170 likes | 437 Views
Relevance of findings in Results to Discussion sections in applied linguistics research. Doing Research in Applied Linguistics April 22, 2011. P unjaporn Pojanapunya Richard Watson Todd. Writing research articles is difficult Discussions & Literature reviews are most difficult to write
E N D
Relevance of findings in Results to Discussion sections in applied linguistics research Doing Research in Applied Linguistics April 22, 2011 PunjapornPojanapunya Richard Watson Todd
Writing research articles is difficult • Discussions & Literature reviews are most difficult to write • Difficulty in writing discussions • Language proficiency • Genre • Content (Bitchener & Basturkmen, 2006)
Content in discussions • Discussions involve “commenting on results” (Lim, 2010; Basturkmen, 2009), but how is this organised? • Genre • e.g. reporting results, summarising results, commenting on results • Results discussed
Research questions • What findings are reported in the discussion section of articles? • What functions of discussion sections are these findings reported in?
Data • Results and Discussion sections of 10 research articles • Quantitative research articles • Explicit RQs • IMRD structure
Analysing Results • Identify each individual finding • Match each finding to the relevant RQ • Identify if the specific finding: • answers or is relevant to an RQ • answers more than one RQ • is not relevant to the RQs
Analysing Discussion sections • Identify all findings reported in discussions • Identify how the findings are reported in terms of level of detail • Analyse genre move in discussions • Match findings with genre moves Presenting new findings Repeating purpose Repeating findings Contributions to the field Linking to literature about the research methodology Linking to real-world applications/practical recommendations Discussing limitations of the study Pointing to directions for future research Explaining reasons for the finding
ResultsRQ1: What findings are reported in the discussion section of articles?
3 ways of reporting findings in D • Actual quantitative data e.g. • During the semester, the 31 students whose data was included in the analysis read 11 graded readers at various levels on average, ranging from 8 to 19 readers with a standard deviation of 2.5 • Comparing post-test 1 and post-test 2, 8 learners achieved lower scores and only 3 higher. • Summary of data/ statistics e.g. • According to time logs kept during RR treatments, the average wpm of the experimental group increased significantly. • The participants were most fluent in the V/NV condition as predicted by Hypothesis 1. • Interpretation e.g. • Again, the results of the current research showed that textbooks with communication strategies are more effective tools of second language instruction than those without them. • The edge which class B has on class A on the Achievement test is another indication that teaching communication strategies can be fruitful.
Summary of findings: RQ1 • High variation of no. of findings in R, while more consistency in no. of findings in D (range from 5-15 findings) • Most findings answer RQs, while some having no relevance to RQs are reported in R and discussed in D • Findings in D are most commonly reported as summaries • Statistic data presented is descriptive rather than inferential
ResultsRQ2: What functions of discussion sections are these findings reported in?
Summary of findings: RQ2 • Findings in D are reported more frequently in the beginning of discussion sections • More than half of findings in D are reported to explain reasons for findings
Discussion and Implications • Different paradigms can lead to great differences in no. of findings but appears to be implicit expectation about no. of specific findings that can be discussed • Expected length of discussion section limits number? • The more you discuss, the less the focus? • Limited number gives more coherence • Most findings are presented as summary • Succinct • Focused • Most discussion is to explain reasons for findings • Some discussion to summarise findings – but this can also appear at end of results section
Discussion and Implications • General heuristic for findings in discussion • Choose 5-15 key findings that need to be explained • Cluster the key findings and present as summaries • Explain the summaries • Move on to other functions of discussion (with occasional citing of findings as evidence where necessary)