Information Guide for Master's Students: Preparation and Defense of Qualification Works at NUBiP Ukraine

This guide summarizes the key requirements, stages, and procedures for preparing and defending a master's qualification work (thesis) based on the official regulations approved by the Academic Council of the National University of Bioresources and Nature Management of Ukraine (NUBiP Ukraine) on September 25, 2025 (Protocol No. 2). It is intended for master's students to ensure compliance with university standards. All information is verified against the document for accuracy and translated into English, with checks for proper spelling, punctuation, morphology, and grammar.

1. General Provisions

The master's qualification work is an independent individual research project with elements of innovation, serving as the culmination of theoretical and practical training under professional or scientific educational programs. It demonstrates acquired knowledge, skills, and competencies for professional duties.

Purpose: Conduct theoretical and practical research, analyze professional issues, and propose innovative solutions for implementation in production or scientific fields.
Key Requirements: The work must include critical analysis of sources, generalization of facts, own research results, clear conclusions, and scientifically justified innovations. It is written in Ukrainian, following orthographic, punctuation, and stylistic norms.
Types: Individual work or complex project (intra-program, intra-branch, or inter-branch) performed by multiple students.
Language Exception: Students in English-taught groups or foreign students may write in English, with a Ukrainian abstract required.
Volume: Up to 60 pages (computer-typed, including appendices).

For scientific programs, at least 30% of the workload is dedicated to research components.

2. Topic Selection and Approval

Students have the right to choose a topic from the department's annually updated list, aligned with faculty/institute approvals. Topics should be concise, relevant to educational and scientific fields, and address current issues.

Structure of Topics: 60% fundamental/applied, 25% innovative, 15% unconventional.
Considerations: Relevance, novelty, availability of research base, experimental materials, and future employment.
Prohibition: Multiple students from the same group cannot use the same topic and enterprise (except for intra-program projects).
For Part-Time Students: Topics should address workplace needs.
Process: Student selects supervisor, agrees on topic, submits application (Appendix A format). Approved by department head, faculty dean/institute director, and university order within 2 months of enrollment.
Supervisor: University academic staff with PhD or Doctor of Sciences degree, matching research interests. Limit: Up to 5 students per supervisor per year.
Changes: Topic clarification possible via application, no later than 2 months before submission; changes require new order.

3. Roles of Supervisor and Student

Supervisor's Responsibilities:

Suggest topics aligned with their expertise and program needs.
Develop task and plan with student.
Assist in individual study plan and portfolio.
Recommend literature and sources.
Guide research, help with publications and conferences.
Ensure no academic plagiarism.
Provide objective review.
Participate in preliminary defense.
Aid in graduate employment.

Student's Responsibilities:

Choose topic per program.
Form task and plan with supervisor.
Create and maintain master's portfolio.
Participate in conferences, including university poster session.
Collect and process materials using modern methods.
Apply theoretical knowledge practically.
Submit draft for review, address feedback.
Obtain supervisor review, bind work, submit to department.
Respond to internal review comments.
Undergo plagiarism check and preliminary defense.

Students report twice on progress during department meetings, recorded in protocols and "MyNUBIP" system.

4. Structure of the Qualification Work

The work follows a standard structure:

Qualification Work Card (Appendix B format).
Title Page (Appendix C format).
Task Assignment (Appendix D format).
Abstract (up to 3 pages: structure summary, content overview, conclusions, keywords).
Table of Contents.
List of Abbreviations/Symbols (if needed).
Introduction (justify relevance, goals, tasks, object/subject, methods; 2-3 pages).
Main Body (sections: literature review, methods, theoretical foundations, results, analysis; ~50 pages total).
Occupational Safety Section (if applicable, at end of main body).
Conclusions (summarize findings, novelties, implications).
List of References (at least 50 sources, formatted per DSTU 8302:2015; Appendix J examples).
Appendices (auxiliary materials, numbered e.g., A.1, B.2).

5. Preparation Stages and Timeline

Key stages ensure systematic progress:

Stage	Description	Timeline (for Professional/Scientific Programs)
Topic Selection & Approval	Choose topic, supervisor; submit application; university order.	Within 2 months of enrollment.
Task & Plan Development	Define goals, tasks, schedule.	After topic approval.
Literature Review	Analyze sources.	Ongoing, presented in 2nd attestation.
Data Collection & Processing	Gather materials, apply methods (e.g., statistical analysis).	During studies/practice.
Draft Writing	Submit initial text to supervisor.	As per plan.
Finalization & Formatting	Address feedback, format per standards.	Before plagiarism check.
Plagiarism Check	Submit electronic version for verification.	2 weeks before preliminary defense.
Poster Presentation	Apprise results at university conference.	3 weeks before public defense.
Supervisor Review	Obtain feedback.	After finalization.
Submission to Department	Bound work with review.	As per schedule.
Internal Review	Review by another department specialist.	After submission.
Preliminary Defense	Department meeting presentation.	2 weeks before public defense.
Public Defense	Before Examination Commission (EC).	Per EC chairs approval order.

6. Formatting Requirements

Follow strict standards for professional presentation:

Paper: A4, white, one-sided.
Font: Times New Roman, 14 pt.
Line Spacing: 1.5.
Margins: Left 30 mm, top/bottom 20 mm, right 10 mm.
Pagination: Arabic numerals, top-right, starting from introduction (page 1).
Headings: Sections centered uppercase; subsections lowercase from paragraph indent.
Illustrations: Numbered per section (e.g., Fig. 1.1), below figure.
Tables: Numbered per section (e.g., Table 2.1), above table.
Formulas: Centered, numbered per section (e.g., (3.2)).
Citations: In square brackets [1-7]; full references per DSTU standard.
Binding: Hard cover.

7. Reviews and Admission to Defense

Supervisor Review (Appendix L): Assesses quality, originality, no plagiarism; recommends defense.
Internal Review (Appendix M): From adjacent department; evaluates relevance, methods, strengths/weaknesses; suggests grade.
Admission: Requires completed curriculum, plagiarism check (via institutional repository), poster participation, portfolio, preliminary defense success.
Non-Admission: If plagiarized, poorly formatted, or incomplete.

8. Presentation Preparation

Prepare a 6-10 minute presentation (up to 15 slides):
Content: Title slide, relevance, goals/tasks, methods, key results, conclusions, proposals.
Design: Consistent template, readable font (min. 20 pt bold), high contrast, graphics (charts for trends, diagrams for relations).
Tools: Multimedia (e.g., PowerPoint); practice for clarity.
Present at preliminary defense and EC.

9. Defense Procedure

EC Composition: Chair (external expert) and members (university staff).
Process: Public meeting (at least 2/3 members present).
- Student's report with presentation.
- Answers to EC questions.
- Responses to review comments.
Duration: Report 6-10 min.; Q&A follows.
Requirements: Full knowledge of work; for group projects, all present and knowledgeable.
Post-Defense: Results announced same day.

10. Evaluation Criteria

Assessed on a 100-point scale, converted to national grades and ECTS:

National Grade	Points
Excellent	90-100
Good	74-89
Satisfactory	60-73
Unsatisfactory	0-59

Recommended criteria (total 100 points):

Criterion	Key Aspects	Max Points
Topic Relevance	Novelty, justification, alignment with program, tasks, external order.	14
Scientific Merit	Literature review, novelty, logic, conclusions.	40
Methodology & Tools	Adequate sources, statistics, software.	15
Practical Value & Testing	Feasibility, implementation, publications/conferences, economic/social effect.	28
Formatting	Compliance with standards.	3

Faculty of Food Technology and Quality Control of Agricultural Products

Department of Standardization and Certification of Agricultural Products