Thesis Writing Guidelines (V4)

Sean Weaver, Principal, Carbon Partnership Ltd. Honorary Research Associate, School of Geography, Environment and Earth Sciences, Victoria University of Wellington;

carbonpartnership ltd September 2010

Report prepared by Sean Weaver of Carbon Partnership Ltd. Dr Sean Weaver, Principal, Carbon Partnership Ltd. 81 Severn St, Island Bay, Wellington. Ph +64 4 383 6898, email: sean.weaver@carbon-partnership.com Web: www.carbon-partnership.com

Copyright 2010. Carbon Partnership Ltd. All rights reserved. Users may reproduce content for non-commercial purposes with a notice that document is copyright of the aforementioned organisations. No other uses are permitted without the express written permission of the afrorementioned organisation.

Table of Contents
1 A THESIS ............................................................................................................................4 2 RESEARCH PROPOSAL ......................................................................................................5 2.1 Purpose Of Research Proposal.......................................................................................................5 2.2 Aim And Objectives ..........................................................................................................................5 2.3 Introduction .........................................................................................................................................6 2.3.1 Preliminary Analysis ...................................................................................................................7 2.3.2 Structuring The Introduction.......................................................................................................8 2.4 Defining A Research Aim .................................................................................................................9 2.5 Defining Your Objectives.............................................................................................................. 10 2.6 Defining Your Methods.................................................................................................................. 12 2.7 Proposal Format ............................................................................................................................. 12 3 WRITING A THESIS...........................................................................................................13 3.1 Making use of your proposal ...................................................................................................... 13 3.2 Thesis Structure ............................................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Abstract............................................................................................................................................ 14 3.4 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 15 3.5 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 15 3.5.1 Literature Review Steps.......................................................................................................... 16 3.5.2 Defining Your Search .............................................................................................................. 16 3.5.3 Physically Obtaining The Literature ..................................................................................... 17 3.5.4 Reading And Note Taking ..................................................................................................... 17 3.5.5 Presenting The Review ............................................................................................................ 18 3.6 Aim .................................................................................................................................................... 18 3.7 Objectives........................................................................................................................................ 18 3.8 Methodology................................................................................................................................... 19 3.8.1 Conceptual Framework........................................................................................................... 19 3.8.2 Specific Methods...................................................................................................................... 22 3.8.3 Sample Set and Procedure.................................................................................................... 22 3.9 Results ............................................................................................................................................... 23 3.10 Analysis and Discussion............................................................................................................... 24 3.11 Conclusion...................................................................................................................................... 25 4 GENERAL ISSUES .............................................................................................................25 4.1 Overcoming Writers Block ........................................................................................................... 25 4.2 References ....................................................................................................................................... 26 4.3 Plagiarism........................................................................................................................................ 30 4.4 Marking Criteria Check List.......................................................................................................... 30 4.5 Publishing Your Findings................................................................................................................ 31 5 CHECKLIST FOR PROPOSAL ............................................................................................33 6 CHECKLIST FOR FIRST DRAFT .........................................................................................34 7 EXAMINERS CHECKLIST...................................................................................................38 7 SUPERVISION EVALUATION............................................................................................39 3

1 A Thesis
The job of a thesis supervisor is to assist you to get the best grade you can. You are responsible for your education and you can increase your chances of a higher grade by paying attention to advice or recommendations from a supervisor when it is offered. Ultimately, though, you need to make your own decisions about your work, including your choice of topic, the perspective from which the research is undertaken, the viewfinder to use as analytical tools, and the conclusions you can draw. A thesis is a great opportunity to learn how to be a good researcher, and also one of the few opportunities you will get to choose a topic that really suits you. In professional research it is more common for ones work to follow the clients needs rather than your own curiosity. Lets be clear, a university education is an opportunity to both train for a profession but also to grow as a person. There is a library full of adventure and you have a licence to journey through unknown territory and build a foundation for your future. The quality of this platform will depend on how much you unleash your passionate interests in a disciplined and purposeful pursuit of new understanding. It is important therefore, to spend sufficient time at the beginning of a thesis adventure, so that you can reflect sufficiently to more deeply discover your passion and then follow it. This includes thinking about who you are in the service of with this work, and then how best to provide that service. A thesis is an opportunity to learn new skills, as well as sharpen existing ones so that you can master an art and a science. A future profession will need certain technical skills and abilities. But it will also benefit from the life-skills that you develop during this research retreat, by pondering and polishing your professional persona. The thesis that is marked is the product of a process, and its quality will depend on that process. Some parts of the process involve climbing a ladder of understanding to gain a view and then having the courage to discard the ladder after it has done its job. In other words, we do not always need to show all of our working, but instead use the research process to transform ourselves into someone who can see things we could not see before, and then simply describe the view from there. The goal is to get a higher perspective than when we started if not then we have not learned anything, but instead just collected some more facts. But innovation comes not from just collecting more facts, but from insight, and this insight comes from a process of genuine inquiry.

2 Research Proposal
2.1 PURPOSE OF RESEARCH PROPOSAL
A research proposal is a very important kind of research document. It is what any researcher in the workforce will need produce in any application for research funds (without which the research will not happen). It is also the first stage in any postgraduate research. Before a postgraduate student can undertake any research they need to produce a proposal that explains what will be done, why it will be done, how it will be done etc.
A proposal is a plan of action that will guide you through the research process. It is primarily for your benefit to produce a good proposal. The more time you spend on your proposal the better it will be later in the research process. This is for the following reasons: 1. If you have thought through your research at the beginning you will find it easier later on. 2. Much of the work you put into the proposal can be cut and pasted directly into the beginning sections of the final document (i.e. working on the proposal is working on the final document). 3. A proposal enables a supervisor to give guidance in the research process to help you stay on course. Research that involves extracting information and opinions from people always needs to fulfil an ethics approval process. This is to ensure that a person providing information has agreed to how the information will be used as a result of the research, to guard against liability issues, and to ensure that the research itself is acceptable.

2.2 AIM AND OBJECTIVES

The powerhouse of your research project is the way in which you define your research aim and objectives and the way in which you design a methodology as a means of extracting the information/knowledge that you seek. This is what examiners are looking for when they evaluate the quality of a piece of work: they need to see clearly what you set out to do, how you went about it, and what you found on the basis of a disciplined inquiry. In a large study as is the case with a masters thesis or a PhD it is important to show an examiner how and why you did what you did, and the application of that research to some problem solving situation (particularly the case in applied research). To do this there are a few steps that can be undertaken to provide a structure to your overall project and also an internal structure to sub-projects (e.g. fulfilling objectives). The first step is an overview survey of your issue to identify the spread of themes contained within your chosen topic. This is followed by a preliminary investigation that launches the research in an introductory fashion so that you can become capable of asking an intelligent research question (aim), and define a detailed set of objectives. The preliminary investigation is 5

composed of a problem analysis (overview) which enables you to set priorities given that the topic or problem is likely to be too big to be addressed in a single study. Once priorities have been set you are able to define the specific focus of your current study and locate it in the broader scheme of things. This procedure of an overview followed by priority setting and then focused inquiry can then be replicated at a smaller scale within the work for example, as a way of structuring your objectives. Project components therefore, may look like this: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Overview survey (literature review) Preliminary investigation of your issue Problem analysis Priority setting Focus of this particular study in one component of the overall picture (i.e. defining your research aim)

This focus is your research aim. You are then able to define your research objectives (se blow for more detail on this), each of which is a subset of your aim and necessary in order to fulfil the aim. Then for each objective you can repeat this process in miniature: a. Overview survey to identify patterns and spread of variation in the sample community (of literature or of a sample population in the case of social survey research). In the case of social research this is usually where questionnaire surveys are undertaken to try to gain an overview of the target population or community where you want to get a broad understanding of any patterns within that community. b. Identify aspects of the pattern or spread of variation in the sample community that are important to understand for the purpose of your investigation for this objective. c. Undertake an in-depth study of these priority themes (e.g. semi-structured interviews of individuals or groups of individuals that are representative of different components of the overall spread). d. Come to conclusions arising from the understanding so generated to complete the task of this objective.

2.3 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the introduction is to: a. Present the problem to be addressed by the study b. Situate the study in its broader context c. Explain the purpose of the study. The introduction needs to show that you have done some preliminary research and that you understand your topic well enough to ask an intelligent question as a research question. You need to have undertaken some preliminary research before you can write your introduction or define your aim and objectives. 6

2.3.1 Preliminary Analysis

Preliminary research can be undertaken by reviewing material that comes up on media web sites (e.g. Google News). Agencies that are working on your issue are likely to be making statements in the media and this is a good place to look for key issues and angles of interest. After defining the general theme for the study (using media references) you need to start doing some preliminary research in the peer reviewed literature or in key literature relevant to the study. To do this you need to do some searches using the Web of Science to gather a collection of references and their abstracts. You can then read the abstracts of recent studies to find out some of the current key points of interest for your topic. This will help you drill into your topic and begin the process of becoming informed about it beyond the realms of debate in the mass media. In an introduction you need to explain the issue in question as well as the policy framework for dealing with that issue. Explaining the issue:
General problem The overall problem will be too big for you to deal with, but you still need to include it in the introduction. E.g. climate change may be the overall problem with a particular reference to carbon emissions.

Component of the Your study will focus on a particular part of the overall problem. E.g. the study problem focused may focus on carbon emissions from tropical deforestation. on by this study Causal factors There will be several causal factors for any phenomenon (because the world is interconnected) and for this reason you need to state what these causes are. E.g. causes of tropical deforestation include slash and burn agriculture, industrial forestry, corruption, conversion to industrial agriculture, natural drying.

Particular causal You do not have time to research all of these causal factors so you need to factor of interest focus on one of them. E.g. of the causes of tropical deforestation you may be interested in one of them: natural drying. Case study There will be many examples of your problem in different parts of the world, but in order to understand your issue it is helpful to focus on a case study. E.g. the threat of forest loss as a consequence of natural drying from global warming in the Amazon basin. The overall solution will have a number of components (because there are several causal factors). You need to mention these but you will need to focus on one of them. E.g. global warming causes drying in the Amazon Basin but there are many causes of global warming (e.g. fossil fuel burning, deforestation, cement production).

General solution

Component of the You need to choose a particular component of the overall solution. E.g. solution focused on reducing carbon emissions from tropical deforestation as a means of lowering

by this study

global CO2 concentrations and sustaining climate related ecosystem services provided by tropical forests of the Amazon Basin.

The knowledge gap In order to develop your particular component of the solution, you will need to gather information to demonstrate how this solution will work in a physical sense. E.g. you need to demonstrate that global carbon balance is affected by the status of forest health in the Amazon Basin, and would benefit from a reduction in the rate of deforestation in that area. To demonstrate this you need to gather information relevant to this task. International policy Because it is a global issue there will likely be an international agreement or framework convention covering your issue. You need to identify the relevant agreement or framework and explore how it relates specifically to your issue. E.g. The Clean Development Mechanism of the Kyoto Protocol is a means by which developed countries can engage in climate change mitigation exercises in developing countries. The rules of this mechanism state that Purpose of this At the end of the introduction you need to state the purpose of your study in study relation to a. the physical system, and b. the policy framework. You need to be very clear about what knowledge is needed in order to implement, use, comply with, or modify the relevant policy mechanism.

Your study Solution 1 Solution 2 Solution 3 Choose one of several solution components to focus on Causal Factors Choose one of several causal factors to focus on Problem Problems have multiple causes

2.3.2 Structuring The Introduction

The introduction needs to take the reader straight into the issue. It then needs to broaden the story to give a context by explaining the general and specific problems, causes and solutions relevant to the study. It then needs to focus in on the part of the overall equation that will form 8

the framework of the current study (by going through the steps defined in 1.2 above). The end of the introduction states the purpose of the study (but does not frame it as an aim). This then leads onto the next section dealing with the aim. Focus in on your particular study Broaden out to give a context Lead paragraph goes straight to your issue

2.4 DEFINING A RESEARCH AIM

The aim in environmental management is to produce a real life management result and consequently some form of change in human behaviour and the behaviour or functioning of a natural system. The aim in environmental policy formulation is to make a policy decision that results in changes in the strategic direction of some organisation or agency. Both of these are different from a research aim. The aim in research is to generate knowledge or information. The wording of an aim therefore, needs to be aligned with the information or knowledge that you want to generate. For this reason a research aim is commonly worded as a question. The question is a very specific question because we need to be comprehensive and systematic in the way that we answer it, and we cannot be comprehensive and systematic about broad and general things. The question is an information seeking question rather than a yes/no kind of question, or a what should we do kind of question. The information or knowledge that we generate from doing research and answering our question can have broader implications for management or policy, but this needs to be explored in the analysis and discussion rather than built into environmental research as such (unless it is environmental policy analysis but this is not the same as research). A policy type question might be should the NZ Government ratify the X Convention in order to protect the X resources of this country? A research question that is associated with X policy might involve the seeking of information or knowledge that would assist in the making of a policy decision. A question that is seeking knowledge or information needs to be appropriately worded so that it guides research activity to generate that information (not to generate a policy decision). Your aim will need to be a very specific question and very carefully worded. A research aim is never to investigate or to evaluate. To investigate is a means to an end, but an aim is an end or a goal. What is it that you want to know? Investigation is the means of doing this and the process of investigation is research. To evaluate is not to produce information or knowledge. Evaluation is a process of comparison between things according to some criteria of quality. This is not research, but it can arise from research. For this reason evaluation may play a role in an

analysis and discussion chapter of a research project, but not in the generation of new information or knowledge. The generation of new information or knowledge is the powerhouse of the research process.

Aim refinement

Many people get this far in the refinement of the aim in a proposal

More preliminary research will help you to bridge this gap

To define your information-seeking question it is important that you frame the question in an objective (and not subjective) fashion. For example, a question seeking a subjective response might be Is there enough food? A question seeking an objective response is How much food is there? By gathering this information, we may be able to come to a conclusion about whether there is enough food but this needs to be demonstrated by providing the factual material, and then evaluating this against some measure of need. Either way, a scientifically credible research question needs to be of the objective form. The same applies to the wording of the objectives.

2.5 DEFINING YOUR OBJECTIVES

In terms of project management a set of objectives is a set of tasks that enable us to achieve our goal (our aim). If our aim is to produce information or knowledge, our objectives will be the means to this end. Our objectives are sub-sets of our aim, whereby the fulfilment of our objectives enables us to fulfil our aim. Each objective is a mini-aim and functions in a similar way - as an information-seeking goal that is framed as a specifically worded question. It is a more specific question than the aim. One of the challenges in research is to match our aim and objectives with our capacity for generating a high quality research result. A high quality research result is one that is generated from a systematic and comprehensive research process. This is what produces knowledge that is powerful, valuable and useful. The trouble is that we cannot be systematic and comprehensive about everything. Therefore, we need to focus. Generating our aim is part of this process of focusing. But sometimes we will not know how focused we are until we have expanded our aim into a set of specific objectives. In order to fulfil our aim we need to find out a number of different things. To determine this we brainstorm all the things we need to know in order to fulfil our aim and list them. Some of these things will be general knowledge about our topic that we do not already know because as research students we are not yet experts in our topic. This general background knowledge is not suitable for a formal research objective but is more appropriately situated as preliminary or 10

background research. It can be used to write our introduction and we can use it in our analysis and discussion. So, we need to separate the general background information that we seek from the formal research objectives that will define our research activity. When we have decided on our list of objectives we need to reflect on just how much work this will take in order to be systematic and comprehensive about it. We may discover that doing all of these things is beyond the scope of this particular study. We then need to make a decision about which objectives are the most important and limit our list of objectives to a shorter list. This will then require us to make an adjustment to the wording of our aim (which will be even further refined by this process). One way of picturing the refinement of the aim is by recognising that your preliminary aim may be still too broad. A particular aspect of it may be suitable for your refined aim. Then we have our aim and our objectives and they are all clearly defined as information targets. We then need to define our methods. Ob. 1 Ob. 2 Ob. 3 Ob. 4 Rename Ob. 3a Ob. 3b Ob. 3c Ob. 3d Expand Ob. 1 Ob. 2 Ob. 3 Ob. 4 Refine / sharpen Aim Reword Aim Revised Proposal Ob. 1 Ob. 2 Ob. 3 Ob. 4 Original Proposal Aim

11

2.6 DEFINING YOUR METHODS

Each objective is an information target, like a particular species of fish that we want to catch, and each method is like a particular type of net that is designed exactly to catch that species of fish (and no other). This is why each objective needs its own method. In literature based research we need to design our method to catch exactly the information we want and refine the method so that we do not catch a whole lot of junk in our net. So, for each objective we need to define this net very specifically. Each method will have the following attributes: 1. Sample Set a. Search engine or instrument b. Search criteria 2. Procedure a. Precisely what you will be looking for in the sample set that you generate from your search. b. Your means of analysing or evaluating the material that you gather. In other words, you need to explain your criteria for evaluating the material. This is equivalent to stating what forms of statistical analysis you will use to analyse the data that you gather in a quantitative study.

The quality of a method section in a piece of research is partly a measure of how easily someone else could come along and repeat exactly what you did to generate the material for the study. This is particularly important for environmental policy research as you will want your readers to have confidence in what you are saying and this confidence is partly a function of their ability to go and check it out for themselves or for someone else to repeat the study.

2.7 PROPOSAL FORMAT

The research proposal needs to foresee the structure of the completed research product to some degree and for this reason I have provided you with some key guidelines on both the proposal and the scope of the final thesis.
Thesis Format Title Page Acknowledgments Abstract Table of Contents List of tables List of Figures Introduction Aim and Objectives Methods Results Analysis and Discussion Conclusions/ Recommendations Reference List Appendices Research Proposal Format Title Introduction (including Preliminary Analysis) Aim and Objectives Methods References Appendix 1 - Ethics Application (copy)

If you do a good job in your proposal you can cut and paste these sections in the final thesis.

12

3 Writing A Thesis
When writing a thesis and preparing a research proposal it helps to know what is expected of you by the examiner. All examiners are different, but there are a number of qualities that a dissertation should have if it hopes to impress any examiner. It is useful to anticipate these when designing a research programme, and particularly when writing up the thesis. Some qualities can be brought into a thesis during the write up, but others can only find there way into the work if they have been planned from the beginning. In many ways, a thesis is written from the primary benefit of an examiner. This is the person you need to impress in order to get a good grade. The examination process is the result of a tradition of academic practice, and so, if an examiner is impressed with then work there is also a good chance that a lot of other people will be too. The process of supervision is partly to help you get the best grade possible and this means impressing the examiner. These guidelines are designed to help you design a thesis and a research process in a way that will get you the best grade possible. We can not do better than we are capable of, but it helps if we know how to put our best foot forward. In some ways these guidelines are somewhat prescriptive, and there is good reason for this. If you follow the prescription you can be confident that you will increase your chances of getting the best grade possible for you. I suggest that you follow this prescription as much as possible and use the checklists to evaluate the quality of your work before you submit your drafts for editing by your supervisor and prior to submitting the final product.

3.1 MAKING USE OF YOUR PROPOSAL

If you have put a good amount of effort in at the proposal stage, there will be many components of the final thesis that have either been completed or which have been well developed. When this is the case it is much easier to write up the first few chapters of the final thesis by making improvements on the sections already completed in the proposal. As such, the chapters already well on the way to completion following the completion of the proposal include the Introduction, Aim and Objectives, and the Methodology.

3.2 THESIS STRUCTURE

A thesis with a clearly defined structure is much easier to navigate, read, and understand, than one that is poorly structured. It is important to make it easy for the examiner to see what you have done, and evaluate each component. A clear structure will increase your chances of getting a higher grade. Below is a thesis structure diagram to help you structure your thesis:

13

Thesis Structure Diagram Chapter 1 Chapter 3 Chapter 4 Chapter 6 Chapter 5 Analysis & Discussion (make sense of results) Conclusion (Answer the Aim) Evaluate Methodology Result 1 Result 2 Result 3 Result 4 Method 1 Method 2 Method 3 Method 4 Objective 1 Objective 2 Objective 3 Objective 4 Chapter 2 Introduction Abstract

Aim

3.3 ABSTRACT
The abstract is a miniature version of the whole piece of work. It is best to write the Abstract at the end of your thesis writing process, and preferably after you have had a break from the thesis so that you can approach it fresh. The purpose of an abstract is to allow a busy person to find out what the study is about and what it found without having to read the whole thing. Abstracts are also used in library referencing and database catalogue systems for the same purpose. It is best to keep the abstract as short as possible. Here you state the purpose of the study, its aim, a short generalised description of the methods used, key results, the meaning of the results, and the conclusion. It is usually about half to two thirds of a page in length.

14

3.4 INTRODUCTION
As indicated above (in the section on the research proposal), the purpose of the introduction is to inform the examiner exactly what the work is about and its purpose. Because your introduction will already be partially developed (in your proposal), by the time you come to write up the final thesis you can use the proposal Introduction as your starting point. The introduction in the main text is more substantial than the proposal but the structure and purpose are the same. You can add value to your proposal introduction by bringing in more detail in terms of references and a clearer overview of the issues to be deal with in the research. You need to remember though, that the Introduction is not designed to come to any conclusions or present any analysis. It is still designed to explain: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. When explaining what the issue is and why it is important, it is sometimes helpful to refer to published documents that show that it is an important area of concern. A good example is print media coverage from the news media. It is relatively easy to gather print media coverage from web based print media archives. You can give the reader a sense that you are up with the current stories and that the issue is important enough to feature in the media. The media of course is not a comprehensive place of analysis which is why research into such issues (such as your research) can help advance our understanding of such issues so that we can resolve them. What the issue is and why it is important What the broader context is What the specific issue is (of particular interest to this research) What kind of solution is needed, and How this research can contribute to this solution

3.5 LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of a literature review is to show the examiner what is already known about our problem so that they (and we) can be sure that the answer has not already been found, and so that we can situate our work in the broader academic community. The literature review can also enable us to show where there are gaps in our knowledge which our research can help to fill. The examiner wants to see from the literature review that you have a good understanding of your subject area and have developed some expertise on the issue. This expertise will enable you to ask intelligent and interesting questions about the issue. Another purpose of a literature review is to provide a resource for those who want to work in this area. By reviewing the literature you are helping others to get a head start in the topic, where you can explain what the different trends are in the literature surrounding your subject. It is important that you do not engage in any analysis or discussion in the literature review. Analysis and discussion are to be done elsewhere in their own sections. The literature review simply presents what is out there without interpreting it.

15

A very important part of a literature review is comprehensiveness. If we are not comprehensive, it will not be a review, but instead a rather undisciplined meander in some literature (in the eyes of an examiner). It is not sufficient to simply read a few review texts and papers on a subject and present what they say about the topic. This will only provide a small number of references in a review that should be characterised by a large number of references. Because the world of literature is so vast, we normally can never read everything there is to read about our topic. Because we cannot read everything, we need to set limits to our literature search, so that we can be comprehensive within these limits. In order to produce a high quality literature review you need to do these things: Define the search Physically obtain the literature Reading and note taking from the literature with a particular focus on key content Present your review as a chapter of your thesis in a logical order and in your own words

3.5.1 Literature Review Steps

Define information sought Explain steps 1 and 2 at the beginning of your literature review. Define limits of search Conduct search and gather literature Organise literature into categories Write literature review

3.5.2 Defining Your Search

The literature review has a method and it helps to explain this method to the examiner so that they can see that there is discipline in your work. This method involves: 1. Defining the limits of the search (e.g. selecting New Zealand environmental education literature, published in peer reviewed journals, and published between 1990 and the present) 2. Presenting a rationale for imposing these limits (explaining why you selected New Zealand environmental education literature, published in peer reviewed journals, between) 3. Selecting search engines for finding the literature (e.g. on-line academic database search engines, reading key review books and articles and using their reference lists to find relevant literature that lies within your search limits) 4. Selecting key content to be scrutinised (e.g. in the international wind-power renewable energy literature you might focus in on public opposition to wind farms as part of the planning process) 5. Generating a targeted bibliography before actually getting the physical documents. 16

Your literature review method will be valuable academically if it can be replicated by someone else at a future date. It will also be able to be published should you want to generate a publication from your thesis (highly recommended for all postgraduate research). Using this form of discipline in the generation of a literature review is also good training for your future employment where people can only be confident in your work when they know that it is the result of a disciplined process and is comprehensive.

3.5.3 Physically Obtaining The Literature

It is very useful, where possible, to gain copies of the literature you wish to review, particularly when this literature is in the form of academic journal articles (which most of it should be in postgraduate research). This means physically collecting the literature that you have selected. Once you have gathered up the literature you wish to use it becomes easy to organise it in different groupings. These groupings will make it easier to organise the written review in a logical order where different themes are presented together. You may not be aware of these different themes until you actually do the literature search. For example, when I did a review of the peer reviewed academic literature available on 1080 poison, I discovered a number of reasonably clear groupings in this literature: chemical structure; natural occurrence in plants; history of industrial use; toxicology; pest control; effects on non-target pests; effects on non- target resources; degradation rates. These groupings helped in the organisation of the writing up of this review, because I could present the material according to section headings of the same name. If you are using literature which you cannot keep a copy or (e.g. library books), it is still helpful to organise them in the way described above. One way of doing this is to take notes from these books or journal articles, and file your notes in the categories mentioned. It is crucial that you do not start taking notes until you have written out the full reference information, because it is a terrible nightmare trying to go back and find such books or articles months later if you have not got the full or correct reference details.

3.5.4 Reading And Note Taking

If you have organised the literature into categories it becomes easier to take notes on the basis of those categories, where you simply present the findings of the different studies. Where possible take the notes in your own writing and then use your notes as the basis for writing up the text. This safeguards against plagiarism. If you have copied a paragraph from a book into your notes, and if these notes are situated amongst other paragraphs that you have written yourself, and then type up your notes without realising that it is a direct quote, then you can plagiarise by mistake. If you do take direct quotes in your notes, remember to copy it exactly, and to refer to the page number in your reference, and only take direct quotes if the wording is spectacular or particularly significant. Minimise direct quotes even in your notes.

17

3.5.5 Presenting The Review

In your literature review you should begin with an introduction to the chapter by explaining the method used to generate the review and the reason for undertaking it. Then present the literature in a logical order. At the end of your literature review you can then have a concluding section that explains where there is consensus, where there is disagreement, perhaps explain why there may be disagreement, and identify gaps that your work aims to fill. As a rule of thumb, you want a lot of reference in this section. Dont be afraid to include a relatively long list of references at the end of some sentences where there are a lot of different authors and studies that are in agreement with each other. Sometimes there are more references than substantive text in literature review sentences. To get high marks you need to demonstrate a comprehensiveness in your work. Checklist 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Define the limits of your search Explain the rationale for imposing these limits Define key content to be scrutinised Select appropriate search engines to generate an extensive bibliography Generate bibliography Gather literature (photocopying articles, gathering inter-loans, taking notes that can be filed with your articles) Organise your literature and notes in sections Write up the review by presenting what is contained in the different sections. Write an introduction explaining the method and rationale for the review Write a concluding section explaining any patterns that emerge from the literature and any gaps that your work aims to fill Double check for plagiarism

3.6 AIM
You will have refined your aim when you completed your proposal, but there may be reason to refine the aim a little when writing up the final thesis. Generally speaking though, most of the work concerning the aim should be able to be cut and pasted from the proposal.

3.7 OBJECTIVES
As with the aim, the objectives section can be lifted from the proposal document. You may, however need to refine this part of the text, but to do so simply refer to the section above explaining the Proposal for ways to refine your objectives. You may have found that the need for some additional objectives arose during the course of the research (e.g. a literature review of literature that you did not anticipate needing). You can update your objectives for the final thesis if this is the case. Either way, remember that each objective is necessary to fulfil the aim, and each objective needs to have a specific method attached to it.

18

3.8 METHODOLOGY
An academic piece of work is characterised (partly) by the use of a methodology, selected from a number of options. It is the understanding that there are different methodological options that remains centrally important for academic work. This is not because academics like to make things more complex than they need be, but simply a consequence of the fact that different methods can produce different answers to the same question and the same set of data. What is interesting and often important for solving real life problems, is whether the methodology chosen is the best one for the task at hand. The methodology is made up of a collection of things. Firstly there is a conceptual framework (the way we do the looking), secondly there is a sample set (what we look at), and a procedure (how we organise and discipline our looking and analysis). Because there are different options for each of these, it is important that we demonstrate that we understand the option chosen and that it is the most appropriate option given the task at hand. The fact that there are different methodologies does not necessarily mean that one method is right and another is wrong. It may simply reflect the fact that we have different tools for different tasks, and we need to choose the appropriate tool for our task. Our task is defined by our objectives.

3.8.1 Conceptual Framework

A conceptual framework is a way of thinking. It is like a set of spectacles. We use them to see the world around us and to interpret what we see. If our spectacles are made of red coloured glass we will see a red world. If they are blue we will see a blue world. In every day life we are constantly using a conceptual framework although we are not always aware of this. This conceptual framework is the rationality that we use to make sense of our world and it has usually been constructed by us and for us by our education (in the family, the school, the university and the workplace). For example, a child raised in a violent household will probably grow up to see violence as an appropriate tool for solving problems (violent spectacles). In academic research, and especially in social science, we acknowledge that the way we see the world arises from a number of choices of rationality (choices of different coloured spectacles). Ultimately we are trying to find the spectacles that are not coloured at all so that we see reality as it is (i.e. the most truthful view of reality). Debates in academic circles often focus on this issue whose spectacles are the clearest? These debates are undertaken in the theoretical levels of a subject like geography or environmental studies. At the deeper level these debates happen in the philosophy of science and philosophy in general. This is a key component of philosophy and is called epistemology or a theory of knowledge. When we decide on a social science methodology we are also needing to decide on our conceptual framework. This is because we need to decide what set of research spectacles we need to wear in order to gain the most truthful view of the phenomena we are studying. Because we have a choice we need to understand the different types of spectacles in order to choose the one that is most appropriate for our task. 19

The conceptual framework defines what kind of specific methods we are likely to use. If for example, we theorised that there is no interesting, useful, or truthful information to be generated other than by means of quantitative data gathering and analysis, then we would not embark on a research agenda that involved in-depth interviews with people. A theoretical foundation (conceptual framework) that assumed, on the other hand, that there is much to be gained from understanding the subjectivity of stakeholders for instance, would require the use of interviews to generate valid and truthful information. Accordingly, it is important that the underlying assumptions of your approach be made clear to the examiner, and this means clarifying your conceptual framework. The way we do this is to define the theoretical basis of our work, which rests on a series of assumptions. To understand this we need to be familiar with our discipline as an academic discipline. This means understanding the different schools of thought that prevail in our discipline sufficiently to be able to (a) differentiate between them, and (b) choose one that suits our purposes. It is not necessary to get too caught up in theoretical debates, or to be a skilled theorist in your discipline in order to be a skilled researcher. As such, try not to venture too much into the theoretical territory unless there is a good reason to where this reason relates to the aims and objectives of your research. This becomes more important for those undertaking a PhD (Doctor of Philosophy), and far less necessary or desirable in a Masters thesis. One reason why it is less desirable for a Masters thesis to venture too much into theoretical debates, is that there is usually not enough room or time in a Masters thesis to do this well (there are some exceptions e.g. where the aims of the thesis involve engaging in theoretical debate). One of the difficulties with this is that when we start a research process as a postgraduate student, we are not as familiar with these things as we would be at the end of the research process. In fact, building up this understanding is one of the things that postgraduate study is designed to do for us. But because you cannot know all of this at the beginning of your postgraduate career, it becomes difficult to define a conceptual framework at the beginning of a research process. You can and should, however, know enough about the theory of your discipline (by year 4 or 5 of your university training) to know the general theoretical ball-park within which you want to work. You will also be able to discuss this with your supervisor who can provide some guidance as to what conceptual framework is likely to be most suitable for your task and your outlook as a researcher. If you discover, through the course of undertaking the research and analysis, that there are limitations to the conceptual framework that you chose, you can always write about this in your discussion. This is to be expected. There is also a specific purpose to understanding the theoretical backdrop to your research. The conceptual framework will need to be used to interpret (make senses of) your results and come to some conclusions about your research findings. The conceptual framework therefore, is presented in the methodology section, but then used again later in the (analysis and discussion) thesis to analyse the results. It is important to show the examiner that you understand the link between the conceptual framework and the analysis of the results, because a different conceptual framework would interpret the same results differently, thereby generating different conclusions.

20

If we want to gain top marks in a thesis examination process we need to demonstrate to an examiner: a. b. c. d. e. f. That we have understood the importance of a conceptual framework That we understand the choices available to us in our discipline That we have a good reason for the choice we have made That the choice we have made is appropriate for the task we have set ourselves That we have understood the relationship between a conceptual framework and the specific methodology chosen That we have understood the relationship between a conceptual framework and the interpretation of our results.

To demonstrate (a), (b), and (c) you need to have read some of the theoretical literature in your discipline and understood the theoretical debates that relate to the different approaches to research in your field. To demonstrate (d) you need to have shown how your choice of conceptual framework enables your methodology to generate knowledge that is capable of answering the research question you have set yourself. To demonstrate (e) you need to show how a particular conceptual framework (epistemology) provides for certain specific methods for extracting knowledge from data of some form. Some conceptual frameworks only allow quantitative data to be analysed and so only quantitative data methods will be employed. In other conceptual frameworks mixed methods are appropriate, or what ever is the case for that epistemology. Some social science epistemologies for example focus on the analysis of the power relations in symbolic interactions (either in social interactions or texts or both), and therefore use discourse analysis to generate data and interpret results. To demonstrate (f) you need to re-employ your conceptual framework when analysing your results (this is after you present your results in your results section without doing any analysis). Your conceptual framework (epistemology) will need to be seen again and used in your analysis and discussion section because this is where you make sense of your results and generate interpretations. In your conclusion section you can come to conclusions about the interpretations you generated in your analysis and discussion section. Checklist: 1. What theoretical options are available to form a conceptual framework for this research? 2. What theoretical option has been chosen for this particular research project 3. Why was this particular conceptual framework chosen and how does it relate to the aims and objectives? 4. How will the conceptual framework be used to interpret the results?

21

3.8.2 Specific Methods

The conceptual framework will set the overriding context of the methodology and the analysis. It will require certain specific methods to be employed methods that are consistent with this outlook. The specific methods, in turn, are closely linked with the objectives, and are the means of undertaking or implementing these objectives. Once your objectives are clearly defined you can then assign specific methodologies to each of them. They will normally have different specific methods because they will normally involve different tasks. You will then need to assign an appropriate methodological tool for each task, and all of them will need to be consistent with the conceptual framework. Each specific method capable of achieving your specific objectives need to have two components: Sample set Procedure

3.8.3 Sample Set and Procedure

The sample set is what you are going to look at using your conceptual framework as a viewfinder. You need to select this sample set carefully and you need to explain to the examiner why you made the selection you did. In other words, you need a strategy for selecting the sample set and you need to make sure that the examiner can see this strategy (by explaining the rationale behind it). As with the selection of the conceptual framework, an important question that an examiner is likely to ask is: why this sample set and not some other? The next thing you will need to make clear is what you will do (proposal)/ did (final thesis) with the sample set in terms of a procedure i.e. how you extracted information or data from the sample set. It is important that this is explained in detail so that the method is able to be repeated by someone else. The details of this part of the research design process are particularly important for those undertaking social research that requires ethics approval. This is because the ethics approval process requires the method to be clear, including the questions to be asked in questionnaires and interviews. For those undertaking a textual or discourse analysis, you will also need to do these things in order that your methodology displays the discipline required of an academic piece of work. If you are planning to analyse specific texts, you need to explain to the examiner exactly what texts you chose to scrutinise (sample set), why these texts and not another set (i.e. what is the rationale for choosing this particular set of texts given that the world of texts is vast and wide), and what you will do with these texts (procedure for content or discourse analysis). Another important part of a methodology is the way that you embed it in the intellectual tradition. You do this by using plenty of references in your methodology section to show that the methods you have chosen (including the conceptual framework) are standard practice in your particular branch of Geography or Environmental Studies. If they are not standard practice, you need to explain in what discipline they are standard practice, and why you have chosen them for this task. 22

So, for each objective you will need to assign a sample set and a procedure. Checklist: 1. List the objectives of the research 2. Explain the methods that are commonly used in this branch of your discipline and refer to methodological texts/articles to support your approach. 3. Assign a specific sample set and procedure for each objective 4. Anticipate any potential limitations with this method 5. Ensure that the methodology is written up so that is can easily be repeated by someone else

3.9 RESULTS
The results section of your thesis is the place where you present the findings as they are without analysis. This enables someone else to view the results without your interpretations so that they can make their own interpretations of the data or information gathered and presented. In order to maintain the systematic nature of your research you should present your results in the same order in which they were generated (i.e. in the order of the objectives with which they are linked). Where possible illustrate your results with figures and graphs to assist the examiner in understanding your findings. If you have lengthy data sets, you may need to include them in appendices. If you have undertaken any statistical analysis you will need to have tested the significance of your results using appropriate significance testing tools. For research projects with a highly technical dimension, it is sometimes appropriate to provide a background section prior to the presentation of the results that provides detailed background information that the examiner will need to consider in their interpretation of the results. For some thesis types it may be appropriate to present results with some degree of analysis and discussion this may occur in some social science research projects where the meaning or significance of the individual results needs to be combined with some form of analysis and discussion. But it is perhaps best to stick with keeping the results separate from the analysis and discussion unless there is a compelling reason to change this. The key is to keep things structured clearly to make it easy for the examiner to evaluate each component of the work, and then the work as a whole. Once you have presented your results in detail it is helpful to end the results section with a summary of the findings. Checklist 1. 2. 3. 4. Present the results associated with each objective. Include graphs and figures where appropriate Include tests for statistical significance where appropriate Summary of results

23

3.10 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

Once you have presented your results without interpretation, you are free to undertake your analysis in order to make sense of your results. To make sense of something we need an apparatus for doing so and this apparatus is our conceptual framework. For each objective (which has its own method and result section in previous chapters) you need to reflect on the findings and draw out some meaning from them. At this point you can evaluate the degree to which you have succeeded in achieving each particular objective. You will also have an opportunity here to evaluate any limitations to the method designed to achieve each specific objective. Once you have done this for each objective separately, you should then undertake an analysis that ties all the (achieved) objectives together in a more general way. This is necessary in order to fulfil your aim (the aim is the result of the linking together the achievement of the different objectives). In this section you need to refer back to your aim so that it is clear to the examiner that this is what you are doing. In this section you can evaluate the degree to which you achieved your aim, and also evaluate any limitations associated with the methodology overall (including limitations to the conceptual framework). Through the course of presenting the analysis of your results, and especially the overall analysis that ties together your separate objectives, you should continually refer back to published work of other researchers (e.g. those presented in the literature review). The analysis is not being undertaken in isolation but as part of a community of researchers in your particular topic area. To earn a place in this community you need to refer to their findings and compare your findings with theirs. It is important that the interpretations you present are derived from the actual results of this particular study. There is sometimes a temptation to make more of our results than can actually be sustained by our results, perhaps because we want to reach a particular conclusion. Please avoid this at all costs. Unsubstantiated interpretations are a major liability to academic research and you will be marked down substantially if this happens. An inconclusive result is still a result, and can still be high quality result. Checklist: 1. Explain how the conceptual framework will be used to interpret the results. 2. Use the conceptual framework to interpret the results associated with each separate objective 3. Evaluate the degree to which the objective has been fulfilled 4. Refer to other studies that have undertaken similar objectives and compare you findings with them 5. Evaluate any limitations associated with the methods assigned to each objective 6. Use the conceptual framework to interpret the overall synthesis of the separate objectives with specific reference to your research aims 7. Refer to other studies that have similar aims and compare you findings with them 8. Evaluate the degree to which the overall aim has been fulfilled

24

9. Evaluate any limitations associated with the conceptual framework and its relation to the aims. 10. Ensure that no interpretations are drawn that cannot be supported by the actual findings of this actual study.

3.11 CONCLUSION
As a result of this process of disciplined inquiry you will be able to draw conclusions from this work. These conclusions will involve the presentation of an end product of the work so that anyone wondering what you found will find this in the conclusion. The conclusion is not a summary. The conclusion is the collection of things that you can confidently say as a result of this study that you have undertaken. As with the analysis please ensure that the conclusions you reach are only those that can be supported by this actual study. In some cases (particularly for applied research) you will need to present any final recommendations in the conclusion section. These recommendations are the final output of applied research and provide a set of instructions on how to solve a particular problem (as defined in the aims and objectives). The conclusion section is not the place to introduce new reference material or new ideas or issues.

4 General Issues
4.1 OVERCOMING WRITERS BLOCK
Writing can be a difficult task when there is a lot of material that we have to cover in a single document. One of the biggest challenges in a large document is to get the story to flow. One way to ensure that the story will flow (even within a single chapter) is to plan what we want to say and sketch out a skeleton for that story. This is an extended table of contents and it can help us to organise our thoughts and the things we want to communicate in a logical order that is more easily comprehended by a reader. The most effective messages tend to be those that get straight to the point by the shortest route and explain what needs to be explained in a language that is understood by the reader. However, when we are trying to explain something somewhat complex, we often need to build up the story by stages. So, we need to plan these stages. By writing an extended table of contents we can (a) get an overview of the whole story and (b) get a list of short essays to write. Once we have this list of short essays we can relax and simply write them. Having a series of short essays to write helps to safeguard against losing the plot (literally).

25

Completing the document can then become a little like joining the dots. Once the whole is together we can read it through and check for continuity.

4.2 REFERENCES
A reference list is a list of all the publications referred to in the text, and only those referred to in the text. A bibliography is a list of publications relating to a particular topic. A list of recommended readings is just that. In a thesis you should present a reference list. The reference list needs to be correctly formatted using an accepted referencing format. It is preferable that you use the APA system (more details below). For example: The rates of bio-degradation of 1080 in water and soil have also been subject to laboratory studies (Booth et al. 1999; Olgilvie et al. 1996). Booth, L.H., Olgilvie, S.C., Wright, G.R., and Eason, C.T. 1999. Degradation of sodium monofluoroacetate (1080) and fluorocitrate in water. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 62: 34-39. Ogilvie, S.C., Hertzel, F., and Eason, C.T. 1996. Effect of temperature on the biodegradation of sodium monofluoroacetate in water and in Elodea canadensis. Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 56: 942-947. If in doubt, check a journal article that uses this system and take the format from there. Different journals often have different details in their formats, so the main thing is to be consistent. You may even wish to state that the referencing format to be used will follow that of a particular journal. This is good practice for academic writing. You need to ensure that each and every reference in the text is in the reference list. This takes cross checking but is most important for a polished final product. FAQ (from the VUW web site). Why should I reference information in my essays?

Acknowledging the source of borrowed information avoids plagiarism, and adds to your academic credibility, by supporting your views with concrete evidence.

What should I reference?

Everything you include in your essay that you have taken from another source (books, newspapers, websites, etc) no matter whether you quote the exact words or paraphrase the information in your own words.

26

Whats the difference in formats?

They all provide authors name, date of publication, title, place of publication and publisher, but each style has its own specific requirements. You must follow one style consistently.
APA: Jones, I. & Smith, P. (2000). Writing essays. London: KP Press. Chicago B: Jones, Ian and Peter Smith. 2000. Writing essays. London: KP Press. Harvard: Jones, I. & Smith, P. 2000, Writing Essays, KP Press, London. MLA: Jones, Ian & Peter Smith. Writing essays. London: KP Press, 2000. List your References in alphabetical order at the end of your essay. Indent second (and subsequent) lines of each entry. What are in-text citations? Used mainly by Commerce, Science and Social Sciences, these provide abbreviated details (authors name and year of publication) in the body of your essay, directing readers to the full entry in your References. e.g. A study of small businesses (Jackson 2000) found that .

Each formatting style has its own layout:

APA: (Jones & Smith, 2000) Chicago B: (Jones and Smith 2000) Harvard: (Jones & Smith 2000)

MLA: (Jones & Smith 2000)

What if theres no author?

Use whatever comes first in your References (title or corporate author) instead: e.g
27

(NZ Statistics 2002) (Ministry of Education 2001) What if theres no date?

How do I cite direct quotes?

Use the abbreviation (n.d.)

Use double quotations marks (), and give the relevant page number(s). APA: (Jones & Smith, 2000, p. 12) Chicago B: (Jones and Smith 2000, 12) Harvard: (Jones & Smith 2000, p. 12) MLA: (Jones & Smith 2000 12) If the quote is longer than four lines, indent the passage, without quotation marks. NB: Your essay should contain no more than 5% quoted material. Always follow a quote with your own comment to justify its significance to your argument.

How do I cite a lecture (or interview)? Only published material goes in your References. Acknowledge the source in the body of your essay instead: e.g. Speaking on the NZ economy, Aroha Clark, from Treasury, stated that A later, in-text citation might be as follows: (Clark, Public Lecture, 5 May 2002) How do I reference material from the Internet? Provide as much information as possible (author, date, title, etc). Cite the URL, and the date you accessed the site. APA: Jacobs, J. (2001). Webpage design. [Online]. Retrieved March 6, 2002, from http://org/articles.html Chicago B: Jacobs, John. 2002. Webpage design. [Online]. 2001 [Cited March 6, 2002]. Available from http://org/articles.html 28

NB: Chicago B uses the access date in place of the publication date. Harvard: Jacobs, J. 2001, Webpage Design, [Online] 6 March 2002, Available at: http://org/articles.html MLA: Jacobs, John. Webpage Design. 2001. 6 March 2002. < http://org/articles.html> NB: for in-text citations, use the author (or title, organisation, etc): not the URL. How do I reference a journal article? As well as author, date, etc, give volume, issue, and page numbers. NB: Italicise the title of the journal, not the article. APA: Williams, S. (2000). Student essays. Writing Quarterly, 6, (2), 106-109.

Chicago B:
Harvard:

Williams, Sara. 2000. Student essays. Writing Quarterly 6 (2): 106-109.

Williams, S. 2000, Student essays, Writing Quarterly, vol 6, no. 2, pp. 106-109. MLA: Williams, Sara. Student Essays. Writing Quarterly 6.2 (2000): 106-109. How do I reference a newspaper or magazine article, a film, or TV programme, etc, etc? Check the relevant Style Guides in the Reference section of the Library (or search on the internet). Sources: http://www.apastyle.org/index.html http://www.envf.port.ac.uk/fac/olc/infoskills/refcite/chicbref.htm http://www.library.uq.edu.au/training/citation/harvard.html#top http://www.mla.org/www_mla_org/

29

4.3 PLAGIARISM
Plagiarism is a serious offence in the academic community and amounts to theft. The penalties are very high. Do not risk this with a thesis. Ensure that you never simply paraphrase another published piece of work and always write in your own words.

4.4 MARKING CRITERIA CHECK LIST

The marking criteria presented here is the one used in the Institute of Geography, in the School of Earth Sciences. This is the measuring stick that is used to mark Honours dissertations and Masters theses. These are the hoops you need to jump through to get the grades that are associated with each of the qualities. They are adhered to in the examination process and debates concerning marks by different examiners. If you are doing an Honours or Masters project I highly recommend that you use this as a guide. Criterion 1

The student has shown that they have a reasonable understanding of the subject they have researched.
Research structure needs to be clear and methods shown to have been used wisely. Sufficient data has been gathered to generate valid findings. Conclusions or inferences drawn are supported by the data and the literature provided. There is a clear demonstration of discipline in the document.

Criterion 2

It is clear that the student has been able to order relevant data to make a meaningful case or adequately address a question. In other words they have demonstrated that they understand the research process.
There are no obvious omissions which would detract from the validity of the research effort, quality in either the methodology, analysis or interpretation.

Criterion 3

The research structure is clear and valid. That is the methods and measures chosen have relevance to the aim. The results and interpretations are accurate.
Criterion 4 The student has chosen the most appropriate method and has demonstrated the basis for this choice, and the method is a recognised method in the tradition within which the research is situated (a branch of Environmental Studies or Geography).

They show they have evaluated different methods and measures and have argued convincingly for the one chosen. They have also evaluated their results (that is know the limitations of the data) and conclusions against other possible interpretations.
No flaws in the argument that would demonstrate a lack of experience or familiarity with the literature. 30

Is demonstrably capable of undertaking independent research and producing valid findings.

Criterion 5

Shows evidence of having evaluated the research framework i.e. they have identified the underlying assumptions and recognised from where, how, and why they were derived. This would require at least an implicit understanding of where their research fits with respect to the existing body of knowledge.
Displays some flair which has given the work more meaning than would have been derived from the other criteria above e.g., excelled in the use of graphic [or other specialist] methods in analysis or presentation; excelled in the use of literary or quantitative skills etc. Mark Allocation C B- B B+ A A+ Criterion 1 Criterion 1 and 2 Criterion 1,2, and 3 Criterion 1,2,3 and 4 Criterion 1,2,3,4 and 5. All of the above and elegance, maturity, professionalism, flair etc. The work is publishable in its current form or in a slightly edited form. The author has displayed a high degree of intellectual curiosity about the subject matter and followed up this curiosity with dedicated research and interpretation.

4.5 PUBLISHING YOUR FINDINGS

Your research is happening in the real world (i.e. there are not many people spending this amount of time on this topic and as a result you are becoming an expert in this topic). For this reason it is important that you make your research findings available to others in this field of inquiry. Another reason why it is important to publish your findings is that research activity is measured only on the basis of publications outputs (if it is not published it does not exist). As such, it is important to get used to the idea of publishing your research findings as a matter of course. The relationship between a student and a supervisor is similar to the relationship between a team leader and a research team in a research institution. In both situations the team leader/supervisor will be providing research leadership in the process of the research (i.e. design and implementation), and in the expertise associated with the research outputs. For this reason it is normal and appropriate for the team leader/supervisor to be a co-author of any publication that arises from the research. For students there are some added benefits for this to happen: 31

It will increase the degree of interest that I (as supervisor) have in your research, because I will have a stake in it. It will help you get a publication on your CV, which is incredibly valuable for job hunting.

The key benefit for me as supervisor is to get a return on my time investment in providing guidance and reading proposals and drafts. My job performance (along with all other lecturers) is becoming increasingly based on publications outputs (and less on teaching quality). As detailed in the supervision agreement, you will produce a draft manuscript for a peer reviewed journal when you hand in your dissertation for marking. It is not particularly difficult to edit a dissertation down to a journal article, because it predominantly involves deleting stuff rather than adding stuff. Academic journals have different requirements in terms of word limits, but it is usually between 3,000 and 5,000 words. When editing your dissertation down to this word limit you can start by deciding what to include (i.e. what will be of interest to an academic audience). An academic audience is interested in the introduction, the aim and objectives, a condensed version of the method, the most important results, a condensed version of the analysis and discussion, and a conclusion, and reference list. When preparing a manuscript for a publication you also need to attend to the particular style of that publication. There is always a style guide or guidelines for authors in a journal, and you will need to use this as a basis for editing your manuscript. Also, if you use a reference database like Endnote it is easy to reformulate the referencing style to suit the particular journal.

32

5 Checklist for Proposal

Name ______________________________________________ Title of Dissertation ___________________________________________________________ Title Page Introduction Aim (and research question) Objectives Preliminary Literature Review Gaps in current knowledge to be filled by this research Conceptual framework Methods (sample set and procedure) Reference list Ethics Approval Requirements Budget (if applicable) Time line Proof read by research buddy Date _________________

33

6 Checklist for First Draft

Name ______________________________________________ Title of Dissertation ___________________________________________________________ Introduction What is the issue in question? Date _________________

What is the particular relevance of this issue and why is it significant to Environmental Studies? Why is this issue important? Who is it important to? What is the broader context within which the issue has arisen? What is the specific problem? What kind of solution (in general) is needed? Described how will this research contributes to the solution Described who will benefit from this work Described the structure of the thesis document to follow Aim Defined single overall aim Reworked aim into research question Objectives Defined objectives Organised objectives into list of sub-projects 34

Literature Review Introduction explaining the method and rationale for the review Literature review written according to logical categories in the literature

Concluding section explaining patterns that emerge from the literature and any gaps that your work aims to fill Double check for plagiarism Conceptual Framework Theoretical options available for this kind of research Theoretical option chosen for this particular research project Rationale for choosing this particular conceptual framework How will the conceptual framework be used to interpret the results? Specific Methods Explained methods that are commonly used in this branch of your discipline Assigned a specific sample set and procedure for each objective Anticipated any potential limitations with this method

Has the methodology been written up so that is can easily be repeated by someone else Results Present the results associated with each objective. Include graphs and figures where appropriate Include tests for statistical significance where appropriate Summary of results Analysis and Discussion Explained how the conceptual framework will be used to interpret the results.

Used the conceptual framework to interpret the results associated with each separate

35

objective Evaluated the degree to which the objective has been fulfilled

Referred to other studies that have undertaken similar objectives and compare you findings with them Evaluated any limitations associated with the methods assigned to each objective

Used the conceptual framework to interpret the overall synthesis of the separate objectives with specific reference to your research aims Referred to other studies that have similar aims and compare you findings with them Evaluated the degree to which the overall aim has been fulfilled

Evaluated any limitations associated with the conceptual framework and its relation to the aims. Ensured that no interpretations are drawn that cannot be supported by the actual findings of this actual study. Conclusion Is the conclusion complete? Ensured that the conclusion does not bring in any new information Does the conclusion restrict itself to what was found in this study? Are there any recommendations to be made, and who are they made to? References Have you checked that every reference in the text is listed in the reference list? Are there any references in the reference list that are not in the text? Is the formatting of your reference list correct, and what style are you using?

Are there any references that you have not personally seen? If so have you referred to them appropriately? Are there sections in the dissertation that rely too heavily on one or two references where a wider selection could be used? Are there opportunities to increase the number of references in the text? Have you referred in your text to every piece of literature that you have gathered?

36

Formatting Checked the pagination of the dissertation Prepared a table of contents Prepared a list of tables Prepared a list of figure Prepared a list of appendices Is the layout of the document clear and professional? Have you run a spell check over entire document? Have you checked the layout of headings and subheadings? Double checked whole document for plagiarism Proof read by you Proof read by another student Draft Publication (for final draft submission) Name of target journal Formatted for target journal Word limit Referencing style Embedded in target journal literature Hard copy Electronic copy Contact details for the correspondence Copy of Guidelines for Authors from target journal

37

7 Examiners Checklist
From an examiners point of view the following questions need to be asked:- 1. Has the student stated a clear aim? 2. Is the aim an appropriate one for an academic study (i.e. it may be practical but also needs to address an academic line of inquiry of interest to the particular discipline). 3. Are the objectives in line with the aim? 4. Is the scope appropriate (not too big not too small)? 5. Is there a clear relationship between the objectives and the methods that will extract the needed information? 6. Are the methods appropriate for the task? 7. Are the methods from an accepted academic discipline? 8. Could the same method be replicated by another independent researcher (i.e. is it written so that this is possible)? 9. Are the results consistent with the application of the method? 10. Do the results produce an observable pattern that could be depicted in some way (sometimes graphically)? 11. Does the discussion explain the patterns observed in the results? 12. Does the discussion explain these patterns with reference to the literature on this particular subject? 13. Are the conclusions reached formed on the basis of the results (i.e. avoiding drawing conclusions that cannot be supported by the actual findings of this actual study)? 38

7 Supervision Evaluation
Please circle one of the responses to each of the statements below: 1= strongly agree; 2= agree; 3 = neutral; 4 = disagree; 5 = strongly disagree 1 I found the supervision to be helpful in the overall design and 1 2 3 4 5 implementation of my research project. 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The supervision helped me to clarify my research topic and 1 2 3 4 5 formulate it into a clear research agenda The supervision helped me to design a project that was both 1 2 3 4 5 practical and academically challenging I found the supervision to be helpful in the design of the aims and 1 2 3 4 5 objectives The supervision helped me to understand the relationship between 1 2 3 4 5 the conceptual framework and the interpretation of results I found the supervision to be helpful in the design and execution of 1 2 3 4 5 the methodology I found the supervision to be helpful in getting through the ethics 1 2 3 4 5 approval process I found the supervision to be intellectually stimulating in a way that 1 2 3 4 5 helped me to understand my topic in a new way The supervisors feedback on draft written material was valuable 1 2 3 4 5 and constructive

10 The supervision helped me in the organisation of the thesis 1 2 3 4 5 document 11 The supervision helped me to build my capacity in project 1 2 3 4 5 management 12 I found the supervisor/student meetings to be constructive and 1 2 3 4 5 helpful 13 The supervision helped me to build my capacity to undertake 1 2 3 4 5 independent research 14 The supervision helped me to understand and appreciate the value 1 2 3 4 5 of publishing the results of research 15 I feel that the supervision has helped to prepare me for the 1 2 3 4 5 workforce

39

40