. who will be interviewed? Why those policy docu-ments and not the others? How many people will receive a question-naire? Why selecting this case study and not another?) The answers to these questions are partially dependent on whether qualitative or quantitative research methods are chosen (see next question). (3) What methods are employed to derive the data from the sources of information? The selection of adequate methods is dependent from on the sources of information, which are seen as relevant to find



answers to the posed research questions. Here the student has to argue why a certain method (e.g., observations, interviews, content analysis) is most appropriate for the research topic at stake. In gen-eral, textbooks distinct between quantitative and qualitative socio-empirical research methods. These terms should thereby never be mixed up with ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’ approaches. Both, quantita-tive as well as qualitative methods aim at objectivity (see chapter “what is a scientific master piece?”). Rather they refer to different qualities of the data, namely whether the data is accessible in direct quantifiable (or measurable) qualities (e.g., the amount of cut timber) or whether the data can only be derived in an interpretative, qualify-ing way (e.g., the underlying motives of illegal logging). As no single method is really suitable to fully capture the complexity of real world phenomena, very often a combination of different meth-ods (e.g., observation plus questionnaire plus group discussions) is applied to assess the same phenomena in order not to miss im-portant information and to fulfill the requirements of validity and relia-bility (especially in qualitative research three different methods are recommended in order to obtain a triangulation of methods). (4) Which instruments within the method family will be used (e.g. questionnaires, semi-structured interview guideline, observation manual).

Design the data analysis: It should be pointed out that methods and in-

struments are necessary for the data collection (that is, to come from theory to data) as well as for data analysis (that is, to come from data to theory). Whereas students are most often familiar with basic methods of data collection, either quantitative or qualitative in nature, they are regu-larly missing the knowledge about data analysis methods. But how do you cope with hundred of pages of transcribed interviews? What are now the results of the interviews? Which statistical tests can be applied given the employed data collection methods? Students should therefore in ad-vance inform themselves about the wide range of methods and the avail-ability of respective instruments (e.g., statistical software packages such as SPSS, content analysis software such as NUDIST) for data analysis.

Working plan and time scheme: The research proposal finally should be completed by a comprehensive working plan, indicating the necessary steps in carrying out the research, as well as their logical order. The dif-ferent steps in writing the MSc-thesis should be distributed in a feasible manner over the available time period (in most cases 26 weeks equaling 26 credit points). The student should also agree with the supervisor about the frequency of contacts as well as milestones for delivering certain parts of the thesis proposal or report.

Preparing the working plan implies additionally to elaborate a financial plan, such as for example costs for travel, mailing costs, field assistance (e.g. for translation) etc. The general necessity of financial means to carry out the thesis work needs to be discussed and agreed between student, supervisor, and examinator before the actual thesis work.

3.3 Go- or No-go-decision

The final research proposal forms the basis for a go- or no-go decision by the supervisor for the further continuation of the thesis-research. This step is in-tended to avoid disappointments and unnecessary waist of time on both



sides. Finalization of the research proposal therefore forms a decisive step in the processes of successfully completing an MSc-thesis with the FNP-group. In most cases the ‘Go- or No-go-decision’ will be informally agreed between the student and the individual supervisor. However, in all cases where stu-dents have problems to provide an adequate research proposal within a rea-sonable and in advance agreed time frame the decision will formally be taken by the examinator, after a joint discussion with the student and the individual supervisor. The supervisor is responsible for indicating the problems to the examinator, after having informed the student clearly and timely in advance about his/her possibly negative opinion of the research proposal. In case of a ‘No-go’-decision the student will be offered the opportunity to start a new thesis with the FNP-group or any other group at Wageningen Uni-versity. Final decision on time compensation is taken by the examinator based on the quality of the preparation process.

3.4 Carrying out the research

When carrying out the research special attention should be given to organiza-tional, ethical and safety aspects. Possible economical, social and technical constrains (e.g. rain seasons, harvesting time, holidays of respond-ents/interviewees) should be taken into account as much as possible in ad-vance of the research work. If unforeseeable circumstances do occur, the re-search plan should be adapted after consultation with the supervisor respec-tively. In any case the student has to respect social, cultural and interpersonal norms and standards. This holds particularly true for privacy aspects of or-ganizations and persons. In any case, it should be avoided that the identity of persons is discernible out of the final text, if not agreed otherwise between the respondents and the researcher. These agreements have to be laid down be-fore information collection. It is recommended to clearly document all research activities, findings and sources, including also seemingly small details. Analytical skills should be ac-companied by organizational accuracy. Experience shows that this can save a lot of time when finally preparing the thesis report. Also in the phase of carrying out the research it is recommended to keep close contact with the supervisor.

3.5 Giving a work in progress colloquium

Working on a MSc-thesis can sometimes become a rather lonesome busi-ness. And it is our experience that particularly at the beginning students are struggling a lot with the required scientific standards. In order to overcome this difficulty and to allow exchange between our MSc students on their efforts in carrying out their thesis research, students are required to attend the work-in-progress colloquia, which are organized monthly. In order to stimulate stu-dent interaction, each student giving a colloquium has to ask a fellow student to act as co-referent. For detailed information on the aim and organization of these colloquia see Annex C. Each thesis student is required to give a collo-quium, to act once as a co-referent, and attend three colloquia sessions. Stu-



dents need to register their attendance at the colloquia on a attendance form, see Annex D, which can be downloaded from FNP webpage.

3.6 Writing the thesis report

The research activities should finally result in a comprehensive, consistent and concise thesis report. The thesis report in average has a size around 60 to 80 pages. It should be written according to scientific standards and using the possibilities of modern text software in the layout. In general the following parts structure the thesis report: Outline / Table of content: Providing the overview on the chapter struc-

ture with the respective page numbers. The outline should also include the summary as well as the possible list of annexes.

Overview of tables and figures: The outline is followed by an overview

of the tables and figures in the text, including the respective page num-bers.

Summary: Providing a short, but comprehensive summary of all chap-

ters. The length should not exceed one A4 page. Introduction: This part includes the problem statement (see also chapter

“Research proposal”), the scientific objectives as well as the research questions (see also chapter “Research proposal”). It can be completed by a characterization of the type of work (referring to the first question in the methodology part of the research proposal) and a short outline of the red line and the structure of the subsequent chapters.

Theoretical Framework: In this section the review of the theoretical and

empirical literature and the reconstruction of the used theoretical con-cepts will be provided (see also section “research proposal”). The theoret-ical framework is very often completed by a conceptual model, in which the relations of the relevant concepts (e.g., behavior, action, values, community) of the applied theories are presented (see also chapter “preparation of a research proposal”).

Research methods: This part reports first the overall research design,

i.e, the general approach of the study. Next information is given on the used information sources, as well as the applied methods and instru-ments for selection of research locations and respondents, and methods for data collection and data analysis (see also section “research pro-posal”). In contrast to the research proposal, where this section is pre-senting the ambitions/plan, in the final thesis report the actual research process (e.g., also problems which occurred) should be presented. If the research has been a case study, circumstances as well as the case should be described here.

Results: In this section the results should be presented in the most ob-

jective and comprehensive manner. Mixing results presentation with sub-jective interpretation and discussion should in any case be avoided. The challenge is to structure the results chapter in such a way, that the re-search questions are as best being addressed. Where appropriate the findings should be illustrated or summarized with tables and figures. ‘Ap-propriateness’ means that they provide an added value compared to or-dinary text. In any case tables and figures must thereby be drawn in such a way, that they can stand on their own independent from the surrounding text. Do not forget to include measurements and an explanation of abbre-



viations. Color figures should be avoided, using gray scales or textures instead. References to tables and figures should be made in the text (e.g., see table 1; cf. figure 2). Note that table captions are given above the table, whereas figure captions are placed below the figure.

Discussion: The discussion sections links the own findings, as presented

in the result section, with those of others. The challenge here is to argue for and against the findings and the related theoretical concepts. Litera-ture references are therefore again a requisite in this section. Further-more the findings should be discussed in the background of the scientific objective and the research question, as well as in the light of the chosen theoretical framework. It might therefore be helpful to structure the dis-cussion section accordingly. Last but not least, it should also not be for-gotten to discuss the extent in which the findings might have been influ-enced by the chosen methods (e.g., possible shortcomings, special cir-cumstances).

Conclusions: This section brings together the most important conse-

quences in the student’s perspective of his or her research. These con-clusions normally touch on three aspects: a.) the scientific objective and the research questions (results); b.) hints for future research on this topic (theoretical framework and methods); c.) practical application of the re-sults (consequences in management and policy).

Bibliography: In this section a list of all referred literature should be giv-

en, as sorted in alphabetical order with the last name of the author. The bibliography section (like the theoretical framework) again can be seen as a sort of “business card” of the researcher. Information given in the bibli-ography should be complete and accurate. The style for the different types of publications (articles in journals, books, chapters in books etc.) should be consistent. Some researchers prefer to mention information sources, such as policy documents and internet sources separately. If reference is made to information on the internet, the complete web-address should be given, as well as the date on which the information has been accessed the latest (e.g., Ministry of LNV (2002): Dutch Forest Policy. Public brochure downloadable at http://www.lnv.nl/brochure.pdf. Information derived on June, 15

th 2002).

Annex/Appendix: The annex should include information, which can be

missed in the direct text body, which, however, is relevant for the under-standing of the research or of important steps of it. This could mean for example the inclusion of the original data, the list of interviewed persons, background information on the study area, the questionnaire, further de-tailed statistical analysis, etc. Note that also the annex pages should be numbered consistently with the general text.

The presented structure of the different parts at the same time also reflects the standard chapter structure of a scientific report, with the ‘Introduction’-section forming chapter 1, the ‘Theoretical framework’ forming chapter 2, and so on. However, different types of research (e.g., historical research, develop-ing methods) might require a slightly different chapter structure.

3.7 Final examination talk

The aim of the final examination talk is to reflect on the whole ‘scientific train-ing’ process, which the student has undergone in preparing the MSc-thesis as well as place the MSc-thesis in the ongoing debates and the larger contexts within forest and nature conservation policy. Beside the student and the su-

http://www.lnv.nl/brochure.pdf



pervisor, the examinator will participate in the final examination talk. The date for the final examination should be arranged at least three weeks in advance. Overall length of the examination talk is about 45 minutes, with about a half an hour of questions and discussions, followed by a feedback and the an-nouncement of the final grade. In preparation of the final examination talk the student receives a thesis evaluation form (see ‘Administrative issues’), which has been completed by his or her supervisor(s). It is the student’s responsibil-ity to provide the supervisor(s) and the examinator with a copy of the final MSc-thesis no later than two weeks in advance of the talk. A third copy has to be handed in, together with a pdf-file of the thesis, at the secretariat. The thesis evaluation form does not yet contain a grade. In the beginning of the final examination talk the student will be provided with the opportunity to react on the supervisor’s evaluation. Afterwards the examinator or the second supervisor will pose questions about the wider context of the thesis topic, possibly including issues from earlier course work. After short consultation between supervisor and examinator the final grade will be announced to the student. The supervisor will care for communication of the grade to the administration. It should be noted, however, that the MSc-thesis work has successfully passed only after all administrative issues (see following section) have been completed.

3.8 Giving a final presentation

Many students like to present the final results of their thesis research to FNP staff, other students, friends and family. The chair group organizes three times each year a final presentation meeting for this purpose. In contrast to the obligatory work-in-progress colloquia, whose purpose it is to have internal working discussions on theoretical and methodological aspects of academic research, the purpose of these final presentation is to present main research results to a wider audience of interested people. Participation in these final presentations is on voluntary basis. The dates for the final presentations will be announced about six weeks in advance, and interested students can then register for giving a presentation.



4 Administrative issues and grading

4.1 MSc-thesis contract

No MSc-thesis work without a contract: the MSc-thesis officially starts only af-ter the student together with the supervisor have filled in a MSc-thesis con-tract (see Annex B). In the contract all aspects with relation to the MSc-work are laid down, such as course requirements, time period (inclusive possible pauses or practical periods), planned research steps, intensity and arrange-ments as regards supervision. The idea of the contract is to provide clarity in advance of the training process, in order to avoid later disappointments on both sides, the student’s as well as the supervisor’s one. Not obeying the agreements can lead to the termination of the training process, with a grading below 6 (“failed”). After signing the MSc-thesis contract by the student, the supervisor and the examinator the original remains with the secretariat of the FNP group. Copies go to the student, the supervisor, as well as to the central study coordinator. The secretariat is at the same time responsible for including the student’s name in the mailing list of all MSc-students at the FNP group, through which the MSc-colloquia will be announced as well as other information will be dis-tributed.

4.2 Costs associated with carrying out the MSc-research

All MSc-research should be planned in such a manner, that no project financ-es or external funding has to be acquired. In any case it should be tried to rely on existing administrative and logistic support from ongoing research projects or guest organizations as much as possible. If despites all efforts costs are unavoidable to carry out the MSc-research (e.g., for traveling to interview partners) the student has to provide in timely advance a financial plan, which has to be agreed upon by the supervisor. All costs made without the a priori agreement of the supervisor have to be carried by the student her- or himself.

4.3 Printing costs of thesis

A student has to provide his/her supervisor(s) with one copy and the secretar-iat of FNP with one copy for the examiner. The reasonable costs for these copies and own copy for student (3 copies) are reimbursed by the chairgroup. Students should contact the chairgroup secretary for the reimbursement form. If additional copies of the final thesis report are required (e.g. for organiza-tions which co-operated in the research) approval in advance is needed from the supervisor. In addition to the printed copies, the student has also to submit an electronic copy (in pdf format) that will be forwarded to the library and stored in FNP thesis archive.

4.4 Thesis evaluation form

Feedback on the student’s performance during the ‘training’ process of pre-paring the MSc-thesis will be provided through the thesis evaluation form.



This thesis evaluation consists of four groups of criteria for judging on the quality of a scientific work (see Annex E), namely: Content focusing on a) problem statement; b) objectives/research ques-

tions; c) theoretical/analytical framework; d) methods; e) results; f) dis-cussion; g) conclusions; h) logic of chapter structure; i) comprehensive-ness of literature review;

Formal aspects focusing on a) scientific text style; b) accurateness of ci-

tations; c) quality and appropriateness of tables and figures; d) quality of layout according to modern text processing standards; e) completeness and consistency of the bibliography;

Working process focusing on a) specific difficulties (e.g., thesis report in

an other than the mother language) and unforeseeable problems (e.g., illness of interview partners); b) degree of independence, with which the research has been carried out as well student’s ability to integrate com-ments; c) work progress within the given time frame of (usually) 26 weeks;

Remarks allowing for additional comments of the supervisor about the

training process of the student The supervisor will fill in the thesis evaluation sheet after having received the final version of the MSc-thesis (at least two weeks in advance of the date for the final talk). The supervisor will provide the completed evaluation sheet to the student no later than two days in advance of the final examination talk, in order to allow for student’s preparation of the talk.

4.5 Grading

The grading will be based on the standard grading scale at Wageningen Uni-versity ranging from 0 to 10 (extraordinary), with a grade lower than 6 mean-ing “failed”. The final grade will be announced immediately after the final ex-amination talk. Conform the standard Wageningen University the grading will be based on both the research competence, the quality of the thesis report and the collo-quim as well as the results of the final discussion on the thesis during the ex-amination. Main emphasis will be given to the final thesis report. Dependent on the thesis report and the overall impression during the working process, the oral presentations, and the answers during the final examinations the su-pervisor will suggest a grade, which subsequently will be discussed with the examinator. After the examinator has agreed on the grade, the supervisor will explain the grade to the student

4.6 Completing the administrative requirements

Before the finally grade can be passed on to Wageningen University’s central student administration, the student need to submit three complete copies of his final thesis (including possible smaller adaptations after the final examina-tion talk). The title page should include the following information:



Name of the student and registration number Title of the thesis research Thesis registration number (can be obtained from the FNP student admin-

istration) Name of the supervisor(s) Name of the chair group and university Month and year of publication Also a digital copy of the thesis (in pdf-format) must be submitted to the FNP student administration. This copy is forwarded to the library of Wageningen University. Both the printed and electronic copies are also archived with the FNP group.

4.7 Copyrights of thesis

MSc theses are normally entered in the E-articles depot of Wageningen Uni-versity and are available as open access publication. The author(s) remain the copyright owners of the MSc thesis. Sometimes students are contacted by commercial book publishers on publishing the thesis. Students are ad-vised to check thoroughly whether this concern reputable publisher firms.



5 Literature and other relevant information sources The following literature lists does not intend to provide a complete nor ex-haustive overview on helpful and interesting literature when starting to write a MSc-thesis. It mainly focuses on standard publications which are easily ac-cessible at the libraries in Wageningen and from which the student can start on to search for more detailed literature relevant for his or her specific topic. Excellent literature hints and online-papers can be also found on the internet, particularly by using the scientific literature search facilities of Net-of-Science, Scoopus or Scholar Google. Beside the literature search facilities provided by the WU libraries at http://www.agralin.nl/desktop/direct/ good literature hints for theses in the field of Forest and Nature Conservation Policy can be found (1) in the ‘Social Sci-ences in Forestry’-online bibliography of the University of Montana at http://forestry.lib.umn.edu/bib/SSiF.html and (2) in the Forest History Bibliog-raphy of Duke University at http://www.lib.duke.edu/forest/biblio.html

5.1 Literature at FNP-group

FNP has a small collection of text books on methodological issues in social science available, that, on request, can be consulted by students. These books can be borrowed at the secre-tariat. It includes the following books:

Field, A. 2004: Discovering Statistics using SPSS for Windows

Neuman, W.L. 2003: Social Reseach Methods. Qualitative and Quantita-tive Approaches.

Jennings, G. 2001: Tourism research

5.2 Introduction into social science

Fuller, S. 1997: Science. Open University Press, Buckingham: 159 p.

Stevenson, L. ; Byerly, H. 1995: The many faces of science : an introduc-tion to scientists, values, and society. Westview Press, Boulder: 257 p.

Hollis, M. 1994: The philosophy of social science : an introduction. Cam-bridge University Press, Cambridge: 268 p.

Trigg, R. 1985: Understanding social science : a philosophical introduc-tion to the social sciences. Blackwell, Oxford: 224 p.

Chambers, A., 1987. Wat heet wetenschap? Over aard en status van de wetenschap en haar methoden. Vierde druk. Boom, Meppel/Amsterdam.

Cornelisse, F.H., 1985. Inleiding tot de wetenschapsfilosofie. Bohn Stafleu Van Loghum, Houten/Zaventem.

Koningsveld, H., 1987. Het verschijnsel wetenschap; een inleiding tot de wetenschapsfilosofie. Achtste druk. Boom, Meppel/Amsterdam.

http://www.agralin.nl/desktop/direct/

http://forestry.lib.umn.edu/bib/SSiF.html

http://www.lib.duke.edu/forest/biblio.html

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?AU=Fuller,+S.+

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?AU=Stevenson,+L.+

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?AU=Byerly,+H.+

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?AU=Hollis,+M.+

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?AU=Trigg,+R.+



5.3 Methodology in social sciences

Berg, B.L. 2001: Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. - 4th ed. Allyn and Bacon, Boston: XV, 304 p.

Bryman, A.; Cramer, D. 2001: Quantitative data analysis with SPSS Re-lease 10 for Windows – a guide for social scientists. Routledge, Hove:

Denzin, N.K.; Lincoln, Y.S. 2000: Handbook of qualitative research. - 2nd ed. Sage, Thousand Oaks: XX, 1065, 46, 11 p.

Hair, J.F.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L.; Black, W.C. 1995: Multivariate data analysis – 5th ed. Prentice Hall, Englewood cliffs, New Yersey: XX, 730 p

Nooij, A.T.J. 1995: Sociale methodiek – Normatieve en beschrijvende methodiek in grondvormen. Stenfert Kroese, Leiden: 256 p

Nooij, A.T.J. 1995: Variabelen en modellen – Multivariate analyse in het sociaal-wetenschappelijk onderzoek. Boom, Amsterdam: 301 p.

Punch, K.F. 2000: Developing effective research proposals. Sage, Lon-don: VII, 125 p.

Segers, J. 1999: Methoden voor de maatschappijwetenschappen. Van Gorcum, Assen: 470 p.

Bohrnstedt, G.W.; Knoke, D. 1994: Statistics for social data analysis. - 3rd ed. Peacock, Itasca: 574 p.

SPSS Inc. (Chicago) 1997: SPSS 7.5 statistical algorithms. SPSS, Chi-cago: 641 p.

Dale, A.; Davies, R.B. 1994: Analyzing social and political change - a casebook of methods. Sage, London: 229 p.

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?AU=Berg,+B.L.+

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?AU=Lincoln,+Y.S.+

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?AU=Knoke,+D.+

http://www.agralin.nl/cgi-bin/WebQuery/clcwwwf?KA=SPSS+Inc.



Annex A: Checklist of actions and responsibilities

Action Who

1. Fixing thesis topic Student, supervisor

2. Filling in MSc-thesis contract, signing by student and supervisor Student, supervisor

3. Signing of MSc-thesis contract for approval by examinator, possibly adoption of contract

Supervisor, examinator (possi-ble adoption: supervisor and student)

4. Delivering completed contract to secretariat Supervisor

5. Providing title of MSc-project and name of student to editor of info-bulletin

Supervisor

6. Registration of MSc-project:

providing copies of contract to a.) student, b.) supervisor, c.) FNP archive, d.) study coordinator

registering student in administrative system

including student into FNP-students mailing list

Student administration

7. Preparation of research proposal Student (supervisor)

8. Approval of research proposal – Go-/No-go decision Supervisor

9. Arranging date for colloquium presentation Student, colloquium coordina-tor

10. Thesis work Student (supervisor)

11. Approval of draft thesis Supervisor

12. Providing copies of final thesis to supervisor and examinator Student

13. Arranging date for final talk with examinator Supervisor, secretariat (exami-nator)

14. Checking partial fulfillment of requirements: participation at 3 collo-quia meetings

Supervisor

15. Filling in thesis evaluation form, sending copies to student and su-pervision a week in advance of final talk

Supervisor

16. Final examination talk Student, supervisor, examina-tor

17. Grading of thesis Examinator, supervisor

18. Delivering grades to secretariat Supervisor

19. Delivering in minimum of 2 final copies and pdf-file of MSc thesis to secretariat (more copies dependent on arrangements)

Student, (supervisor, secretari-at)

20. Administrative finalization:

grades to central administration,

delivering copy to library

deleting student from FNP_students mailing list

Student administration



Annex B: Thesis contract form

Wageningen University Master Thesis Agreement

This Wageningen University (WU) master thesis agreement serves to lay down agreements between a

master student and a chair group. The agreement registers rights and duties of both parties and is a fur-

ther supplementation and elaboration of the Higher Education and Research Act (WHW), Education

and Examining Regulations and the Student Charter.

The form has to be completed for each master thesis by the student and a representative of the chair

group before the start of the study activities.

Student and representative sign three copies of the form. Both receive a copy. A third one is send to a

representative of the programme: the study advisor mentioned below.

When the agreement is modified the student will receive a copy of the adjusted form.

For complaints on the supervision or assessment the student can appeal to:

- The study advisor for advice and support

- The Examining Board for advice on procedures or an official complaint.

- The Examination Appeals Board.

- A dean or a Confidential advisor for students

For additional information see the explanation on page 4.

1. Information on student and chair group

Student:

Study programme:

Registration number:

Study advisor:

Chair group:

Supervisor(s):

Examiner b1:

Course code:

Examiner a2:

The student is informed upon the (written) guidelines and rules of the chair group for

thesis students: yes/no

2. Prerequisite course(s)

Course code: Passed: yes/no

Course code: Passed: yes/no

3. Admission to the thesis

Study advisor has stated that the student

is

qualified3 for a master thesis and that the thesis is optional for the programme of the

student.

1 This name can be entered later.

2 This can be the supervisor.



4. Title and planning

Title of the thesis project:

Date of completion parts of the-

sis:

Date of start:

Date of finish:

Special arrangements for plan-

ning:

5. Arrangements on supervision (Arrangements on the type and intensity of meetings of student and supervisor on role and responsibili-

ties when more supervisors or more chair groups are involved)

6. Arrangements on facilities (Work place (office/lab), access to buildings and locations. Availability and use of equipment, materi-

als and facilities)

7. Arrangements on report (Language and lay out, time and format of transfer of results and data, agreements on secrecy of results

and publicity of the thesis report)

8. Arrangements for individual situations.

(Circumstances beyond one’s control, disability, absence for special reasons)

3 This means that the student has completed all requirements for starting with this master thesis.



9. Assessment

The assessment form4 for theses of WU has to be used.

The percentages in the assessment form that will be used are:

Learning outcomes (assessment criteria) percentage

A. Research competence

B. Thesis report

C. Colloquium

D. Examination

The assessment will be done in week (on)

10. Signature

The student agrees to report any relevant change in circumstances which may affect

the results of the project to the supervisor.

The student declares to be acquainted with rules and procedures of the chair group

and with the assessment form. The chair group declares to have provided the student

with all relevant information (including rules, regulations, safety issues).

Wageningen,

Name Date Signature

Student:

Supervisor(s):

Examiner a:

Examiner b:

4 https://portal.wur.nl/sites/owi/kwaliteitszorg/Policy Documents and Forms/Thesis assessment form

WU UK v9.xls

https://portal.wur.nl/sites/owi/kwaliteitszorg/Policy%20Documents%20and%20Forms/Thesis%20assessment%20form%20WU%20UK%20v9.xls



Explanation5

1. Information student and chair group

The study advisor has to be asked for advice on the progress of the student and quali-

fication for a master thesis. The study programme (study advisor) has to be informed

about the arrangements students want to make for thesis projects in order to establish

whether the programme allows the student to take this thesis and to keep record of the

student’s progress.

The examiner will be the chair holder being responsible for the thesis. The supervisor

takes care of daily supervision. A supervisor from an external organization can not

have a formal role, and can not be involved in the marking because he is not a quali-

fied lecturer. If more supervisors and chair groups are involved each role should be

explained under item 5. WUR employees outside the university section (e.g. research-

ers) can be regarded as supervisor like a WU lecturer.

2. Prerequisites Chairs can require a maximum of two prerequisite courses (in total 12 credits) for

starting a thesis. These prerequisites have to be published in the study handbook. The

student has to pass the exam(s) to gain access to the thesis.

3. Admission to the thesis The chair group (supervisor, coordinator education) should contact the study advisor

personally to be informed about the student being qualified for starting with the mas-

ter thesis.

4. Description and planning In general reference can be made to a previously described project proposal of the

chair group with subject and type of activities. It is considered very important that the

student writes a detailed project description and is aware of all consequences with re-

spect to type of activities, intensity and planning of work. If the student intends to in-

terrupt the project for exams or leave the supervisor should agree in advance.

5. Arrangements on supervision A supervisor will have his own rules for planning meetings with students, for in-

volvement of co-workers. Especially when more supervisors and chair groups are in-

volved it should be avoided that the student is confronted with conflicting rules and

opinions. Only one supervisor should be the focal point for the student.

6. Arrangements on facilities The chair group takes care of the facilities the student needs. In general it should be

assumed that the student is not familiar with the policy concerning priorities for use of

equipment and facilities, and is not aware who is in charge of them. It should be ex-

plained to the student that arrangements can never be a guarantee for availability and

that because of unpredictable circumstances the thesis project may have to be adapted

with respect to time planning and/or content. Chair group and student have to find

solutions together.

5 This Master Thesis Agreement form is established by the Board of the Education Institute in Septem-

ber 2009: it is a revision of the Thesis Contract used at WU since January 1996.



7. Arrangements on report Specific rules on the lay-out of a report, the transfer of data sets and processed results

have to be agreed.

The thesis project can be part of a larger project in which external partners are in-

volved, or in which results may be generated that require confidentially. The universi-

ty has rules on protection and embargo of scientific results. Thesis reports can be reg-

istered with a restriction on disclosure of contents. The examiners and supervisor(s),

however, always need a full copy to assess the student.

From October 2009 all master theses have to be uploaded to the Wageningen UR Dig-

ital Library through the AIR (Administration Enrolment data and Results). It is up to

the involved chair group and student to decide whether the thesis will be made public

or not in the Digital Library.

8. Arrangement for individual situations Students can ask for specific facilities e.g. to work with a disability. Student and chair

group can ask study advisor or dean for students for advice.

9. Assessment procedure Examining Boards and Board of the Education Institute have decided

6 in 2006 that all

chair groups of WU have to use the standard assessment form for theses and two ex-

aminers. The chair group can adjust the weight (percentages) of the assessment crite-

ria on the excel-form. The student should be informed on this (item 9 of this agree-

ment).

The completed assessment form for the thesis has to be uploaded to the AIR.

6 https://portal.wur.nl/sites/owi/kwaliteitszorg/Policy%20Documents%20and%20Forms/thesis-letter-

061102.pdf

https://portal.wur.nl/sites/owi/kwaliteitszorg/Policy%20Documents%20and%20Forms/thesis-letter-061102.pdf



Annex C: Work-in-progress colloquium

Background and aim Students working on their FNP Thesis have to give a ’work in progress’ presentation in the MSC Thesis Colloquia series. The requirement to present a work in progress colloquium is valid for all students supervised or co-supervised by any member of the Forest and Nature Conservation (FNP) group. The FNP chair considers the participation in the colloquia series an essential aspect of doing a MSc. project, as this platform offers excellent opportunities for both, presenters and audi-ence, to reflect on background, objective, theoretical frame, and methodological approach selected of own and other’s research projects. The work in progress colloquium is meant to serve as non-public (’closed shop’) environment to train and test individual skills and expertise in presenting, discussing, analyzing and critically discussing proposed research projects. The aims of the work in progress colloquium are the following: 1) For the individual MSc. student:

Presentation will serve as milestone for final clarification of thesis background, objec-tive, theoretical frame, methodology and methods chosen for the further research to be carried out.

Meeting and discussion will give opportunity to all students to meet the FNP scientists and student colleagues doing their thesis at FNP

2) For the group of MSc. students at FNP

Starters will get to know each other and get insight into structure, progress, potential problems, and appropriate solution strategies for doing MSc. thesis work.

Experienced MSc. students will train their ability to detect potential pitfalls in the pro-jects presented and may be ready to provide valid hints how to avoid or solve prob-lems during the research progress.

3) For scientists at FNP

Scientists working at FNP will become better informed on recent research projects and respective project backgrounds. Chances for joint approaches and potential syn-ergies may become obvious.

Organization In order to fulfill these aims, the colloquim meetings have the character of a ’closed shop’. This should stimulate an informal workshop rather than formal presentation atmosphere. The meetings are organized in the following way:

Preparation of information sheet on thesis objective and study approach. This infor-mation sheet is distributed one week before the presentation.

Presentation of 20 minutes for the presentation of research

Reaction of about 5 minutes by a fellow student acting as co-referent. This reaction is meant as an introduction to the discussion and serves to stimulate student (rather than only staff) contribution to the discussion.

General discussion of 20 minutes. The reaction of the co-referent and general discussion will focus on three main items: a) clarification of remaining unclear aspects of the presentation, b) discussion and development of potential solution strategies for the most critical problems identified by the student in the information sheet, and c) critical discussion and defense of parts or entire research approach chosen by the student presenting.



‘Rules of the game’ For good coordination and successful meetings some formal aspects must be met regarding preparation, information and appropriate presentation:

Application on time All students starting a MSc. thesis project will jointly decide with their supervisors on an ap-propriate time for the work-in-progress presentation according to the contracted time line of the thesis. Immediately afterwards the student will get in contact with the persons being re-sponsible for organizing the colloquia to become listed for a colloquium (Henda Martakis email: below).

Reflection at ’halftime’ As the work in progress meeting is expected to be done around the mid of the thesis project, and in any case before students will leave to case study areas abroad, the presentation typi-cally will be done in the second or third month of the thesis work. Students presenting at the colloquia series are then expected to prepare themselves by again reflecting on the current state of their work. To organize this reflection, and as a means of later communication, stu-dents are requested to fill in an Information Sheet form for the colloquium (see details below). The form is to be individually prepared and to be discussed with the supervisor.

Communication at appropriate time The Information Sheet is to be send via appropriate communication channels (mail groups) to the colloquium participants. In order to organize the distribution process all students present-ing at a certain colloquium will send the Information Sheet by email to Henda Martakis (email: below). Note: Deadline for sending the Information Sheet is one week ahead of the presenta-tion day. Responsibility for this procedure is given to the student presenting.

Presenting in time Students should plan their colloquium consisting of presentation, co-referent comments and general discussion in such a way, that the colloquium does not exceed 45 minutes (including 25 minutes discussion time). This means that the number of slides should be restricted to about 15-20! Students should arrive 15 minutes before the colloquium meeting starts to install the presentation files used during the colloquium on the computer connected to the beamer. Planning and timing schedule The following time line of activities may serve as quick orientation and repetition:

1. The MSc.-Student and his/her Supervisor will jointly discuss and decide, when the work-in-progress presentation will be given.

2. The MSc.-Student will apply for an open time slot to do a presentation at the monthly organized colloquia meeting.. Applications (including title of presentation) are send to Henda Martakis at least two weeks before the presentation is to be given. She will in-form the student about being accepted in the proposed colloquium meeting.

3. The student selects a co-referent from amongst fellow FNP thesis students. 4. The MSc.-Student prepares the Information Sheet (see below), discusses it with the

Supervisory, and send the form to Henda Martakis (see above) at latest 1 week be-fore the day of the Colloquium.

5. The official announcement together with the Information Sheets will be sent to the FNP group and students doing their Msc.thesis at FNP.

In case of any need for further explanation or additional information, do not hesitate to contact the FNP colloquium coordinator: Dr. Freerk Wiersum (E-mail [email protected]). Information sheet The form on the next page may be of help to structure your presentation. Fill in the form (be concise and limit description to one page) and discuss its content with your supervisor. Don't forget to send the filled form one week before the colloquium start to Henda Martakis ([email protected]).



Information sheet for work-in-progress colloquium Name Student

Working title of Thesis

Name(s) Supervisor(s)

Name of co-referent

A. What is the back-ground of the thesis and what's the scientific interest in your thesis?

B. Clearly specify the scientific objective(s) of your thesis project?

C. Name the most rele-vant theories (conceptu-al frames) you are intend-ing to use in your thesis. Specify: Theory, relevant author(s), theories' con-tent and expected use for your thesis project!

D. Exactly specify which information you need and attempt to get by applying your research method!

E. Exactly clarify the methodology and relat-ed methods to be ap-plied for satisfying your information needs!

F. Explain how infor-mation to be generated in later phases of your research will relate to the objective of your research project!

G. Name your three most relevant problems you would like to solve or for which you expect recommendations or advise during the collo-quium:



Annex D:

FNP thesis path schedule

Overview of main activities

Thesis topic:

Supervisor(s):

1. Progress of planning and implementation of thesis research

Activity Date approved/presented/

completed

Signature supervisor

Thesis contract

Research proposal

(incl. GO/NO GO

decision)

Work-in-progress

colloquium

Final discussion

with examiner

2. Participation in FNP colloquia meetings

a) Acting as co-referent

Date Name of

presenter

Title of presentation Staff signature

b) Attendence of minimal three colloquium workshop sessions

Date Titles of presentations Staff signature



Annex E: Thesis evaluation sheet

Student

Thesis Title

Credits

Supervisor

Content

Problem statement

Objectives/ Research question

Theor. / analytical framework

Method

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

Chapter structure

Literature

Formal Aspects

Text style

Citations

Table and Figures

Layout

Bibliography

Working Process

Difficulty/Problems

Independence

Progress



Remarks

-

Overall Grade

Summarizing the given arguments the work is graded with

Wageningen, januari 17, 2012

(Signature Supervisor)