1 / 6

Your exam paper

Your exam paper. Structure. Important parts: Abstract. 4-10 full sentences (Swales 2004 282) Keywords in abstract – ”Google” (Booth 1995 219 220) Which words would other researchers search for when searching your paper – put in abstract Three types of abstracts (Booth 1995 220)

kitra-mayer
Télécharger la présentation

Your exam paper

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Your exam paper Structure

  2. Important parts: Abstract • 4-10 full sentences (Swales 2004 282) • Keywords in abstract – ”Google” (Booth 1995 219 220)Which words would other researchers search for when searching your paper – put in abstract • Three types of abstracts (Booth 1995 220) • context + problem + main point • context + problem + launching point • summary • Features of a good abstract (Rienecker 2000 311) • Stand-alone: can be understood by non-expert colleagues • Short: 100 – 200 words • Provide basis for deciding whether to embark on reading the paper • Mainly communicates - topic and problem, problem statement, purpose, method, results, - conclusions, recommendations, extraordinary points • Preferably provides bibliographical information: author, source, year, ...

  3. Important parts: Introduction • Elements of the introduction – not necessarily in this order (Rienecker 2000 298) • Topic – focussing on problem • Problem statement + motivation • Purpose • Definitions • Hypotheses • Approach • Theories • Methods + motivations • Theories + frame • Empiri • Focus • Organisation of the paper • The introduction: present the project, not the doubt (Rienecker 2000 304) • Creates the reader’s expectations – they should be as positive as possible • Say what you want to do and how

  4. Important parts: discussion • They should go beyond the results (Swales 2004 269) • They should be more than summaries (Swales 2004 269) • Compared to summaries they should be (Swales 2004 269) - more theoretical - more abstract - more general - more integrated with the field - more connected to the real world - more concerned with implications or applications • ”In the discussion section you should step back and take a broad look at your findings and your study as a whole” (Swales 2004 269 278)

  5. Important parts: conclusion • The conclusions should answer the following questions (Rienecker 2000 305) • What have you found or arrived at? • Have you achieved your goal? • How appropriate were your theories and methods wrt. the purpose? • Have you gained insight re. problem, methods, framework? • Who can use your results? • What don’t we still know? • Which avenues should be investigated? • Use the same elements as in the introduction – just in reverse order (Booth 1995 236) • Start with your main point • Be sure to use the same language as in the introduction • State the significance of your findings or points – should be the answer to the question ”So what?” in the introduction • Call for more research

  6. Academic Writing • Materials Compiled by Anker Helms Jørgensen, who teaches our phd students this topic • All material comes from: • (Blåsjö 2000)Blåsjö, Mona (2000): Uppsatsens yta och djup - Studenters skrivutveckling mellan B- och C-uppsats [Surface and depth of the student essay. Writing development of university students.] TeFa report 33, Dept. of Nordic Languages, Stockholm University. • (Booth 1995)Booth, Wayne C., Colomb, Gregory G., and Williams, Joseph M. (1995): The Craft of Research. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. • (Heltberg 1997)Heltberg, Eva and Kock, Christian (red): Skrivehåndbogen [The Writer’s Handbook]. Gyldendal, 1997. • (Rienecker 1997)Rienecker, Lotte (1997): Den gode opgave – arbejdsprocesser og kvalitetskriterier i opgaver på humaniora [The Good Essay – work processes and quality criteria in essays in the Humanities]. Gyldendal. • (Rienecker 1999)Rienecker, Lotte and Jørgensen, Peter Stray (1999): Opgaveskrivning på videregående uddannelser - en læreRbog [Writing essays in higher education – a Teacher’s handbook]. Frederiksberg, Samfundslitteratur. • (Rienecker 2000)Rienecker, Lotte and Jørgensen, Peter Stray (2000): Den gode opgave - opgaveskrivning på videregående uddannelser [The good essay – writing essays in higher education]. 2. udg. Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur. • (Rieneceker 2005)Rienecker, Lotte and Jørgensen, Peter Stray (2005): Den gode opgave. Håndbog i opgaveskrivning på videregående uddannelser [The good essay. Handbook in writing essays in higher education]. Samfundslitteratur. • (Swales 2000)Swales, John. M and Feak, Christine (2000): English in today’s research world – a writing guide. University of Michigan Press. • (Swales 2004)Swales, John M and Feak, Christine B. (2004): Academic Writing for Graduate Students – essential tasks and skills. Univ. Michigan Press. 2nd ed.

More Related