Leiden University · Faculty of Humanities

Thesis & Research Supervision

Assessment Standards

These assessment standards apply across the programs I supervise (BAIS, BAKS, MAAS, MAIR). The core criteria are broadly shared, with expectations calibrated to program level. See your program overview for program-specific details.

Assessment Criteria

Every Faculty thesis assessment form includes five dimensions. The first four criteria capture the quality of the written thesis and are assessed by both readers. The fifth, Learning Skills, concerns the research process and is assessed by the supervisor/first reader. Program handling and weighting can differ.

Knowledge and Insight

Thesis sections: Introduction, Literature Review

  • A clear, well-motivated research question that reflects insight into key discussions and methods in the field
  • A literature review that assesses existing research critically, identifies a gap, and demonstrates originality
  • Evidence of engagement with relevant academic debates

Application of Knowledge

Thesis sections: Analytical Framework, Findings

  • Critical analysis of primary and/or secondary sources
  • Selection and effective application of appropriate research methods
  • Clear justification of the chosen methodology and its suitability to the research question
  • Thoughtful management of data, with attention to transparency and reproducibility where applicable

Reaching Conclusions

Thesis sections: Conclusion & Discussion

  • Logical, well-founded conclusions grounded in the empirical analysis
  • Meaningful connection between findings and the research question
  • Discussion of the contribution to existing knowledge
  • Honest assessment of limitations, alternative explanations, and directions for future research

Communication

Assessed across: Entire thesis

  • Competent academic writing with readable style, careful spelling and grammar, and appropriate terminology
  • Clear and logical structure with effective transitions between sections
  • Proper citations following a recognized style, used consistently (check your program overview for specific requirements)
  • Professional formatting and presentation

Learning Skills (Process)

Assessed by: Supervisor/first reader. Program handling and weighting differ

  • Degree of independence throughout the research process
  • Planning and time management
  • Responsiveness to supervisor feedback
  • Participation in thesis group (if applicable)

This criterion is assessed by the supervisor based on their observation of the research process. Check your program overview for how this is weighted in your program.

Example Thesis Structure

The specifics of your thesis will depend on your topic and methodology. The following structure is a workable starting point:

I. Introduction

  • Research question
  • Research problem, gap, and motivation
  • Proposed research plan
  • Thesis roadmap (brief summary of each chapter)

II. Literature Review

  • Thematic or chronological review of relevant scholarship
  • Identification of the gap your research addresses

III. Analytical Framework

  • Research design, data sources, and methods
  • Methodological concerns and scope conditions

IV. Empirical Findings

  • Presentation and analysis of results
  • Organized by theme, case, or research sub-question

V. Conclusion and Discussion

  • Summary of research and key findings
  • Research contributions
  • Limitations and alternative explanations
  • Directions for future research

VI. Bibliography

VII. Appendices (if applicable)

Grade Descriptors

Grade Level Description
9–10 Distinction Outstanding work with excellent understanding of the field, original thinking, and a rigorous, persuasive argument
8–8.9 Merit Excellent understanding, independent thought, and a strong, well-supported argument
7–7.9 Merit Good to very good work, with most criteria met convincingly
6–6.9 Pass Satisfactory understanding and a reasonable argument, with minor shortcomings in some areas
5.1–5.9 No grade issued The faculty does not issue grades in this range
3–5.0 Fail Inadequate understanding, with substantial omissions or weaknesses
0–2.9 Ungradable No significant grasp of the material, or work that is irrelevant, incomplete, or plagiarized

BA vs MA Expectations

All programs share core assessment criteria, but the expected depth and sophistication differ by level.

Dimension BA (BAIS, BAKS) MA (MAAS, MAIR)
Research question Clear and focused, addressing an identifiable gap Demonstrates advanced understanding of theoretical debates and situates the research within the field
Literature review Engages with key scholarship and identifies a gap Synthesizes a broader body of literature and situates the research within theoretical frameworks
Methodology Appropriate and clearly explained More sophisticated and well justified, with methodological awareness and reflexivity
Analysis Sound application of chosen methods Deeper analytical engagement and careful interpretation of findings
Independent contribution Shows capacity for independent research Demonstrates a more advanced level of scholarly engagement and sustained independent inquiry
Word count 10,000 (±10%) 12,000–15,000 (MAAS) / 15,000 hard max (MAIR)

In short, a strong BA thesis demonstrates that a student can conduct independent research competently. A strong MA thesis reflects a greater depth of scholarly engagement and the capacity for sustained independent research.

Thesis Assessment System

All theses in the Faculty of Humanities are graded through the faculty’s digital thesis assessment system. Both the first reader (supervisor) and second reader complete independent assessments.