Between learning outcomes and academic conventions: Theory use and analytical reasoning in public administration theses

This study examines how intended learning outcomes are manifested in bachelor’s and master’s theses within a public administration programme at a Swedish university. Final theses constitute central forms of assessment in higher education and are intended to demonstrate students’ analytical, methodological, and theoretical competence. Based on a document analysis of 80 bachelor’s and 80 master’s theses produced between 2024 and 2025, the study investigates patterns in subject selection, theoretical frameworks, methodological approaches, and the use of theory in empirical analysis. The qualitative research design combines document analysis, descriptive mapping, and qualitative content analysis. Drawing on perspectives from constructive alignment, authentic assessment, and higher education research on analytical reasoning, the analysis examines how intended learning outcomes are expressed in completed thesis texts. Particular attention is paid to similarities and differences between bachelor’s and master’s theses in theoretical integration and analytical reasoning. Most theses focus on governance-related issues at the municipal level and rely predominantly on qualitative and interview-based methodologies. Institutional, governance, and implementation-oriented perspectives dominate the theoretical frameworks, indicating limited theoretical diversification. Theory serves different functions, ranging from conceptual framing and empirical categorisation to broader interpretation and reflection. A central finding is that the analytical role of theory depends less on the breadth of theoretical discussion than on how effectively theoretical concepts are operationalised and integrated throughout the research process. While master’s theses more frequently demonstrate broader theoretical discussion and reflection, substantial variation exists within both levels. The study contributes to research on higher education and public administration education by illustrating how thesis writing can function as both an assessment practice and a site of disciplinary learning. The recurring patterns are discussed in relation to previous research on supervision, disciplinary traditions, and institutional expectations, which offers an interpretive context for the findings; these factors were not examined empirically.