Amsterdam University College

Excellence and Diversity in a Global City

Capstone Guidelines
2015-2016
Table of Contents
1. Capstone definition and requirements p. 3

2. Timeline p. 4

3. Supervisor and Reader Responsibilities p. 4

4. Graded Parts and Assessment Guidelines p. 5

Appendix I: Capstone Learning Outcomes p. 10

Appendix II: Honours Designation: Thesis Of (Highest) Distinction p. 10

2
1. Capstone definition and requirements
The goal of the AUC Capstone is for students to complete an independent research
project on a substantial scholarly topic within the students’ major (see learning outcomes
Appendix I). The product of the Capstone is a bachelor thesis, the most significant
document a student produces while at AUC. The Capstone is intended to draw upon the
student’s unique curriculum and myriad of intellectual experiences encountered while at
AUC.

The research and writing is overseen by a supervisor from AUC Faculty or UvA/VU, and
evaluated by both the supervisor and reader. The thesis is completed during a required
Capstone course (12 ecp) that all students enrol in during their final (third) year of AUC.
Outstanding bachelor theses will be awarded with the predicate ‘Thesis of Distinction’ or
‘Thesis of Highest Distinction’ (see Appendix II for procedures).

2. Timeline
 Students are advised to begin identifying possible supervisors early in the
Capstone process. A good rule of thumb is to consider faculty with whom th e
stu den t had classes, as it ensures a minimum level of familiarity with what the
supervisor deems as important conceptual or methodological approaches.
 A student is responsible for finding a thesis supervisor and reader, and obtaining
consent.
 The student should have a first meeting with his/her supervisor before the before
the autumn-semester to discuss first ideas.
 Overall, student and supervisor should meet at least four time, it is left to the
discretion of the students supervisor to plan these or more meetings.
 All students must follow the Capstone Timeline. Deadlines – except the final deadline
- may be extended by the supervisor for a maximum of 5 work days. The Capstone
Team needs to be informed of this extension by means of an email to
capstone@auc.nl from the students and cc-ed to the supervisor.
 Theses uploaded after the final deadline will automatically receive an F. Student can
ask for an extension through the Board of Examiners as soon as necessity becomes
apparent. In such cases of submission after the deadline The Board of Examiners
may decide to grant the student a period of time to remedy the capstone failure.
After resubmission the thesis may be upgraded, depending on the evaluation of
supervisor and reader, but to no higher grade than a C.

See next page for timeline.

3
Deadlines* Tasks

Wednesday 24 February  Student uploads Research Proposal to Blackboard and sends to

(23:59 PM) supervisor.

 Supervisor mails Capstone Coordinator name and email of the

reader (cc-ing reader and student).

Wednesday 9 March  Supervisor grades Research Proposal and mails grade + short
(23:59 PM) comment to the student and the Capstone address
(capstone@auc.nl).

Wednesday 23 March  Students uploads Writing Update to Blackboard and sends to

(23:59 PM) supervisor.
Wednesday 6 April  Supervisor grades Writing Update and mails grade + short
(23:59 PM) comment to the student and the Capstone address
(capstone@auc.nl).

Wednesday 20 April  Student uploads a First Draft (not graded) to Blackboard and
(23:59 PM) sends to supervisor.

 Supervisor does Plagiarism check in Blackboard.

Between 2 May and 25  Supervisor and student meet for Oral Evaluation.
May
 Supervisor gives feedback on First Draft and provides guidance for
the final thesis.

 Supervisor grades presentation and mails grade + short comment to

the student and the Capstone address.
Wednesday 25 May, 11.59  Upload your Final thesis (70% of final grade) in MS
pm Word or text PDF to BB (Before Midnight – non-
negotiable deadline!)

No later than Wednesday  Supervisor and reader independently grade thesis (70% of final
8 June, 5 pm grade) and each send their 70% form to capstone@auc.nl, while
the supervisor also submits the 100% form.`

 The Capstone Team checks 70% forms and finalises 100% forms.

 The Capstone Team sends forms and grades to student before

Wednesday 15 June.
Wednesday 22 June,  Capstone conference
1:00-5:00 pm Theses of (highest) distinction decisions made public by the
chair of the Capstone Distinction Committee

*Note: January starters follow the same deadlines, but should work ahead in January.

4
3. Supervisor and Reader Responsibilities

The student’s capstone is overseen by the supervisor and t h e reader, who are
charged with assessing the overall quality of the Capstone and assigning a grade. The
supervisor and reader must be AUC, VU and/or UvA faculty.

Supervisor
The role of the supervisor for an AUC bachelor thesis is to guide the student through
the entire Capstone process. The thesis supervisor has an important role in the student’s
curriculum and represents an essential academic mentor as the student transitions
from undergraduate study to graduate research. Each AUC thesis supervisor is
compensated for 15 hours per capstone project. Supervisors are allowed to supervise a
maximum of 5 projects per academic year (exceptions can only be made by the Capstone Team
after consultation with the Director of Education). Specific supervisor responsibilities include:

1. Providing guidance, giving suggestions and written critique on all graded parts of
the capstone;
2. Setting up at least four meetings with the student during the capstone process;
3. Monitoring progress and reporting delays to the Capstone Team;
4. Confirming that all thesis requirements have been met;
5. Checking for plagiarism using Ephorus in Blackboard;
6. Submitting all grades, including written feedback, to the Capstone Team
(capstone@auc.nl) by the determined deadlines;
7. Finding a reader in the first month of the thesis;
8. Referring the student, if academic writing guidance is needed, to the AUC Centre
for Writing Excellence (see for info: http://www.auc.nl/life-at-auc-
students/current-students/current-students).

Reader
The role of the reader is to evaluate the final thesis only, independent of the supervisor.
Readers will be allocated 3 hours for each readership. Readers are allowed to read a
maximum of 5 projects per academic year.

4. Graded Parts and Assessment Guidelines

The final grade is calculated by applying the specific criteria to the four grade
components below:

1. Research proposal 10% - graded by supervisor

2. Writing update 10% - graded by supervisor
3. Oral evaluation 10% - graded by supervisor
4. Thesis 70% - graded by supervisor (50%) and reader (50%) without prior
consultation.

Important Note: In case the supervisor’s and the reader’s marks differ by more than
15 percentage points and/or in case reader or supervisor grade the thesis with a grade
below 55% the Capstone Coordinator will inform the Board of Examiners (BoE) and will
ask the Head of Studies (HoS) of the student’s major to suggest an extra reader. After
the third grade comes in the HoS will advise the BoE on a final grade. The final grade
will be the average of all three grades, unless the BoE decides otherwise.

1. Research proposal
Completion of the Capstone Proposal is an essential step in the Capstone process and
constitutes 10% of the Capstone grade. Importantly, a good proposal prepares the
researcher for the forthcoming activities and outlines the task ahead. The process of

5
proposal writing helps to assure that the researcher has a clear understanding of the
relation between the research topic (problem, objectives, hypotheses) and the research
activities (methods and analysis). Finally, the proposal serves as an assurance that the
supervisor and student share the same expectations from the standpoint of the research
goals, activities, and workload. The grade for the proposal will depend on the extent to
which the requirements given there will be met.

The research proposal should contain the following parts:

 Title Page: A good title is important because it creates the first impression for the
audience. The title should be brief, descriptive, and specific and should reflect the
importance of the proposal, providing a clear statement of the subject of the
research. Highly technical words should be avoided where possible. The title page
should include
 Title
 Submitted by: name of author (with affiliation: AUC)
 Submitted to: name of supervisor (with affiliation: AUC, VU, UvA)
 Date of submission
 Name of major
 Project summary (abstract): The project summary should be a self-contained
description of the activity to be undertaken and should include: (a) overall project
goal(s) and supporting objectives; (b) general plans (activities) to accomplish project
goal(s); and (c) larger significance of the study. The summary should be limited to
500 words.
 Project Description: The text of the project description should not exceed 2000
words. Although the contents and subsection titles may vary according to the
research topic, the project description should contain some combination of the
following components:

 Introduction: This will include a brief description of the topic, research

objectives/aim/purpose/rationale and research question(s) to be addressed. The
Introduction should note what you plan to do, why it needs to be done - i.e.
identify research gap and explain why it is relevant to fill -, and how you plan to
do it. The research purpose/ objectives are clearly defined in a format that is
readable to a non-specialist.
 Literature Review/Critical Context/Previous Research: The literature review
should expand upon your research question in greater depth with a thorough
and concise review of related research/literature. It should compactly synthesise
previous work (perhaps including a table or figure). A synthesis of the literature is
not a blow-by-blow account of what each previous research h a s accomplished.
Rather, it synthesises t h e results o r i d e a s of different studies into a single
idea. This can be articulated by making committed and informed statements
about the status of knowledge, which is subsequently supported by statements
that cite the key references. A good literature review describes the theoretical
concepts model/s being tested and addresses debates relative to the research
problem. Here it can be helpful to justify why you associate with one side of the
debate. A good literature review should include “key” classic (benchmark)
references and also the current citations. Specific propositions, hypotheses or
research problems should follow from the review.
 Research Approach/Methods: this section will vary across disciplines and majors,
and depends on the nature of the study, but the essence should be that this
section shows how scientific knowledge - related to the hypotheses or research
questions being asked - is produced within this study in a transparent and
replicable manner. In the empirical Social Sciences and Sciences (and some
subjects in the Humanities) it is made clear what the research design is: what the
setting will be; how data will be sampled; how (systematic) observations are
made and measured; and, by what means the data will be analysed. For literature
review and historical studies is shows how research evidence relevant to the

6
 research question will be identified, appraised, selected and synthesized. In some
subjects of the Humanities, such as in literary studies, this section does not
always need to be as detailed, and might refer to whether your study is
exploratory, comparative or analytical, whether it employs a particular theory or
involves archival research.

While depth of knowledge of the subject matter is illustrated by the literature

review, the “methods” section provides an opportunity to demonstrate
competence in actually doing the research. Appropriate references should be cited
for specific research activities. It helps to be detailed and descriptive in this
section so that the reader has a clear understanding of how the research is
intended to unfold.

 Feasibility and ethics: A tentative schedule for conducting major steps involved
in these investigations and/or experiments. Be sure to mention in your timetable
when you will be involved in each of the major steps (training, field activities, lab
work, analysis, etc.). Furthermore, fill out and follow the instruction on AUC’s
Ethics Committee’s checklist and add this to your proposal.
 Preliminary Bibliography: All references cited should be complete, and the
referencing style should conform to one of the standard Style guides in the field
of specialty, e.g. MLA (HUM), APA (SSC) or CSE (SCI).

Important note: Drawing from/elaborating on materials from a students’ own work in

Advanced Research Writing (formerly Academic English II) or from earlier parts of the
students’ own capstone thesis (such as proposal or writing sample) does not count as
self-plagiarism.

2. Writing update
The writing update should contain:
1) A significant writing sample, such as a first chapter (~3000 words) or description
of the experimental set-up etc.;
2) The thesis outline with a brief summary of each chapter.

In evaluating the writing sample, the supervisor will have the opportunity to illustrate
the kind of evaluation that will be applied to the final version of the thesis.
The second part of the writing update will be evaluated based on consistency and
structure of the given outline.

3. Oral Evaluation/Presentation
The student will be asked to give a 15-20 minute presentation, and to engage in a 5-10
minute discussion. The audience may include other students supervised by the student’s
supervisor. Evaluation criteria for oral presentations:

1. Substance, Content
2. Structure
3. Use of language (grammar, style)
4. Presentation: enthusiasm, eye contact
5. Command of voice
6. (Use of) Visual media (PowerPoint, hand-out)
7. Time management
8. Discussion: responding to questions

The weight of each category as part of the Oral evaluation is unique to each project. The
supervisor may decide to organise a different type of oral evaluation: a discussion, a
debate, or a (Skype) conversation.

7
4. Final thesis
The Capstone grading criteria for the final thesis are based on the student’s capacity
for independent research and intellectual initiative, critical analysis, and academic
writing. While the organisation and length of AUC theses will vary, based on the field of
specialisation, methodological approach, and the supervisor’s guidance, all AUC theses
must include a thorough review of the literature, research approach (methods),
presentation of findings or main arguments, and conclusions as appropriate to the field of
study.

The research project are evaluated on the quality and inclusion of the following parts
(titles may vary based on field of specialty):

 Title Page: A good title is important because it creates the first impression for the
audience. The title should be brief, descriptive, and specific and should reflect the
importance of the proposal, providing a clear statement of the subject of the
research. Highly technical words should be avoided where possible. The title page
should include
 Title
 Submitted by: name of author (with affiliation: AUC)
 Submitted to: name of supervisor (with affiliation: AUC, VU, UvA)
 Date of submission
 Name of major
 Abstract (Project Summary): A succinct (300 words) narrative of the overall
research project, including rationale, methodological approaches, conclusions, and
implications
a. Layman’s summary (in case of more technical (Science)projects): An
accessible summary (300 words) of the project, focussing on the broader
impact of the thesis, free of specific terminology, mathematical formulae,
or complex definitions. On the basis of this summary an educated reader
from a different major should be able to understand the purpose,
rationale, relevance and conclusions of the research.
 Introduction: This will include a brief description of the topic, research
objectives/aim/purpose/rationale and research question(s) to be addressed. The
Introduction should note what you plan to do, why it needs to be done - i.e.
identify research gap and explain why it is relevant to fill -, and how you plan to do
it. The research purpose/ objectives are clearly defined in a format that is
readable to a non-specialist.
 Literature Review/Critical Context/Previous Research: The literature review should
expand upon your research question in greater depth with a thorough and concise
review of related research/literature. It should compactly synthesise previous work
(perhaps including a table or figure). A synthesis of the literature is not a blow-by-
blow account of what each previous research h a s accomplished. Rather, it
synthesises t h e results o r i d e a s of different studies into a single idea. This can
be articulated by making committed and informed statements about the status of
knowledge, which is subsequently supported by statements that cite the key
references. A good literature review describes the theoretical concepts model/s
being tested and addresses debates relative to the research problem. Here it can be
helpful to justify why you associate with one side of the debate. A good literature
review should include “key” classic (benchmark) references and also the current
citations. Specific propositions, hypotheses or research problems should follow from
the review.
 Research Approach/Methods: this section will vary across disciplines and majors, and
depends on the nature of the study, but the essence should be that this section
shows how scientific knowledge - related to the hypotheses or research questions
being asked - is produced within this study in a transparent and replicable manner.
In the empirical Social Sciences and Sciences (and some subjects in the Humanities)
it is made clear what the research design is: what the setting will be; how data will

8
 be sampled; how (systematic) observations are made and measured; and, by what
means the data will be analysed. For literature review and historical studies is shows
how research evidence relevant to the research question will be identified,
appraised, selected and synthesized. In some subjects of the Humanities, such as in
literary studies, this section does not always need to be as detailed, and might refer
to whether your study is exploratory, comparative or analytical, whether it employs
a particular theory or involves archival research.
 Results/Findings (this section is only necessary to include in empirical studies):
A succinct characterization of the findings, presented in tables, charts and/or
figures. The writing should be centred on the presentation of the data (qualitative
or quantitative).
 Discussion/Analysis:
Sciences and Social Sciences: The results are related back to the literature in the
specialty, particularly to theoretical debates. Furthermore, assumptions and inherent
limitations of the study are also discussed here. Finally, this section may conclude by
considering the broader relevance of the research findings (beyond their specialty),
such as societal, environmental, management, or other interdisciplinary implications.
Humanities: The discussion comprises of the main argument of the Capstone. It
develops by drawing from specific texts and/or artefacts, considering these within an
established framework and details the results of the research, analysis or
interpretation.
 Conclusion: The conclusion should provide a succinct summary of the argument, the
significance of findings within the broader theoretical foundations of the discipline
and the scope for additional future research.
 Bibliography: All references cited should be complete, and the referencing style
should conform to one of the standard Style guides in the field of specialty, e.g. MLA
(HUM), APA (SSC) or CSE (SCI).

Additional graded parts are:

 Writing: Development of a consistent, well-organised, coherent discussion and/or
argument; Capacity to formulate clear and grammatically correct sentences.
 Presentation and layout: Ability to present the materials, such as figures and tables, in
a clear way; neat and professional layout; correct use of citation and referencing
sources.
 Formatting: all AUC theses must comply with one of the academic style guides
recommended (APA, CSE or MLA), as agreed with the supervisor and in accordance
with the field of study.
 Word Count - the number of words for the “main text” of AUC theses per major is:
a. Science majors: between 5.000 and 10.000 words.
b. Social Science majors: between 7.500 and 15.000 words
c. Humanities majors: between 7.500 and 15.000 words

9
Appendix I: Capstone Learning Outcomes

Capstone learning outcomes as related to the Academic Standards and Procedures 2014-
2015

2.3.1 Knowledge
Graduates will have achieved:
a. a deep knowledge base in the chosen field of study. This depth is to be found in
the understanding of the knowledge domain and in the ability to apply concepts,
and not only in the accumulation of facts;
b. knowledge of and the ability to apply the most prominent theories and
methodological foundations of the chosen field of study;

2.3.2 Academic skills

Graduates will have:
a. highly developed cognitive, analytic and problem-solving skills;
b. the capacity for independent critical thought, rational inquiry and self-directed
learning;
c. the ability to work, independently and collaboratively, on research projects that
require the integration of knowledge with skills in analysis, discovery, problem
solving, and communication;
d. the ability to plan work and use time effectively.

2.3.3 Interdisciplinary skills1

Graduates will demonstrate interdisciplinary skills, i.e. they will:
a. be able to evaluate which disciplines are involved in the solution of complex
issues;
b. be able to assess which research methods are most suitable in a particular
situation;

2.3.4 Learning skills

Graduates will possess the attitude as well as the skills for lifelong learning, i.e. they:
a. know how to obtain and evaluate information;
b. are able to focus on a new knowledge domain, formulate an overview and
determine their knowledge gaps.

2.3.5 Communication skills

Graduates will demonstrate excellent communication skills, i.e. they will be able to:
a. express themselves well verbally and at an academic level in writing;
b. present ideas in a clear effective way;
c. communicate knowledge to a public consisting of specialists or laypersons,
making use of various modes of communication.

Appendix II: Honours Designation: Thesis Of (Highest)

Distinction

Theses that represent the highest scholarship shall be considered for AUC’s “Thesis of
Distinction” or “Thesis of Highest Distinction” award. The number of awards per year is
not limited, and students are judged by a faculty committee in which each major is
represented. The Thesis of Distinction or Thesis of Highest Distinction award will be
listed on the student’s academic transcript.

1 If applicable, i.e. in cases of an interdisciplinary capstone project.

10
Criteria for Thesis of Distinction or Thesis of Highest Distinction
Theses will be evaluated based on the degree to which high standards were met in all
grading criteria judged by the Supervisor and the Reader and according to the following
categories as judged by the awards committee. The committee will designate those
theses that most strongly meet the thesis requirements as Theses of Highest Distinction.

1. Intellectual Contribution: Does the thesis significantly contribute to the body of

knowledge in his/her field?
2. Originality: Does the thesis manifest originality in its approach, content and/or
writing style?
3. Interdisciplinary Contribution (if applicable, that is, in case of an interdisciplinary
project): To what extent are the findings and implications relevant to other
fields of knowledge? Is the linkage with other fields of knowledge explicit or
implied?
4. Research Effort: What is the level of depth and sophistication of the
research efforts? Was the depth of analysis appropriate for the student’s
training and the research question? What was involved in obtaining the
research materials (primary, secondary, archival, etc.)?
5. Broader Impact: What is the societal relevance of the research? Did the
student make explicit or implicit connections between his/her research findings
and society?
6. Writing: Is the thesis well written? Is the use of academic English at an advanced
level? Does the writing demonstrate coherence?
7. Presentation: Are figures, tables, graphics, and other illustrations clear? Were
the thesis guidelines and formatting instructions closely followed?

Procedure for Nomination and Selection

1. Both supervisor and reader sent the 70% grade form for the final thesis to the
Capstone Team no later than the assigned deadlines (capstone@auc.nl).
2. All theses graded with a grade ≥ 82.50 by both supervisor and reader will be
handed over to the capstone selection committee.
3. A selection committee will convene to judge the theses.
4. A selection of nominees will be invited to present their capstone project in the
college-wide “Capstone Conference”; there will also be at least two wild cards for
not-nominated students.
5. The awards will be announced at the Capstone Conference.
6. Some of the Awardees, especially the ones who were awarded thesis of Highest
distinction, will be invited to submit their research findings to the AUC
Undergraduate Journal of Liberal Arts & Sciences, an annual journal dedicated to
the dissemination of premier research by AUC’s students. The journal shall
consider all majors within AUC and will have an editorial board comprised of AUC
faculty and AUC students.

11