Writing a Discussion Chapter Dissertation Writing for

International Students,
June 2023

glasgow.ac.uk/SLD Dr Mona O’Brien

[email protected]
Student Learning Development (SLD) 1
Register your If the QR code
attendance doesn’t work, please
register using the
using the QR paper sheet being
Code passed around.

2
 Mentimeter:

How are you

feeling today
on the Cat
Scale?
Vote on
Mentimeter
Use the QR code or
Go to: Menti.com
Use the voting code: 75 13 43 2
3
Session ILOs and structure

Intended Learning Outcomes

(ILOs):
Lecture
1. Understand the aim of the
discussion chapter.
Q&A 2. Understand your marker’s
expectations of the discussion
chapter.
3. Begin to consider ways to meet
these expectations.
4
Lecture outline

1. The aim of the discussion chapter

2. Reader expectations

3. Examples
5
1. The aim of the discussion chapter

Photo from Microsoft Stock Images 6

 Aim of the Discussion Chapter

 Show the reader that we know more than we did when we

started the dissertation.

 Provide an argument/answer on the research questions.

 Locate your findings against relevant literature.

7
Showing that we now know more

Literature Review
Findings
What we know
Discussion
+ What you found
What we don't know (filling the gap) What we now know
(gap) Discuss what you found in
relation to the literature
review you presented
earlier.
Discuss the extent to
which you have filled the
gap

8
2. Reader
expectations

Photo from Microsoft Stock Images 9

The reader has a good understanding of your project
so far…

The literature and

what you think we What you found
Research rationale, What you did to fill
know and don’t from doing the
framing, and context the gap.
know in this area of research project
research

10
Reader expectations of the Discussion

 They want to know what the results/findings mean.

 Expects you to justify that “we” now know more than we
did before. ‘What have you added to the field?’
 They want to know the significance of your study. ‘Why is
this important?’

11
Remember…

Literature Review
Findings
What we know
Discussion
+ What you found
What we don't know (filling the gap) What we now know
(gap) Discuss what you found in
relation to the literature
review you presented
earlier.
Discuss the extent to
which you have filled the
gap

12
3. Examples

Photo from Microsoft Stock Images 13

Example 1, part I: Literature review

Third, there is little evidence about what postsecondary institutions can do to address
these issues or facilitate success for college students with autism. Studies by
Accardo et al. (2018) and Scheef et al. (2019) note that some students find value in
academic accommodations like extended time on tests, but far more studies suggest
these traditional disability accommodations may be inadequate for students with
autism (e.g., Knott & Taylor, 2014; Roux, et al. 2015; Sarrett, 2018; Van Hees et al.,
2015). Students also report wanting, but not adequately receiving, individualised
support for navigating interactions with their peers, instructors, and physical
environments (e.g. Anderson et al., 2017; Bolourian et al. 2018; Sarrett, 2018). When
students describe things that help them succeed, they tend to mention specific
individuals like family members, friends, or faculty/staff (Anderson et al., 2019;
Anderson & Butt, 2017; Cox et al., 2017; LeGary, 2017); references to supportive
institution-level environments, policies, or practices are comparatively infrequent.

From: Cox, B., J. Edelstein, and A. Roy, ‘Navigating Challenges to Facilitate Success for College Students with
Autism’, The Journal of Higher Education, (2020): 1-27. 14
 Example 1, part 2: Findings section
Recognize: autism-related characteristics and institutional norms
“It’s not fair to us autistic people. It’s not designed for us autistic people” – Brian
Although the manifestation of autism was different for each student, most expressed awareness of their
specific autism-related characteristics and the role those characteristics played in shaping their college
experiences. Edmund explained,
My symptoms are still underlying and they’re still there but I learned to work with it… I’m deathly afraid of
heights. I cannot make it into certain buildings… I think I still have problems keeping my focus, it’s still there but I
try to control it. I’m trying to get over the shyness… I do have problems, I do get confused every once in a while
with instructions and where to go on campus and what to do.
Students described first encountering problems in college when their autism-related characteristics
clashed with their institutions’ implicit norms–particularly those related to instructional practices and
professorial support–that neither appeared to consider no proactively accommodate the distinctive
characteristics of students with autism. For example, Brian suggested his struggles with coursework were
due to the mistmatch between how his brain worked and how material was presented in class. Brian said
about students with autism, “We’re linear learners, linear people. We’re literal people.” He called himself
“a linear learner. I mean, I’m autistic. And if it’s not linear I can’t learn it. That’s a problem, that’s a major
problem.” He summarized by saying “It’s not fair to us autistic people. It’s not designed for us autistic
people.”
15
From: B. Cox et al., ‘Navigating Challenges’.
 Example 1, part 3: Discussion section

Improving support services for autistic college students

Our study’s findings highlight the extent to which institutions of higher education have
yet to effectively engage with autistic college students while creating an environment
that places considerable burdens on students to seek out personal adaptations that
will support their college success. As in Sarrett’s (2018) study, the faculty members
described in this study were less than accommodating, often blaming someone else
(e.g., the advisor) or passing off the student to another office (e.g., the Disability
Service Office). Faculty members’ (and, we suspect, administrators’) discomfort in
these situations may relate to concerns about student privacy and the legal
complexities surrounding FERPA and HIPAA laws (Bower & Schwartz, 2010), which
can cause institutions to compartmentalize data and discussions about students with
disabilities’ [sic.] (Rooker, 2004). Yet, failure to engage in these discussions limits the
ability of colleges and universities to adapt to meet these students’ needs and
perpetuates the expectation that the students must instead adapt to the institution.
From: B. Cox et al., ‘Navigating Challenges’. 16
Let’s take a
break from
text-heavy
slides…

Comic by Chibird. From Quickmeme

https://chibird.com/

17
 Example 2: Literature Review vs Discussion section

Literature Review
…far more studies suggest these traditional disability accommodations may be inadequate
for students with autism (e.g., Knott & Taylor, 2014; Roux, et al. 2015; Sarrett, 2018; Van
Hees et al., 2015). Students also report wanting, but not adequately receiving,
individualised support for navigating interactions with their peers, instructors, and physical
environments (e.g. Anderson et al., 2017; Bolourian et al. 2018; Sarrett, 2018).

Discussion Section/Chapter
As in Sarrett’s (2018) study, the faculty members described in this study were less than
accommodating, often blaming someone else (e.g., the advisor) or passing off the student
to another office (e.g., the Disability Service Office).

From: B. Cox et al., ‘Navigating Challenges’.

18
 Example 3: Results vs Discussion sections

Results
Magnitude and Patterns of Self-Censorship
Over the 17-days, 71% of all users censored content at least once, with 51% of users censoring at least one post
and 44% of users censoring at least one comment. The 51% of users who censored posts censored 4.52 posts
on average, while 44% of users who censored comments censored 3.20 comments on average.

Discussion
While 71% of our users did last-minute self-censor at least once, we suspect, in fact, that all users employ last-
minute self-censorship on Facebook at some point. The remaining 29% of users in our sample likely didn’t have a
chance to self-censor over the short duration of the study. Surprisingly, however, we found that relative rates of
self-censorship were quite high: 33% of all potential posts written by our sample users were censored, and 13%
of all comments. These numbers were higher than anticipated and are likely inflated with false positives because
of the imprecise nature of our metric. Nevertheless, our metric should be strongly correlated with self-censorship,
so while the exact numbers we report might be rough, self-censorship on Facebook does seem to be a common
practice. Furthermore, the frequency of self-censorship seems to vary by the nature of the content (e.g., post or a
comment?) and the context surrounding it (e.g., status update or event post?).
From: Sauvik Das and Adam Kramer, ‘Self-Censorship on Facebook’, Proceedings of the Seventh International AAAI
Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 7:1(2021): 120-127. 19
Register your If the QR code
attendance doesn’t work, please
register using the
using the QR paper sheet being
Code passed around.

20
Q&A:
Raise your
hand or add
your questions
via Mentimeter

Or go to Menti.com
Use the voting code: 75 13 43 2
21
Contact Details

Student Learning Development (SLD)

[email protected]

glasgow.ac.uk/SLD
22