Summarize the literature in table or concept map format Galvan recommends building tables as a key way to help you overview, organize, and summarize your findings, and suggests that including one or more of the tables that you create may be helpful in your literature review.
The Discussion section is sort of an odd beast because it is here where you speculate, but must avoid rambling, guessing, or making logical leaps beyond what is reasonably supported for your data. If conflicting inferences can be drawn from your results, evaluate the merits of all of them.
San Francisco Edit, Suggest practical applications of your results. Clearly tell us what that piece of missing knowledge was. It's clearer and more concise than the passive voice.
First sentence content The article should begin with a short declarative sentence, answering two questions for the nonspecialist reader: Mention relevant ethical considerations. There should be enough information here to allow another scientist to repeat your experiment.
Now access the resources and add anything you have missed or that you can add to your brainstorm. In contrast, this example strays subtly into interpretation by referring to optimality a conceptual model and tieing the observed result to that idea: Notice how using parallel structure will eliminate extra narration in the Discussion part since we can anticipate the flow of your ideas based on what we read in the Results segment.
Did the study achieve the goal resolve the problem, answer the question, support the hypothesis presented in the Introduction. Maintain an objective and analytical tone.
Keep a record of all sources used and the relevant pages when you make notes so that you can include them in your in-text references and reference list. Start by writing a summary that includes whatever you think is important, and then gradually prune it down to size by removing unnecessary words, while still retaini ng the necessary concepts.
For you, they will: The description of findings [results] and the interpretation of their significance [discussion] should be distinct sections of your paper. Highlight the most significant results, but don't just repeat what you've written in the Results section.
Use your judgement about how much more you need to read in order to know what this source says and does. Do the data support your hypothesis.
Always make sure to describe any modifications you have made of a standard or published method. You may, however, include preliminary results that were used to design the main experiment that you are reporting on. Section Headings: Main Section Headings: Each main section of the paper begins with a heading which should be capitalized, centered at the beginning of the section, and double spaced from the lines above and elleandrblog.com not underline the section heading OR put a colon at the end.
Example of a main section. This section describes an organizational structure commonly used to report experimental research in many scientific disciplines, the IMRAD format: Introduction, Methods, Results, And Discussion.
Although the main headings are standard for many scientific fields, details may vary; check with your instructor, or, if submitting an article to a journal. Both a contract drafter and a contract reviewer can save some time by first reviewing — together — the Common Draft short-form contract drafts (as well as other clause titles) and discussing just what types of provision they want in their document.
The Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue University houses writing resources and instructional material, and we provide these as a free service of the Writing Lab at Purdue.
Writing for Arts and Social Science subjects is ideally clear and straightforward. You may find yourself reading some sources that do not live up to that ideal, but you will appreciate the ones that do. Writing good user stories can be hard, but these ten tips will help you tell powerful stories.Writing a good discussion section