Study Guide

Objective

Students are able to implement a research, development or evaluation process according to their thesis plan.

Content

Implementation of the process according to the thesis plan.

Materials

Current scientific articles recommended by teachers. The list in Moodle platform.
Suositeltavaa kirjallisuutta:
Burns, N., & Grove, S. (2009). The practice of nursing research. Appraisal, synthesis and generation of evidence. 6th ed. Missouri: Saunders Elsevier.
Cresswell, J. (2003). Research design. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Second edition. Thousand Oaks. Sage Publications.
Hirsjärvi, S., & Hurme, H. (2004 tai uud.). Tutkimushaastattelu, teemahaastattelun teoria ja käytäntö. Yliopistopaino, Helsinki.
Johansson, K., Axelin, A., Stolt, M., & Ääri, R-L. (2007). Systemaattinen kirjallisuuskatsaus ja sen tekeminen. Turun yliopisto, Hoitotieteen laitoksen julkaisuja A51/2007, Turku.
Kankkunen, P, & Vehviläinen-Julkunen, K. (2009). Tutkimus hoitotieteessä. WSOYpro.
Keränen, T., & Pasternack, A. (2015). Kliinisen tutkimuksen etiikka. Kustannus Oy Duodecim, Tallinna.
Kniivilä, S. (2017). Tiede ja teksti, tehoa ja taitoa tutkielman kirjoittamiseen. Gaudeamus Oy, Tallinna.
Kostamo, P., Airaksinen, T., & Vilkka, H. (2022). Kirjoita itsesi asiantuntijaksi. Opas toiminnalliseen opinnäytetyöhön. Art House, Tallinna.
Malmivaara, A. (2022). Vaikuttavuus sosiaali- ja terveydenhuollossa. Kustannus Oy Duodecim, Tallinna.
Metsämuuronen, J. (2000). Tilastollisen kuvauksen perusteet. Methelp.
Metsämuuronen, J. (2006). Laadullisen tutkimuksen käsikirja. Methelp.
Metsämuuronen, J. (2005). Tilastollisen päättelyn perusteet. Methelp.
Mäkinen, O. (2005). Tieteellisen kirjoittamisen ABC. Kustannusosakeyhtiö Tammi, Karisto Oy, Hämeenlinna.
Polit, D.F., & Beck, C.T. (2012). Nursing research: Generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice (8th ed.) Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
Puusa, A., & Juuti, P. (2020). Laadullisen tutkimuksen näkökulmat ja menetelmät. Gaudeamus Oy, Tallinna.
Stolt, M., Axelin, A., & Suhonen, R. (2016). Kirjallisuuskatsaus hoitotieteessä. Turun yliopisto, Hoitotieteen laitoksen julkaisuja. Tutkimuksia ja raportteja A73/2016, Turun yliopisto.
Toikko, T, & Rantanen, T. (2009). Tutkimuksellinen kehittämistoiminta. Näkökulmia kehittämisprosessiin, osallistamiseen ja tiedontuotantoon. Tampere University Press ja tekijät. 3. korjattu painos. Tampereen Yliopistopaino Oy – Juvenes Print, Tampere.
Vilkka, H., & Airaksinen, T. (2004a). Toiminnallinen opinnäytetyö. Kustannusosakeyhtiö Tammi. Gummerus Kirjapaino Oy, Jyväskylä.
Vilkka, H., & Airaksinen, T. (2004b). Toiminnallisen opinnäytetyön ohjaajan käsikirja. Kustannusosakeyhtiö Tammi. Tammer-Paino Oy, Tampere.
Vilkka, H. (2020). Akateemisen lukemisen ja kirjoittamisen opas. PS-kustannus, Otavan Kirjapaino Oy, Keuruu.
Vilkka, H. (2021). Näin onnistut opinnäytetyössä. Ratkaisut tutkimuksen umpikujiin. PS-kustannus. Otavan Kirjapaino Oy, Keuruu.

Teaching methods

Master Thesis, seminars
Individual and group counseling

Student workload

270 h

Evaluation scale

1-5

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)

The thesis process has started slowly but according to the thesis plan.

Assessment criteria, good (3)

There is progress in implementing the process according to the thesis plan.

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

The process is implemented according to the thesis plan.

Assessment methods and criteria

Accepted implementation of Master Thesis process

Assessment criteria, satisfactory (1)

The topic is not of current interest or related to the student’s own professional field.
The choice of the topic has not been substantiated. The topic has no importance for the
development of the field. The research problems or the tasks and goals of the thesis have not been defined at all. The goals offer no challenge.
The student is not in contact with the supervisor and/or the commissioner at all or only
occasionally. The timetables are vague or lacking. In his thesis process, the student
demonstrates passivity and lack of initiative.
Previous knowledge has been applied to a very small extent or not at all.
The theoretical framework or the background of the thesis is missing.
The key concepts have not been defined. Only a few or no sources have been used. The methods are inappropriate and/or very simple, and their use is not substantiated.
The data are scarce or missing. Analyses of the data have been made occasionally or not at all, and the student demonstrates a poor command of methods. The reliability and representability of the data used remains questionable. No ethical questions are addressed. The connection of the results and/or production of the thesis with the theory or background remains vague or is missing. As a whole, the results and/or production is insufficient or of poor quality. The results and/or production are not based on an analysis of the data or an interpretation of the documentation of the production.The
production/development project does not include anything new or innovative. The thesis has no practical
significance.
The author’s own discussion and criticism are lacking. The conclusions and/or discussion
are lacking or they are not based on the results and/or production. The structure of the report is vague and diffuse. The layout of the report is unfinished. Errors in language complicate decisively the comprehension of the text. The text does not observe the principles of academic writing. The oral presentation of the thesis is poor, the student is not able to answer questions, and visualization is lacking. The student has not attended the seminars as instructed. The agreed peer assessment has not been made.

Assessment criteria, good (3)

The topic is not of particular current interest in the professional field. The choice of the topic has been insufficiently substantiated. The topic has little importance for the development of the field. The research problems or the tasks and goals of the thesis are poorly and superficially defined. The goals area easy to reach. The student’s contacts with the supervisor and/or the commissioner are scarce. The timetables are observed to some extent, or the process breaks at times. The student’s responsibility and initiative are scarce.
Previous knowledge has been applied to some extent. The theoretical framework or the
background of the thesis is insufficient.The key concepts have been defined only partiallyor vaguely, and their use is inaccurate. The use of sources is scarce and unsystematic, and source criticism is missing.
The methods are simple, and their use is insufficiently substantiated. The data is too scarce for the implementation of the thesis.The analysis of the data is scarce or incomplete, and the student demonstrates an insufficient command of methods.
The reliability and representability of the data is insufficient. Ethical questions are addressed superficially. The connection of the results and/or production of the thesis
with the theory or background remains vague or is limited or insufficient. The resultand/or production are scarce in quality and as a whole. The results and/or production are
based on an analysis of the data or an interpretation of the documentation of the production. The opportunities to exploit the thesis remain scarce. The thesis includes a scarce amount of the student’s own discussion and critical thinking. The conclusions and/or discussion are weakly connected with the results and/or production and their
presentation is insufficient. The innovativeness of the production/development project is
scarce. The report is not clear and consistent. The layout of the report is unfinished to some extent. Errors in language complicate the comprehension of the text, and the
text includes many stylistic and grammatical errors. The text observes the principles of
academic writing variably and occasionally. The thesis is presented superficially
and without visualization, and answering questions is uncertain. The student has attended the seminars to a variable extent. The student has prepared superficially for the agreed peer assessment and attended it passively.

Assessment criteria, excellent (5)

The topic is of current interest and related to the development of the professional field.
The choice of the topic has been considered and substantiated.The topic provides new information for the development of the field. The research problems or the tasks
and goals of the thesis are well defined. Reaching the goals requires application.
The student’s contacts with the supervisor and/or the commissioner are regular. The timetables have been planned, and they are sufficiently observed. The student demonstrates responsibility and initiative. Previous knowledge has been dealt
with sufficiently. The theoretical framework or the background of the thesis is comprehensive.The key concepts have been defined, and their use is consistent. The number of national and international sources is quite large, and they cover the major part of the topic area, but source criticism is occasional. substantiated, and they are
sufficient with respect to the data and the tasks of the thesis. The data is large and it has been collected in an adequate way. The data has been sufficiently analysed, and the student has a good command of methods. The collected data is quite reliable and representative. The student has a good command of ethical questions. The results and/or production of the thesis are connected with the goals and theory or the background.
The results and/or production are appropriate in quality and as a whole. The results and/or production are based on a sufficient analysis of the data or an appropriate interpretation of the documentation of the production. The production/development
project has novelty value and/or innovativeness. The results of the thesis can be
exploited.
The thesis includes the student’s own discussion and critical thinking. The conclusions and/or discussion are based on the results and/or production and they are presented. The structure of the report is mainly consistent and clear. The layout of the report mainly
conforms to the instructions. The language of the text is fluent but includes some stylistic and grammatical errors.The text mainly observes the principles of academic writing. The thesis is presented with visualization, and the student is able to answer questions.
The student has attended the seminars as instructed. The student has prepared for the
agreed peer assessment, and diverse questions are asked about the topic.

Assessment criteria, approved/failed

The topic is of current interest and important for the development of the professional field.
The choice of the topic has been carefully considered and substantiated.The topic provides significant new information for the development of the field. The research problems or the tasks and goals the thesis are clearly defined.The goals are demanding, and reaching them requires much application. The student’s contacts with the
supervisor and/or the commissioner are regular and the interaction is active. The timetables have been thought through, and the entire process proceeds systematically.
The student acts independently and responsibly and has a great deal of initiative.
Previous knowledge has been dealt with comprehensively. The theoretical framework or the background of the thesis is presented in a well-structured and
clear manner. The key concepts have been comprehensively defined, and their use is consistent.The number of sources is large, and they are used in a critical way
(scientificity, internationality, recency). The choice of the methods has been
made carefully and it has been substantiated well. The data is sufficient in qualitative
and quantitative terms and it has been collected in an adequate way.The data has been analysed carefully and comprehensively, and methods have been used with skill and expertise. The collected data is reliable andnrepresentative. Ethical questions have been
addressed comprehensively and they have been solved in a sustainable way. The connection of the results and/or production of the thesis with the theory or background is
clear and consistent.The results and/or production give an elaborate and careful overall
impression. The results and/or production are based on a careful analysis of the data or a pertinent interpretation of the documentation of the production. The production/ development project is clearly innovative. The results of the thesis are of
significant use.
The results of the thesis are discussed consistently and critically.
The conclusions and/or discussion are based on the results and/or production and they are presented clearly and linked with the entire thesis.
The structure of the report is consistent and clear.The layout of the report is finished
and conforms to the instructions. The language of the text is fluent
and virtually free from stylistic and grammatical errors. The text fully observes the principles of academic writing. The presentation of the thesis is fluent, visual and expert, and the student answers questions clearly. The student has attended the seminars actively and as instructed. The agreed peer assessment is diverse, critical, and presents new points of view.