Useful site is about custom coursework writing help

Writing a thesis chapter

May 14, 2018

13 Oct 2016

Essay Writing Guides

It is a part of a scientific work that includes a set of scientific algorithm of cognition that a writer uses to reach the aim of the research methodology dissertation. It is important. A person should describe every algorithm he uses while writing an essay: all research methodology for dissertation should be carefully chosen and described. It is important to understand that research methodology for dissertation that was factually used should be mentioned. Do not write about techniques you did not use; do not use samples of other people as this template can be incorrect.

How much is it necessary to write?

You should write as much as you can: the length is up to you; try to describe all the methods you took and that will be enough. Decide yourself. You should understand that two or three techniques are not enough as you are writing a serious thesis paper. You should read everything about dissertation research methodology and choose the techniques that are the most suitable for you; this part is difficult for undergraduates, and they are looking for proposals to write the chapter for them.

What should I write in this chapter?

It is necessary to list the techniques you have used and to describe every technique in details: you should mention how it was useful in your paper. Methodology chapter in dissertation should make the process of your research clear for people who are not acquainted with it.

Types of methodology for secondary research dissertation

Methods can be theoretical and empirical. You will use both types in your thesis because the scope of your paper is quite big; to choose the methods you should read about each of them and understand their core.

Theoretical methods

Theoretical techniques are abstract and generalized. Thanks to them, the factual material is systematized. Such techniques of scientific research are axiomatic, formalization, hypothetical abstraction and general logical methods. General logical methods include logical analysis, cognitive synthesis, necessary deduction, and analogy.

Empirical methods

Empirical techniques allow us to investigate the practice and its results. On the basis of these techniques the specific facts are collect; phenomena are identified and described. Empirical methods include observation, qualitative comparison, accurate measurement and unique experiment.

Observation is a process that is characterized by activity and cognition. It is based on the senses of a human which are thought to be the most basic: the observations lead to results that are not based on the desire, will and feelings. Observations inform about the relationship, and the properties of certain existing real phenomena, objects.

Comparison contributes to the establishment of similarities and differences of phenomena, objects, and the measurement determines the numerical value of the unknown quantity in its units. The algorithm allows obtaining information about the objects.

Thanks to the intervention of the experiment it is possible to find out the unique information about objects: this algorithm is very useful in writing dissertation on different topics.

You should mention all the techniques in your research outline. The questionnaire shows that outline can help students to cope with the thesis paper. If you have no idea how to write this chapter this article may help you.


Law dissertation methodology:

- Theoretical: theoretical analysis of literature, newspapers;

- Empirical: interviews, questionnaires, opinion poll.

If you need to write a literary essay you can also take these methods into consideration.

The discussion chapter is the problem child of the thesis. The chapter most likely to provoke fear, uncertainty and doubt. Not everyone writes a chapter called “discussion”, but everyone has to do discussiony bits because, well – that’s where the creative magic of the PhD happens.

Screen Shot 2016-04-03 at 5.56.10 pmThe discussion section is scary because you have to make new knowledge claims of your own, not just agree or disagree with other people. Knowledge claims are like dumplings in the thesis soup or chocolate chips in the PhD cookie. Without knowledge claims you don’t have a thesis at all, just a report of work that was done.

It’s important to get the discussion bits right. According to the seminal paper by Mullins and Kiley “It’s a PhD, not a Nobel Prize“, examiners want to know if you would be an interesting future colleague. They will evaluate the quality, amount and – most importantly – the believability of your knowledge claims. If you are not sufficiently speculative there will  not be not enough ‘philosophy’ in your thesis soup to justify the title of Dr. If you are too speculative you might tip over the believability cliff.

There’s a lot of advice about why a discussion chapter is important and what it should contain, but relatively little on the mechanics of actually doing it. Years ago I wrote a post on how to start the discussion chapter. I gave a few suggestions for generating creative ideas, but not a detailed discussion of how to do any of them. The post was a useful starting point, but unfortunately not enough to actually help one of my students, Wendy, write her discussion chapters.

Like many thesis writers, Wendy has had a long slog with this project and is having trouble seeing the wood for the trees. Wendy is in the creative arts, so her findings are not in the form of formulas and graphs. The findings are really a series of observations which can be backed up with evidence.

We decided to use the ‘big list’ method described by Evans, Gruba and Zobel in “How to write a Better Thesis” but with extra Inger- style diagrams. I think we made good progress with a whiteboard in the last meeting and I asked her if I could share what we did with the world, she generously agreed (thanks Wendy!). Here’s what we did:

Step one: the mud map

How to write a Better Thesis suggests that you start the discussion by simply writing a huge list of everything you learned about your topic – these are your provisional conclusions, observations, interesting facts and statements. The book suggests that you write this list with the help of a sympathetic listener who knows the project, like a supervisor.

Wendy sat in a chair and just talked at me. I wrote what she said on the whiteboard, asking a question now and then to clarify or expand on a point. The whiteboard was an ideal medium for this task. We could both see it and it was easy to rub out stuff. At the end of about 20 minutes we had this ‘mud map’ of possible findings:

Screen Shot 2016-04-07 at 11.12.04 am

Step two: Assess the findings

The mud map enabled us to start sorting and organising the ideas. I put a little ‘O’ next to every finding I thought represented an original knowledge claim. Wendy still has one data collection round to run so some findings are more speculative than others. I put ticks next to statements I felt she had sufficient data to argue, question marks next to statements where we are waiting for data and 1/2 wher we weren’t sure. I added a few arrows and brackets to connect obviously related statements.

Step Three: Find themes

The next step is a similar method to so called ‘grounded theory’ coding which is a common method in social science. This is a creative process which involves reading over the mud map again and again, writing ideas for over arching themes under which the findings might fit. After about another 45 minutes of fiddling and arguing about it, we had this provisional list of four themes:

Screen Shot 2016-04-07 at 11.53.12 amWe took a couple of photos of the board with my phone and then rubbed it all out.

Step four: use a spider diagram to make connections explicit

This is where we diverted from How to write a better thesis and brought in my favourite thinking tool, the spider diagram. We put the overall aim of the thesis in the middle of the bubble and put the emergent themes in the first layer of bubbles around it:

Screen Shot 2016-04-07 at 11.55.38 am

The third layer of bubbles contained findings from our mud map (recorded in the photos on my phone) that we thought fell under these themes. As we wrote the findings into the bubbles we shifted the wording to find shorter ways of saying the same thing and started to blend some of the findings together.

This process enabled us to see how some findings from the mud map might fall under multiple themes, which suggested a satisfactory repetition was emerging. You know you have a thesis on your hands when you feel like you are saying the same thing over and over, but in a slightly different way every time.

A spider diagram is a great tool for this kind of work because it doesn’t commit you to a structure. Wendy might decide that ‘big data’ should be its own theme, or she might decide to sprinkle the ‘big data’ goodness throughout the other themes. This is a stylistic choice – there is no right or wrong way to do it, but the diagram lets you imagine different results and discuss the implications of the various choices. We took several photos as this diagram evolved and changed to present different options.

Step Five: Make a snowflake

At this point I was happy. I know I can work from a spider diagram, but Wendy was still not comfortable. She is a more creative person than me and was worried that she would muck around and just find more and more connections – a fair point. So I suggested we try using a matrix. While a spider diagram encourages you to see connections, a matrix forces you to think about hierarchy.

The snowflake method is a technique used by novel writers. It involves making a simple outline, which becomes more and more complex as the writing develops. We started by drawing a table like this:

Screen Shot 2016-04-07 at 12.09.25 pmThe first column contains themes from our bubble diagram, the next number of words for that section (bearing in mind that we don’t want this chapter to be more than about 8000 words long). The last column is a list of subheads.

In the row ‘shareability’ there are four provisional subheadings. Each of these subheads will have 500 words – a page of text. To further develop the snowflake, Wendy will write at least four points under each subhead, to make paragraph headings. With a little manipulation these paragraph headings become topic sentences for each paragraph. From a huge mess of ideas the writing task now looks much simpler – just a matter of picking off the paragraph you want to tackle and writing 200 – 300 words.

Of course, in practice writing is not that easy, but this process does help you see the wood instead of the trees. Wendy went away smiling from our meeting and that’s what matters to me most anyway.

How about you? Got any tips on the discussion chapter? Have you used any methods like the ones outlined here? What works well for you?

Related posts

How do I start my discussion chapter?

The Zombie Thesis

Theory Anxiety

Share this:

Like this:




A lot of legends, a lot of people, have come before me. But this is my time. Usain Bolt

The following examples are acceptable ways of formatting your thesis and chapters when including one or more publications.

Essential requirements

All theses with publications must have the following:

Main text examples

Example 1Example 2Example 3Example 4Example 5
Previous: Research paper topics for thesis in english literature
Next post: Write my law essay uk athletics