Claudio Coletta

Guidelines for the degree thesis

This section describes how I work with students who choose to write their thesis with me. Its purpose is to make timelines, expectations and working methods predictable, and to avoid the most common misunderstandings.

The thesis is a process of research and progressive learning. It takes time to define the problem, study the literature, write, discuss drafts and revise the text several times. The date of the graduation session is a working target, but it does not take precedence over the quality and completeness of the thesis.

The official rules of the degree programme and the deadlines published by the University remain in any case the point of reference for administrative and editorial matters.

In brief:

• write to me at least six months in advance for a Bachelor’s thesis, twelve months in advance for a Master’s thesis;

• in your first message, state your degree programme, the type of thesis, the intended graduation session, relevant exams already passed and the topic you are interested in;

• attach an abstract (half a page for a Bachelor’s thesis, one page for a Master’s thesis) before our first meeting;

• look at the research areas listed in section 1: proposals consistent with them are more likely to be supervised well;

• send me your material at least two weeks before each meeting;

• I normally need two weeks to read a chapter and provide feedback, often longer during teaching and examination periods;

• tell me straight away about any specific needs (specific learning difficulties, disability, work, caring responsibilities, health): timelines can be adapted, but only if we know in advance.

Part I — Before you start

1. Research topics

The proposals below indicate the areas in which I can offer supervision closely connected to my own scholarly work. They are not ready-made titles: the topic will need to be narrowed down and turned into a research question starting from your own interests.

Different proposals are also welcome, provided they are compatible with my expertise; if they are not, I will point you towards colleagues better suited to supervise them.

1.1 Infrastructures and digitalisation in the age of the ecological transition

The ecological transition is not only a matter of technologies and policies, but also of the way institutions and organisations construct urgencies, deadlines, expectations and representations of the future.

Possible questions:

• how the timescales of the ecological transition are defined;

• how emergencies, delays and long-term objectives shape decisions;

• who is able to wait and who bears the effects of acceleration or inaction;

• how ideas of the future change in climate adaptation and mitigation projects.

Possible case studies: urban climate plans, climate governance, sustainable mobility, energy transitions, the transformation of neighbourhoods or disused infrastructures.

A Bachelor’s thesis can analyse a case through public documents, scholarly literature and political debate. A Master’s thesis can include interviews, observation and comparison between different actors or projects.

1.2 Technologies, innovation, data and the algorithmic government of the city and the territory

Digital platforms, artificial intelligence and monitoring systems do not merely describe the world: they contribute to transforming it, defining which problems are visible, measurable and governable and which are not.

Possible questions:

• how a phenomenon is turned into data;

• which forms of knowledge and experience are left out of indicators;

• how the skills and responsibilities of practitioners change;

• how algorithms and platforms shape mobility, safety, the environment or public services;

• how social agency is embedded in technologies.

Possible case studies: digital twins, platforms and digital services, environmental sensors, video-surveillance systems, applications for civic participation.

For a Bachelor’s thesis it is advisable to focus on public discourse and on the controversies surrounding a given technology. A Master’s thesis can reconstruct the sociotechnical and organisational workings of a project through interviews, documents and qualitative observation.

1.3 Crisis, resilience, climate, epistemic and social justice

Events such as floods, droughts and heatwaves show that disasters are never purely “natural”: their effects depend on infrastructures, past decisions, forms of knowledge and social inequalities.

Possible questions:

• how crises are defined in the age of the Anthropocene;

• how response and responsibility are publicly constructed after an extreme event;

• how subjects and experiences come to be recognised as competent;

• how infrastructures and repair practices distribute risks and vulnerabilities;

• what “resilience” means for institutions, technical staff and local communities;

• what conflicts emerge between restoration, adaptation, mitigation and transformation.

Possible case studies: the social, technological and political dimensions of extreme events (drought, urban heat islands, civil protection, climate insurance, post-emergency reconstruction, and so on) and of the management of natural resources.

A Bachelor’s thesis can reconstruct a controversy and compare the different interpretations of an event. A Master’s thesis can study in the field the relations between public administrations, expert and local knowledge, associations and citizens, paying attention to climate justice and its intersection with epistemic and social justice.

In all three areas, proposals that connect theory and concrete cases, distinguish the positions of the actors involved and critically analyse the relationship between knowledge, technologies, organisations and political choices are especially welcome.

A note on fieldwork. Theses involving interviews with people affected by disasters or crises require particular ethical care: please read section 9 before proposing them.

2. When and how to contact me

• At least six months before the intended graduation session for a Bachelor’s thesis.

• At least twelve months in advance for a Master’s thesis.

These are minimum timelines, unless the degree programme provides otherwise and sets its own deadlines for the formal assignment of a supervisor. Complex topics, empirical research, interviews, periods of study abroad or interdisciplinary theses require longer.

Whether I am available to supervise depends on how well the proposal fits my research areas, on the number of theses already in progress and on whether I can guarantee adequate support. If I am not able to supervise you, I will tell you immediately and explicitly.

In your first message, please state:

• your degree programme and the type of thesis, Bachelor’s or Master’s;

• the intended graduation session;

• relevant exams or educational activities already completed;

• the general topic you are interested in;

• any experiences, case studies or materials from which the proposal arises;

• any constraints or needs relevant to planning (work, international mobility, accessibility requirements).

Send an abstract before our first meeting. You do not need to have a fully defined project from the outset, but you do need to arrive at the first meeting with something that can be discussed and delimited.

For a Bachelor’s thesis, half a page setting out: the problem you are interested in; why you find it relevant from a sociological, anthropological or philosophical point of view; two or three readings you have actually done, with one line on what you took from them.

For a Master’s thesis, roughly one page setting out: the problem; its relevance; the main research questions or hypotheses; a preliminary body of reference literature; any empirical materials or case studies and the method by which you would analyse them.

An original, tentative abstract is more useful than a generic, self-referential one. If you do not yet have a defined topic, we can agree together on one compatible with your interests.

3. Bachelor’s and Master’s theses

Bachelor’s thesis

It must focus on a well-defined problem that can be addressed within the time available. The following are particularly important:

• an accurate reconstruction of an author, a concept or a debate;

• the ability to distinguish correctly between different positions;

• an informed use of the scholarly literature;

• the construction of a clear and coherent argument;

• the ability to test the argument against current cases and examples;

• a command of citation practice and editorial conventions.

It is preferable to explore one delimited question thoroughly rather than to present many themes superficially.

Master’s thesis

It requires greater theoretical and methodological depth. In addition to the elements above, it must demonstrate:

• an explicit and well-motivated research question;

• an up-to-date and articulated knowledge of the literature;

• a recognisable methodology, appropriate to the materials;

• the ability to compare different theoretical perspectives;

• an independent contribution, which may consist of an original interpretation, a critical synthesis or empirical research;

• an empirical component, normally conducted through ethnographic enquiry, case analysis, in-depth interviews or systematic documentary analysis;

• attention to the social, political and institutional implications of the problem, where relevant.

Co-supervision

If the research spans more than one disciplinary field, it may be appropriate to identify a co-supervisor with complementary expertise. Co-supervision is compulsory for Master’s theses. The proposal should be discussed with me before contacting the person concerned; you should then check with the student administration office whether the degree programme requires formal approval.

4. What you can expect from me

The supervisory relationship involves obligations on both sides. On my side:

• I aim to reply to emails within seven working days, except during periods of absence, which I will flag;

• I guarantee meetings on the basis of materials submitted by you, in addition to email exchanges;

• I read each chapter through one substantive round of comments, and I carry out a final review of the whole thesis, giving an assessment;

• I return written comments on the text, distinguishing between substantive problems and minor observations;

• I will tell you clearly, and not at the last minute, if I believe the work is not ready for the intended session.

What I do not do. I do not correct the text line by line, nor do I provide language proofreading: the text you send me must already have been re-read by you. I do not carry out the bibliographic research on your behalf, although I will suggest readings and lines of enquiry. I do not rewrite parts of the thesis. I do not read material sent less than two weeks before a meeting, nor drafts sent close to the upload deadline.

Part II — How we work together

5. Defining the project

After the first meeting, within one month you should prepare:

• a provisional title;

• a research question;

• an annotated table of contents;

• an initial bibliography;

• a work plan compatible with the intended session;

• for empirical research, a description of the materials, the field and the method.

The table of contents is a working tool and may change. It must, however, make visible the thread of the argument and the role of each chapter.

For managing the bibliography and sharing materials we may use Zotero, a free bibliographic management software, where agreed.

6. Working method and version management

1. Preparation of the abstract and the table of contents.

2. First meeting to set up the project.

3. Bibliographic research and definition of the corpus or empirical material.

4. Progressive submission of chapters.

5. Return of comments.

6. Meeting to discuss the main problems.

7. Revision of the text and continuation with the next chapter.

8. Submission of the complete draft.

9. Final revision, editorial check and upload.

It is preferable to send coherent sections or chapters, rather than isolated fragments without a recognisable structure. A first draft does not need to be perfect: what matters is that it makes visible the reasoning, the sources used and any doubts.

Reading times

To read a chapter or a substantial part of the thesis I normally need at least two weeks; during teaching and examination periods, at times of institutional deadlines or over the summer break, longer may be required. Please therefore send your material at least two weeks before each meeting.

Meetings are held in person or on Teams. They are far more productive when you have sent the material beforehand and clearly indicate the points you want to discuss.

File names and versions

Every file must include your surname, the content and the date or version number, and must be IN AN EDITABLE FORMAT (DOC, DOCX, ODT, RTF). For example: Rossi_Capitolo2_2026-04-15.odt

When you send a new version:

• make the changes recognisable (tracked changes or highlighting);

• indicate briefly which comments you have taken up;

• flag any observations you did not understand, or choices you decided not to adopt, explaining why;

• always send the most up-to-date version before a meeting.

Revision does not consist in applying corrections mechanically: you must understand them, weigh them and rework the text independently. A choice that differs from mine is perfectly legitimate, provided it is reasoned.

7. Editorial guidelines

The editorial guidelines for the thesis are available at  .

8. Quality criteria

A good thesis must:

• have a clearly delimited object;

• develop an original and recognisable argument;

• distinguish precisely between authors, concepts and theoretical traditions;

• avoid general or categorical statements without support;

• use reliable academic or institutional sources;

• state transparently the method adopted;

• connect interpretations and conclusions to verifiable evidence;

• present citations and bibliography consistently;

• be accurate in grammar, punctuation and form;

• maintain a coherent authorial voice.

Some useful advice:

• Delimit the object.

• Move from the formulation of the problem to the questions you intend to investigate.

• Support and develop your own arguments.

9. The ethics of empirical research

If the thesis involves interviews, observation or the collection of materials concerning people, research ethics is not a formality but part of the method. We will discuss it before you enter the field.

Minimum rules:

• informed consent: every person interviewed must know who you are, what research they are taking part in, what use will be made of what they say, and that they may stop at any time and withdraw their consent. Consent must be obtained in writing or, where this is not possible, recorded orally at the start of the recording;

• anonymisation: names, minor locations and identifying details must be replaced with pseudonyms or generic descriptions already at the transcription stage. In the thesis, people appear by role, not by name, unless explicitly agreed otherwise with those speaking in a public capacity;

• data storage: recordings and transcripts must be kept on password-protected devices, not on shared personal cloud services, and deleted at the end of the research. Recordings must not be attached to the thesis;

• ethics committee: check whether your degree programme or department requires prior review. This is generally necessary where the research involves minors, people in a vulnerable position, health data or special categories of personal data;

• vulnerable subjects and post-emergency contexts: asking someone to recount a disaster, a displacement or a loss is not a neutral request. You must consider whether the interview is really necessary, how to stop it if the person is in difficulty, and where you might direct them for support. In such cases we will plan the fieldwork together with particular care.

10. Integrity of the text and use of artificial intelligence

The thesis must be your own work. When in doubt, cite. A thesis with many well-handled citations is good work; a thesis with vague, undeclared paraphrases does not meet academic quality standards.

Artificial intelligence tools do not replace the reading, the research, the writing and the responsibility of the person who signs the thesis. Whoever submits the work is responsible for it in its entirety and must be able to discuss every part of it, both in supervision meetings and before the examining committee.

Permitted uses, provided they are declared:

• language support on text you have already written (grammatical correction, synonyms, fluency);

• translation of passages, to be checked against the original;

• initial brainstorming on a topic, before the research proper begins;

• non-textual technical support (formatting, tables, code for data analysis, provided you understand how it works).

Uses that are not permitted:

• generating paragraphs, sections or chapters to be inserted into the thesis, even if subsequently edited;

• having texts you have not read summarised and using the summary as the basis of your own reconstruction;

• obtaining bibliographic references without checking them at source. These tools regularly produce citations that do not exist or are wrongly attributed: every reference must be located, opened and read;

• generating or completing empirical data, interview extracts or field notes;

• producing parts of the text whose reasoning you would not be able to reconstruct or whose choices you would not be able to defend.

Signs that something is wrong: stylistic inconsistency between sections, generic statements that cannot be traced to a specific source, a bibliography that does not match the content, an inability to answer questions about your own text. Where such signs appear, I will ask you to account for your writing process.

If you have used these tools, I would appreciate it if you made this explicit in a dedicated section of the thesis, reflecting on how you constructed your prompts and critically examining the answers you obtained and what benefits you drew from them. I then invite you to complete the declaration below and include it at the end of the thesis. I do consider it a penalising factor if the use of AI tools for the thesis is not declared.

Suggested template for the declaration on the use of artificial intelligence tools in the thesis

In preparing this thesis I have used the following generative artificial intelligence tools: [state name and version].

I have used them for: [state the specific uses, for example: language revision of text I wrote myself; translation of passages from English, checked against the original].

I have not used them to generate argumentative content, for bibliographic research not verified at source, or to produce or process empirical materials. I have personally verified every piece of information, citation and reference in the text and I am responsible for the entire content of this thesis.

Date and signature

If you have not used any such tool, you may include a declaration to that effect.

The University’s own guidance, available at this link, applies in any case.

Part III — Towards graduation

11. Indicative timeline for the Bachelor’s degree

• 6 months before the upload: first contact, abstract, initial meeting to set up the project.

• 5 months before: definition of the research question, table of contents and bibliography.

• 4–3 months before: writing and discussion of the chapters.

• 2 months before: assembly of the complete draft.

• Final month: substantive revisions and editorial check.

• Before the upload: submission of the complete version for a final check.

12. Indicative timeline for the Master’s degree

• 12 months before: first contact and preliminary definition of the project.

• 11 months before: survey of the literature, definition of method and table of contents.

• 10–4 months before: research, collection of materials and writing of the chapters.

• 3–2 months before: completion of the first full draft.

• Final month: overall revisions.

• Before the upload: submission of the complete version for a final check.

Planning will be adapted to the nature of the research, but it is not advisable to concentrate writing and revision in the weeks immediately preceding the deadline.

13. When things do not go as planned

This happens, and in itself it is not a problem. It becomes one when it is not talked about.

If you are struggling or behind schedule, write to me anyway, even just to say that you are stuck. A thesis that slows down can be picked up again; a thesis I have heard nothing about for months, which then resurfaces three weeks before the session, cannot be salvaged. In that case I will not be able to read the material in time and the defence will have to be postponed.

Prolonged interruptions. If I hear nothing from you for more than three months, I will consider the process suspended: when you resume, we will need to check whether the project is still current and recalculate the timeline.

If the project is not working. It can happen that a field turns out to be inaccessible, that the literature leads elsewhere, that the topic does not hold up. It is better to recognise this early and redefine the object than to persist with a framework that does not stand.

If you want to change supervisor, you are entirely free to do so, without this affecting our relationship in any way. Tell me frankly; I will help with the transition as far as I can.

Specific needs. If you have certification for a specific learning difficulty or a disability, if you work, if you have caring responsibilities or are going through a difficult period healthwise, please tell me as soon as possible. Timelines, the way comments are returned and the organisation of meetings can be adapted, and I will turn to the relevant University services where necessary. You are not required to explain the details to me, but without being told I cannot take them into account.

14. Graduation application and final submission

Submitting the graduation application is an administrative step and does not amount to approval of the thesis.

Before the upload, time is needed to:

• read the complete draft;

• carry out at least one round of revision;

• harmonise notes, citations and bibliography;

• correct typos and formal errors;

• check the requirements set by the degree programme.

If the thesis still requires substantial work, we will consider together postponing to the next session. This is not a sanction: the priority is to submit work that is complete, accurate and genuinely mastered by the person who signs it.

15. Preparing the presentation

Once the final version has been approved, we will prepare the defence. The presentation must be concise and focus on:

• the problem and the research question;

• method and materials;

• the main steps of the argument;

• results or the thesis advanced;

• limitations and possible developments.

The aim is not to summarise every chapter, but to make clear to the committee the central contribution of the work.

Enjoy your work!

Claudio Coletta