New evaluation session
Sets the final grade scale, the mentions and the pass threshold. The jury’s 0–5 rubric is the same in every system.
Minutes (.docx) details
Optional — used to generate the institutional Word minutes after the defence.
Document structured in sections, using the terminology of the chosen language: defence details, committee, table of scores, reasons, nominal vote and decision.
Jury composition
3 to 5 members for a master's; president plus 4 to 6 members for a doctorate. Exactly one president.
Each member’s email is optional and is used only to send them their access link and the result summary. It is deleted with the session.
The six levels are the same; only the displayed label changes.
Share the code or the individual links; each member scores privately.
Criteria and weights
Rubric pre-filled from European best practice (Wageningen, Utrecht, QAA). Adjust weights if needed — they must total 100%.
Weights total: 100%
Deliberation rules
Turn off if the president is not from the thesis's scientific field (keeps the casting vote in a tie).
The top mention requires unanimity of the jury — the European cum laude model. The threshold depends on the grading system chosen.
The top of the scale is only reached with jury unanimity on “published” or “publication potential” — Dublin descriptors and the Wageningen rubric.