Writing the Title

A short but attention-arousing title is preferred on thesis. The student may begin with a working title for the
research. Later on, she/he can improve this title as the work progresses to a finish, i.e., wisely choosing
word sand concepts that fit into the final thesis title (suggested number of words in a title: not
more than ten words).

PART II: WRITING THE THESIS

Parts of the thesis:
Title Page
Title (including subtitle), author, institution, department, date of delivery

Approval Sheet

Acknowledgment Adviser(s) and anyone who helped: Intellectually (assistance, advice) technically (including
materials, supplies) financially (for example, departmental support, travel grants)

Abstract
The abstract explains in the first line why the thesis is important. It then g o e s o n t o g i v e a s u m m a r y o f t h e
m a j o r r e s u l t s . If qualitative, the researcher must summarize his/her major discoveries in the abstract. The final
sentences explain the major implications of the study.

- A good abstract is brief, concise, compact, and above all, readable.

- It is a continuous summary, not randomly written, disconnected notes.
- It contains a brief outline or general overview of the main points of the a r g u m e n t o r t h e o r y
behind the thesis. It contains a short statement about the area of investigation, a
b r i e f d i s c u s s i o n o f m e t h o d s a n d procedures used a brief summary of findings, and a brief summary
of conclusions.
- Length should be 1-2 paragraphs, approximately 400 words.
- It should not repeat the information in the title.
- It should be explicit.
- It could use numbers where appropriate. The abstract should contain answers to these questions:

1. What did the researcher do?

2. Why did she do it? What question was she trying to answer?
3. How did she do it? State methods briefly.
4. What did he/she learn? State major results in a concise way.
5. Why does it matter?

The researcher then must point out the significant implication. Clearly, the abstract must be very compact, and
this requirement leads many inexperienced researchers to make it unintelligible. The researcher must
remove unnecessary words and eliminate less important details of method and results.
Table of Contents
The table of contents serves as a map to the entire thesis, not only for the reader but for the researcher as
well. The researcher must create a thorough table of contents before beginning to write and refer to it throughout the
thesis writing process. He/She must continually re-evaluate the order of topics and be sure that he/she has
included every relevant piece of information. The table of contents is a neat list of chapters, headings, and sub-
headings, along with the page numbers where each begins. It should be numbered using the Roman
numeral system.

*All of the above shall be paginated by using Roman numerals in lower case on the upper right hand
corner of the page.

*The succeeding parts of the thesis shall be paginated using the Hindu-Arabic numerals on the upper right hand
corner except the first page of every chapter (where it will therefore be hidden).

Chapter I: Introduction
T h e i n t r o d u c t i o n s h o u l d c o n t a i n n o t o n l y a c l e a r t h e s i s s t a t e m e n t t h a t describes the main idea
of the thesis, but also an interesting statement that would make the reader want to read the thesis. These are examples:

- a startling statistic or unusual fact

- a vivid description
- a question
- a story or quotation
- a bit of dialog

The introduction should explain why the researcher has chosen to writes bout the particular issue or
problem the thesis is addressing. The researcher should explain why it is important to study this
problem and assert that the thesis will help solved the problem. A good introduction establishes what
the body of the paper says. It contains an interesting lead. It should draw the reader in and make the
reader want to read the rest of the thesis. This is a statement that declares the importance of the
problem that the paper either solves or addresses.

T h e n e x t p a r a g r a p h s i n t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n s h o u l d c i t e i n b r i e f p r e v i o u s research in this area.

It should cite those who had the idea or ideas first, and should cite those who have done the most recent and
relevant work.

T h e n , t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n s h o u l d g o o n t o e x p l a i n w h y m o r e w o r k w a s necessary (this
thesis, of course.) It should be obvious where introductory material ends and the contribution of the thesis begins.
Re m e m b e r t h a t t h i s i s n o t a r e v i e w p a p e r . T h e i n t r o d u c t i o n s h o u l d describe the
previous work or works upon which the study was made and a p r o m i s e o f a n i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d a n a l y s i s
b y t h e t h e s i s r e s e a r c h e r t o move things forward. Many experts say that it is better to write the introductory
section(s) after the researcher has completed the rest of the paper, rather than before. This e n s u r e s t h a t t h e
r e s e a r c h e r i s c l e a r a b o u t w h a t t h e p a p e r s a y s a n d c a n therefore write a cogent introduction. The
introduction section is usually broken into smaller, logical segments by using subheads:
Background of the Study
S u f f i c i e n t b a c k g r o u n d i n f o r m a t i o n t o a l l o w t h e r e a d e r t o understand
the context and significance of the question the thesis researcher is trying to address.

Rationale of the Study

This section expounds on the reasons for studying the topic. Often includes a personal experience which
prompted the researcher to engage in the study.

Statement of the Problem

This section presents the statement of the problem that stimulated the researcher in the first place to conduct the study.

- State the question.

- Assert that this question remains unanswered.
- Argue why this question is worth answering at all. In stating the question, clarity is of utmost
importance. Here it is not a good idea to beat around the bush. The researcher must use clear,
concise language and exact terminology to avoid misleading the reader. T h e i n t r o d u c t i o n s h o u l d
e s t a b l i s h t h e q u e s t i o n t h a t r e m a i n s unanswered up to now, and should argue why it is worth
answering this question at all. What good will come out of finding an answer? In what ways will the answer
contribute to knowledge? The reader needs to have some understanding of the purpose of the thesis
in order to be sympathetic to the researcher’s views.

A good problem:
Do adult newspaper readers in a rural kebele setting have characteristics that are similar to adult newspaper readers in
general?

A poor problem:
W h a t a r e t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f r u r a l a d u l t n e w s p a p e r readers in a rural kebele
setting? (Too narrow)

A poor problem:
H o w c a n t h e X Y Z A g e n c y b e t t e r s e r v e r u r a l a d u l t newspaper readers?
(Not generalize)

Objectives
This section presents the General Objective which is the narrative form of the Statement of the Problem. The Specific
Objectives are the actions that the researcher plans to undertake in order to solve the problem/s presented.

Significance of the Study

T h i s c o v e r s w h o w i l l b e n e f i t f r o m t h e s t u d y . T h e s i g n i f i c a n c e should not repeat the abstract.
The thesis must contribute to those involved in the field of human communications in particular and to the body
of human knowledge in general.

Hypothesis

This portion the researcher explains tentatively about his/her study as a basis for further investigation.

Scope of the Study

This part explains the scope of the work, what will and will not be included in the thesis. A very important
section of the research proposal but will not be included in the final draft.

Limitations
This portion is where the researcher acknowledges the limits in the conduct of the study
w h e t h e r i n t e r m s o f p a r t i c i p a n t s , m e t h o d s , a n d procedures. Problems that were encountered are also
discussed here.

Chapter II: Review of Related Literature (RRL)

This section presents what others have said or written about the problem. The RRL shows the background from
where the problem arose, and how o t h e r s h a v e a t t e m p t e d t o r e s o l v e t h e p r o b l e m . I t i s n o r m a l
t o c o n s u l t between 50 to 75 or sometimes more sources. Much of this information will come from
the research others have done before this current study. The researcher must learn what other scholars have
said about the topic. The RRL differs from the introductory section on background information in that whereas
background information remains more general in scope, t h i s s e c t i o n c o n c e n t r a t e s o n t h o s e
i s s u e s a n d a s p e c t s o f t h e f i e l d t h a t specifically relate to the question the thesis seeks to answer. As such,
this section should also incorporate an examination of the varying view points surrounding the question, in order
to orient the reader in the discourse of the field. The researcher should keep in mind that at this stage of the
thesis writing the goal is simply to present these varying viewpoints, not to be critical of them. That
comes later. Each section should have a topic-specific title, and should be organized ar o u n d i d e a s
r a t h e r t h a n b y a u t h o r s o r w o r k s . U s i n g s u b s e c t i o n s i s a practical means of distinguishing the
different approaches to the problem. T h i s c h a p t e r s h o u l d e n d w i t h a s u m m a r y o f t h e r e c o g n i z e d
f a c t s a n d information in academic literature about a given subject.

Chapter III: Study Framework

This chapter picks up from the end of the previous chapter and clearly explains the research issue and
outlines the proposed solution or extension using someone else's theory or solution. When deciding upon which pre-
established theory to include in the thesis, the researcher must be clear about what she is claiming so that the readers
can keep it in mind while reading the thesis.

Theoretical Framework
What is the theoretical basis for the study? The researcher’s answer/s must use some major theory that applies to
the particular problem or question. The researcher should show t h a t t h i s t h e o r y a c t u a l l y a p p l i e s
well to the topic and leads the reader to a better answer than the alternatives, not only
i n t h e abstract but also in this particular case. A theoretical framework guides the research, determining
what t h i n g s t h e r e s e a r c h e r w i l l s t u d y a n d w h a t r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h e r e s e a r c h e r w i l l
l o o k f o r . A t h e o r y i s a s t a t e m e n t a b o u t t h e phenomenon under study. A theoretical
framework is critical and deductive, theory-testing s t u d i e s w h e r e i t m u s t b e v e r y s p e c i f i c a n d
well thought out.

A theoretical framework is also important in qualitative, exploratory studies, where a researcher really does not know
much about what is going on, and is trying to learn more. There are two reasons why theoretical frameworks
are important. First, no matter how little a researcher thinks she knows about a topic, and how
unbiased she thinks she is, it is impossible for her not to have preconceived notions, even if they are of a very
general nature. A theoretical framework guides the researcher so that she can follow the unbiased leads of
the data in his/her study.

Conceptual Framework
The conceptual framework is a collection of interrelated concepts that makes it easier for the
research to explain the topic further. T h e c o n c e p t u a l f r a m e w o r k i s a s e t o f a s s u m p t i o n s ,
v a l u e s , a n d definitions under which the researcher’s ideas work together. T h e c o n c e p t u a l f r a m e w o r k c a n
h e l p t h e r e s e a r c h e r d e c i d e a n d explain the route she is taking to achieve here objectives, why she
plans certain methods and not others to get to a certain point.

Operational Framework (if quantitative research)

The operational framework identifies the particular units, elements o r i n d i v i d u a l s i n v o l v e d i n t h e
s t u d y b a s e d o n t h e c o n c e p t u a l framework. It narrows down the concepts to the units under study a n d
s h o w s h o w t h e s e u n i t s i n t e r a c t a n d r e l a t e t o e a c h o t h e r . I t guides the researcher in making
her framework operational when conducting the actual study.

Definition of Terms
This section contains the conceptual and operational definition of each term in the title, in the
problem, in the objectives, and in the frameworks as well as other terms the researcher used in the thesis. In
defining, the researcher uses her own words and explains how the term is used in the thesis and the
context in which it is used. Terms are defined in complete sentences.

Chapter IV: Study Design/Methods of Research

This chapter contains information that will allow the reader to assess the believability of the results
of the study, information needed by another researcher to replicate the experiment. T h e S t u d y D e s i g n
describes the materials and procedures planned to gather the data and come closer to the
s o l u t i o n o f t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e thesis. It includes the calculations, technique, procedure,
equipment, and c a l i b r a t i o n p l o t s a s w e l l a s t h e l i m i t a t i o n s , a s s u m p t i o n s , a n d r a n g e o f
validity that the researcher will use. This section should be able to:

- a l l o w o t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s r e p e a t t h e e x p e r i m e n t b y f o l l o w i n g t h e descriptions in
the research study
- provide enough information provided so that one can replicate the study under specific circumstances

Methods and Procedures

A researcher can use a number of different research methods. She can conduct a survey, facilitate
focus group discussions, perform interviews, do content analysis or perform experiments using the
s c i e n t i f i c m e t h o d . W h a t e v e r k i n d o f m e t h o d h e / s h e c h o o s e s , i t i s important to understand
that the methods are appropriate for the thesis and will help answer the researcher’s questions. Appropriate
research methods will most likely allow the researcher t o f i n d t h e r i g h t d a t a t h a t w i l l p o i n t t o t h e
r i g h t d i r e c t i o n s i n s o l v i n g t h e p r o b l e m o f t h e t h e s i s Most thesis studies require a detailed
explanation of the subject p o p u l a t i o n , p r o c e d u r e s , t i m e l i n e s , o b j e c t i v e s , l i m i t a t i o n s ,
i n s t r u m e n t s , d a t a c o l l e c t i o n , e t h i c a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , t o o l s , a n d statistical analysis. Methods
selected will vary depending on subject matter, type of experiment conducted, and requirements of the
thesis.

Participants
It is important to be able to give the readers a good grasp of who the participants are in the study by
including the following: the n u m b e r o f p a r t i c i p a n t s i n v o l v e d w i t h a d i s c u s s i o n o f
t h e i r characteristics, i.e., age, gender, locale represented, socio economic s t a t u s , e t c ; a n d t h e m e t h o d o f
s e l e c t i o n ( S a m p l e a n d S a m p l i n g Technique). The setting in which the study will take place needs to be
extensively described (Locale).

A. Sample
 B. S a m p l i n g T e c h n i q u e s
C. L o c a l e Instruments

I n s t r u m e n t s a r e u s e d t o b e a b l e t o m e a s u r e t h e v a r i a b l e s i n t h e study. Depending on the method

which will be used to gather data, q u e s t i o n n a i r e s a n d g u i d e q u e s t i o n s a r e a l w a y s b a s e d o n
t h e objectives of the study. These instruments need to be described and have to undergo pre-testing. This
will allow the researcher to proceed in using the instruments or improve them, as the case may be, based on the pre-
testing results. A . Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s B . G u i d e Q u e s t i o n s

Chapter V. Results and Discussion Results

T h e r e s u l t s a r e a c t u a l s t a t e m e n t s o f o b s e r v a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g s t a t i s t i c s , tables and graphs.
The researcher must indicate information on the range of variations resulting from the methods used. He/She
must mention negative as well as positive results. It is best to break up the results into logical segments
by using subheads. The researcher must not interpret results; instead, she must save that for the
discussion. The researcher must be sure to discuss the premises of the methodologies before listing the results. If
experimental, the results should mention the variables of the experiment, the value of standard
deviations, and other applicable background information. The researcher must stack up the results in a
clear and logical manner so t h a t t h e r e a d e r c a n d r a w h i s o w n i n f e r e n c e s a n d
c o n s t r u c t h i s o w n explanations. Diagrams, graphs, and charts will be very useful in illustrating the results.
However, the researcher should be cautious on spending too many hours building elaborate graphs
and tables as soon as he/she has gathered the data. He/She runs the risk of wasting time in the word
processor because of the intricacies in building such graphs or tables. In fact, the researcher can hand
draw a graph or table first, presenting the data accurately for clear understanding between his/her and
the adviser, and not waste time trying to make it look perfect right away. Once the researcher and the adviser
have agreed upon how they should graphically present the data, it is time to prepare perfect looking graphs
and tables.

Discussion
The researcher should quarantine observations (the results) from the interpretations
(discussion). The researcher must make it crystal clear to the reader which statements are observation and
which are interpretation. I n m o s t c i r c u m s t a n c e s , t h e r e s e a r c h e r c a n b e s t a c c o m p l i s h
t h i s b y physically separating statements about new observations from statements about the meaning or
significance of those observations. Alternatively, t h i s g o a l c a n b e a c c o m p l i s h e d b y c a r e f u l u s e
of phrases such as "The r e s e a r c h e r i n f e r s . . . " G o o d t h e s i s t h a t s u r v i v e a r e
those in which observations were presented in stand-alone fashion,
u n m u d d i e d b y whatever ideas the author might have had about the processes that caused the observed
phenomena. T h e d i s c u s s i o n p a r t o f t h i s s e c t i o n s h o u l d e x p l a i n t h e m e a n i n g o f t h e results,
where they fit in the current literature concerning the issue, and whether they concur with or deviate from
other experimenters’ work.

The discussion ties in the data to the researcher’s statements about the i s s u e s h e h a s s t u d i e d .
H e / S h e s h o u l d e x a m i n e t h e f i g u r e ( s ) o r t a b l e ( s ) pertaining to the result(s) and assess whether:

- discussion statements have support from the data

- discussion statements are contradicted by the data
- the data are insufficient to prove or refute the discussion statements
- the data may support the textual statement, but the researcher may not be sure that other
researchers will see the same deductions from the phenomenon the researcher claims to have seen.
Tips for a great discussion section:
- Start with a few sentences that summarize the most important results.
- What are the major patterns in the observations?
- Circumscribe your argument. Explain where your generalizations apply, where they do not, and why.
- W h a t a r e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s , t r e n d s a n d g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s a m o n g t h e results?
- What are the exceptions to these patterns or generalizations?
 - What are the likely causes (mechanisms) underlying these patterns resulting
predictions?
- Is there agreement or disagreement with previous work?
- Interpret results in terms of background laid out in the introduction -what is the relationship of the
present results to the original question?
- W h a t i s t h e i m p l i c a t i o n o f t h e p r e s e n t r e s u l t s f o r o t h e r u n a n s w e r e d questions in the
field of study?
- A v o i d b a n d w a g o n s : j u m p i n g a c u r r e n t l y f a s h i o n a b l e p o i n t o f v i e w unless the results
really do strongly support them.
- What are the things the readers will now know or will understand that they did not know or
understand before the present study?
- Include the evidence or line of reasoning supporting each interpretation.
- What is the significance of the present results: why should the reader care? Why should anyone
even care?
- Break up the section into logical segments by using subheads. This section should be rich in references to
similar work and background needed to interpret results. However, interpretation/discussion
section(s) are often too long and verbose. Is there material that does not contribute to one of the elements
listed above? If so, the research will want to consider deleting or removing these extraneous materials.

Implications
This is where the researcher contemplates on the future direction of the concluded research. It is
important that the researcher is realistic as to how the research can serve as a springboard in improving or
starting other researches.

Chapter VI: Summary, Conclusions, and Recommendations Summary

This section of the chapter should present the strongest and most important
statements that the researcher can make from the discussion. In t h i s c h a p t e r , t h e r e s e a r c h e r w r i t e s d o w n
w h a t s h e w a n t s t h e r e a d e r t o remember about her thesis. It briefly explains what has been learned,
explained, decided, and proven by the thesis.

Conclusions
Here, the researcher refers back to problem posed, and describes the conclusions that
s h e h a s r e a c h e d f r o m c a r r y i n g o u t t h i s i n v e s t i g a t i o n , listing down new observations, new
interpretations, and new insights that h a v e r e s u l t e d f r o m t h e p r e s e n t w o r k . S h e s h o u l d
i n c l u d e t h e b r o a d e r implications of her results. The researcher must be sure that this section is not a
reiteration of facts presented, but a serious discussion of conclusions and inferences that can be drawn from those
facts. This section is not a summary but a way to help the readers understand what conclusions they can
reasonably draw from the findings.

Caution: Do not repeat word for word the abstract, introduction or

discussion.

Recommendations
This section presents remedial action to solve the problem or to treat the problem when it presents
itself again in the future under different modes or circumstances. The research here suggests further
research to fill in gaps in understanding the problem or the issue. She underscores directions for future
investigations on this or related topics.

T h e r e s e a r c h e r h e r e c o m e s u p w i t h s u g g e s t i o n s t h a t e x t e n d t h e t h e s i s ’ s cope, answering these

questions:
 - What can be studied that will use this research and its findings as a foundation and expand forward?
- What is the future of the field and how does this research change that future or impact it in some
way?
- What natural next step can follow this research? This section should not end with a quote or
statement that could begin another paper.

References
This section should contain sufficient references such that a reader could achieve a sophisticated understanding
of the context and significance of the question by going to the library or reading the original work from the
citations. P r o p e r a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t o f t h e p r e v i o u s w o r k o n w h i c h t h e r e s e a r c h e r
i s building is of utmost importance. Every citation made in the body of the thesis must appear in the list of
references. The list of references is a measuring stick to evaluate the breadth of the research. The reader will
typically review the list of references to determine whether the researcher has consulted the appropriate
works in the field. U n l i k e a b i b l i o g r a p h y , w h i c h m a y i n c l u d e t i t l e s t h a t t h e r e s e a r c h e r d i d n o t
directly refer to in the text, every item in the list of references must refer to a citation from the body of
the thesis. Miriam College uses the APA format for students’ theses, based on:

- Cone, J.D. & Foster, S.L. (2006), Dissertations and theses from start to finish: Psychology and
related fields. Washington, D.C.:American Psychological Association.
- American Psychological Association (2001). Publication manual (5th Edition). Washington D.C.: Author.

Appendixes

A . S a m p l e Q u e s t i o n n a i r e
B . L i s t o f G u i d e Q u e s t i o n s

Appendixes include technical material (program listings, output, system flow diagrams, lengthy data
tables, complex charts and graphs, extensive listings of any kind, etc.) which would disrupt the flow of the
thesis if inserted in the body of the thesis.

Appendixes help explain or provide details to the curious reader. It contains the extras that did not fit
into the body of the thesis, extras that would h a v e d i s t u r b e d t h e s m o o t h p r o g r e s s o f i d e a s i n
t h e t h e s i s , a n d e x t r a s t h a t a r e overly technical, or are simply asides, but which should be available to the
reader to back up relevant points in the textual argumentation. What else to include in the Appendixes Section:

- Complex data that the reader needs for deeper understanding of the results
- Reference data/materials not easily available (theses are used as a resource by the department
and other students)
- Tables (where more than 1-2 pages)
- Calculations (where more than 1-2 pages)
- A key article that can explain any part of the research in deeper fashion
- A list of additional resource material, etc
- List of equipment used for an experiment or details of complicated procedures

Note: Figures and tables, including captions, should be embedded in the text and not in an
appendix, unless they are more than 1 -2 pages and are not critical to the argument.