How to write a research paper

How to write a research paper

Section 1: abstract Section 2: key words Section 3: introduction Section 4: literature review Section 5: Methodology Section 6: findings Section 7: discussion Section 8: conclusion

Section 9: references / works cited/ bibliography

Section 1: abstract

1. a short summary (150-125 word)

helping readers decide whether the article is relevant to their interests and whether it needs to be read in its entirety

2. fairly impersonal in tone

talks about what the paper does rather than about what the author did

“This article considers…”, “This article proposes…”, “This article examines…” 3. need for brevity

more complex in syntax than the actual article mentioning all the sections of the paper

drawing the ideas for one sentence or two from each of the article’s main sections 4. the content of an abstract 1) research objective

2) methodology (research subjects/research instrument / methods of statistical analysis) 3) research results and major conclusions 4) the significance of the findings

Section 2: key words

Investigate / investigation? (which one is preferred?) Using noun instead of verb

4---6 words min: 2 words max:10 words Chosen from the title and abstract writing & punctuation

Section 3: introduction

a crucial part of the paper ,the hardest part to write

Function: to draw readers into the topic, to make them see why it is important and what you have to say about it is new and interesting three steps

Step 1: to establish the general territory in which you are working

One traditional way to begin : emphasize the importance of the general topic by briefly reviewing previous research in the area and making generalizations about what has been found Step 2:to establish a specific research point for yourself in that general area

1) by making a counterclaim to a previous researcher’s ---Because of the interpretive nature of qualitative work, it is rare----and accordingly, perhaps risky----to claim that someone else is simply wrong. More usually, a counterclaim is described as a different way of explaining things,

not as the right way as opposed to the wrong one.

2) by indicating that there is a gap in previous research---- If you choose this option, remember that the people whose work you are talking about may be reading yours, so you had better describe the gap your work fills in rather than talk about what other people have “failed” or “neglected” to show respect for the work of others. Bear in mind that the mere fact something has not been studied before is not itself a reason to study it: you have to show why it is important that your research space be filled in

3) by raising new questions, or, conversely, by showing that your are continuing an important research tradition (rarely used due to the difficulty) Step 3: refining the research questions

Step 4: the outline / structure of the paper (optional) Step 5: writing content

1) The general territory (the importance of the general topic)

2)review the previous research in the area and make generalizations/conclusions 3) the gap in previous research

4) your research content and questions

Section 4: literature review

Purpose: put what you are doing in context

either integrated into the introduction or as a separate labeled section. describe other work that bears on your topic a complete overview of your particular topic

Section 5: Methodology /method

being explicit about how you chose who or what to study, why, about how you collected data, about how much data, or how many speakers, or how long you spent in the field, and about your analytical methods. The content

1) research questions (optional)---- how you chose what to study, why 2) research subjects (how you chose who or what to study, why

discussion subjects’ representatives and distribution: why didn’t your sample include men, or African-Americans, for example, if it did not; in what ways are your results likely to be generalized and in what ways are they unlikely to be? Bear in mind that the rhetorical function of this part is to show that your know what is important about the methodological decisions you made. ) 3) research instrument (how you collected data)

4)data collection and analysis (how much data, or how many speakers, or how long you spent in the field, and about your analytical methods. )

Section 6: findings

the description of results

answer each research question in turn

Having sufficient evidence (In addition to suggesting answers to your research questions, an important function of this part of the paper is to make it clear what your evidence was for each answer, and that your evidence was sufficient.)

Demonstrating the results with particular examples illustrating particular claims

a retrospective analytical report about the research process rather than a narrative of the research process

Bear in mind that what you are describing is not what you did, but what you found.

A chronological account of your activities may form part of your discussion of your methodology, but it is not the same as a research report.

Section 7: discussion

discuss findings

comment in a speculative way, about what they have done involves summarizing, particularly if the paper is a long one

involves talking about what needs to be done or what the next step in the research will be

involves commenting on the significance of the project and findings, highlighting ----but not overstating----what is suggested by your findings that is important and news, what sociolinguists know now that we needed to know and did not know before. It is important to show that you are aware of what still needs to be done, but do not make too strong a case for the limitations of your project!

The grammar of particularity

(a1) Mrs. Blair uses nonstandard forms rarely. (b1) Mrs. Blair used nonstandard forms rarely.

(a2) In casual conversation, women are interrupted more than men. (b2) In casual conversation, women were interrupted more than men.

Principle: use the past tense rather than the present tense in descriptions of people’s actions or words

(b2) In casual conversation, women were interrupted more than men. (?) Is it appropriate? If no, how to polish it?

In the casual conversations I recorded, the women were interrupted more than the men.

Principle 2: making sure you refer to the situations and people you studied in definite ways

Research questions for English testing

1) analyze the item difficulty and item discrimination and the distractors

2) analyze whether the items are designed according to the guidelines of constructing effective items

3) analyze how many items are effective from these two perspectives 4) construct the effective items

5) analyze the item difficulty and item discrimination and the distractors of items designed by you