Thesis Writing in Business Education – from a Student Perspective

2and demonstrate acquired academicqualifications. It is also very importantfrom the perspective of the institution,since the quality of finished theses canbe seen as an indicator of the quality ofits education and teaching practices. InSweden, finished theses are for examplelooked upon when the National Agencyfor Higher Education evaluates thequality of institutions and programmes.It also seems as if this kind of degreeprojects will be of even moreimportance in the future, as an indicatorof educational quality. According to theNational Agency, a suggested newquality-based resource allocationsystem will involve changes withrespect to its quality evaluationprocedures. More emphasis will be paidon the results of educationalprogrammes, e.g. the quality of thesisprojects, instead of mainly evaluatingcircumstantial and institutional factors,such as teaching resources andinfrastructure (see Swedish NationalAgency for Higher Education,www.hsv.se).Thesis writing is thus important inseveral respects. However, it is also asource of severe problems; for students,for university teachers, and fordepartments. This is the background formany pieces of research on the subjectin question (see e.g. Ylijoki, 2001;Emsheimer, 2005; Hagström, 2005);also the one presented here.In this article, thesis writing isexplored within a business educationcontext. The aim is to approach it fromthe students’ perspectives in order tolearn more about their expectations,experiences and understandings ofthesis writing and related researchproject. As Ramden says (2003, p. 6):“...we can improve our teaching bystudying our students’ learning – bylistening to and learning from ourstudents.”In next, I describe thesis writing inthe context where it is studied, that is aSwedish bachelor’s programme inbusiness and economics. Here I alsotouch upon the problems that we – asteachers and as an educationalinstitution – experience. Thereafter, Ielaborate on earlier research projectsand findings. I also position my study inrelation to previous ones. In section IV,the method used is described beforereviewing the results of the study insection V. The article ends with adiscussion on the results and theirimplications for teaching practices.II.Thesis Writing in a BusinessEducation ProgrammeIn Sweden, it is common to endprogrammes in business and economicswith a thesis writing project. At abachelor’s level, this project is normallyorganised as a 15 credits course andscheduled to take about 10 weeks ofstudy. This is also the case within theprogramme in business and economicswhich are offered at Blekinge Instituteof Technology (BTH), and which are atfocus here. During the thesis writingcourse at BTH, a number of lectures andseminars are officially scheduled. Thelectures normally deal with issues suchas formulating the research topic,methods for collecting and analysingdata and thesis writing. During theseminars, the suggested research topicsas well as thesis drafts are presented anddiscussed, by student colleagues andteachers. Most thesis writing projectsare conducted in groups of two or threestudents. Each group gets a supervisorwhich more continually helps thestudents in the process of conducting aresearch project and writing a thesis.There are no general guidelines forsupervision, at least no formally andexplicitly expressed ones. Howsupervision is performed depends muchon the supervisor’s ideas and ideals aswell as the capacity of and agreementswith the student group.

3Even if the thesis writing projectofficially should take about 10 weeks, itusually takes much longer. In somecases, the students struggle for years tofinish their theses. Obstacles whichoccur during the process are oftenrelated to the activity of formulating theresearch problem, collecting empiricalmaterial and analysing/interpreting thematerial. Corresponding parts within thewritten thesis frequently point atdeficient quality with respect to thescientific research problem, thereasoning regarding methods, thequality and quantity of empiricalmaterial, as well as the level of analysis.These problems with respect to time andquality create frustration among bothstudents and teachers. They also meanthat supervising activities require moreresources than planned and allocatedfor. Besides that, these problems reducethe number of degrees produced andlengthen the time of study for thestudents. In order to overcome some ofmentioned problems we have plannedand organized the thesis writing coursein different ways, e.g. with respect tocourse length, number of meetings,written instructions and prescribedbooks. The underlying idea has beenthat the ways we plan and organize thethesis course have an impact on thestudents’ possibilities to complete theirtheses; similar to one of the meaningsthat Hagström presents (2005, pp. 113-119). However, these attempts do notseem to have resulted in any majorimprovements with respect to time andquality deficiencies. The underlyingproblem seems to go deeper than theplanning and organising of the thesiswriting course. Besides that, thesedifferent attempts have not really beenbased upon any research findingsregarding such aspects and studentresults.III.Studies on Thesis WritingConsidering the importance as well asthe challenge of thesis writing, it hasattracted attention from a number ofresearchers. One interesting piece ofresearch is presented in Hagström(2005). In her work, Hagström analysestexts on thesis writing, both handbooksand research texts. Based on heranalysis, she concludes that differentmeanings of thesis writing emerge. Inmany handbooks for example, thesiswriting seems to be much aboutfollowing rules. This kind of text dealswith such issues such as grammar,referencing, academic style anddisposition. She also states that thesetexts are – paradoxically – seldom veryacademic in their character, in the senseof presenting a critical andproblematising view of thesis writingand thesis writing projects.Even if Hagström does not reallyapproach the subject from a studentperspective, her analysis of handbooksstill contributes to an increasedunderstanding of it. By being aware ofthose meanings that handbooks – andprobably also related teaching – present,we can better understand students’ ideasand pre-understandings of such projectsand writings.As mentioned, Hagström alsoanalyses research texts and constructmeanings in a similar way as withhandbooks. She identifies one type ofstudy which addresses institutionalfactors in relation to thesis writing. Theidea behind this kind of research is thata determining factor with respect to thestudents’ possibility to complete theirtheses is the universities’ planning andorganising of the course and the thesiswriting process. According to Hagström(ibid.), these studies suggest that factorssuch as an early introduction of the task,organised meetings between studentsand teachers and clarity in requirementshave positive effects on the thesiswriting process.

4Another type of research texts whichHagström identifies represent aperspective which this article and studyis inspired by. This perspective is basedupon – what Hagström calls – aphenomenographic research traditionwith e.g. Marton, Hounsell andEntwistle (1986), Biggs (2003) andRamsden (2003) as importantadvocates. Within this genre ofresearch, the students’ own learning isat focus. What students believe that theyshould learn, what they learn, how theylearn, and how they experience teachingmethods and assessment procedures aresome central questions which are dealtwith in this kind of research. Anunderlying idea is that we can improveour teaching by better understandinglearning – as well as teaching – from thestudents’ perspective. Another centralidea, expressed by these researchers, isthat higher education should encouragewhat they call ‘deep learning”. Theythus make a distinction made betweensurface and deep learning. Somewhatsimply put, surface learning relates tomemorising facts whereas deep learninginvolves a deeper understanding ofmeaning. According to previousresearch, many students seem to aim atsurface learning. However, and moresevere, is that a lot of teaching andexamination methods seem toencourage surface learning; often incontrary to teachers’ intentions (see e.g.Entwistle, 1986). Another commonalityamong mentioned researchers is thatthey suggest a holistic approach toteaching. This is for example reflectedin Bigg’s model of constructivealignment (2003), which includesaspects such as students’ expectationsand prerequisites, stated learningoutcomes, and teaching and learningmethods. According to Hagström, thesiswriting in these texts is much aboutunderstanding the content. In order toaccomplish a good thesis, the studentshave to understand thesis writing in adeep and holistic sense. Still anotherperspective that is dealt with byHagström in relation to research texts isthe meaning of thesis writing aslearning in context. The study by Blåsjö(2004) can be mentioned as an exampleof this last perspective. In her study,Blåsjö conducts fieldwork in twodifferent departments; a department ofhistory and one of economics.Observations from her study show thatthe educational setting has a majorinfluence on students’ writing. The twodisciplines are very different withrespect to epistemology, scientificideals and research discourse;differences that are reflected in finishedtheses and the process of writing them.Accordingly, in the work of Hagström(2005) existing texts and studies onthesis writing are analysed anddiscussed. A different kind of textanalysis is presented by Emsheimer(2005; see also 2004). In his study,Emsheimer analyses student theses withrespect to e.g. research questions,methods, theory and the interpretationof empirical data. Emsheimer concludesthat investigated theses have many goodqualities. The literature review and theamount of empirical data are oftenimpressive in the students’ work, as twoexamples. However, several theses haveshortcomings, particularly with respectto method and the analyses of empiricaldata. In order to better understandobserved shortcomings, Eimsheimerinterviews a handful of students. Oneinterpretation that Eimsheimer does hasconnections to Hagström’s meanings ofthesis writing. According toEimsheimer, few students seem to reallyreflect upon the meaning of e.g. methodand theory, and their role in the thesiswork. The students have in other wordsnot developed a deep understanding ofthese concepts and phenomenon. Tothem thesis writing – for example thewriting of a method section – is much

7presented. Being inspired by Bigg’s 3Pmodel(2003), I have structured theresults in three sections which eachreflect one P in his model. The first P –presage – relates to factors, whichconstitute the conditions for teachingand learning. It addresses both studentfactors and institutional ones, such asstudent expectations, prerequisites,teaching capacity and availableliterature. Since this study approachesthesis writing from a studentperspective, the article covers mainlystudent-related factors. Naturally,students are not aware of institutionalfactors and may not consider them. Thenext P – process – focuses on learningactivities. In this section, I addressteaching methods, supervision, studentactivities among other things. The last Pin Bigg’s model relates to the productof a course or an assignment; in otherwords learning outcomes.i. Expectations/PreunderstandingsIn this section, I will cover three aspectswhich can be argued to be presagefactors;a) expectations, b) goals andambitions, and c) perceivedpreparedness.To start with expectations, thestudents that I talk to which are in thevery beginning of their thesis writingproject express both positive andnegative attitudes towards theapproaching task. All five expect thetask to be time-consuming and hard toaccomplish in time; something theyhave heard from other students as wellas from teachers. Some do also expectthe work to cause some frustration. Onestudent expresses her expectations ofthe thesis writing task in the followingway:“It will be irritating and tough.”Another student put it in a similarway, when saying:“It will be hard work, time-consuming.And if we have to rewrite and rewrite, itmay also be frustrating.”The students’ accounts also reveal aportion of anxiety among theinterviewees, primarily related to theintroductory work of determining thetopic and specifying the purpose of theproject. One student explains that shefeels some anguish since she does notknow yet what she and her group matesshould write about. Another femalestudent – who is very positive to thethesis writing task and look forward toit – adds:“But sure, I am a little bit worried. Tostart the work, to get it right from thebeginning. I know it is hard to find agood problem area.”A third student expresses his anxietyin the following way:“I am worried, if I should manage it ornot. I have respect for the task, you couldsay.”In the interviews, it becomes evidentthat all five students are well aware ofthe fact that many students do not finishthe thesis work in time, and that somedo not manage to finish it at all. Theyalso know that many failures go back tothe introductory work of determiningthe topic and formulating a researchproblem. This awareness explains someof the students’ anxiety.Despite anxiety and some negativeexpectations, they seem to have mainlypositive feelings regarding the task andthey are eager to start the work.Especially one student expresses a verypositive attitude towards the thesiswork. She says:“It will be so much fun! [...] We [me andmy group mates] want to start now.”

8She explains that she likes the kind ofwork that a thesis project involves andthat she thinks that she is prepared forthis challenging assignment. She likeswriting and to do independent projects.She continues:“Think of traditional written exams. It ismuch about memorizing facts. [...] Idon’t like that and this task is different.”Here then, she indicates that she doesnot aim at the kind of surface learning,that she believes traditional writtenexams encourages. Still another studentuses the word “fun” when describinghis ideas about the thesis work. When Iask him what he thinks about the task,he answers:“Fun. Interesting. It will be fun to dealwith a problem and to try to solve it.”Thereafter, he touches upon anotheraspect which some of the others alsomention; an aspect which make themfeel positive about the thesis writingproject. It is the last assignment beforetaking a degree!Statements also indicate that theyhave great expectations regarding thework. It is now that they should showus – and themselves – that they can useall knowledge that they have learnedduring the programme. It is now that allpieces should be put together. And it isnow that they finally will get anopportunity to learn a subject moredeeply.Several of the students also clarifythat they are looking forward to the daywhen the thesis is finished. They haveall seen how happy, relieved andsatisfied students are, the day whenthey present the final version of thethesis.Regarding the students’ goals andambitions, they all mention the sameones. Their main goals seem to be toproduce a good thesis, in time. Thesegoals and ambitions are for exampleexpressed in the following statements:“My goal is to do accomplish a goodpiece of work, as good as possible.”“I want it to be the best that I have done;something to be proud of.”“We aim at June [which is the officiallydeadline]; then we want the thesis to befinished.”They also declare that they areprepared and are willing to work veryhard to accomplish this. One studentexclaims:“We will work as hell.”One student also emphasises that theyhave to work efficiently. It means thatthey have to set the alarm clock, start towork at eight o’clock in the morningand then work the whole day. He thenadds with a smile:“Something that we [as students] maynot be used to.”In general, they also feel that they areprepared for the task and that they havethe prerequisites that are required inorder to accomplish it. None of thestudents that I talk to expresses anypuzzlement regarding the project. Theyfeel that they have a clear idea of whatthey should do and what is required ofthem. They particularly mention oneprevious course – called Seminars andscientific research projects – as onewhich has made them well prepared forthe assignment. Regarding this course,one student says:“It has made me realize how a thesisshould look like. And what parts thatshould be included.”Since the students seem to expect it tobe especially tricky to formulate a

9research problem, I also ask about this.I ask them if they – by now –understand the meaning of a researchproblem. All answer yes on thatquestion. According to themselves, theyknow quite well the requirements andcharacteristics of a research problem.Three of the students also mention acourse in organisation as a useful one.In that course they practiced to analyseempirical data with the help of theory;something that they think will be usefulin the thesis work.Also assignments included inspecialisation courses, which precedethe thesis work, are mentioned as goodpreparations for the thesis project.However, here the answers differsomewhat since the students have takendifferent courses. One student says thatshe had to read many scientific articlesin her course, which she thinks willhelp her. Another student mentions thatthey had to do interviews and writepapers in her specialisation course;good exercises which have made hermore prepared.In general then, the students are quiteconvinced that they have neededknowledge and capabilities in order tosuccessfully finish the project.However, the time is a problem.Therefore, a couple of students say thatthey would have appreciated if they –already in the specialisation course –had started to work on the thesisproject. These students argue that itwould have felt even better if they –when the thesis writing course starts –already had a relevant and interestingtopic to dig into.It can further be added that also thestudents, that recently have finishedtheir projects, think that they were wellprepared for the task. However, whentalking to these students, some thingsare brought up which they – afterwards– realise that they lacked knowledgeabout and experiences in. One of theseis knowledge about different methods.In previous courses, they have learnedlittle about methods. They have furtherdone very few – if any – profoundempirical investigations.ii.Process ExperiencesConsidering the above presentationbased on the students’ accounts, moststudents enter the project with positivefeelings, even if they are a little bitanxious about their capacity. They alsofeel quite prepared for the task and haveclear ambitions to work very hard.Despite this, a majority of the studentsget into trouble quite early. Asmentioned in the method section, Iconduct four interviews with studentsthat – according to officially schedules– should be in the middle of theprocess. Three of these students werealso talked to before they started towork on their theses. These follow upinterviews reveal that all students –except for one – are well behind thetimetable after only a couple of weeks.It can also be noted that those studentsthat recently have finished their thesesalso passed the initial deadline a longtime ago. One student have evenrestarted the thesis writing project fromthe very beginning, after having failedto finish her first one.In this section, I elaborate on theproblems which the students haveencountered during the process. I alsodiscuss how they perceive the supportfrom e.g. supervisors, lectures andseminars in order to see weaknesses andstrengths in teaching methods – andthus from the students’ perspective. Ialso pay some special attention to thestudent who is in line with thetimetable; something that can be statedas unusual.As expected, it is mainly theintroductory work that causes thestudents problem. The interviews revealthat they have a very hard timepresenting a research project that fulfilsscientific requirements. Two students,

10who work together, tell me that theyrecently have changed topic andthereby almost started from thebeginning. One of them explains:“It didn’t turn out as we expected. [...]We thought that we could continue onour track, and make it into aresearchable problem. But it didn’t work.So, we decided to change tracks.”When they try to explain why theycouldn’t continue to develop theiroriginal idea they are quite vague. Theysay that they think that their project wastoo broad and the research problem tooimprecise, but they can’t explain inwhat sense. When I explicitly ask themif they understand the shortcomings oftheir previous draft and project idea,they both answer:“No, not really.”One of them continues:“Actually, it felt quite good. [...] But wehave to trust our supervisors.”They further describe that they feltquite overwhelmed when they realisedthat the project did not meet scientificrequirements and that they had torethink. When I do the interview, theyfeel though that they are on track again.They have – together with theirsupervisors – determined a purpose andthey feel that they have a quite clearidea of what they should do.The interviews further reveal thatmany of their class mates – also thosethat I do not talk to – are in a similarsituation, even if they have not gone sofar and changed the topic as theprevious group. But they struggle withthe task of defining the project andformulating a researchable problem.Also the students who have managed tofinish their theses claim that this wasthe most difficult part of the work andrequired much more time and effortthan they ever could have expected.One group that I interview likened thewhole process of writing a thesis with aroller coaster. They say:“It was ups and downs”.They further clarify that the work ofdefining a project and formulating aresearch problems involved many – andheavy – downs.Still another student that should be inthe middle of the process clarify thather group is behind the timetable. Sheadds though another explanation forthis. She tells me that it took weeksbefore they got a supervisor and thengot in contact with him. She says:“Since we didn’t have a supervisor wedidn’t know if we were on the right track.Which we weren’t...”She further explains that once theymet him, they received great help withthe problem statement. Even if there arestill some improvements andclarifications to make, she feels thatthey – by now – know quite well whatthe purpose of the project is. But shestresses that the delay that this blundercaused them will be impossible to catchup with.As mentioned, there is one exceptionamong all the delayed projects. Onestudent clarify that her group followsthe plan, or they are even a little bitahead of the plan. Consequently, shestrongly believes that they will be ableto finish the project in time. She evenclaim that the work so far have beensomewhat easier than she expected. Sheputs it in the following way:“It feels good. I thought that I would bemore under stress. But it feels verygood...”She also clarifies that their supervisorseems very pleased with what they haveaccomplished so far. When this student

11– let’s call her Sara – communicates herideas about the work of writing a thesis,she provides me with a picture whichhas similarities with Ylijoki’s businesslikestory (2001). According to Sara, itis not a big deal to write a thesis. It justhas to be done, and you need to workhard and with great discipline. At thesame time, Sara seems to have – whatGibb et.al. (1986) call – an academiclearning orientation. She likes theacademic elements in her education andshe sees the point in them, even if notplanning an academic career.Accordingly, the combination of anacademic orientation and a businesslikeattitude towards the task of writinga thesis seems to be a good one, in therespect of keeping the timetable andsatisfying the supervisor.When I ask the students to describewhere they are in the process, theyfirstly tell we what parts they havechapter, have started to write on themethod and so forth. This written in thethesis. For example, they declare theyhave almost finished the introductorysuggests that they mainly see theproject as a writing task; somethingwhich also the title of this articleindicates. To them then, the meaning of‘thesis writing’ is closely related towriting a report. Even if some of themmention that they have made someinterviews, few accounts indicate thatthey also see the task as a researchproject.To continue with the students’perspective of teaching methods duringthe course and process, they are ingeneral very satisfied. When I ask themabout the lectures which has beenoffered on e.g. methods and academicwriting, they have been to most ofthem. They also assert that they find thelectures useful. All students that I talkto – irrespective of supervisor – are alsovery pleased with the supervision, whenit takes place. They stress that thesupervisors are eager to help, that theyhave the right attitude, and that theyprovide them with useful comments.They also appreciate that thesupervisors leave the decisions to them,and that they do not provide them withsolutions. The students – somewhatimplicitly – express the idea that thesiswriting is an independent project, whichthey want to accomplish mostly bythemselves. This also explains why thestudents do not want the supervisors tointerfere more in their work, and whythey do not ask for more meetings.However, some disappointment withrespect to supervising is brought up. Asmentioned, one group had to wait quitelong before they got a supervisor. Thereare also some accounts that reveal thatsome supervisors are hard to get incontact with, and that they are bad atanswering short questions in e-mail.But – and as already pointed at – whenthey meet with their supervisors andreal supervision takes place, thestudents are satisfied.Regarding the seminars that arescheduled and where the aim is topresent drafts and to discuss them, thereare different opinions. On the one hand,most of them think that these seminarsare necessary. They need to read otherstudents’ reports and they need tocomment upon them. On the otherhand, they do not really find themuseful in the sense of carrying their ownpiece of work forward. Mostly, they getcomments from the seminar leaders;which they would have gotten anywaywhen meeting with the supervisors. Afew students do also find these seminarsunfair. According to them, some groupsget a lot of criticism and some hardlyany comments. And they can’t reallysee the correlation between the amountof comments and the quality of thework. Thereby, the seminars may beperceived as unfair and somewhatmysterious.

12iii.Learning OutcomesIt is now time to turn our attention tothe last P – the product. In this section,I will cover three topics that in somesense are related to the product. Besideslearning outcomes, I also elaborate onthe purpose of the course and therequirements in order to pass it.Regarding the purpose of the course,all the students who are about to enterthe thesis project seem to have a clearidea what it is, even if they have notread the official course plan. (It is onlyone student who has read the courseplan and that is Sara – our modelstudent.) However, the ideas about themain purpose differ somewhat. Somestudents stress that they – in this lastassignment – should show us what theyhave learned during their education.Such ideas are reflected in thefollowing statements:“The purpose... It is to show you that wehave understood all the things that wehave learned. And also showourselves...”“[In this work] we shall demonstratewhat we have learned.”A statement which is quite contrary isprovided by a third student. He says:“At the beginning of the education Ithought that we should show you all thatwe have learnt [in this piece of work].But now, I don’t think so. It is not aboutthat. It is impossible to show you all thatwe have learned...”However, when I try to figure outwhat kind of knowledge they think thatthey should show us, I realise that theideas differ. One student explains thatthey should show us that they knowhow to write an academic report.Another one mainly think of knowledgerelated to the subject of business andmanagement. Still another one bringsup knowledge related to research andinvestigatory work.Some students emphasise theacademic purpose of the thesis writingtask. They say:“It [the thesis work] is part of thisacademic thing. To conduct a study, todo research.”“[The aim is to get a] deeperunderstanding of how humans create –and store – knowledge.”A last student think that the purposeis to “tie up the sack”, as he puts it. Inother words, and according to his view,the aim is to get all pieces together.It can also be noted that all students –except for possibly one – claim thatthey regard the thesis writing project asa useful one, also in relation to a futureprofessional life. This was somewhatunexpected considering what waspreviously mentioned; that manystudents regard business educationsmore as a vocational education than asan academic one. However, the way ofreasoning is somewhat differentbetween the students. Those studentsthat have recently finished the thesiswork, mention such learning outcomessuch as the ability to conduct a projectsystematically and the ability to arguelogically and trustworthy. Among thosethat are about to start the project, theybring forward to topic of the project andthe usefulness of digging deep into aspecific topic. They also mention theusefulness of knowing how to write areport. Two of those students alsomention that they in a futureprofessional life may have to makesmaller investigations; somethingwhich the thesis writing task preparethem for. However, one student admits– with some hesitation – that he thinksthat thesis writing is mainly anacademic device, which has littleconnection to a ‘real’ life.Consequently, he sees limited

13usefulness of the task, in relation to hisfuture professional life.The above answers also indicate whatthe students think that the learningoutcomes of the course will be, or havebeen. According to the students, theywill learn – or have learned – how towrite a report, how to make aninvestigation, how to read and analysescientific articles and papers, as someexamples. However, there is only onestudent – in the beginning of theprocess – who has read the course planand thus has seen the officially statedlearning outcomes. As mentioned, it isSara.Regarding the officially statedlearning outcomes, I read them to thosethree students who worked together andwho recently have finished their thesis.Luckily, they all nod convincingly at allof them, when I ask them if they thinkthat those aims have been fulfilled andif they have managed to reach statedlearning outcomes. However, it hastaken quite long time since they presenttheir thesis half a year after planneddeadline. When discussing this, they donot have any ideas on how to speed upthis process. They simply state:“These things take long time to reallyunderstand. You need time.”Regarding requirements – the lastaspect which will be covered here – theobservations are somewhatcontradictory. At one hand the studentsclaim that they are well aware of therequirements and what is expected ofthem. When I ask the students at thebeginning of the process, if they feelconfused about the task, several of themclaim with certainty:“No, not at all.”There are however many otherstatements that indicate that there issome confusion despite all. First of all,those students that recently havepresented their thesis at a final seminarseem to have no idea what the gradewill be. Also, statements, whichindicate that the students find workingseminars and comments from seminarleaders unfair, point at some confusion.It suggests that the students are unableto evaluate their own and otherstudents’ work, in relation to scientificrequirements.VI. Discussion and TeachingImplicationsThe above account of students’perceptions and experiences of thethesis work raises many questions andtopics for discussion. One observationthat can be made is that their statementsdirect attention towards some issuesthat quite easily can be handled in orderto improve the planning andimplementation of the thesis writingprocess. Some of these ideas are in linewith previous studies on institutionalfactors, mentioned by Hagström (2005)and in section III. One such thing is theidea to relate one assignment in thepreceding course to the thesis work.Thereby, the students would be forcedto start earlier with the project, whichmeans that they may have a topicalready when the thesis writing coursestarts. This would probably diminishthe students’ anxiety and help themkeep the timetable. Since the studentshave very limited time – which we alsostress – it is of course important that we– as teachers and supervisors – actquickly. No group should have to waitfor weeks before getting a supervisor.We also have to be better at answeringstudents’ questions quickly, also whenthey are sent on mail. For us – asteachers – it is easy to assume that it isnot very urgent to react on students’mail. We seem to assume that thestudents simply continue their thesiswriting work while waiting. However,some statements from the studentsindicate that they do not. Even if the

14students regard thesis writing as anindependent project and claim that theydo not want more involvement from thesupervisors, they seem to stop the workwhile waiting for an answer from thesupervisor. It suggests that the studentshave a quite linear view of the projectwork. One issue or problem has to befinished and solved before tackling thenext.Another thing which may improvethe thesis writing project – also relatedto supervision – is that it may be fruitfulto have a more active way ofsupervising in the beginning of theprocess; with many frequent meetingscharacterised by dialogue anddiscussions. This would possibly helpthe students in the process of definingthe purpose of the project.The students’ stories and accountsalso reveal aspects which are moretroublesome to deal with. Asmentioned, most students encounteredsevere problems when formulating ascientific research problem, despite thefact that they claim that they knew whata research problem means. Thisobservation suggests that students knowthe requirements of a scientific researchproject on a surface level. In otherwords, they can quite easily line up thecharacteristics of a research project ofhigh quality. However, they seem tohave limited understanding of thedeeper meaning of these requirements,and the consequences when doing anown piece of research. This may alsorelate to similar aspects, such as methodand theory (cf. Emsheimer, 2005). Acentral question is then: How can wechange our teaching methods andlearning activities in order to encouragedeep learning regarding such difficultthings as research problem, method andtheory? All these concepts can beunderstood as threshold concepts (seee.g. Meyer & Land, 2003). They are allvery difficult to understand but oncethey are understood a new worldappears. Maybe a first step is to moredeeply dig into the students’ ideas andperceptions of these concepts.The study also reveals that thestudents have a hard time understandinghow we assess their work and how weevaluate the quality of written theses.One group did not understand why theirproject idea was not good enough. Onegroup could not understand why theyhad received many comments during aseminar despite the fact that theythought that their draft was better thansome of the others. And the studentswho recently had finished their thesesfound it hard to speculate on the finalgrade. All these observations indicatethat the evaluation process and ourassessment criteria are quite obscure tostudents. Accordingly, a challengingtask is to make the process and thecriteria more visible and to explicitlyrelate comments and judgements tostated evaluation criteria.Furthermore, many different picturesand ideas about the thesis writingproject appear in the students’ accounts,even if we also see some similarities intheir way of reasoning The studentsrelate the project with somewhatdifferent purposes, different meanings,and different learning outcomes. AsHagström (2005) stresses, handbooksfor example reflect a meaning of thesiswriting that it is mainly about followingrules, and particularly in relation towriting. Such ideas do also occur inmany the students’ stories. Of course, itis important to be aware of this; thatstudents relate thesis writing withdifferent meanings. However, andmaybe even more important, is toconsider that our teaching methods andteaching activities may support variousmeanings. Hereby, we may not be ableto accomplish the kind of constructivealignment as Biggs (2003) advocatesfor, in the programme generally and inthe thesis writing course specifically.

15Accordingly, this study raises manyquestions and point at many things thatcan be done, both related to teachingand research on thesis writing.Considering further research, it wouldbe very interesting to more closelyfollow a student group through theirthesis writing process and to join themin their “ups and downs”.VII.ReferencesArmstrong, S J, Allinson, C W &Hayes, J (2004) “The effects ofcognitive style on research supervision:A study of student-supervisor dyads inmanagement education”. Academy ofManagement Learning and Education,Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 41-63.Biggs, J (2003) Teaching for QualityLearning at University. London: OpenUniversity Press.Blåsjö, M (2004) Studenters skrivande itvå kunskapsbyggande miljöer.Doctoral Dissertation. Stockholm:Almqvist & Wiksell International.Dysthe, O, Samar, A & Westrheim, K(2006) “Multivoiced supervision ofMaster’s students: a case study ofalternative supervision practices inhigher education”. Studies in HigherEducation, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 299-318.Emsheimer, P (2004) Hur utvecklavetenskaplighet? Utvärdering avexamensarbetena i den särskildalärarutbildningen (SÄL). Stockholm:Lärarhögskolan i Stockholm.Emsheimer, P (2005) Likheter,skillnader och bearbetande – en studieom studenter i examensarbete. WorkingPaper. Stockholm: Lärarhögskolan iStockholm.Emsheimer, P (2008) ”För mig är detstudenten som är produkten”. En studieav handledaruppfattningar om måletför handledning av examensarbeten ochutsagor om handledningsarbetetskaraktär. Working Paper. Stockholm:Stockholms Universitet.Entwistle, N (1986) “Olika perspektivpå inlärning”. In Marton, F, Hounsell,D & Entwistle, N (Eds.) Hur vi lär.Stockholm: Prisma.Gibb, G, Morgan, A & Taylor, E (1986)”Den lärandes värld.” In Marton, F,Hounsell, D & Entwistle, N (Eds.) Hurvi lär. Stockholm: Prisma.Hagström, E (2005) Meningar omuppsatsskrivande i högskolan. DoctoralDissertation. Örebro: Örebro Studies inEducation 12.McCune, V (2004) “Development offirst-year students’ conceptions of essaywriting”. Higher Education, 47, pp.257-282.Li, S & Seale, C (2007) “Managingcriticism in Ph.D. supervision: aqualitative case study”. Studies inHigher Education, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp.511-526.Light, G (2002) “From the personal tothe public: Conceptions of creativewriting in higher education”. HigherEducation, 43, pp. 257-276.Marton, F, Hounsell, D & Entwistle, N(1986) Hur vi lär. Stockholm: Prisma.Meyer, E & Land, R (2003) “ThresholdConcepts and Troublesome Knowledge:Linkages to Ways of Thinking andPracticing within the Disciplines”.Occasional Report, 4, ss. 1-12.Ramsden, P (2003) Learning to Teachin Higher Education. London:RoutledgeFalmer.Ylijoki, O-H (2001) ”Master’s thesiswriting from a narrative approach”.

Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 26,No. 1, ss. 21-34.16