Your guide to safeguarding quality as the MSP-side assessor of a BTR student
Overview: What is the Internal Advisor?
Every BTR student has an Internal Advisor (IA) alongside their Research Supervisor. The IA is usually a member of the MSP or allied staff who verifies that the scientific level of the proposed experiments, the actual research, and the final outcomes are of sufficient academic quality. While the Research Supervisor guides the research day to day, the IA is the MSP's independent set of eyes on the student's trajectory.
Appointed by the BTR team, before the proposal is submitted. Students cannot choose their IA; assignments are made once the cohort's Requests to Start are approved, and students can see their IA in their Collent profile.
You will likely be a member of staff familiar with the student and their academic background, such as an academic advisor.
You are not necessarily an expert in the research area of the thesis, and you do not need to be. Your role is to judge academic quality at the bachelor level, guided by the rubrics.
Important: Specific deadlines vary by cohort (September or February start). The current September 2026 grading deadlines are listed below; for anything else, see the cohort timeline or contact the BTR Office.
Your Role, and What It Is Not
What You Do
Quality verification: confirm that the proposed experiments, the research as carried out, and the final outcomes meet the academic standard expected of an MSP bachelor thesis.
Second assessor: grade the proposal and the written thesis alongside the Research Supervisor, and the video alongside a peer from the student's cohort (see below).
Progress discussions: meet the student at key points, most importantly the progress meeting around the proposal (see below), and further by request from either side.
Impartial advice: advise the BTR Coordinator on conflicts or extension requests when asked. You are the neutral MSP voice in the student's supervision team.
What You Do NOT Do
You are not a second supervisor: you do not contribute to the development of the thesis except in general terms, and you are not involved in designing or finalizing it.
You do not review drafts of the proposal or the thesis. The one-draft feedback round is the Research Supervisor's job; Internal Advisors never check drafts. This keeps the playing field level across students.
You do not grade the practical work: the midterm (15%) and final (35%) practical grades are entered by the Research Supervisor alone.
Regular meetings are not mandatory if the student's progress is smooth. Students can request additional feedback meetings if they want them.
Assessment & Grading Responsibilities
As Internal Advisor, you grade three of the five BTR components:
1. Research Proposal (15% of total grade)
Graded with: the Research Supervisor
Submitted: four weeks after the BTR start, on Collent
What to assess: literature review, aims/hypotheses, methodology, anticipated outcomes, research importance, ethical considerations
Word-count and plagiarism checks are done by the BTR Office; you do not apply penalties
2. Written Thesis (25% of total grade)
Graded with: the Research Supervisor
Length: below 15,000 words, excluding references and appendices
Grades are returned on a necessarily short deadline, because graduation depends on them
3. BTR Video (10% of total grade)
Graded with: a peer from the student's cohort (the second assessor); the Research Supervisor does not grade the video
Format: 5-7 minutes, aimed at non-scientists, covering scientific importance, societal importance, and ethics
If a video is longer than 7 minutes, stop at the 7-minute mark; content after it is not graded
Grading focuses on content, not production values
You receive the student's WeTransfer link via Collent; if a link has expired, the BTR Office sends you a SurfDrive backup link
Components You Do NOT Grade
Midterm Practical (15%) and Final Practical (35%): graded by the Research Supervisor only
To pass the BTR, the student needs a weighted average of 5.5 or higher across the five components; a low component can be compensated by the others. Detailed criteria are on the rubrics page.
How Grading Works in Practice
You receive an automatic Collent notification when your student uploads work
You grade in Collent, using the rubric on the form; the overall numerical grade should be consistent with your assessment of the individual criteria
Students see their grades and assessment forms on Canvas, not in Collent
Grading Discrepancies (the 1.5 rule)
On the proposal and the thesis, where you and the Research Supervisor grade jointly:
If your grades are more than 1.5 apart, the BTR Office will ask the two of you to discuss and reach a consensus
This does not necessarily mean either grade changes (although it may); it ensures both perspectives are understood
Do not communicate grades to the student until you are sure there are no such issues; you will be advised by email
Any discussion must take place immediately, so that grades are recorded on time and the student can graduate
If consensus cannot be reached quickly, the BTR Coordinator reserves the right to make a final decision
September 2026 cohort: grade-submission deadlines
Proposal grade:Friday 16 October 2026
Thesis grade and video grade:Friday 15 January 2027
Grades are entered in Collent; students see them on Canvas shortly after (the Monday following: 19 October and 18 January). Collent notifies you when your student uploads: proposal 28 September 2026, thesis 7 December 2026, video 11 December 2026 (all at 13:00). The midterm deadline (6 November) is the Research Supervisor's, not yours.
The Progress Meeting
Around the time the proposal is graded, you have a meeting with the student. This is the core contact moment of the IA role.
What to Discuss
The student's research progress, including their proposal
Their work ethic and how they are fitting into their chosen position
Practicalities
Meet in person when the student works in or near Maastricht, or via video call or phone if they are geographically remote (for example doing their BTR abroad)
It should be possible for the student to talk to you alone, without the supervisor present. It is important that the student can be honest about their progress and how they are getting on
Further contact can take place later if either of you deems it necessary, and students are free to request additional feedback or an overall discussion
If you want to discuss the student with the Research Supervisor, contact them to arrange a suitable time; supervisors may also contact you by request
Extensions & When Problems Arise
Extension requests come from the student to the BTR Office, not through you. When the office processes one, it needs confirmation of the new dates from both the Research Supervisor and you before the extension is final
When an extension is granted, your grading deadlines move along with it; the office sends the revised timeline
In cases of special circumstances (deadline extensions, personal circumstances, disputes), the BTR Coordinator makes the final decision on the advice of the Research Supervisor and the Internal Advisor. Your value here is the impartial MSP-side view of the situation
If a student raises problems with you, point them to the BTR Office (msp-btr@maastrichtuniversity.nl) for anything that needs a formal request; the responsibility for making such requests lies with the student
