A review of a thesis in economics is a review, as a rule, of one teacher of a discipline in economics or a professional economist for a bachelor, specialist, or master performed by WRC.
What is a review for?
The review is carried out in order to evaluate the work of a professional by the simplicity and scientific character of writing, the content of the necessary chapters and paragraphs, the number of sources of information analyzed and other indicators, as a result of which he makes a general assessment of the possibility of awarding the qualification of an “Economist” to a student who has completed a specific WRC submitted for review.
Requirements
A review of a thesis in economics can be made up of 1-2 pages of computer text. If in any teaching aids on writing WRC the requirements for the design of the review are not stipulated, then the reviewer chooses the font size and line spacing.
The content of the review of an economic diploma
The review of the thesis in economics should include the following structural elements:
- The relevance of WRC.
- Conformity of the material presented in the thesis to the stated topic.
- The scientific, practical and theoretical significance of the work, the depth of the material.
- Independence in writing work.
- The logic and validity of conclusions and suggestions.
- The level of preparation of a graduate to work as an economist.
- His ability to think economically and perform economic analysis.
- Positive qualities that distinguish the student from other similar ones. Not only are they cited in reviews of the thesis in economics. Deficiencies should also be reflected in it.
- Issues such as the presentation style present in the work, as well as the accuracy of the thesis, may be noted.
- At the end of the review, the reviewer gives his assessment of this work, which can be performed according to the four-point assessment system adopted at universities, or in the phrases “deserves a high (positive) mark”.
Consider the review of the thesis in economics as a model.
Introduction
As a rule, a review begins with a description of the relevance of the topic under consideration: "The relevance of the topic of the work submitted for review is beyond doubt, because ...". As a rule, a task for its implementation is attached to the thesis. The review reflects whether the content of the thesis corresponds to the assignment, in what sequence - appropriate or inappropriate to the assignment - the work is stated.
Analysis of structure and content
When considering the submitted work, the reviewer should write a review of the thesis in economics, the main component of which should be an analysis of the structure of the work, as well as the content of each structural element of this work. The logic of its construction should be analyzed. When writing a review of the thesis on the economics of the enterprise, it should be indicated how fully and accurately the student who wrote the thesis was able to use the production data. It also provides information on the number of sources of information used, although there may be options without indicating the quantity, but only that the work is written using a sufficient number of information sources in both Russian and foreign languages. If necessary, it is emphasized that the student is able to use the regulatory framework on the subject under study.
As a rule, WRC should include statistical processing of the material, which confirms the reliability of the data. This is also indicated when writing a review.
In addition, a good review indicates how conscientiously the author refers to the references used and other sources of information.
Conclusion
It indicates how logical the conclusions made when writing the thesis. It is emphasized that the results obtained when writing the WRC can be used in the work of the enterprise, on the basis of which it was carried out.
Shortcomings, weaknesses of the work are emphasized, comments on the design and style of presentation, if any, are given.
The presented structure is approximate and may vary slightly in different universities. This review of the thesis in economics is an example.
Internal review
In most cases, the WRC of economists draws up an internal review, which suggests that it will be a teacher, mainly with a degree in economics. This review can be made by an appropriate specialist from an adjacent department of one faculty, or maybe from the same department at which work was performed.
The latter is practiced, as a rule, in the branches of universities in which there is an insufficient number of specialized departments. An internal review is usually certified by the signature of the reviewer. If necessary, this signature can be verified by the human resources inspector.
External Review
Sometimes, instead of internal, an external review of the thesis in economics is used. In this case, it is assumed that it will be issued by a specialist of the enterprise with economic education, on the basis of which the thesis was carried out. In this case, two points are completely overlooked.
- Most experts have no time to write reviews on theses, which you must familiarize yourself with before you write. In this case, the review becomes formal, because it is written either by the student himself or by his supervisor.
- It is becoming increasingly difficult for students to find a basis for writing a thesis, and in some cases diplomas are written in fictitious enterprises. But in any case, the requirement for external review may exist, and, therefore, it must be fulfilled.
As already noted, the main difference between an external review and an internal review lies in the reviewer. In addition, the external review in addition to the signature of the reviewer, as a rule, is certified by the seal of the organization or individual entrepreneur, on the basis of which the thesis was carried out.
Title design
The review of the thesis in economics should have a title, which can be issued on a separate sheet in the case of using a special form for review, or as a text preceding the main text on the same page. The title indicates the word "Review" and then "to WRC on the topic" ... ", performed by the student, indicates the course, faculty, department, university, if the work is written in the branch, the name of the branch is also indicated. The student’s training form may also be indicated .
Examples of reviews of thesis in economics
Consider an example of a review with a slightly different structure from that given in the sample.
...State University
Department of Economics
Review on the WRC, carried out on the topic: “Modernization of the marketing service in LLC“ Madagascar ”by a student ... of a course of the Faculty of Economics, studying in the specialty“ Marketing ”
The topic submitted for review by the WRC is relevant, since the effective marketing activities carried out by the corresponding service in the enterprise determine the successful operation of this legal entity. This is especially important for the distributor, to which Madagascar LLC belongs.
When writing this work, a systematic approach was used. F. I. O. critically approached the study of marketing strategies, revealed the theoretical mechanism for their formation and the practical mechanism for their implementation in our enterprise.
The author proposes measures to improve the activities of the marketing service at the enterprise. Their implementation will improve the marketing strategy, thereby improving marketing activities in Madagascar LLC.
The construction of the work is logical, competent. Data is professionally processed using statistical methods.
The work has ... tables, ... figures, ... applications. There are no comments on the work.
The thesis (full name of the student) is commendable, its author deserves the award of qualification "Economist".
Reviewer ... signature (transcript). Seal of organization.
An example of a review of a thesis in economics, in accordance with the model described above, is shown in the figures.
Finally
Thus, the review of the diploma can be internal and external, must be executed by a specialist in this field, includes a number of mandatory elements, including the evaluation of the work of the reviewer.