Research paper
Basic Information
Description
About the Master Thesis
There is no particular pre-selected topic for the research paper.
The research paper should address a question or problem of the student’s own choice, but it has to be agreed with the supervisor. It is possible to write the paper on one of the topics of the other modules, or to develop (substantially) one of the papers written for the other modules.
Work on the paper will be supervised by one of the faculty of the APhil Master. Students can approach any of the faculty to ask whether he or she would be prepared to supervise their paper. Typically this would be done some time into the second semester. The coordinator will then, some time before April, ask all students whether they have found a topic and a supervisor. In April, each student will be assigned a supervisor. This assignment will take into account, as far as possible, the arrangements already made between students and potential supervisors.
For those who later go on to study for a PhD in Analytic Philosophy, the supervisor of the research paper need not, and often will not, be the future PhD supervisor.
In addition to giving initial advice on an appropriate question to be addressed in the paper, supervisors will typically read, and provide feedback on, one complete draft of the research paper (whether in one go or in instalments). They are not expected to go over the same material several times. Students are advised to plan their meetings with the supervisor ahead of time.
Master Thesis Supervisor
The Master Thesis is developed under the supervision of a member of the Faculty of the program.The student’s tutor will help her/him choose a supervisor for the Master Thesis, and the supervisor shall confirm her/his acceptance signing a special form which should be signed also by the student and delivered to the tutor, through the Campus Virtual or email.
Master Thesis agreement registration
Students willing to defend their final paper in the current academic year must complete a form (find it here) and send it signed by them and their advisor to the MA coordinator (via email) before Easter (you will be notified by email when the deadline approaches). The form contains the name of the supervisor(s) and a working title for the MA Thesis.
Master Thesis format & UB Digital Repository
The dissertation cover should be based on the template provided by the university to where the advisor belongs (download it here). Once the thesis is finished students who attain at least a 9/10 grade in the thesis can deposit the thesis in the University's repository using the following form (to be found here). The approval of the supervisor and of the tutor is necessary for the publication in the digital repository. All this information and documents are also available in the Campus Virtual.
Previous Master Theses
Here you can find some examples of excellent previous Master Theses.
Learning outcomes
Competences
-
C02 – To defend a critical line of thought that, within the context of philosophical research, respects and promotes the equality, freedom, and dignity of women and men, as well as non‑discrimination, within a framework that recognises plurality and diversity and as part of fundamental rights.
-
C03 – To display attitudes consistent with ethical conceptions, deontological codes, and intellectual integrity, with an awareness of the implications of the different activities carried out in relevant philosophical work.
-
C06 – To use diagnostic skills and creativity for the resolution of philosophical problems.
-
C08 – To design research projects autonomously, identifying the topic, objectives, and appropriate methodologies for the relevant philosophical project.
-
C09 – To use appropriately the terminology, concepts, and methods proper to specialised philosophy in both oral and written discussion.
Knowledge / Content
-
K04 – To identify methodological errors, rhetorical devices, uncritical conventional assumptions, vagueness, and superficiality.
-
K05 – To defend one’s conclusions, and the ultimate knowledge and reasons that support them, to both specialised and non‑specialised audiences in a clear and unambiguous manner.
Skills / Abilities
-
H01 – To express oneself effectively in English, both orally and in writing, in presentations, debates, written assignments, and exams, at the level appropriate to the academic framework of philosophy.
-
H02 – To use information sources critically and responsibly in accordance with the standards of analytic philosophy.
-
H03 – To apply philosophical knowledge in an original way to the development and implementation of ideas, especially in a research context.
-
H05 – To formulate judgements based on incomplete or limited information, including considerations of social and ethical responsibilities.
Methodology
Activities
- Information search: The search for information, organised as an active information‑gathering process carried out by the students, enables not only the direct acquisition of knowledge but also the development of skills and attitudes related to academic research.
- Independent work: Independent student work, consisting of personal study activities required to prepare seminars and write an essay.
- Supervised activity: Writing an essay or paper on the topics and readings, under the guidance of the tutor and supervisor(s).
As a result, students should be capable of doing independent research and critically assessing the relevant literature on the topic of their choice. Students must be capable of carrying out:
- A precise formulation of a research problem.
- A precise formulation of a reasonable hypothesis to solve it.
- A public presentation of the work done with appropriate visual aids (power-point presentations, handouts, etc).
Evaluation
Regulations
The assessment system and criteria for the Master’s Final Project (TFM) are regulated by the TFM Regulations of the Faculty of Philosophy, in accordance with the general TFM regulations of the University of Barcelona (UB).
The final paper, or thesis, is an essay that must not exceed 8,000 words. The student is assigned both an academic tutor and a TFM supervisor. The TFM must be written in English. In order to submit it, the student must have passed the remaining credits of the master’s programme. The student must submit the written work and defend it orally before an examination panel.
The TFM must address a research problem agreed upon by the student and the supervisor. The work will be supervised by one of the lecturers of the master’s programme.
The TFM must be submitted through the Campus Virtual link for plagiarism and AI detection.
Evaluation
The TFM is assessed through an oral defence in a public session before a panel composed of three examiners, with a minimum of two members from the master’s teaching staff. At least two members of the panel must be part of the master’s programme.
- Written work (70%): The formal quality of the work (30% of the final grade). The scientific quality of the content of the written work (40% of the final grade).
- Oral defence (30%): The oral presentation quality and the student’s ability to debate and defend arguments (30% of the final grade).
Lecturers have access to evaluation criteria to facilitate assessment, unify criteria, and encourage improvements in students’ work.
The committee will make public the final marks in the 24 h following the examination.
Usually marks have to be delivered to the faculty approximately by 10th of September, the exact deadline for delivery of marks is determined every year by the Faculty of Philosophy of the UB. The defense meeting has to take place before this date, at a time agreed early on between student and examiners. The research paper must be submitted by a deadline that allows the examiners to assess it before the defense. This will be agreed individually, but should be agreed well in advance when the date for the defense is set. Thus, a typical timetable might be: deadline for submitting paper: 1st of September, defense meeting: 8th of September. There is no objection to holding the defense much earlier, say in July.
Students must submit their research paper in an agreed format by the agreed deadline. Typically, the agreed format will involve the student sending the paper via email as a pdf file to each of the examiners.
If you have any questions about any aspect of the research paper, please speak to your tutor.
Other considerations
A Note on Originality and Plagiarism:
Students often wonder whether their work must be original. In a minimal sense, every good essay will be original, for the author will have made his or her own choice of which position to defend, which arguments to adduce, how exactly to explain or articulate these things etc. The student is speaking with his or her own voice. Thus, even if you defend a position that many others have defended before you, and you use standard arguments to defend it, your essay will be original in this minimal sense: you are using your own words, and you have made up your own mind as to how to evaluate the standard positions and arguments. Of course, if you provide a new original argument, or defend a new position, then this makes your essay more original and interesting, and this is good. But this is not expected of you.
In writing about a philosophical problem, it is often good to discuss and make reference to the work of others. Often it is necessary to recount the arguments or positions of others. Sometimes it is necessary to quote others verbatim—for example in order to provide evidence that some philosopher makes a certain claim, it may be desirable to cite his or her words. However, it must at all times be clear which are the claims attributed to others, and which are the claims made by the author him or herself. Moreover, it must be indicated clearly when the exact words of others are being reproduced, providing a page reference and the bibliographical details of the work being cited. Failing to do so may amount to plagiarism. Your work might be marked down or even failed if your sources are not acknowledged properly.
Plagiarism is often defined as follows: using the words or ideas of others without proper acknowledgement of the source. The dividing line between plagiarism and proper acknowledgement of sources is fine, but usually quite clear.
For example, consider the following short passage, which might occur in an essay:
Perry argues "that the essential indexical poses a problem for various otherwise plausible accounts of belief" (Perry 1979, p. 3). The first account he considers is the view he calls "the doctrine of propositions", the second …
Now consider the following modified version:
In "The Essential Indexical", Perry argues that the essential indexical poses a problem for various otherwise plausible accounts of belief. The first account he considers is the view he calls "the doctrine of propositions", the second …
As innocent as this modification may seem, the second version does in fact involve plagiarism as defined above: the exact words of Perry are used without properly acknowledging the source.
It is therefore crucial that, in writing essays, you indicate clearly, at all times, whether you are speaking with your own voice or quoting someone else. Failure to do so may not only cause misunderstandings, but could even be interpreted as an attempt to cheat. It is therefore important to be quite conscientious about proper acknowledgement when quoting verbatim.
It is also important to use direct quotation sparingly, i.e. only when this serves some clear aim, such as proving that some author does indeed make such and such a claim (where this is controversial), displaying how exactly the claim is being made, or perhaps for presentational reasons. An essay consisting merely of quotations (however fully acknowledged) will probably not be a good essay.
It is also important to acknowledge properly your sources when you are not quoting directly, i.e. when you are merely paraphrasing. If you take ideas and arguments from others it is important that you say so explicitly.
This is emphasized in a handbook used at Edinburgh University1, when it says that plagiarism does not need to be “100% verbatim” (p. 12). One “will not avoid the charge of plagiarism by occasional changes in the wording of an otherwise unacknowledged quotation” (ibid.). Nor will one avoid such a charge “by acknowledging [one’s] source once and then claiming that ‘everything’ is ‘covered’—it isn’t” (ibid.). As the guidance from Edinburgh continues, “[e]very quotation must be acknowledged separately—if in doubt, acknowledge again” (ibid.).
The last paragraph gives you an example of carefully making sure that the reader can always tell which bits are paraphrase, which bits are quoted verbatim. One should always provide a page reference, if the same page reference is repeated, there is a conventions to say “ibid.”, meaning that the quote stems from the same page. You may have noticed that I put some words in square brackets. This is done to mark out a departure from exact wording within a quoted passage.
Essays involving plagiarism (the unacknowledged use of the work of others—their words or their ideas) will be marked down. In some cases this may be exclusively a presentational problem, but this is one of the criteria by which you are marked, and it is an important criterion, especially when your failure to acknowledge misleads the reader. In other cases, it may in addition mean that your essay is extremely derivative and—instead of answering the philosophical question your essay is supposed to answer—merely reports what someone else says about this question.
Finally the severest cases: an unacknowledged use of another’s work in an attempt to deceive the reader is a form of cheating: cheating yourself and cheating the person marking your essay.
Similar considerations apply to essays produced with LLMs. Detection software can be used and essays will be disqualified in such cases.
1 Taught Masters Handbook 2008/09, School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences, University of Edinburgh.