In this module we present the main "ingredients" commonly found in research article discussion sections, and their connection to other sections in an article.
Ethics are at the core of any professional practice. Healthcare interpreting requires interpreters to respond to a wide array of difficult situations in an ethical manner. Trainers of Healthcare Interpreters must provide their students with both an understanding of interpreter ethics and practice in applying them. During this 90-minute webinar for interpreter trainers, veteran trainer Cindy Roat shared three different frameworks for introducing and practicing interpreter ethics; frameworks that can be implemented in an hour, a day or a semester. Specific problems in teaching ethical decision-making were discussed. http://www.ncihc.org/trainerswebinars
Tips to write a thesis. Inputs on, for example, developing a research question, quantitative and qualitative methods, theories, results, quotations / references / citations, and conclusion.
Santa maria-ph d-thesis 2009_visual genre conventions and user performance on...luisphd
PhD thesis investigates how the violation of visual web conventions affects user performance.
Tese de doutorado que investiga como a violação de convenções visuais de sites afeta a performance de usuários.
A small amount of bias is part of being a human with past experiences. But have you ever thought about how much of it you are bringing to your research projects? Have you thought about all of the places it is coming from? And have you considered the impact this is having on your research, your findings, your reports and your designs?
In this workshop, we will explore the bias in our research. We will unpick all of the places it sneaks in – from the moment our research projects kick off, into our research sessions through to our final deliverables.
Once we have uncovered all of the places bias can creep into our projects, we will explore ways to reduce its effect.
Ethics are at the core of any professional practice. Healthcare interpreting requires interpreters to respond to a wide array of difficult situations in an ethical manner. Trainers of Healthcare Interpreters must provide their students with both an understanding of interpreter ethics and practice in applying them. During this 90-minute webinar for interpreter trainers, veteran trainer Cindy Roat shared three different frameworks for introducing and practicing interpreter ethics; frameworks that can be implemented in an hour, a day or a semester. Specific problems in teaching ethical decision-making were discussed. http://www.ncihc.org/trainerswebinars
Tips to write a thesis. Inputs on, for example, developing a research question, quantitative and qualitative methods, theories, results, quotations / references / citations, and conclusion.
Santa maria-ph d-thesis 2009_visual genre conventions and user performance on...luisphd
PhD thesis investigates how the violation of visual web conventions affects user performance.
Tese de doutorado que investiga como a violação de convenções visuais de sites afeta a performance de usuários.
A small amount of bias is part of being a human with past experiences. But have you ever thought about how much of it you are bringing to your research projects? Have you thought about all of the places it is coming from? And have you considered the impact this is having on your research, your findings, your reports and your designs?
In this workshop, we will explore the bias in our research. We will unpick all of the places it sneaks in – from the moment our research projects kick off, into our research sessions through to our final deliverables.
Once we have uncovered all of the places bias can creep into our projects, we will explore ways to reduce its effect.
Academic Writing in English - Tips on the publication process (2019)Ron Martinez
In this module, we look at a few important points that can come up during the submission process, such as taking care to avoid plagiarism flags, and what should go into a cover letter. In addition, we also provide a few tips on how to respond to reviewers' critiques.
Academic writing: the 3 Cs and authorial voice - 2019Ron Martinez
A careful look at how to make your introduction flow and read better, including how to make sure you are not hiding behind the voice of other authors when you write.
How to Add Chatter in the odoo 17 ERP ModuleCeline George
In Odoo, the chatter is like a chat tool that helps you work together on records. You can leave notes and track things, making it easier to talk with your team and partners. Inside chatter, all communication history, activity, and changes will be displayed.
Introduction to AI for Nonprofits with Tapp NetworkTechSoup
Dive into the world of AI! Experts Jon Hill and Tareq Monaur will guide you through AI's role in enhancing nonprofit websites and basic marketing strategies, making it easy to understand and apply.
The simplified electron and muon model, Oscillating Spacetime: The Foundation...RitikBhardwaj56
Discover the Simplified Electron and Muon Model: A New Wave-Based Approach to Understanding Particles delves into a groundbreaking theory that presents electrons and muons as rotating soliton waves within oscillating spacetime. Geared towards students, researchers, and science buffs, this book breaks down complex ideas into simple explanations. It covers topics such as electron waves, temporal dynamics, and the implications of this model on particle physics. With clear illustrations and easy-to-follow explanations, readers will gain a new outlook on the universe's fundamental nature.
MATATAG CURRICULUM: ASSESSING THE READINESS OF ELEM. PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS I...NelTorrente
In this research, it concludes that while the readiness of teachers in Caloocan City to implement the MATATAG Curriculum is generally positive, targeted efforts in professional development, resource distribution, support networks, and comprehensive preparation can address the existing gaps and ensure successful curriculum implementation.
Normal Labour/ Stages of Labour/ Mechanism of LabourWasim Ak
Normal labor is also termed spontaneous labor, defined as the natural physiological process through which the fetus, placenta, and membranes are expelled from the uterus through the birth canal at term (37 to 42 weeks
Executive Directors Chat Leveraging AI for Diversity, Equity, and InclusionTechSoup
Let’s explore the intersection of technology and equity in the final session of our DEI series. Discover how AI tools, like ChatGPT, can be used to support and enhance your nonprofit's DEI initiatives. Participants will gain insights into practical AI applications and get tips for leveraging technology to advance their DEI goals.
This slide is special for master students (MIBS & MIFB) in UUM. Also useful for readers who are interested in the topic of contemporary Islamic banking.
How to Build a Module in Odoo 17 Using the Scaffold MethodCeline George
Odoo provides an option for creating a module by using a single line command. By using this command the user can make a whole structure of a module. It is very easy for a beginner to make a module. There is no need to make each file manually. This slide will show how to create a module using the scaffold method.
2. Syllabus outline
• 28/08 - Introduction
• 04/09 - IMRaD, Most common errors,
electronic tools
• 11/09 - Strategic planning for your article:
CARS and other approaches
• 18/09 - Title, Abstract e Introduction
• 25/09 - Writing your Introduction
• 02/10 - Coherence, cohesion and clarity, and
use of authorial voice
• 09/10 - (Introduction due) The Method
section
• 16/10- The (Results and) Discussion section
• 23/10 - (Introduction peer feedback due)
Discussing and Concluding
• 30/10 - Writing (no class)
• 06/11 - (1st draft article due) Students
exchange articles (no class)
• 13/11 - Special guest speaker
• 20/11 - (1st draft peer feedback due)
Plagiarism, the submission process
• 18/12 - Final draft of full article due (send
also to “orientador”, with evaluation form)
• 29/01/2020 - Evaluation form due from
orientador
3. Students send to their orientador by December 18*
*Professors can do self or peer evaluation
4.
5. Today
1. A reminder about your Introductions
2. Reviewing Introduction + Method
3. Discussing your results
14. 2. Method
Men (n=4) were chosen for the experiment. After playing
basketball, each man applied two different deodorants, one
on each armpit. A young woman was recruited to judge
how pleasing the smell of each deodorant was. The female
judge smelled each armpit, each time noting her
impressions. Her final analysis was then given, based on
the notes taken.
15.
16. Questions you (the “reviewers”) raised
• What were the ages of the men?
• Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada axila?
• Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
• The men were wearing different clothes. Does that compromise
ventilation and consequently the odor after the game?
• What was the criterion used to choose the deodorants?
• Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
• Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro desodorante?
• A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi igual para todos os
participantes?
18. 1. What were the ages of the men?
2. Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada
axila?
3. Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
4. The men were wearing different clothes. Does
that affect odor?
5. What was the criterion used to choose the
deodorants?
6. Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
7. Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro
desodorante?
8. A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi
igual para todos os participantes?
DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
RESULT
S
19. 1. What were the ages of the men?
2. Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada
axila?
3. Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
4. The men were wearing different clothes. Does
that affect odor?
5. What was the criterion used to choose the
deodorants?
6. Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
7. Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro
desodorante?
8. A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi
igual para todos os participantes?
DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
RESULT
S
20. 1. What were the ages of the men?
2. Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada
axila?
3. Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
4. The men were wearing different clothes. Does
that affect odor?
5. What was the criterion used to choose the
deodorants?
6. Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
7. Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro
desodorante?
8. A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi
igual para todos os participantes?
DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
RESULT
S
21. 2. Method
Men (n=4, ages 27-39) were chosen for the experiment.
After playing basketball for ten minutes, each man applied
a roll-on and spray deodorant, one on each armpit. A
young woman was recruited to judge how pleasing the
smell of each deodorant was using the same criteria
described in Smellerson (1993). The female judge smelled
each armpit for exactly two seconds, each time noting her
impressions. Her final analysis was then given, based on
23. 2. Method
Men (n=4, ages 27-39) were chosen for the experiment.
After playing basketball for ten minutes, each man applied
a roll-on and spray deodorant, one on each armpit. A
young woman was recruited to judge how pleasing the
smell of each deodorant was using the same criteria
described in Smellerson (1993). The female judge smelled
each armpit for exactly two seconds, each time noting her
impressions. Her final analysis was then given, based on
24. 2. Method
Men (n=4, ages 27-39) were chosen for the experiment.
After playing basketball for ten minutes, each man applied
a roll-on and spray deodorant, one on each armpit. A
young woman was recruited to judge how pleasing the
smell of each deodorant was using the same criteria
described in Smellerson (1993). To control for intensity,
the female judge smelled each armpit for exactly two
seconds, each time noting her impressions. Her final
25. 1. Introduction
There has been an alarming decline in birthrates in the
world (Alarmiston, 2017). One possible cause is a decline in
deodorant use among men (Ridikuleski, 2018). Much has
been published on the effectiveness of deodorants, yet
whether it is better to use a spray or roll-on type is still
unknown. ...
26. 1. What were the ages of the men?
2. Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada
axila?
3. Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
4. The men were wearing different clothes. Does
that affect odor?
5. What was the criterion used to choose the
deodorants?
6. Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
7. Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro
desodorante?
8. A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi
igual para todos os participantes?
DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
RESULT
S
27. 1. What were the ages of the men?
2. Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada
axila?
3. Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
4. The men were wearing different clothes.
Does that affect odor?
5. What was the criterion used to choose the
deodorants?
6. Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
7. Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro
desodorante?
8. A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi
igual para todos os participantes?
DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
RESULT
S
28. 1. What were the ages of the men?
2. Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada
axila?
3. Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
4. The men were wearing different clothes.
Does that affect odor?
5. What was the criterion used to choose the
deodorants?
6. Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
7. Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro
desodorante?
8. A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi
igual para todos os participantes?
DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
RESULT
S
29. 1. What were the ages of the men?
2. Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada
axila?
3. Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
4. The men were wearing different clothes.
Does that affect odor?
5. What was the criterion used to choose the
deodorants?
6. Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
7. Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro
desodorante?
8. A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi
igual para todos os participantes?
DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
RESULT
S
31. 1. What were the ages of the men?
2. Quanto tempo ela permanecia avaliando cada
axila?
3. Qual foi a higiene prévia dos participantes?
4. The men were wearing different clothes.
Does that affect odor?
5. What was the criterion used to choose the
deodorants?
6. Qual o critério utilizado por ela para avaliação?
7. Foi levado em consideração o uso de outro
desodorante?
8. A quantidade e qualidade do exercício físico foi
igual para todos os participantes?
DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
METHOD
RESULT
S
32. Main reasons articles get rejected
Belcher (2007) Bordage (2001) Sullivan (2002) McKercher
(2007)
Wrong journal X ✓ ✓ ✓
Faulty method ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Lack of transparency X ✓ ✓ ✓
Problems with statistics X ✓ ✓ ✓
Poor discussion ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Improper formatting X ✓ X ✓
Writing difficult to follow ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Literature review ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Nothing new ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Contribution not clear ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Poor English X X X X
35. Why was it rejected?
"The manuscript is interesting and it brings original ideas. However
a major revision is necessary. The methods should be described
comprehensively and not confused as it is. Details such as use of water
or not to process the mixtures are not mentioned and this is
an important point in this kind of product compositions, mainly due to
lime and phase formation; there are not characteristics of the individual
components as the authors mentioned that the materials were
characterized; the results should justify the interpretations and
conclusions, however they are just pointed out and not discussed at all.
Figures II, III and IV should be standardized (scale). Sometimes one of
the components is namely referring to paper sludge, sometimes it is
namely ETE's sludge waste, and so on. Language should be also
reviewed. Since the manuscript is concerning
to technological development it could present sample image (example:
fracture surface image). Finally, a good, very good revision in the
manuscript is necessary."
36. Why was it rejected?
"The manuscript is interesting and it brings original ideas. However
a major revision is necessary. The methods should be described
comprehensively and not confused as it is. Details such as use of water
or not to process the mixtures are not mentioned and this is
an important point in this kind of product compositions, mainly due to
lime and phase formation; there are not characteristics of the individual
components as the authors mentioned that the materials were
characterized; the results should justify the interpretations and
conclusions, however they are just pointed out and not discussed at all.
Figures II, III and IV should be standardized (scale). Sometimes one of
the components is namely referring to paper sludge, sometimes it is
namely ETE's sludge waste, and so on. Language should be also
reviewed. Since the manuscript is concerning
to technological development it could present sample image (example:
fracture surface image). Finally, a good, very good revision in the
manuscript is necessary."
37. Why was it rejected?
"The manuscript is interesting and it brings original ideas. However
a major revision is necessary. The methods should be described
comprehensively and not confused as it is. Details such as use of water
or not to process the mixtures are not mentioned and this is
an important point in this kind of product compositions, mainly due to
lime and phase formation; there are not characteristics of the individual
components as the authors mentioned that the materials were
characterized; the results should justify the interpretations and
conclusions, however they are just pointed out and not discussed at all.
Figures II, III and IV should be standardized (scale). Sometimes one of
the components is namely referring to paper sludge, sometimes it is
namely ETE's sludge waste, and so on. Language should be also
reviewed. Since the manuscript is concerning
to technological development it could present sample image (example:
fracture surface image). Finally, a good, very good revision in the
manuscript is necessary."
38. Why was it rejected?
"The manuscript is interesting and it brings original ideas. However
a major revision is necessary. The methods should be described
comprehensively and not confused as it is. Details such as use of water
or not to process the mixtures are not mentioned and this is
an important point in this kind of product compositions, mainly due to
lime and phase formation; there are not characteristics of the individual
components as the authors mentioned that the materials were
characterized; the results should justify the interpretations and
conclusions, however they are just pointed out and not discussed at all.
Figures II, III and IV should be standardized (scale). Sometimes one of
the components is namely referring to paper sludge, sometimes it is
namely ETE's sludge waste, and so on. Language should be also
reviewed. Since the manuscript is concerning
to technological development it could present sample image (example:
fracture surface image). Finally, a good, very good revision in the
manuscript is necessary."
39. Why was it rejected?
"The manuscript is interesting and it brings original ideas. However
a major revision is necessary. The methods should be described
comprehensively and not confused as it is. Details such as use of water
or not to process the mixtures are not mentioned and this is
an important point in this kind of product compositions, mainly due to
lime and phase formation; there are not characteristics of the individual
components as the authors mentioned that the materials were
characterized; the results should justify the interpretations and
conclusions, however they are just pointed out and not discussed at all.
Figures II, III and IV should be standardized (scale). Sometimes one of
the components is namely referring to paper sludge, sometimes it is
namely ETE's sludge waste, and so on. Language should be also
reviewed. Since the manuscript is concerning
to technological development it could present sample image (example:
fracture surface image). Finally, a good, very good revision in the
manuscript is necessary."
43. What do you think?
1. Why is the Discussion section so challenging?
2. What should the Discussion section “do”? What
are the most common “ingredients”?
48. Discussion : 6 common elements
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
49. Discussion : 6 common elements
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
50. Discussion : 6 common elements
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
51. Discussion : 6 common elements
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
52. Discussion : 6 common elements
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
Expand, explain,
extrapolate
53. Discussion : 6 common elements
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
Expand, explain,
extrapolate
Talk about applications
and practical implications
54. Discussion : 6 common elements
!
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
Expand, explain,
extrapolate
Talk about applications
and practical implications
55. Discussion : 6 common elements
!
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
Expand, explain,
extrapolate
Talk about applications
and practical implications
Talk about limitations
56. Discussion : 6 common elements
!
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
Expand, explain,
extrapolate
Talk about applications
and practical implications
Talk about limitations
57. Discussion : 6 common elements
!
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
Expand, explain,
extrapolate
Talk about applications
and practical implications
Talk about limitations
Talk about how the study
advances the area;
what is still needed
66. Discussion : 6 common elements
!
Revisit points raised
(Intro./Results)
Compare with other
studies
Expand, explain,
extrapolate
Talk about applications
and practical implications
Talk about limitations
Talk about how the study
advances the area;
what is still needed
119. When you write your Discussion think about
1. How do your findings connect back to issues raised in the
Introduction?
2. How do your research and results compare to those of other
studies that were published previously?
3. Which findings are particularly strong/relevant?
4. What are some possible applications/implications of your
data/results?
5. What are some of the limitations of your study? (Reflect critically
on your Method.)
6. What is the main contribution of your research? How does it help
your field of study advance?
7. What directions for further research are advanced by your study?
121. Homework
• Download and read the article on our class webpage.
What elements discussed in today’s class are present?
Which are missing? (Respond on Formative.)
• Remember to complete feedback on Peer Grade.
• Write about your feedback experience on Formative.
• If time: Try outlining the rest of your article.