Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Writing Up
A quick run through of the structure and content of the thesis with some additional tips on how to present it…
Thesis Structure
Front pages Introduction and rationale Aims and Objectives Literature Review Methodology Analysis (results AND discussion of results) Conclusion Recommendations References Appendices
Front pages of the thesis
Your thesis should include:1. Title page (see handbook for sample)2. Executive Summary/Abstract3. Acknowledgements (to those who contributed to
the production of the thesis e.g. organisation/supervisor)
4. Contents Page5. List of Tables6. List of Figures7. List of Appendices
Writing Convention
Your thesis should be written in the 3rd person (except perhaps for the acknowledgements)
“This research examined…” “The method adopted was” And not “I did….”
It’s a story
Your thesis should tell a story (but in the 3rd person) It should have a central theme or message that it is
trying to sell It should have a beginning, a middle and an end
(with signposts at the end of each chapter to navigate the reader to the next)
Every single sentence in the thesis should be directly relevant to the main theme or message
Executive Summary/Abstract
Write in past tense ONE side of A4 (approximately 200 words) A CONCISE summary of the following (one or two
sentences on each): Rationale and aim of programme of study Methodology Findings of Analysis Interpretation of those findings Conclusions and recommendations
Written in clear paragraphs, no bullet points
Introduction The purpose/structure:
To provide a general introduction to the area of research and the theoretical background
Introduce the organisational context/background Define key terms. To provide a clear rationale for why the research was required
(this should draw from both theoretical/research limitations in the literature and from the organisational context)
Length: Approximately 2 sides of A4
Is followed by the Aim of the research and the explicit objectives. These should flow clearly from the rationale you have provided.
You do NOT need research questions
Literature Review
Purpose: To provide a systematic critical evaluation of the
research and literature that is DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO YOUR OBJECTIVES
It is NOT an essay that describes every thing you have ever read about the vague subject you are looking at
Literature Review 2 Structure may vary depending on what you are looking at and whether one of your
objectives will be met within the review Start with a paragraph or two that introduces the reader to the area of research Quickly move onto discussing key theoretical frameworks relevant to your topic area.
Describe them concisely AND THEN EVALUATE each. This discussion should provide a clear rationale for the specific framework(s) YOU are
using. You should make it clear why you have chosen particular frameworks by discussing their
strengths and relevance. But you must also demonstrate you are aware of weaknesses AND be clear about how you have dealt with those/why they are not too important
A key component of a literature review is to critically review RESEARCH and literature that is directly relevant to each of your objectives in turn. You need to describe and evaluate what has been done by other people so as to provide a context for your study and findings (in the discussion section you will go on to talk about what you have found in relation to these other studies).
There is a temptation to describe what has been written in text books. DO NOT! DO place more emphasis on RESEARCH (what did they do, what did they
find, what did they conclude, what were the limitations of that research?) The key is to evaluate throughout. Question what others have written and be
sure to point out the limitations of the research you discuss. You can assume that the markers have a certain level of knowledge so you
don’t have to go into basics. However, you must not make statements or present points WITHOUT evidence. ALWAYS provide evidence (in the form of research findings along with a correct citation)
Methodology Purpose:
To provide readers with a clear, concise description of what you did so that the study can be replicated by someone else
To provide a sound rationale for WHY the study was designed and conducted the way it was
To demonstrate you have built in as much reliability and validity to the design and methods as possible.
It is NOT to describe every research method known to man or to witter on about research onions. Focus on what YOU did and why.
But remember to write in the 3rd person AND in the past tense
Methodology 2
Structure is a series of subsections in the following order:
1. Research Philosophy2. Research Design/Strategy3. Methods (data collection)4. Participants5. Procedure (might include pilot studies you
conducted)6. Ethical considerations
Research Philosophy
One or two paragraphs outlining: whether you took a positivist approach or a
phenomenological approach and WHY you decided on that approach
DO NOT witter on and on about all the options available. Simply state what philosophy was adopted and why (sometimes it is appropriate to point out you did not choose another option because …..)
Research Design/Strategy
Briefly state the overall research design e.g.
Case study / experiment/ quasi-experiment / survey etc Cross-sectional/longitudinal Exploratory/explanatory
And remember to explain WHY the study was designed in that way
Again, do not waste your time going on at length about all the other options available. Briefly state what YOU did and why you did that as opposed to something else
Remember this all has to be written in the 3rd person
Methods 1
Written in past tense and third person What data collection methods did you use and why? Make sure you concisely state how data to answer each
objective was collected if different objectives required different data collection methods
You must be clear about how each variable was assessed since constructs like psychological contract, well being and commitment would all require different questionnaires – which scales were selected and why?
Append Interview transcripts and questionnaires and refer to them in the text (e.g. See Appendix 1)
Methods 2 Questionnaires:
Be sure to state where your questionnaire was derived from and why you used that particular scale. Or, how it was constructed – where have all the items come from? Why did you use those items and not some from another questionnaire? What reliability and validity figures does it have? Did you pilot it and what did you find? Provide examples of the questions asked and describe the response scales.
Interview schedules: State whether it was
structured/semi-structured/unstructured (and why) How it was constructed (e.g. based on focus group/other
research etc)
Participants
Who? (and why?) How many? Gender breakdowns? Age breakdowns? Job breakdowns? How sampled (and why)?
Procedure
If your study was complicated or included waves of data collection then it is useful to briefly describe the order in which things were done.
Most commonly seen in experiment write ups but sometimes necessary in other research
Ethics
What did you do to ensure that ethical considerations were met?
E.g. briefing letter Letter of consent
Results/Findings/Analysis
Begin with a paragraph that details what kind of data was collected and what you then did to it (e.g. quantitative data was collected and inputted to SPSS).
Then structure the rest of this section BY OBJECTIVE.
Look at each objective in turn and then have a concluding paragraph that sums up how each objective has been answered
Presenting Findings For an Objective – Quantitative data
1. State the objective and what analyses you have conducted in order to answer it i.e. state what the remaining sub section is going to include
2. Describe what the raw data looked like (e.g. likert scale data 1 to 5)3. Describe what you did to the data (e.g. transformations such as summing items,
what the scores could range from, what low/high scores meant etc)4. Discuss the results of the descriptive statistics (mean/mode/median; SD; kurtosis
and skewness if relevant; frequencies) and produce graphs and tables to illustrate WHAT YOU WRITE in the text.
5. State what inferential tests you ran. Describe the variables used within the analyses
6. State what the results of the test were using the proper scientific notation and stating clearly what the test found. Use descriptive data to help illustrate.
e.g. an independent samples t-test was run to compare male and female IQ scores. The test showed that mean male IQ was 116 (SD= 1.67) and mean female IQ was 123 (SD = 2.12) and that this difference was not significant t (357) = 1.023, p >.05.
7. Then be clear to state HOW this analysis actually answers your objectivee.g. To answer the objective then it appears that there are no differences between
males and females in IQ suggesting that differences in performance between the groups is in fact due to some other measure.
Graphs and Tables
Must have a Table number or Figure number (for graphs and diagrams). Usually a chapter number followed by a full stop followed by the number that table comes in that chapter e.g. 3.4.
Must also have a title Must be clearly referred to in the text where you
succinctly state what the table or graph shows ARE NOT AN ANALYSIS IN THEMSELVES Pie charts suck. Use the same table layout for every table you use in
the whole dissertation
Figure 1.2. Scatterplot of Husband’s and Wife’s
Age
Table 1.1. Mean IQ Scores and SD’s for Males versus Females
Gender Mean IQ Score SD
Male 116 2.56
Female 119 3.12
Presenting Findings For Qualitatitive Analysis
More or less the same but sometimes analysis for qualitative data is presented by theme. If you take this approach YOU must be able to write in such a way that you link it all back to objectives.
Easier to:1. State the objective2. State what form the data was, where it came from, how it was
gathered and what particular form of qualitative analysis has been conducted (AND WHY).
3. Describe how the analyses will be presented.4. Present the analyses, making sure that you have ample evidence
for the themes you claim to have found Make sure you sum up with a paragraph that clearly states how
your analysis actually answers the objective.
Results/Findings/Analysis
Unless you are highly skilled at writing and are therefore presenting by themes, the key thing you must do is analyse by objective and make sure that you have a clear statement at the end of each analysis that ANSWERS THE OBJECTIVE
Under no circumstances should you analyse your data by item (from the questionnaire) or by question (from the interview). This does not answer the objective and is very difficult to follow.
STRUCTURE BY OBJECTIVE (or by theme if you are doing qualitative analysis and have the skills to link your analysis back to the objectives at the end)
Discussing Your Findings
With pure quantitative data this is traditionally done in a separate chapter to the analysis/results
With qualitative data this is traditionally done in the same chapter.
Either way it should be structured by objective
With a General Discussion at the end
So what do you discuss?1. How did the findings answer the objective? Can you
explain why you found what you found? (using theory, organisational context or using quirks of your research design?)
2. How do your findings relate to the theoretical framework(s) in place? (do they support or negate the theory?)
3. How do your findings compare to other research studies which have looked at similar things? (same? Different? If so why?). How do they add to the literature?
4. What do your findings mean within the organisational context?
5. What might your findings mean in the grander scheme of things?
The general discussion
Pulling together all your findings into a coherent whole with some sort of explanation that is grounded in theory or how you designed your research.
Linking to other theories/across subject matter Implications for theory, research, organisational
context Discussing limitations and where future research
might go. Practical applications
Conclusions
Summing up of what was found and why Restatement of aim of research and how that
has been met Restatement of answers to each objective What do you conclude (Don’t bring in new material at this point) Should lead to what you are going to
recommend in the next section
Recommendations
MUST be based on theory and your research findings
Must flow sensibly Must be viable and resource specific
References
Presented using the Harvard format (i.e. in alphabetical order by Author surname)
Should contain EVERY citation from the text, presented in ONE section and not split into books/journals/websites etc
Do not use the abbreviation et al within the reference section – list every author.
You might also include a bibliography (a list of all the other sources from which you drew from but did not necessarily use directly)
Appendices
Should definitely include data collection methods (e.g. your questionnaire) and should include a sample briefing/consent letter
Consult with your supervisor as to whether they want to see transcripts or completed questionnaires. Some do, I don’t (unless I think you have made them up).
Might include some additional statistical output if relevant
Might include diagrammatic representation of thematic analyses
