Conclusion section in

Dissertations/Theses and RAs

By

Dr. Omer Mahfoodh

omer_ed@yahoo.com

omer197435@gmail.com

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