The replication crisis in the social sciences has uncovered a number of problems that have been overlooked for decades. One of the new approaches brought about by the replication crisis is the promotion of the principles of openness and transparency in research. One of these approaches is the pre-registration of research. Today, pre-registration for research is a common part of good scientific practice (especially in medicine). Registering hypotheses, methods, analyses, techniques, describe data, etc., before study begins helps to make the research more robust, reliable, transparent, and open. If pre-registration has many advantages, why is it not yet a common part of thesis writing? Pre-registration may help students improve the study design by itself, because it allows a critical reflection on the proposed hypotheses and methods used. At the same time, pre-registration makes it possible to record research progress, changes, and adjustments in research design. All this transparently and openly. Additionally, pre-registrations can be published for feedback early in the thesis process. Thus, for students, pre-registration has educational and feedback value and instills in them the principles of openness and transparency of research. However, it may not be apparent to students that they should preregister their research, and they may not know how to do this. Indeed, there are a number of ways in which pre-registration can be done. Therefore, this paper aims to discuss the benefits and negatives of preregistering research for the final theses. The article will provide guidance for students on how to preregister their research, what to include in the pre-registration, and what tools and platforms can be used for pre-registration. The article will also focus on ways to get feedback on pre-registration from the scientific community. The paper will also offer a framework for universities and policy makers, how to incorporate pre-registration into undergraduate and graduate studies.