Upload
omer-mahfoodh
View
251
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
This was a talk in Classroom research methodology workshop for language teachers. School of Languages, Literacies and Translation, USM, Malaysia.
Citation preview
Conclusion section in
Dissertations/Theses and RAs
By
Dr. Omer Mahfoodh
Classroom research methodology
workshop for language teachersPPBLT, USM
6 July 20121
Outline
1. Introduction
2. The Conclusion section in the organisations of
theses/RAs
3. Boundaries of the Discussion and Conclusion
sections
4. Relationship between Introduction and
Conclusion section
5. Examiners are your audience
6. Features of the Conclusion section
7. Typical structure of the Conclusion section
8. The language of Conclusions
9. Suggestions for writing the conclusion2
Topic 1:
Introduction
3
Introduction
Writing in higher education is not a set of rules thatshould be followed strictly.
Rather, it is a set of conventions at different levels:university, school, field and supervisor.
Most of these conventions are untold but practicedand learnt implicitly/not directly expressed.
These conventions are also different from onecontext to another.
However, there are some common sharedconventions in most institutions in higher education.
Our talk in this slot attempts to focus on theseshared conventions.
A Conclusion section in RAs (Research Articles) andin theses/dissertations.
4
Topic 2:
The Conclusion section in the
organisations of theses/RAs
5
1. ‘IMRAD’
2. ILM[RD]C
3. IM[RD]C,
4. IMRDC,
5. ILMRDC
6. ILMRD
I = introduction L = Review of LiteratureM = Methods R = ResultsD= Discussion C = Conclusion
6
A number of researchers have discussed the
organization of different types of theses.
‘IMRAD’ (introduction– methods–results–
discussion) type thesis a ‘traditional’ thesis
(Dudley-Evans,1999).
Traditional theses are divided into those which
have ‘simple’ and those which have ‘complex’
patterns of organization (Thompson, 1999) .
A thesis with a ‘simple’ traditional pattern is one
which reports on a single study and has a typical
organizational structure of ‘introduction’, ‘review of
the literature’, ‘materials and methods’, ‘results’,
‘discussion’ and ‘conclusion’.
7
Topic 3
Boundaries of the Discussion and Conclusion sections
8
Discussion
(interpretation of the
results)
Conclusion
(value of such
findings)
Discussion and
Conclusion
9
Some authors admit that there is no clear-cut
distinction in the literature to date.
Theoretically, the Discussion section is
concerned with the interpretation of the
results, i.e., how a writer interprets the
research results, while the Conclusion section
highlights the value of such findings and
explains in what way the discussion helps the
researcher add something to the research
field.
It is often the case that the two sections are
just combined into one section with little
distinction made between them, though
oftentimes they are distinctly signaled.
10
It is uneasy to distinguish these two terms as it
depends on a number of factors which are not all
understood (Swales & Feak, 2004) .
Since the content is there, the two sections can
be separated or combined in one section.
Often a Conclusion chapter is only a few pages
long, as opposed to the Discussion chapter
which should be much longer and much more
extensive in its elaboration and reference to prior
research.
11
Topic 4 Relationship between Introduction and
Conclusion section
12
Introduction (set of
intentions)
Conclusion
(Realisation of the
intentions)
GeneralSpecific
13
Initial contact with the
readers/examiners
Final opportunity to
explain your findings
Normally, Introduction introduces the existing
field, relates the research to the field and
focuses on the deficiencies of the literature to
create a research space for the research,
trying to persuade the reader that the research
is worth investigation (Swales, 1990).
Conclusion is seen as working “from inside
out” which focuses on the current study first
and gradually progresses towards the wider
circle of the field to contextualize the research
findings and the contributions.
14
It is essential to forge the link between the
Discussion & Conclusion and Introduction sections
through responding to the research aims and
questions stated in the beginning chapter
(Evans,1995) .
A close link must be forged between the
Discussion & Conclusion and Introduction sections
as the content and organization of Discussion &
Conclusion chapter are determined by the research
purposes and questions which are made in the
Introductory part (Cooley & Leckwicz, 2003).
The Discussion & Conclusion chapter is a
response to Introduction in the sense that it is
expected to respond to the research purposes and
questions posed in Introduction.
15
Topic 5Examiners are your audience
16
Experienced examiners are careful to check for
links between the Introduction, in which students
state their intentions, and the Conclusion ‘where
the intentions should have been realised’
(Mullins & Kiley, 2002.
Moderating your claims becomes very important
as you should neither ‘boost’ them too strongly,
or overgeneralise, nor should you fail to make
them with the appropriate force to convince the
readers/examiners of the value of the claim
being made.
This is where the linguistic resources known as
‘hedges’ become extremely important to adjust
the strength of your claims in relation to the
audience and communicative purposes.
17
Most of the examiners look for:
1. appropriately developed conclusions and
implications that are linked to the research
framework and findings;
2. a high standard of literary quality and
presentation;
3. a contribution to knowledge on the particular
topic.
4. restatement of the problem, the objectives and
the research design in the Conclusion section.
5. researcher’s own ideas and solutions
18
Topic 6
Features of the Conclusion section
(Evans & Gruba, 2002)
19
1. The Conclusion may be a separate chapter or
may be combined with the Discussion chapter,
labeled ‘Discussion and Conclusions’.
2. The Conclusions reached in this chapter should
be drawn from the Discussion chapter.
3. There should be no further discussion in the
Conclusion chapter.
4. The Conclusion should respond to the aims that
were stated in the first chapter.
20
Topic 7
The typical shape of Conclusions
(Thompson, 2005)
21
1. introductory restatement of aims, research
questions;
2. consolidation of present research (e.g.
findings, limitations);
3. contributions of the study
4. practical applications/implications;
5. recommendations for further research.
22
23
Section Content
1 Introductory
statement
Restatement of the issue being
researched, work carried out, purpose of
the study, research questions or
hypotheses
2 Consolidation of the
research space
Summary and evaluation of methods,
summary of results/findings and claims
3 Recommendations
and implications
Future research, practical applications,
limitations of the study
Topic 8
The language of Conclusions
24
In the Conclusion section, writers report,
comment and suggest.
They typically refer to one of three things when
they do these:
1. the world,
2. other research
3. the methodology
4. findings of the thesis itself.
25
1. Some language expressions used in the
Conclusion section are:
Based on the preceding discussion of the results,
several conclusions were drawn from this study.
The study achieved its primary goal of
establishing ….
It was also concluded that …
This study also found that the most significant
factor influencing …
Results of this study supports ….
This study provides empirical support …
26
Topic 9
Suggestions for a good Conclusion section
27
1. The argument should be based on the materials
of your research: references, examples and
results.
2. Repeating what have already been discussed in
other chapters should be avoided.
3. A summary of findings is not the same as
conclusions. Summaries are a statement of what
the researchers found; conclusions are a
statement of the significance of what they found.
4. Highlighting the issues that are not answered or
explored yet should be dealt with while providing
suggestions for future research. This can be done
by offering new issues for the future research.
28
5. The dissertation conclusion should prove the
importance of the research and promote your
success in bringing closure to the problem.
6. Since there is a lot of disciplinary variation in the
Conclusion section, researchers/writers are
recommended to examine examples of previous
theses and dissertations to see what writers typically
do.
7. Show how your findings relate to the previous
research.
8. While writing the Conclusion section, step back and
take a broad look at your findings, and the study as a
whole saying not just what the study has done, but
also ‘what does it mean’ (Weissberg & Buker 1990).
9. Provide clear statements of the original contribution
to knowledge made by your research.
29
THANK YOU
30
www.researchgate.net/profile/Omer_Mahfoodh/?ev=hdr_xprf
http://www.slideshare.net/omer1974
References Cooley, L. & Lewkowicz, J. (1995). The writing needs of graduate students’ at the
University of Hong Kong: A project of report. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and
Language Teaching, 18, 121-123.
Dudley-Evans, T. (1999). The dissertation: a case of neglect? In P. Thompson (Ed.),
Issues in E AP writing research and instruction (pp. 28–36). Reading University: CALS.
Evans, D. (1995). How to write a better thesis or report. Carlton Victoria: Melbourne
University Press.
Evans, D. and Gruba, P. (2002) How to Write a Better Thesis, Carlton South, Vic:
Melbourne University Press.
Mullins, G. and Kiley, M. (2002) ‘“It’s a PhD, not a Nobel Prize”: how experienced
examiners assess research theses’, Studies in Higher Education, 27: 369–386.
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential
tasks and skills (2nd ed). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weissberg, R., & Buker, S. (1990). Writing up research: Experimental report writing for
students of English. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Regents.
Thompson, P. (1999). Exploring the contexts of writing: interview with PhD supervisors.
In P. Thompson (Ed.), Issues in EAP writing research and instruction (pp. 37–54). The
University of Reading: CALS.
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2007). Thesis and dissertation writing in a second
language: A handbook for supervisors. Routledge.
31