University of Helsinki Master's Thesis: General Process and Verification Map

Reader outcome

This guide maps the University of Helsinki’s university-wide master’s-thesis process and shows exactly which details a student must verify in their own degree programme. It is a navigation aid, not a replacement for current programme instructions, Sisu, faculty communications, the supervisor or E-thesis.

Scope and verification warning

The source pages were checked on 27 July 2026. The general thesis page had been updated in May 2026 and included programme-specific schedules for the 2026–2027 academic year. Requirements can differ by degree programme and faculty. Where a programme page, curriculum or supervisor instruction differs from this guide, the official programme-specific instruction controls.

Do not use a deadline copied from another programme. Before relying on any time-sensitive statement, re-check the official page and record the degree-programme filter used.

General thesis scope

The university’s general guidance describes a master’s thesis as usually worth 30 credits, while medicine, dentistry and veterinary medicine have a different 20-credit scope. The thesis should demonstrate familiarity with the topic, command of relevant research methods, scientific thinking and academic writing.

A student should confirm the required credit scope, language, format, assessment rubric and maturity-test arrangement in the current curriculum of the specific degree programme.

Process map

1. Identify programme requirements early

Locate the degree programme’s thesis instructions and curriculum in the university systems. Record the current page title, programme code where applicable, verification date and any faculty-specific schedule. Check whether there are required seminars, registrations, forms, ethics steps or data-management plans.

2. Prepare and approve a thesis plan

The general guidance requires a thesis plan to be discussed and approved according to the degree-programme curriculum. The plan should identify the topic, objectives or research questions, scholarly framework, proposed material and methods, timetable and supervisor or supervisors.

Approval of a plan is not the same as ethical approval, research permission or data-access permission. Those processes must be completed separately when the project requires them.

3. Clarify supervision and independent authorship

The thesis is an independently written academic work. It can be connected to a research project or, where the programme permits, completed with another student, but the student’s independent contribution must be identifiable. Confirm supervision frequency, feedback boundaries, authorship expectations and responsibilities for data, code and confidentiality.

4. Conduct and document the work

Follow the approved design, maintain source and analysis records, and document deviations from the plan. The programme’s assessment criteria commonly examine the objective or research questions, scholarly framework, material and methods, results, discussion, conclusions, academic writing and the research process.

Use the actual programme rubric as a planning checklist. Do not assume that a general checklist captures every criterion or weighting.

5. Prepare the submission file and abstract

Check the required file format, naming convention, title page, abstract language, accessibility requirements and any programme templates. The University of Helsinki treats master’s theses as public documents. Confidential information should not be placed in the assessed thesis. The official guidance also states that abstracts are public.

When a project involves confidential material, discuss a lawful and academically acceptable structure with the supervisor and data owner before writing. Do not attempt to solve confidentiality by marking the submitted thesis “private” without official agreement.

6. Submit through E-thesis

E-thesis is used for submission and assessment. The official guidance should be followed for the correct system version, file upload, metadata, publication permission and any maturity-test workflow. Verify that the submission is final; do not assume a file can be freely replaced after the assessment process begins.

7. Assessment and decision

The general guidance describes assessment by two examiners and grading on a 0–5 scale, with a dean’s decision based on the proposed grade. Programme-specific schedules determine when a submission enters assessment and when decisions are expected. The official page states that the completion date is tied to the submission-for-assessment date.

Students should check the procedure for reviewing the examiners’ statement, responding to a proposed grade, correcting metadata and appealing or seeking rectification where applicable.

8. Complete the maturity test

The maturity test is a separate requirement connected to demonstrating familiarity with the thesis field and, depending on the student’s prior education, language proficiency. Current guidance describes it as pass/fail and carrying no credits. The university page also states that AI assistance is not allowed in the maturity test. Students must follow the current programme instructions for format, timing and language.

9. Publication and repository choice

Assessment and open publication are distinct decisions. E-thesis handles publication permission, and openly published approved theses may be transferred to the Helda repository. A thesis can remain a public document for inspection even when the author does not grant open online publication. The current E-thesis instruction must be checked for access arrangements and repository workflow.

Student verification worksheet

Before beginning:

• Degree programme and programme code
• Curriculum period
• Thesis credit scope
• Required seminars or registrations
• Approved supervisor(s)
• Ethics, permissions and data-management requirements

Before submission:

• Programme-specific deadline and assessment meeting
• Required file format and title-page template
• Abstract language and metadata
• Maturity-test procedure
• E-thesis version and submission steps
• Publication permission choice
• Confidentiality review
• Expected examiner-statement and decision dates

Save evidence of the official page and verification date for personal planning, but do not redistribute restricted university materials.

Common mistakes

• Following a deadline from another faculty or an old academic year.
• Treating plan approval as ethics or data-access approval.
• Assuming group work removes the requirement for an identifiable independent contribution.
• Including confidential data in a public thesis document.
• Confusing submission for assessment with open repository publication.
• Leaving maturity-test requirements until after the intended graduation deadline.
• Relying on a third-party guide instead of checking the current programme page.

Source and verification notes

This guide is based on the University of Helsinki’s official general thesis and maturity-test instruction, E-thesis guidance, and a programme-filtered 2026–2027 schedule/assessment page. It deliberately separates general statements from programme-dependent details. No deadline is reproduced as universal.