Postgraduate Office
Master’s Thesis/Dissertation Examiner Report
Date Last Modified: May 2014
Thank you for agreeing to examine the attached Master’s thesis/dissertation. Please use this form to
report your recommendation and return it as an email attachment to the Postgraduate Office
(postgraduate-office@canterbury.ac.nz). This form will be released to the candidate and supervisors at
the completion of the examination process. Additional guidelines are attached.
A Master’s thesis student at the University of Canterbury is expected to demonstrate critical insight
and a capacity to carry out independent research/scholarship in his/her chosen discipline. We would
expect a thesis to include a critical appraisal of the literature, excellence of presentation, appropriate
analyses, and good integration of the candidate’s work with prior work in the relevant discipline.
The time that students take to complete a Master’s thesis may differ according to Faculty, but is
typically between one and two years of full-time study. There are no university-wide restrictions on
thesis size, though some Departments/Schools impose restrictions. Notwithstanding any time or
word limits, the thesis should comprise a body of work that encompasses a minimum of the
equivalent of one year of full-time study in the relevant discipline (i.e., 1 EFTS). Examiners will be
notified if the thesis/dissertation being examined differs from these requirements – some
dissertations are only weighted a .75 EFTS but this will be identified as appropriate.
The thesis/dissertation should:
 contain a critical review of the relevant literature on the subject, demonstrating an understanding
of the theoretical underpinning and context of the research;
 set out clearly the aims and the objectives of the research;
 use appropriate methods, described in sufficient detail, to meet the standards of the discipline;
 use suitable techniques to evaluate the results, presented in a clear manner and consistent with
the standards of the discipline;
 contain discussion that integrates the present results into previous work and might identifies
further research needs;
 contain clear, precise, comprehensive and well-justified conclusions;
 be free of typographical, spelling and grammatical errors and should reference work by previous
researchers appropriately;
 be devoid of plagiarism.
Examiners are asked to evaluate the thesis/dissertation as a whole, rather than giving specific
weighting to different aspects of the thesis. Although all the aspects of the thesis described above are
important, the relative weighting of each aspect may vary by thesis/dissertation size and research
discipline. The content, presentation and structure may also vary by discipline or approach. Written
presentation is of secondary importance, although poor presentation may result in a lower grade.
Having assessed a thesis, the examiner is asked to allocate a single letter grade in accordance with
the criteria in Table 1. Passing grades are A+, A, A-, B+, B, B-, C+, C, C-. Where the Master’s
Page 1 of 5
degree is being completed “by thesis only” the degree will normally be awarded with Distinction if
the final grade awarded is an A- grade or higher.
Examiners shall not require nor allow, substantive revision or correction of the thesis, and must
recommend a grade for the thesis as submitted. Examiners may, however, recommend that, as a
condition of the award of the degree, minor editorial corrections or amendments (e.g. correction of
typographical errors) be made to the thesis.
Table 1: Criterion-Based Grading

A+
Exceptionally high
performance


A
Mid point in A range

A-
B+
High quality performance

Very good





B
Mid point in B range
B-
Good
C+
Pass







C
Mid point in C range


C-
Fail
(D or E)
Well-structured and integrated research plan. Wellformulated research questions and appropriate
investigative methodology.
Excellent knowledge and understanding of subject.
High quality original data/materials collected (if applicable)
and rigorous and critical data analysis.
Excellent and clear understanding of significance of the
data/evidence.
High level of original and critical thinking. Arguments
presented logically and coherently.
Conclusions comprehensive and well justified.
Thesis well-constructed and well-illustrated.
Sound research plan.
Reasonable formulation of research questions and
appropriate investigative methodology used.
Reasonable knowledge of the literature and evaluation of
previous work.
Appropriate original data collected (if applicable) and
reasonable data analysis.
Some appreciation of the significance of the data/evidence.
Some evidence of original and critical thinking.
Arguments presented reasonably well.
Thesis reasonably well constructed.
Research questions formulated and adequate research
methodology applied.
Knowledge of subject matter shown but with some lapses,
inadequacies and errors.
Adequate attempt at data analysis but may lack adequate
justification.
Original and critical thinking present but limited.
Marginal pass



Work lacks breadth and depth.
Understanding and coverage inadequate. Poor attempt at
interpretation.
Thesis poorly presented.
Page 2 of 5
Master’s Thesis/Dissertation Examiner Report
Candidate’s Name:
Thesis Title:
Recommended Grade:
Date:
Examiner’s Name:
Signature:
Please provide an overall evaluation of the thesis/dissertation, highlighting the strengths and
weaknesses of the work.
(this box will expand as you type)
Criteria
Examiner’s comment
Critical review of relevant literature and
demonstration of the understanding of the
theoretical underpinning of the research
Clarity of research aims and objectives
Research materials and methods – appropriateness
of use and clarity of description
Data analysis – appropriateness of techniques and
clarity of explanation
Discussion - integration of results into past
research and identification of future research needs
Clarity and justification of conclusions
Quality of presentation – free of typographical,
spelling and grammatical errors and inclusion of
appropriate referencing of past work
Please detail any recommended minor editorial corrections to thesis
Only minor corrections (e.g., typos; grammatical errors) should be required.
The grade recommended for the thesis/dissertation should be for the thesis/dissertation as submitted and
not contingent on any amendments.
Page 3 of 5
Vice-Chancellor’s Office
Postgraduate Office
Guidelines for Master’s Thesis Examiners
Date Last Modified: May 2014
These guidelines provide additional information regarding the Master’s Thesis Examination process
to supplement the information provided on the Examiner’s Report Form.
The examiners:
There are two independent thesis examiners. One examiner is external to the University of
Canterbury. The other examiner will usually be an academic staff member of the University but
cannot be the Senior Supervisor and will not normally be a member of the supervisory team. If no
suitable examiner can be identified at the University then two examiners external to the University
may be appointed.
The examiners are appointed by the Dean of Postgraduate Research, after considering the
recommendations from the relevant Department/School.
Prior to the confirmation of examiners the candidate has the right to make a case to the Dean of
Postgraduate Research that a particular person not be appointed as an examiner.
Prior to grading the thesis, examiners are requested to direct any questions regarding the
examination to the Dean of Postgraduate Research. The relevant Departmental Postgraduate
Coordinator may contact examiners after the examiners’ reports have been received, in order to
reach consensus over the recommended grade for the thesis.
Confidentiality and embargoes.
All theses are considered to be confidential during the examination process. After examination,
theses containing confidential and/or commercially sensitive material may be embargoed for up to
two years. More information on the University’s policies on these matters in can be found in the
University’s Intellectual Property Guide (http://www.canterbury.ac.nz/ucpolicy/index.aspx).
Determination of the final recommended grade
The final grade for a thesis is determined as follows.
 Where there is a just one grade between the grades recommended by the two examiners the
higher grade shall be awarded (e.g., if examiner recommendations are a B+ and a B, the
student will be awarded a B+). The relevant Department/School Postgraduate Coordinator
can apply to the Dean of Postgraduate Research for this normal process not to be followed
under exceptional circumstances.
Page 4 of 5


Where there is a discrepancy of two grades, the mid-point grade shall be awarded (e.g., if
examiner recommendations are a B+ and a B-, the student will be awarded a B). The
relevant Department/School Postgraduate Coordinator can apply to the Dean of
Postgraduate Research for this normal process not to be followed under exceptional
circumstances.
If there is a discrepancy greater than two grades (e.g., a B and an A) the examiners will be
contacted, usually by the Department/School Postgraduate Coordinator, to see if consensus
can be reached. The Postgraduate Coordinator will (a) share each examiner’s report with
the other examiner to ensure each understands the views of the other and (b) investigate
whether the examiners might move towards a consensus view; this may be done by roundtable discussion, a conference call, or separate discussions with each examiner. If, after such
discussions, the examiners still disagree, then an adjudicator will be appointed by the Dean
of Postgraduate Research based on recommendation from the relevant Department/School.
The Adjudicator will examine the thesis and consider the examiners’ reports, and make a
decision which will be final.
The result of the examination is final, unless the candidate can demonstrate the examination process
has been affected by procedural errors or inappropriate practice. A student who believes that there
has been such a violation can make an informal academic appeal to the Dean of Postgraduate
Research. If the student is not satisfied with the response from the Dean, he or she can formally
appeal to the University Grievance Advisor.
Page 5 of 5