Platforma průmyslové spolupráce
CZ.1.07/2.4.00/17.0041
Název
Assignment of external thesis (Process manual)
Popis a využití
• procesní manuál
• dokument se zabývá zadáváním a vedením závěrečných prací vedených ve
spolupráci s externí firmou
Jazyk textu
• anglický
Autor (autoři)
• Jiří Kolář
Oficiální stránka projektu:
• http://lasaris.fi.muni.cz/pps
Dostupnost výukových materiálů a nástrojů online:
• http://lasaris.fi.muni.cz/pps/study-materials-and-tools
Assignment of external thesis
Process manual
Jiří Kolář
Version 2.6
Introduction
This document describes the process of assignment, elaboration and evaluation of a thesis topic submitted by an industry partner of Faculty
of Informatics. It should provide step-by step guidelines for all the participants through the whole process from the submission of a thesis
topic to the completion of the thesis and successful handling of the results back to the industry partner. The aim is to improve the cooperation
efficiency and to standardize the process. Process efficiency is measured by metrics and participants provide feedback which helps both the
faculty and the industry partner to evaluate how successful the cooperation is.
Goals (why to follow the process):
To provide standardized mechanism for assignment, elaboration and evaluation of external thesis topics proposed by industry partner
To achieve win-win efficient cooperation with measurable results
To provide feedback, which will help both sides to evaluate and improve cooperation to be more valuable
Objectives (how to achieve goals):
Enable the partner to test the cooperation with the student and provide him insight into development process and used technologies
Enable partner to leverage results of students work
Provide valuable advisory for student
Enable student to acquire good insight into partner’s development process and used technologies
Assure student's goals are aligned with Proposer's goals
Set standardized communication between students and Advisor
Set standardized periodic evaluation of the progress
Assure all deliverables are properly handled to the Proposer
Gather student's feedback about advisor
Gather Proposer's feedback about student
Roles:
Proposer:
Proposer is a representative of an industry partner interested in submission of a thesis topic. In certain situations one person can represent
both Proposer and Advisor roles.
Responsibilities:
Submit a topic of diploma thesis
Define time schedule of thesis, goals and expected results
Interview student if necessary
Agree with Supervisor/Advisor on student selection
Assign Advisor for each topic
Supervisor:
Supervisor is usually a member of the faculty, an individual who is allowed to officially supervise Student's thesis.
Responsibilities:
Approve topic proposed by Proposer
Publish topic to university IS
Interview and preselect Student
Provide advisory to Student in formal aspects of thesis
Supervise cooperation of the Student and the Advisor
Approve Proposers request of Advisor change
Submit his part of evaluation
Handle any exceptional situations eventually terminate the process if something goes wrong
Monitor Student’s work and help them to comply with the faculty requirements (both formal and technical) on final theses
Make sure that copyrights (or intellectual properties) are handled correctly – from both the faculty and Proposal points of view.
Advisor:
An individual chosen by Proposer supposed to help Student with technical aspects of the thesis. In certain situations one person can represent
both Proposer and Advisor roles.
Responsibilities:
Advise Student concerning technical aspects of thesis
Make sure Student's goals are aligned with Proposer's goals
Monitor Student's progress and keep Supervisor informed about it.
Make sure deliverables meet requirements
Submit feedback about Student
Confirm that requested deliverables were delivered in requested quality
Submit his part of thesis evaluation together with cooperation assessment
Terminate process if something goes wrong
Student:
Student of university, interested in the submitted topic
Responsibilities:
Choose a topic
Pass an interview with Supervisor/Proposer/Advisor
Consult desired goals and progress with Advisor
Regularly report to Supervisor and Advisor
Elaborate thesis according to Proposers and formal requirements
Hand in finished thesis text to faculty administrative and requested deliverables to Proposer
Write feedback about Advisor
Process efficiency metrics (KPI's)
Success rating - how the Student achieved goals set by Proposer (filled by Advisor)
Deadline precession – how the Student met deadlines (filled by Advisor)
Advisor rating - how helpful Advisor was (filled by Student)
Communication rating - efficiency of Student's communication between Student and Advisor (filled by Advisor, Student)
Knowledge gains – knowledge acquired by Student during thesis elaboration (filled by Student)
Rating: 0 -15 pts
F: failed completely
D/E: lowest acceptable - very poor
C: average
A/B: excellent – as expected
A+: overstep expectations significantly
The process itself
The process consists of three basic sub-processes. There can be a termination inside each sub-process that terminates the whole process.
Creation and assignment sub-process table:
Process name Creation and assignment sub-process
Description Sub process is initiated by Proposer. Proposer posts topic proposal to particular Supervisor. If suggested, potential
Advisor is assigned at this time. Proposal is refined by Supervisor and submitted to IS MUNI as topic specification.
When a Student applies for the topic, both Supervisor and Proposer or/and Advisor interview Student to find out
whether student's skills and interests match the topic specification. If necessary, some changes are made in topic
specification. In case both of them are satisfied, Student is accepted and Proposer must assign Advisor if one is not
assigned yet. In case Student is rejected, topic can be either canceled or offered to other students.
Inputs: Topic proposal
Outputs: Topic specification
Data objects: Topic proposal consists at least of:
Goal of the thesis
Deliverables
Rough time schedule
Topic specification has usual structure following faculty regulations.
Roles: Student, Supervisor, Proposer, Advisor
Creation and assignment sub-process diagram:
Elaboration sub-process table:
Process name Elaboration sub-process
Description Student elaborates thesis in iterations with help of Advisor and Supervisor. Advisor defines Checkpoints & schedule
for thesis elaboration, those are approved by Supervisor. Further Student elaborates defined tasks, consults formal
aspects of thesis with Supervisor and technical aspects with Advisor. At the end of iteration the Student submits
Checkpoint report & deliverables requested for particular checkpoint. Advisor reviews report and deliverables.
In case Advisor is not satisfied, he either redefines checkpoints or after agreement of Supervisor terminates
cooperation from his side and submits Advisor's thesis assessment, where he explains why Student did not succeed. In
such case process can continue further, but without Advisor and his Advisor's thesis assessment is taken in account
during thesis defense.
In case Advisor is satisfied, he accepts the report. I there are more iteration planned sub-process proceeds to next
iteration. The last iteration starts with faculty deadline for topic changes. Latest during final iteration Supervisor
submits Official topic specification. In case Advisor accept report from the final checkpoint, all thesis deliverables
(complete text + all developed artifacts) are evaluated by both Advisor and Supervisor who approve submission of
completed thesis. If they approve, sub-process end, if not Advisor consider topic refinement same as above.
Inputs: Topic Specifications
Outputs: Checkpoints and schedule, Official topic specification, Advisor's thesis assessment, Checkpoint reports & deliverables
Data objects: Topic Specifications and Official topic specification have
usual structure following faculty regulations.
Checkpoints & schedule describes:
All checkpoints and their time schedule
Tasks to be accomplished within each checkpoint
How tasks will be accomplished
Deliverables of each checkpoint
Deadline for checkpoint
Checkpoint report & deliverables contains:
Reports on how the tasks within a checkpoint were
fulfilled and where the problems were
Student's intention for next checkpoint, if any
Deliverables requested within the checkpoint
Advisor's thesis assessment consists at least of:
Evaluation of cooperation with student
Evaluation of deliverables quality and usability
Reason why cooperation was terminated in this
phase of process.
Roles: Student, Supervisor, Advisor
Elaboration sub-process diagram:
Hand in and evaluation sub-process table:
Process name Hand in and evaluation sub-process
Description Student's Completed thesis is submitted to IS MUNI and delivered to Advisor. Advisor evaluates delivered artifacts
and submits Advisor's thesis assessment. The thesis is further evaluated by Supervisor who evaluates the thesis text and
some of the deliverables, but takes in account Advisor's thesis assessment and submits his part of evaluation Supervisor's
thesis assessment to IS MUNI. At the same time Student writes Student's feedback about cooperation with
Advisor and Advisor writes Advisor's feedback about Student. After that thesis is being presented and student receives a
grade according to usual faculty process.
Inputs: Completed thesis
Outputs: Advisor's thesis assessment, Supervisor's thesis assessment, Advisor's feedback , Student's feedback
Data objects: Completed thesis consists of:
thesis text meeting formal requirements for
diploma thesis
deliverables requested by Proposer defined in
Thesis specifications document
comments from Student describing gaps/problems
of solution , if necessary
Supervisor's thesis assessment has the usual form
following faculty regulations.
Advisor's thesis assessment consists of at least Evaluation
of cooperation with student
Evaluation of deliverables quality and usability
Possibilities of further cooperation with student if
there are any
Student's feedback should describe:
quality of provided help, how helpful was
cooperation with Advisor/Supervisor
quality of topic specifications and how realistic
they were
gains of topic elaboration, whether he/she has
learned new things
Advisor rating, Communication rating, Knowledge
gains
Advisor's feedback should describe:
quality of cooperation with Student, how he was
meeting deadlines and fulfilling goals
quality of deliverables
Success rating, Communication rating, Involvement
rating
Roles: Student, Supervisor, Advisor
Hand in and evaluation sub-process diagram:
Artifact responsibility matrix
RACI matrix for all involved roles and artifacts
(Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed) Proposer Supervisor Advisor Student
Topic proposal R A C
Topic specification A R C
Official topic specification I A R C
Checkpoints & schedule I A R C
Checkpoint report & deliverables I C C A
Advisor's thesis assessment A C R
Supervisor's thesis assessment A C I
Completed thesis - text C C A
Completed thesis - artifacts C C A
Student's feedback I I I A
Advisor's feedback I C A I
Detailed legend (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matrix)