After Master’s Thesis As A Tool For Program Evaluation

After Master’s Thesis As A Tool For Program Evaluation

A. Kindgren, U. Nilsson, I. Wiklund (2012).  After Master’s Thesis As A Tool For Program Evaluation. 16.

This paper presents initial experiences and results from the content analyses of reflection documents made by students after finishing their Master’s theses. The reflection document is a compulsory part of the examination of the Master’s thesis since spring semester 2011.The main objectives of the reflection document has been to give feedback to examiners and program boards about how the learning outcomes of the program are fulfilled and how the student’s individual skills have developed during the thesis work.

At the Institute of Technology at Linköping University all engineering programs use the CDIO-syllabus, slightly modified, to express goals and learning outcomes. Since there is an upcoming national evaluation of engineering education in Sweden this study is an initiative to test if the reflection documents can be used as a complement in the evaluation process to provide evidence of fulfillment of the national program learning outcomes.

This pilot study includes a subset of all the submitted reflection documents. The result from this study indicates that the method used can provide evidence of the students’ perceptions of the program and fulfillment of the goals. The findings show that the students find most of the learning outcomes fulfilled although some areas must be clarified and improved.


Authors (New): 
Annalena Kindgren
Ulf Nilsson
Ingela Wiklund
Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
learning outcomes
reflection document
content analysis
Bankel J., Berggren K.-F., Crawley E., Engström M., El Gaidi K., Östlund S., Soderholm D. and Wiklund I., “Benchmarking Engineering Curricula with the CDIO Syllabus”, The International Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 21, No. 1, 2005, pp 121-133.: 
Bankel J., Berggren K.-F., Blom K., Crawley E. F., Östlund S. and Wiklund I., “The CDIO Syllabus: A comparative study of expected student proficiency”, The European Journal of Engineering Education, Vol. 28, No. 3, 2003.: 
Gunnarsson S., Wiklund I., Svensson T., Kindgren A., and Granath S., “Large scale use of the CDIO Syllabus in formulation of program and course goals”, 3rd International CDIO Conference, 2007.: 
Malmqvist J., Östlund S. and Edström K., “Integrated Program Descriptions – A Tool for Communicating Goals and Design of CDIO Programs”, 2nd International CDIO Conference.: 
Sparsö J., Klit P., May M., Mohr G. and Viglid M.E., “Towards CDIO-based B.eng studies at the Technical University of Denmark”, 3rd International CDIO Conference, 2007.: 
Gunnarsson S., Herbertsson H., Kindgren A., Wiklund I., Willumsen L. and Viglid M.E., “Using the CDIO Syllabus in Formulation of Program Goals – Experiences and Comparisons”, 5th International CDIO Conference.: 
Edwardsson Stiwne E. and Jungert T., “Engineering Students Experiences of the Transition from Study to Work”, 3rd International CDIO Conference, 2007.: 
Svensson T. and Krysander C. (2011) Project Model LIPS. Studentlitteratur, Lund, 2011.: 
ISBN 9789144075266.
General Guidelines for Self-Evaluation in the Swedish National Agency for Higher Education´s Quality Evaluation System 2011—2014, Stockholm, Högskoleverket, 2011:11 R. Available at <>.: 
Sadurskis A., “Quality Assurance of Engineering Education in Sweden”, 1st International CDIO Conference.: 
Lux Examination Review: Handledning för korsvis utvärdering av examensarbeten (in Swedish), Linköping University & Umeå University, 2010. Available at <>: 
Gunnarsson S., Lindblad E., and Wiklund I., “Using an alumni survey as a tool for program evaluation”, 1st Annual CDIO Conference, Kingston, Ontario, Canada, 2005.: 
Berggren K.-F., Svensson T., Gunnarsson S., and Wiklund I., “Development of the Applied Physics and Electrical Engineering (Y) Program at Linköping University through the participation in the CDIO Initiative”, 8th UICEE Annual Conference on Engineering Education, Kingston, Jamaica, 2005.: 
Study Guide 2012, Institute of Technology, Linköping University <>: 
Hsiu-Fang H. and Shannon S.E., “Three Approaches to Qualitative content Analysis”, Qual Health Res November 2005: 
Go to top