When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

  • PLOS Biology
  • PLOS Climate
  • PLOS Complex Systems
  • PLOS Computational Biology
  • PLOS Digital Health
  • PLOS Genetics
  • PLOS Global Public Health
  • PLOS Medicine
  • PLOS Mental Health
  • PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
  • PLOS Pathogens
  • PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
  • PLOS Collections
  • How to Write Discussions and Conclusions

How to Write Discussions and Conclusions

The discussion section contains the results and outcomes of a study. An effective discussion informs readers what can be learned from your experiment and provides context for the results.

What makes an effective discussion?

When you’re ready to write your discussion, you’ve already introduced the purpose of your study and provided an in-depth description of the methodology. The discussion informs readers about the larger implications of your study based on the results. Highlighting these implications while not overstating the findings can be challenging, especially when you’re submitting to a journal that selects articles based on novelty or potential impact. Regardless of what journal you are submitting to, the discussion section always serves the same purpose: concluding what your study results actually mean.

A successful discussion section puts your findings in context. It should include:

  • the results of your research,
  • a discussion of related research, and
  • a comparison between your results and initial hypothesis.

Tip: Not all journals share the same naming conventions.

You can apply the advice in this article to the conclusion, results or discussion sections of your manuscript.

Our Early Career Researcher community tells us that the conclusion is often considered the most difficult aspect of a manuscript to write. To help, this guide provides questions to ask yourself, a basic structure to model your discussion off of and examples from published manuscripts. 

paper discussion you tube

Questions to ask yourself:

  • Was my hypothesis correct?
  • If my hypothesis is partially correct or entirely different, what can be learned from the results? 
  • How do the conclusions reshape or add onto the existing knowledge in the field? What does previous research say about the topic? 
  • Why are the results important or relevant to your audience? Do they add further evidence to a scientific consensus or disprove prior studies? 
  • How can future research build on these observations? What are the key experiments that must be done? 
  • What is the “take-home” message you want your reader to leave with?

How to structure a discussion

Trying to fit a complete discussion into a single paragraph can add unnecessary stress to the writing process. If possible, you’ll want to give yourself two or three paragraphs to give the reader a comprehensive understanding of your study as a whole. Here’s one way to structure an effective discussion:

paper discussion you tube

Writing Tips

While the above sections can help you brainstorm and structure your discussion, there are many common mistakes that writers revert to when having difficulties with their paper. Writing a discussion can be a delicate balance between summarizing your results, providing proper context for your research and avoiding introducing new information. Remember that your paper should be both confident and honest about the results! 

What to do

  • Read the journal’s guidelines on the discussion and conclusion sections. If possible, learn about the guidelines before writing the discussion to ensure you’re writing to meet their expectations. 
  • Begin with a clear statement of the principal findings. This will reinforce the main take-away for the reader and set up the rest of the discussion. 
  • Explain why the outcomes of your study are important to the reader. Discuss the implications of your findings realistically based on previous literature, highlighting both the strengths and limitations of the research. 
  • State whether the results prove or disprove your hypothesis. If your hypothesis was disproved, what might be the reasons? 
  • Introduce new or expanded ways to think about the research question. Indicate what next steps can be taken to further pursue any unresolved questions. 
  • If dealing with a contemporary or ongoing problem, such as climate change, discuss possible consequences if the problem is avoided. 
  • Be concise. Adding unnecessary detail can distract from the main findings. 

What not to do

Don’t

  • Rewrite your abstract. Statements with “we investigated” or “we studied” generally do not belong in the discussion. 
  • Include new arguments or evidence not previously discussed. Necessary information and evidence should be introduced in the main body of the paper. 
  • Apologize. Even if your research contains significant limitations, don’t undermine your authority by including statements that doubt your methodology or execution. 
  • Shy away from speaking on limitations or negative results. Including limitations and negative results will give readers a complete understanding of the presented research. Potential limitations include sources of potential bias, threats to internal or external validity, barriers to implementing an intervention and other issues inherent to the study design. 
  • Overstate the importance of your findings. Making grand statements about how a study will fully resolve large questions can lead readers to doubt the success of the research. 

Snippets of Effective Discussions:

Consumer-based actions to reduce plastic pollution in rivers: A multi-criteria decision analysis approach

Identifying reliable indicators of fitness in polar bears

  • How to Write a Great Title
  • How to Write an Abstract
  • How to Write Your Methods
  • How to Report Statistics
  • How to Edit Your Work

The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…

Book cover

How to Practice Academic Medicine and Publish from Developing Countries? pp 225–230 Cite as

How to Write the Discussion?

  • Samiran Nundy 4 ,
  • Atul Kakar 5 &
  • Zulfiqar A. Bhutta 6  
  • Open Access
  • First Online: 24 October 2021

29k Accesses

1 Citations

Many authors, and editors, think this is the most difficult part of a paper to write well and have described it variously to be the ‘narrating the story of your research’, ‘the movie or the main scientific script’ and the ‘proof of the pudding’. The idea of a discussion is to communicate to the readers the importance of your observations and the results of all your hard work. In this section, you are expected to infer their meaning and explain the importance of your results and finally provide specific suggestions for future research [1, 2]. The discussion places the outcome into a larger context and mentions the implications of the inferences for theoretical and practical purposes [3].

That then is the first draft and you should never think of having fewer than six drafts Stephen Lock, BMJ editor in chief (1929–…)

Download chapter PDF

1 What Is the Importance of the Discussion?

Many authors, and editors, think this is the most difficult part of a paper to write well and have described it variously to be the ‘narrating the story of your research’, ‘the movie or the main scientific script’ and the ‘proof of the pudding’. The idea of a discussion is to communicate to the readers the importance of your observations and the results of all your hard work. In this section, you are expected to infer their meaning and explain the importance of your results and finally provide specific suggestions for future research [ 1 , 2 ]. The discussion places the outcome into a larger context and mentions the implications of the inferences for theoretical and practical purposes [ 3 ].

figure a

2 How Should I Structure the Discussion Section?

There are three major portions for the discussion of a manuscript.

The first paragraph should baldly state the key findings of your research. Use the same key concept you gave in the introduction. It is generally not necessary to repeat the citations which have already been used in the Introduction. According to the ‘serial position effect’, themes mentioned at the beginning and end of a paragraph are more likely to be remembered than those in the middle [ 1 ]. However, one should remember that the discussion should not look like a second introduction, and all the ancillary information which has been previously cited should not be repeated [ 4 ].

For example, in a paper on the ‘Role of sulfasalazine in the Chikungunya arthritis outbreak of 2016’, the review may start with, ‘Our key findings suggest that chikungunya arthralgia is a self-limiting disorder. Persistent arthritis was recorded in only 10% of the affected population and in those who received sulfasalazine, clinical improvement both in tender and swollen joints, was recorded in 95% of the subjects’.

The middle portion should consist of the body of the discussion. This section interprets the important results, discusses their implications and explains how your data is similar to or different from those that have been published previously.

Discuss in fair detail studies supporting your findings and group them together, against those offering a different perspective (e.g., Western experience, smaller numbers, non-randomized studies, etc.). An explanation should be offered on how your work is similar to others or how it is different from the others. This should be followed by a review of the core research papers. The results should now be divided thematically and analyzed. The discussion should also contain why the study is new, why it is true, and why it is important for future clinical practice [ 4 , 5 , 6 ].

For the above research mention the clinical features, patterns of joint involvement, how long arthritis persisted, and any role of disease-modifying agents. Have any other researchers found different findings under the same circumstances.

The final paragraph should include a ‘take home message’ (about one or two) and point to future directions for investigation that have resulted from this study.

The discussion can be concluded in two ways:

By again mentioning the response to the research question [ 5 , 7 ]

By indicating the significance of the study [ 2 , 4 ]

You can use both methods to end this section. Most importantly you should remember that the last paragraph of the discussion should be ‘strong, clear, and crisp’ and focus on the main research question addressed in the manuscript. This should be strengthened by the data which clearly states whether or not your findings support your initial hypothesis [ 1 , 5 , 8 , 9 , 10 ].

3 What Are the General Considerations for Writing a Discussion? [ 3 , 10 , 11 ]

Start the discussion with the ‘specific’ problems and move to the ‘general’ implications (Fig. 21.1 ).

The discussion should not look like a mass of unrelated information. Rather, it should be easy to understand and compare data from different studies.

Include only recent publications on the topic, preferably from the last 10 years.

Make certain that all the sources of information are cited and correctly referenced.

Check to make sure that you have not plagiarized by using words quoted directly from a source.

The written text written should be easily understood, crisp, and brief. Long descriptive and informal language should be avoided.

The sentences should flow smoothly and logically.

You need not refer to all the available literature in the field, discuss only the most relevant papers.

figure 1

How a discussion should look. First arrow—Mention your key results/findings; Second arrow—Discuss your results with their explanations\step by step; Third Arrow—Enumerate your studies limitations and strengths; Last arrow—Suggest future directions for investigation

4 Discussion Is Not a War of Words

figure b

5 How Long Should the Discussion in the Manuscript Be?

Most journals do not mention any limits for discussion as long as it is brief and relevant (Fig. 21.2 ). As a rule, ‘The length of the discussion section should not exceed the sum of other parts-introduction, materials and methods, and results’. [ 3 ] In any good article, the discussion section is 3–4 pages, 6–7 paragraphs, or approximately 10 paragraphs, and 1000–1500 words [ 1 , 5 , 8 , 12 ].

figure 2

Discussion pyramid

6 What Should Be Written in the Conclusion Section?

The conclusion is the last paragraph and has the carry-home message for the reader. It is the powerful and meaningful end piece of the script. It states what change has the paper made to science and it also contains recommendations for future studies.

7 Conclusions

Discussion is not a stand-alone section, it intertwines the objectives of the study with how and what was achieved.

The major results are described and compared with other studies.

The author’s own work is critically analysed in comparison with that of others.

The limitations and strengths of the study are highlighted.

Masic I. How to write an efficient discussion? Mediev Archaeol. 2018;72(4):306–7.

Google Scholar  

Bagga A. Discussion: the heart of the paper. Indian Pediatr. 2016;53(10):901–4.

Article   Google Scholar  

Ghasemi A, Bahadoran Z, Mirmiran P, Hosseinpanah F, Shiva N, Zadeh-Vakili A. The principles of biomedical scientific writing: discussion. Int J Endocrinol Metab. 2019;17:e95415.

Zeiger M. Essentials of writing biomedical research papers. Canadian J Stud Discourse Writing. 2000;11:33–6.

Bavdekar SB. Writing the discussion section: describing the significance of the study findings. J Assoc Physicians India. 2015;63:40–2.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Foote M. The proof of the pudding: how to report results and write a good discussion. Chest. 2009;135(3):866–8.

Alexandrov AV. How to write a research paper? Cerebrovasc Dis. 2004;18(2):135–8.

Annesley TM. The discussion section: your closing argument. Clin Chem. 2010;56(11):1671–4.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ng KH, Peh WC. Writing the discussion. Singap Med J. 2009;50:458–60.

CAS   Google Scholar  

Coverdale JH, Roberts LW, Balon R, Beresin EV. Writing for academia: Getting your research into print: AMEE guide No. 74. Med Teach. 2013;35:e926–34.

Araujo CG. Detailing the writing of scientific manuscripts: 25–30 paragraphs. Arq Bras Cardiol. 2014;102(2):e21–3.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kearney MH. The discussion section tells us where we are. Res Nurs Health. 2017;40(4):289–91.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Surgical Gastroenterology and Liver Transplantation, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India

Samiran Nundy

Department of Internal Medicine, Sir Ganga Ram Hospital, New Delhi, India

Institute for Global Health and Development, The Aga Khan University, South Central Asia, East Africa and United Kingdom, Karachi, Pakistan

Zulfiqar A. Bhutta

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Nundy, S., Kakar, A., Bhutta, Z.A. (2022). How to Write the Discussion?. In: How to Practice Academic Medicine and Publish from Developing Countries?. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5248-6_21

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-5248-6_21

Published : 24 October 2021

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-16-5247-9

Online ISBN : 978-981-16-5248-6

eBook Packages : Medicine Medicine (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • Publish with us

Policies and ethics

  • Find a journal
  • Track your research

A Brilliant Mind

Writing and productivity boost for scientists

How to structure the discussion of your scientific paper

paper discussion you tube

The discussion of a scientific paper is the resolution of its story: Everything comes together to shed light on the question that motivated the research. A well-written discussion leaves the reader inspired and satisfied—a noble goal and a difficult one to achieve. If you are struggling to write the discussion of your scientific article, know that you are not alone. Writing an interesting discussion is a craft that few people master. In this post, I tell you what you need to know to make this craft your own. 

Before diving into your discussion, you may want to learn about the other sections of a scientific paper. Don’t hesitate to check my Ultimate Guide to Scientific Writing as well as these other posts on the introduction , the materials and methods , and the result section.

The structure of the discussion

The discussion of a scientific article follows a triangular shape. It begins narrowly with a reminder of the niche and a summary of the main findings. The discussion then broadens with the interpretation of the results and a description of their implications, problems, and limitations of the research. Finally, it usually closes with a conclusion highlighting the take-home message. In the following paragraphs, I elaborate on each of these parts.  

paper discussion you tube

1.    Goal(s) and summary of the main results

Begin your discussion by reminding the reader of the goals of your research and its main findings. Restating the research goals, i.e., the problem it aimed to solve, may seem redundant; after all, you have already described it at length in the introduction . Still, you should begin your discussion with this recap.

Not everyone reads your article from cover to cover. Many readers go straight to the discussion to get the gist of the paper. Your job is to make it easy for them. Besides, even readers who have been with you from the first few sentences of the introduction will appreciate a reminder of the reasons that motivated your research. They’re just coming out of the methods and results sections, and their brains are fogged with details. You need to help them zoom out and see the big picture again. 

Once you have reiterated the goals, you should describe your key findings and explain how they deliver on the promises made in the introduction .

paper discussion you tube

Here’s what the first paragraph of the discussion of an article testing a new treatment for dragon pox* might look like (that’s the same imaginary study I used to illustrate my previous posts ).

“Dragonpox, the most common disease in children, is usually treated with Aclocyvir. Unfortunately, this drug has significant side effects that lead one-third of patients to interrupt treatment before completion. The research presented in the current article examined the efficacy of a treatment combining Aclocyvir with adeninoside. We compared two groups of patients suffering from dragon pox: one group treated with aclocyvir alone and one treated with aclocyvir combined with adeninoside. We found that patients who received adeninoside reported less nausea, loss of appetite, and diarrhea and were 23 percent more likely to continue treatment to term. As a result, these patients also recovered faster and had fewer complications than the control group who did not receive adeninoside.”

* Dragon Pox is an imaginary disease that affects wizards and witches, like chickenpox (see the Harry Potter series). The symptoms are green and purple rashes and sparks coming out of the nostrils when the patient sneezes.

2. Interpretation of the results

Now that you have summarized your research, you should explain why these results are important and how they fit into the existing literature. By explicitly connecting your results to other important findings, theories, and problems, you help the reader understand the implications of your work.

paper discussion you tube

To achieve this concretely, you can address one or more of the following questions:

  • How does your research contribute to solving a current problem? 
  • How does your research advance an important theory?
  • Does your research clarify an important concept or phenomenon? If so, what did you learn about this concept or phenomenon? Why does it matter?
  • Did you discover the mechanism of an important phenomenon? How does this mechanism work?
  • Did you identify the moderator(s) of an important phenomenon? What are these moderators? Why are they relevant?
  • Does your research say something about the world, society, nature, human beings…? 
  • Does it ask an important new question? What is this question? How can it be answered in the future?
  • Have you replicated a well-known phenomenon? Why is this replication important?
  • Have you failed to replicate a well-known phenomenon? Why do you think this happened? What implications can you draw from this? 

3. Problem resolution

Anyone who has ever done empirical research knows that perfect data only appears once in a blue moon. In real life, scientific studies can go wrong in many different ways. Such as:

  • Your methods didn’t work as expected . For example, the questionnaire that you used to measure patients’ appetite doesn’t show good internal reliability in our sample (internal reliability is a statistical value calculated to test the validity of a questionnaire).
  • Your results contradict your assumptions, previous findings, or theoretical predictions . For example, you expected that patients treated with adeninoside would have less fever than the control group, but your results do not show any significant difference.
  • You realize that there is more than one way to interpret your data . For example, you didn’t give your control group a placebo. Thus, one could argue that patients treated with adeninoside showed an improvement, not because of the drug itself, but because they received two pills (adeninoside + acyclovir) instead of one (acyclovir).

Science is not exempt from life’s messiness! When problems arise during your study – or if a reviewer draws attention to them – you should discuss them.

If the problem is major, such as a serious methodological flaw, you may want to reconsider publishing the data. What is the value of sharing data of questionable validity with the world?

If the problem is minor or raises an interesting discussion, then go ahead: Discuss it! Explain where the problem lies. Don’t sweep it under the rug, but don’t roll in self-depreciation either. Explain why you chose the methodology that you used, provide potential explanations for the problems you encountered, and suggest ways to resolve this issue in the future. Here is an example of how you can do that:

“To measure appetite, we relied on one of the most frequently used scales: the Appetite Inventory (AI). This scale has the advantage of being easy to administer. Besides, previous studies have shown that the Appetite Inventory has good internal validity. However, we did not replicate this result in our sample and found low internal validity. This discrepancy could be due to the fact that our participants were younger than those with whom the scale was originally validated. Since appetite changes with age, especially at puberty, the Appetite Inventory may not be appropriate for school-aged children. Therefore, for the time being, we have decided not to include this scale in our analyses. The development of tailored scales for children would make it possible to study in future studies how the treatment of dragon pox influences their appetite”.

paper discussion you tube

4. Limitations

There are limitations to any research. Limitations are different from problems in the sense that you can anticipate them. Generally, limitations are due to poor representation of the target population (for example, the sample was too small or not diverse enough) or constraints in the practical application of the methods used (for example, the body temperature of different patients was assessed at different times of the day).

Acknowledging your limitations does not mean that you admit having done something wrong. A phenomenon should only be believed once it has been demonstrated using various methods and contexts and once it has been replicated by different research teams. Limitations are inevitable, and discussing them can help put the findings into perspective and emulate new research.

That said, there are some things to keep in mind when addressing the limitations of your research:

  • Be specific and particular. Many scientists acknowledge limitations that are not specific to their study but apply to the entire research field. Let’s take our example of the new treatment for dragon pox and imagine that all your patients were recruited from one hospital. This fact limits the conclusions we can draw for the general population. But while it is true that our study should be replicated in other hospitals, such a limitation need not be mentioned in a scientific article. The scientists who read our work are already aware of such weaknesses.  
  • Keep your section on limitations short. We are so used to being critical of ourselves that we could go on and on about what could have been better in our study. But the truth is that we often don’t really know if another setting would have improved our results. We can only know it if we test it. The discussion is not the place to fantasize about the supposedly perfect experiment you would conduct if you had the opportunity to do it again. The discussion is where you can focus on what you can learn from your research and perhaps mention a few relevant limitations.

5. Conclusion

It is possible to end your article with a conclusion. Some journals expect it, but not all of them. The conclusion is the final hammer to drive your story’s nail into the readers’ minds, a few sentences to remind them of your most important conclusions and their implications. The conclusion is the take-home message.

paper discussion you tube

A few extra tips for writing a great discussion

1. be particular and specific.

This advice is true not only for the limitations but also for the whole discussion. Many authors are far too general in their discussions. They point out vague and generic implications that would apply to dozens of other articles (for example, “This article sheds light on the treatment of dragon pox”). It is much more interesting for the reader to know precisely what the research is about and what can be learned from it.

2. Write your discussion around your results

Some discussions include paragraphs of background information that are not connected to the article’s findings. The discussion is not the place to reiterate the introduction. It should be focused on the discussion of the research results.

3. Emphasize the strengths of your research and its importance

You have done this research for a reason, you wanted to learn about something. Make clear what can be learned from your results.

4. If you are aware of problems in your research, don’t hide them

The reviewers and many of your readers are experts in the field. They won’t be fooled easily, and if you don’t address obvious problems, they will blame you for it.

By taking the lead and confronting these problems, you show honesty and can justify the decisions you have made and the relevance of your results.

That’s it for the discussion! I hope you enjoyed this post. Good luck writing your discussion!

All the best from Austria!

Cover image by Background photo created by freepik – www.freepik.com “>Fre Background photo created by freepik – www.freepik.com ” target=”_blank” rel=”noreferrer noopener”>e Background photo created by freepik – www.freepik.com “>pik ; dragon image by  JL G  from  Pixabay ; results image by  Gerd Altmann  from  Pixabay ; question-solution image by  mohamed Hassan  from  Pixabay ; tips image by  wiredsmartio  from  Pixabay  

You May Also Like

A scientific writing tracker to reach your goals, where does your writer’s block come from, using ‘s, of, and zero possessive: a guide for scientific writers.

Pingback: How to write the introduction of your scientific paper

FREE RESOURCES

_____________

Your Scientific Writing & Productivity Toolbox

Sign up for my newsletter, improve your writing and boost your productivity! Our toolbox is designed to empower you with a range of free tools and resources: checklists, guides, comprehensive workbooks and more.

SIGN UP AND GET YOUR DOWNLOADS

FREE RESOURCES Scientific Writing & Productivity Toolbox

Sign up for my newsletter and get free resources to improve your writing and boost your productivity.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

  • Knowledge Base
  • Research paper
  • How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples

How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples

Published on August 21, 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on July 18, 2023.

Discussion section flow chart

The discussion section is where you delve into the meaning, importance, and relevance of your results .

It should focus on explaining and evaluating what you found, showing how it relates to your literature review and paper or dissertation topic , and making an argument in support of your overall conclusion. It should not be a second results section.

There are different ways to write this section, but you can focus your writing around these key elements:

  • Summary : A brief recap of your key results
  • Interpretations: What do your results mean?
  • Implications: Why do your results matter?
  • Limitations: What can’t your results tell us?
  • Recommendations: Avenues for further studies or analyses

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

upload-your-document-ai-proofreader

Table of contents

What not to include in your discussion section, step 1: summarize your key findings, step 2: give your interpretations, step 3: discuss the implications, step 4: acknowledge the limitations, step 5: share your recommendations, discussion section example, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about discussion sections.

There are a few common mistakes to avoid when writing the discussion section of your paper.

  • Don’t introduce new results: You should only discuss the data that you have already reported in your results section .
  • Don’t make inflated claims: Avoid overinterpretation and speculation that isn’t directly supported by your data.
  • Don’t undermine your research: The discussion of limitations should aim to strengthen your credibility, not emphasize weaknesses or failures.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

  • Academic style
  • Vague sentences
  • Style consistency

See an example

paper discussion you tube

Start this section by reiterating your research problem and concisely summarizing your major findings. To speed up the process you can use a summarizer to quickly get an overview of all important findings. Don’t just repeat all the data you have already reported—aim for a clear statement of the overall result that directly answers your main research question . This should be no more than one paragraph.

Many students struggle with the differences between a discussion section and a results section . The crux of the matter is that your results sections should present your results, and your discussion section should subjectively evaluate them. Try not to blend elements of these two sections, in order to keep your paper sharp.

  • The results indicate that…
  • The study demonstrates a correlation between…
  • This analysis supports the theory that…
  • The data suggest that…

The meaning of your results may seem obvious to you, but it’s important to spell out their significance for your reader, showing exactly how they answer your research question.

The form of your interpretations will depend on the type of research, but some typical approaches to interpreting the data include:

  • Identifying correlations , patterns, and relationships among the data
  • Discussing whether the results met your expectations or supported your hypotheses
  • Contextualizing your findings within previous research and theory
  • Explaining unexpected results and evaluating their significance
  • Considering possible alternative explanations and making an argument for your position

You can organize your discussion around key themes, hypotheses, or research questions, following the same structure as your results section. Alternatively, you can also begin by highlighting the most significant or unexpected results.

  • In line with the hypothesis…
  • Contrary to the hypothesized association…
  • The results contradict the claims of Smith (2022) that…
  • The results might suggest that x . However, based on the findings of similar studies, a more plausible explanation is y .

As well as giving your own interpretations, make sure to relate your results back to the scholarly work that you surveyed in the literature review . The discussion should show how your findings fit with existing knowledge, what new insights they contribute, and what consequences they have for theory or practice.

Ask yourself these questions:

  • Do your results support or challenge existing theories? If they support existing theories, what new information do they contribute? If they challenge existing theories, why do you think that is?
  • Are there any practical implications?

Your overall aim is to show the reader exactly what your research has contributed, and why they should care.

  • These results build on existing evidence of…
  • The results do not fit with the theory that…
  • The experiment provides a new insight into the relationship between…
  • These results should be taken into account when considering how to…
  • The data contribute a clearer understanding of…
  • While previous research has focused on  x , these results demonstrate that y .

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing - try for free!

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

paper discussion you tube

Try for free

Even the best research has its limitations. Acknowledging these is important to demonstrate your credibility. Limitations aren’t about listing your errors, but about providing an accurate picture of what can and cannot be concluded from your study.

Limitations might be due to your overall research design, specific methodological choices , or unanticipated obstacles that emerged during your research process.

Here are a few common possibilities:

  • If your sample size was small or limited to a specific group of people, explain how generalizability is limited.
  • If you encountered problems when gathering or analyzing data, explain how these influenced the results.
  • If there are potential confounding variables that you were unable to control, acknowledge the effect these may have had.

After noting the limitations, you can reiterate why the results are nonetheless valid for the purpose of answering your research question.

  • The generalizability of the results is limited by…
  • The reliability of these data is impacted by…
  • Due to the lack of data on x , the results cannot confirm…
  • The methodological choices were constrained by…
  • It is beyond the scope of this study to…

Based on the discussion of your results, you can make recommendations for practical implementation or further research. Sometimes, the recommendations are saved for the conclusion .

Suggestions for further research can lead directly from the limitations. Don’t just state that more studies should be done—give concrete ideas for how future work can build on areas that your own research was unable to address.

  • Further research is needed to establish…
  • Future studies should take into account…
  • Avenues for future research include…

Discussion section example

If you want to know more about AI for academic writing, AI tools, or research bias, make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

Research bias

  • Anchoring bias
  • Halo effect
  • The Baader–Meinhof phenomenon
  • The placebo effect
  • Nonresponse bias
  • Deep learning
  • Generative AI
  • Machine learning
  • Reinforcement learning
  • Supervised vs. unsupervised learning

 (AI) Tools

  • Grammar Checker
  • Paraphrasing Tool
  • Text Summarizer
  • AI Detector
  • Plagiarism Checker
  • Citation Generator

In the discussion , you explore the meaning and relevance of your research results , explaining how they fit with existing research and theory. Discuss:

  • Your  interpretations : what do the results tell us?
  • The  implications : why do the results matter?
  • The  limitation s : what can’t the results tell us?

The results chapter or section simply and objectively reports what you found, without speculating on why you found these results. The discussion interprets the meaning of the results, puts them in context, and explains why they matter.

In qualitative research , results and discussion are sometimes combined. But in quantitative research , it’s considered important to separate the objective results from your interpretation of them.

In a thesis or dissertation, the discussion is an in-depth exploration of the results, going into detail about the meaning of your findings and citing relevant sources to put them in context.

The conclusion is more shorter and more general: it concisely answers your main research question and makes recommendations based on your overall findings.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, July 18). How to Write a Discussion Section | Tips & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved February 19, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/discussion/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a results section | tips & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Turk J Urol
  • v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write a discussion section?

Writing manuscripts to describe study outcomes, although not easy, is the main task of an academician. The aim of the present review is to outline the main aspects of writing the discussion section of a manuscript. Additionally, we address various issues regarding manuscripts in general. It is advisable to work on a manuscript regularly to avoid losing familiarity with the article. On principle, simple, clear and effective language should be used throughout the text. In addition, a pre-peer review process is recommended to obtain feedback on the manuscript. The discussion section can be written in 3 parts: an introductory paragraph, intermediate paragraphs and a conclusion paragraph. For intermediate paragraphs, a “divide and conquer” approach, meaning a full paragraph describing each of the study endpoints, can be used. In conclusion, academic writing is similar to other skills, and practice makes perfect.

Introduction

Sharing knowledge produced during academic life is achieved through writing manuscripts. However writing manuscripts is a challenging endeavour in that we physicians have a heavy workload, and English which is common language used for the dissemination of scientific knowledge is not our mother tongue.

The objective of this review is to summarize the method of writing ‘Discussion’ section which is the most important, but probably at the same time the most unlikable part of a manuscript, and demonstrate the easy ways we applied in our practice, and finally share the frequently made relevant mistakes. During this procedure, inevitably some issues which concerns general concept of manuscript writing process are dealt with. Therefore in this review we will deal with topics related to the general aspects of manuscript writing process, and specifically issues concerning only the ‘Discussion’ section.

A) Approaches to general aspects of manuscript writing process:

1. what should be the strategy of sparing time for manuscript writing be.

Two different approaches can be formulated on this issue? One of them is to allocate at least 30 minutes a day for writing a manuscript which amounts to 3.5 hours a week. This period of time is adequate for completion of a manuscript within a few weeks which can be generally considered as a long time interval. Fundamental advantage of this approach is to gain a habit of making academic researches if one complies with the designated time schedule, and to keep the manuscript writing motivation at persistently high levels. Another approach concerning this issue is to accomplish manuscript writing process within a week. With the latter approach, the target is rapidly attained. However longer time periods spent in order to concentrate on the subject matter can be boring, and lead to loss of motivation. Daily working requirements unrelated to the manuscript writing might intervene, and prolong manuscript writing process. Alienation periods can cause loss of time because of need for recurrent literature reviews. The most optimal approach to manuscript writing process is daily writing strategy where higher levels of motivation are persistently maintained.

Especially before writing the manuscript, the most important step at the start is to construct a draft, and completion of the manuscript on a theoretical basis. Therefore, during construction of a draft, attention distracting environment should be avoided, and this step should be completed within 1–2 hours. On the other hand, manuscript writing process should begin before the completion of the study (even the during project stage). The justification of this approach is to see the missing aspects of the study and the manuscript writing methodology, and try to solve the relevant problems before completion of the study. Generally, after completion of the study, it is very difficult to solve the problems which might be discerned during the writing process. Herein, at least drafts of the ‘Introduction’, and ‘Material and Methods’ can be written, and even tables containing numerical data can be constructed. These tables can be written down in the ‘Results’ section. [ 1 ]

2. How should the manuscript be written?

The most important principle to be remembered on this issue is to obey the criteria of simplicity, clarity, and effectiveness. [ 2 ] Herein, do not forget that, the objective should be to share our findings with the readers in an easily comprehensible format. Our approach on this subject is to write all structured parts of the manuscript at the same time, and start writing the manuscript while reading the first literature. Thus newly arisen connotations, and self-brain gyms will be promptly written down. However during this process your outcomes should be revealed fully, and roughly the message of the manuscript which be delivered. Thus with this so-called ‘hunter’s approach’ the target can be achieved directly, and rapidly. Another approach is ‘collectioner’s approach. [ 3 ] In this approach, firstly, potential data, and literature studies are gathered, read, and then selected ones are used. Since this approach suits with surgical point of view, probably ‘hunter’s approach’ serves our purposes more appropriately. However, in parallel with academic development, our novice colleague ‘manuscripters’ can prefer ‘collectioner’s approach.’

On the other hand, we think that research team consisting of different age groups has some advantages. Indeed young colleagues have the enthusiasm, and energy required for the conduction of the study, while middle-aged researchers have the knowledge to manage the research, and manuscript writing. Experienced researchers make guiding contributions to the manuscript. However working together in harmony requires assignment of a chief researcher, and periodically organizing advancement meetings. Besides, talents, skills, and experiences of the researchers in different fields (ie. research methods, contact with patients, preparation of a project, fund-raising, statistical analysis etc.) will determine task sharing, and make a favourable contribution to the perfection of the manuscript. Achievement of the shared duties within a predetermined time frame will sustain the motivation of the researchers, and prevent wearing out of updated data.

According to our point of view, ‘Abstract’ section of the manuscript should be written after completion of the manuscript. The reason for this is that during writing process of the main text, the significant study outcomes might become insignificant or vice versa. However, generally, before onset of the writing process of the manuscript, its abstract might be already presented in various congresses. During writing process, this abstract might be a useful guide which prevents deviation from the main objective of the manuscript.

On the other hand references should be promptly put in place while writing the manuscript, Sorting, and placement of the references should not be left to the last moment. Indeed, it might be very difficult to remember relevant references to be placed in the ‘Discussion’ section. For the placement of references use of software programs detailed in other sections is a rational approach.

3. Which target journal should be selected?

In essence, the methodology to be followed in writing the ‘Discussion’ section is directly related to the selection of the target journal. Indeed, in compliance with the writing rules of the target journal, limitations made on the number of words after onset of the writing process, effects mostly the ‘Discussion’ section. Proper matching of the manuscript with the appropriate journal requires clear, and complete comprehension of the available data from scientific point of view. Previously, similar articles might have been published, however innovative messages, and new perspectives on the relevant subject will facilitate acceptance of the article for publication. Nowadays, articles questioning available information, rather than confirmatory ones attract attention. However during this process, classical information should not be questioned except for special circumstances. For example manuscripts which lead to the conclusions as “laparoscopic surgery is more painful than open surgery” or “laparoscopic surgery can be performed without prior training” will not be accepted or they will be returned by the editor of the target journal to the authors with the request of critical review. Besides the target journal to be selected should be ready to accept articles with similar concept. In fact editors of the journal will not reserve the limited space in their journal for articles yielding similar conclusions.

The title of the manuscript is as important as the structured sections * of the manuscript. The title can be the most striking or the newest outcome among results obtained.

Before writing down the manuscript, determination of 2–3 titles increases the motivation of the authors towards the manuscript. During writing process of the manuscript one of these can be selected based on the intensity of the discussion. However the suitability of the title to the agenda of the target journal should be investigated beforehand. For example an article bearing the title “Use of barbed sutures in laparoscopic partial nephrectomy shortens warm ischemia time” should not be sent to “Original Investigations and Seminars in Urologic Oncology” Indeed the topic of the manuscript is out of the agenda of this journal.

4. Do we have to get a pre-peer review about the written manuscript?

Before submission of the manuscript to the target journal the opinions of internal, and external referees should be taken. [ 1 ] Internal referees can be considered in 2 categories as “General internal referees” and “expert internal referees” General internal referees (ie. our colleagues from other medical disciplines) are not directly concerned with your subject matter but as mentioned above they critically review the manuscript as for simplicity, clarity, and effectiveness of its writing style. Expert internal reviewers have a profound knowledge about the subject, and they can provide guidance about the writing process of the manuscript (ie. our senior colleagues more experienced than us). External referees are our colleagues who did not contribute to data collection of our study in any way, but we can request their opinions about the subject matter of the manuscript. Since they are unrelated both to the author(s), and subject matter of the manuscript, these referees can review our manuscript more objectively. Before sending the manuscript to internal, and external referees, we should contact with them, and ask them if they have time to review our manuscript. We should also give information about our subject matter. Otherwise pre-peer review process can delay publication of the manuscript, and decrease motivation of the authors. In conclusion, whoever the preferred referee will be, these internal, and external referees should respond the following questions objectively. 1) Does the manuscript contribute to the literature?; 2) Does it persuasive? 3) Is it suitable for the publication in the selected journal? 4) Has a simple, clear, and effective language been used throughout the manuscript? In line with the opinions of the referees, the manuscript can be critically reviewed, and perfected. [ 1 ]**

Following receival of the opinions of internal, and external referees, one should concentrate priorly on indicated problems, and their solutions. Comments coming from the reviewers should be criticized, but a defensive attitude should not be assumed during this evaluation process. During this “incubation” period where the comments of the internal, and external referees are awaited, literature should be reviewed once more. Indeed during this time interval a new article which you should consider in the ‘Discussion’ section can be cited in the literature.

5. What are the common mistakes made related to the writing process of a manuscript?

Probably the most important mistakes made related to the writing process of a manuscript include lack of a clear message of the manuscript , inclusion of more than one main idea in the same text or provision of numerous unrelated results at the same time so as to reinforce the assertions of the manuscript. This approach can be termed roughly as “loss of the focus of the study” In conclusion, the author(s) should ask themselves the following question at every stage of the writing process:. “What is the objective of the study? If you always get clear-cut answers whenever you ask this question, then the study is proceeding towards the right direction. Besides application of a template which contains the intended clear-cut messages to be followed will contribute to the communication of net messages.

One of the important mistakes is refraining from critical review of the manuscript as a whole after completion of the writing process. Therefore, the authors should go over the manuscript for at least three times after finalization of the manuscript based on joint decision. The first control should concentrate on the evaluation of the appropriateness of the logic of the manuscript, and its organization, and whether desired messages have been delivered or not. Secondly, syutax, and grammar of the manuscript should be controlled. It is appropriate to review the manuscript for the third time 1 or 2 weeks after completion of its writing process. Thus, evaluation of the “cooled” manuscript will be made from a more objective perspective, and assessment process of its integrity will be facilitated.

Other erroneous issues consist of superfluousness of the manuscript with unnecessary repetitions, undue, and recurrent references to the problems adressed in the manuscript or their solution methods, overcriticizing or overpraising other studies, and use of a pompous literary language overlooking the main objective of sharing information. [ 4 ]

B) Approaches to the writing process of the ‘Discussion’ section:

1. how should the main points of ‘discussion’ section be constructed.

Generally the length of the ‘Discussion ‘ section should not exceed the sum of other sections (ıntroduction, material and methods, and results), and it should be completed within 6–7 paragraphs.. Each paragraph should not contain more than 200 words, and hence words should be counted repeteadly. The ‘Discussion’ section can be generally divided into 3 separate paragraphs as. 1) Introductory paragraph, 2) Intermediate paragraphs, 3) Concluding paragraph.

The introductory paragraph contains the main idea of performing the study in question. Without repeating ‘Introduction’ section of the manuscript, the problem to be addressed, and its updateness are analysed. The introductory paragraph starts with an undebatable sentence, and proceeds with a part addressing the following questions as 1) On what issue we have to concentrate, discuss or elaborate? 2) What solutions can be recommended to solve this problem? 3) What will be the new, different, and innovative issue? 4) How will our study contribute to the solution of this problem An introductory paragraph in this format is helpful to accomodate reader to the rest of the Discussion section. However summarizing the basic findings of the experimental studies in the first paragraph is generally recommended by the editors of the journal. [ 5 ]

In the last paragraph of the Discussion section “strong points” of the study should be mentioned using “constrained”, and “not too strongly assertive” statements. Indicating limitations of the study will reflect objectivity of the authors, and provide answers to the questions which will be directed by the reviewers of the journal. On the other hand in the last paragraph, future directions or potential clinical applications may be emphasized.

2. How should the intermediate paragraphs of the Discussion section be formulated?

The reader passes through a test of boredom while reading paragraphs of the Discussion section apart from the introductory, and the last paragraphs. Herein your findings rather than those of the other researchers are discussed. The previous studies can be an explanation or reinforcement of your findings. Each paragraph should contain opinions in favour or against the topic discussed, critical evaluations, and learning points.

Our management approach for intermediate paragraphs is “divide and conquer” tactics. Accordingly, the findings of the study are determined in order of their importance, and a paragraph is constructed for each finding ( Figure 1 ). Each paragraph begins with an “indisputable” introductory sentence about the topic to be discussed. This sentence basically can be the answer to the question “What have we found?” Then a sentence associated with the subject matter to be discussed is written. Subsequently, in the light of the current literature this finding is discussed, new ideas on this subject are revealed, and the paragraph ends with a concluding remark.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is TJU-39-Supp-20-g01.jpg

Divide and Conquer tactics

In this paragraph, main topic should be emphasized without going into much detail. Its place, and importance among other studies should be indicated. However during this procedure studies should be presented in a logical sequence (ie. from past to present, from a few to many cases), and aspects of the study contradictory to other studies should be underlined. Results without any supportive evidence or equivocal results should not be written. Besides numerical values presented in the Results section should not be repeated unless required.

Besides, asking the following questions, and searching their answers in the same paragraph will facilitate writing process of the paragraph. [ 1 ] 1) Can the discussed result be false or inadequate? 2) Why is it false? (inadequate blinding, protocol contamination, lost to follow-up, lower statistical power of the study etc.), 3) What meaning does this outcome convey?

3. What are the common mistakes made in writing the Discussion section?:

Probably the most important mistake made while writing the Discussion section is the need for mentioning all literature references. One point to remember is that we are not writing a review article, and only the results related to this paragraph should be discussed. Meanwhile, each word of the paragraphs should be counted, and placed carefully. Each word whose removal will not change the meaning should be taken out from the text.” Writing a saga with “word salads” *** is one of the reasons for prompt rejection. Indeed, if the reviewer thinks that it is difficult to correct the Discussion section, he/she use her/ his vote in the direction of rejection to save time (Uniform requirements for manuscripts: International Comittee of Medical Journal Editors [ http://www.icmje.org/urm_full.pdf ])

The other important mistake is to give too much references, and irrelevancy between the references, and the section with these cited references. [ 3 ] While referring these studies, (excl. introductory sentences linking indisputable sentences or paragraphs) original articles should be cited. Abstracts should not be referred, and review articles should not be cited unless required very much.

4. What points should be paid attention about writing rules, and grammar?

As is the case with the whole article, text of the Discussion section should be written with a simple language, as if we are talking with our colleague. [ 2 ] Each sentence should indicate a single point, and it should not exceed 25–30 words. The priorly mentioned information which linked the previous sentence should be placed at the beginning of the sentence, while the new information should be located at the end of the sentence. During construction of the sentences, avoid unnecessary words, and active voice rather than passive voice should be used.**** Since conventionally passive voice is used in the scientific manuscripts written in the Turkish language, the above statement contradicts our writing habits. However, one should not refrain from beginning the sentences with the word “we”. Indeed, editors of the journal recommend use of active voice so as to increase the intelligibility of the manuscript.

In conclusion, the major point to remember is that the manuscript should be written complying with principles of simplicity, clarity, and effectiveness. In the light of these principles, as is the case in our daily practice, all components of the manuscript (IMRAD) can be written concurrently. In the ‘Discussion’ section ‘divide and conquer’ tactics remarkably facilitates writing process of the discussion. On the other hand, relevant or irrelevant feedbacks received from our colleagues can contribute to the perfection of the manuscript. Do not forget that none of the manuscripts is perfect, and one should not refrain from writing because of language problems, and related lack of experience.

Instead of structured sections of a manuscript (IMRAD): Introduction, Material and Methods, Results, and Discussion

Instead of in the Istanbul University Faculty of Medicine posters to be submitted in congresses are time to time discussed in Wednesday meetings, and opinions of the internal referees are obtained about the weak, and strong points of the study

Instead of a writing style which uses words or sentences with a weak logical meaning that do not lead the reader to any conclusion

Instead of “white color”; “proven”; nstead of “history”; “to”. should be used instead of “white in color”, “definitely proven”, “past history”, and “in order to”, respectively ( ref. 2 )

Instead of “No instances of either postoperative death or major complications occurred during the early post-operative period” use “There were no deaths or major complications occurred during the early post-operative period.

Instead of “Measurements were performed to evaluate the levels of CEA in the serum” use “We measured serum CEA levels”

  • Affiliate Program

Wordvice

  • UNITED STATES
  • 台灣 (TAIWAN)
  • TÜRKIYE (TURKEY)
  • Academic Editing Services
  • - Research Paper
  • - Journal Manuscript
  • - Dissertation
  • - College & University Assignments
  • Admissions Editing Services
  • - Application Essay
  • - Personal Statement
  • - Recommendation Letter
  • - Cover Letter
  • - CV/Resume
  • Business Editing Services
  • - Business Documents
  • - Report & Brochure
  • - Website & Blog
  • Writer Editing Services
  • - Script & Screenplay
  • Our Editors
  • Client Reviews
  • Editing & Proofreading Prices
  • Wordvice Points
  • Partner Discount
  • Plagiarism Checker
  • APA Citation Generator
  • MLA Citation Generator
  • Chicago Citation Generator
  • Vancouver Citation Generator
  • - APA Style
  • - MLA Style
  • - Chicago Style
  • - Vancouver Style
  • Writing & Editing Guide
  • Academic Resources
  • Admissions Resources

How to Write a Discussion Section for a Research Paper

paper discussion you tube

We’ve talked about several useful writing tips that authors should consider while drafting or editing their research papers. In particular, we’ve focused on  figures and legends , as well as the Introduction ,  Methods , and  Results . Now that we’ve addressed the more technical portions of your journal manuscript, let’s turn to the analytical segments of your research article. In this article, we’ll provide tips on how to write a strong Discussion section that best portrays the significance of your research contributions.

What is the Discussion section of a research paper?

In a nutshell,  your Discussion fulfills the promise you made to readers in your Introduction . At the beginning of your paper, you tell us why we should care about your research. You then guide us through a series of intricate images and graphs that capture all the relevant data you collected during your research. We may be dazzled and impressed at first, but none of that matters if you deliver an anti-climactic conclusion in the Discussion section!

Are you feeling pressured? Don’t worry. To be honest, you will edit the Discussion section of your manuscript numerous times. After all, in as little as one to two paragraphs ( Nature ‘s suggestion  based on their 3,000-word main body text limit), you have to explain how your research moves us from point A (issues you raise in the Introduction) to point B (our new understanding of these matters). You must also recommend how we might get to point C (i.e., identify what you think is the next direction for research in this field). That’s a lot to say in two paragraphs!

So, how do you do that? Let’s take a closer look.

What should I include in the Discussion section?

As we stated above, the goal of your Discussion section is to  answer the questions you raise in your Introduction by using the results you collected during your research . The content you include in the Discussions segment should include the following information:

  • Remind us why we should be interested in this research project.
  • Describe the nature of the knowledge gap you were trying to fill using the results of your study.
  • Don’t repeat your Introduction. Instead, focus on why  this  particular study was needed to fill the gap you noticed and why that gap needed filling in the first place.
  • Mainly, you want to remind us of how your research will increase our knowledge base and inspire others to conduct further research.
  • Clearly tell us what that piece of missing knowledge was.
  • Answer each of the questions you asked in your Introduction and explain how your results support those conclusions.
  • Make sure to factor in all results relevant to the questions (even if those results were not statistically significant).
  • Focus on the significance of the most noteworthy results.
  • If conflicting inferences can be drawn from your results, evaluate the merits of all of them.
  • Don’t rehash what you said earlier in the Results section. Rather, discuss your findings in the context of answering your hypothesis. Instead of making statements like “[The first result] was this…,” say, “[The first result] suggests [conclusion].”
  • Do your conclusions line up with existing literature?
  • Discuss whether your findings agree with current knowledge and expectations.
  • Keep in mind good persuasive argument skills, such as explaining the strengths of your arguments and highlighting the weaknesses of contrary opinions.
  • If you discovered something unexpected, offer reasons. If your conclusions aren’t aligned with current literature, explain.
  • Address any limitations of your study and how relevant they are to interpreting your results and validating your findings.
  • Make sure to acknowledge any weaknesses in your conclusions and suggest room for further research concerning that aspect of your analysis.
  • Make sure your suggestions aren’t ones that should have been conducted during your research! Doing so might raise questions about your initial research design and protocols.
  • Similarly, maintain a critical but unapologetic tone. You want to instill confidence in your readers that you have thoroughly examined your results and have objectively assessed them in a way that would benefit the scientific community’s desire to expand our knowledge base.
  • Recommend next steps.
  • Your suggestions should inspire other researchers to conduct follow-up studies to build upon the knowledge you have shared with them.
  • Keep the list short (no more than two).

How to Write the Discussion Section

The above list of what to include in the Discussion section gives an overall idea of what you need to focus on throughout the section. Below are some tips and general suggestions about the technical aspects of writing and organization that you might find useful as you draft or revise the contents we’ve outlined above.

Technical writing elements

  • Embrace active voice because it eliminates the awkward phrasing and wordiness that accompanies passive voice.
  • Use the present tense, which should also be employed in the Introduction.
  • Sprinkle with first person pronouns if needed, but generally, avoid it. We want to focus on your findings.
  • Maintain an objective and analytical tone.

Discussion section organization

  • Keep the same flow across the Results, Methods, and Discussion sections.
  • We develop a rhythm as we read and parallel structures facilitate our comprehension. When you organize information the same way in each of these related parts of your journal manuscript, we can quickly see how a certain result was interpreted and quickly verify the particular methods used to produce that result.
  • Notice how using parallel structure will eliminate extra narration in the Discussion part since we can anticipate the flow of your ideas based on what we read in the Results segment. Reducing wordiness is important when you only have a few paragraphs to devote to the Discussion section!
  • Within each subpart of a Discussion, the information should flow as follows: (A) conclusion first, (B) relevant results and how they relate to that conclusion and (C) relevant literature.
  • End with a concise summary explaining the big-picture impact of your study on our understanding of the subject matter. At the beginning of your Discussion section, you stated why  this  particular study was needed to fill the gap you noticed and why that gap needed filling in the first place. Now, it is time to end with “how your research filled that gap.”

Discussion Part 1: Summarizing Key Findings

Begin the Discussion section by restating your  statement of the problem  and briefly summarizing the major results. Do not simply repeat your findings. Rather, try to create a concise statement of the main results that directly answer the central research question that you stated in the Introduction section . This content should not be longer than one paragraph in length.

Many researchers struggle with understanding the precise differences between a Discussion section and a Results section . The most important thing to remember here is that your Discussion section should subjectively evaluate the findings presented in the Results section, and in relatively the same order. Keep these sections distinct by making sure that you do not repeat the findings without providing an interpretation.

Phrase examples: Summarizing the results

  • The findings indicate that …
  • These results suggest a correlation between A and B …
  • The data present here suggest that …
  • An interpretation of the findings reveals a connection between…

Discussion Part 2: Interpreting the Findings

What do the results mean? It may seem obvious to you, but simply looking at the figures in the Results section will not necessarily convey to readers the importance of the findings in answering your research questions.

The exact structure of interpretations depends on the type of research being conducted. Here are some common approaches to interpreting data:

  • Identifying correlations and relationships in the findings
  • Explaining whether the results confirm or undermine your research hypothesis
  • Giving the findings context within the history of similar research studies
  • Discussing unexpected results and analyzing their significance to your study or general research
  • Offering alternative explanations and arguing for your position

Organize the Discussion section around key arguments, themes, hypotheses, or research questions or problems. Again, make sure to follow the same order as you did in the Results section.

Discussion Part 3: Discussing the Implications

In addition to providing your own interpretations, show how your results fit into the wider scholarly literature you surveyed in the  literature review section. This section is called the implications of the study . Show where and how these results fit into existing knowledge, what additional insights they contribute, and any possible consequences that might arise from this knowledge, both in the specific research topic and in the wider scientific domain.

Questions to ask yourself when dealing with potential implications:

  • Do your findings fall in line with existing theories, or do they challenge these theories or findings? What new information do they contribute to the literature, if any? How exactly do these findings impact or conflict with existing theories or models?
  • What are the practical implications on actual subjects or demographics?
  • What are the methodological implications for similar studies conducted either in the past or future?

Your purpose in giving the implications is to spell out exactly what your study has contributed and why researchers and other readers should be interested.

Phrase examples: Discussing the implications of the research

  • These results confirm the existing evidence in X studies…
  • The results are not in line with the foregoing theory that…
  • This experiment provides new insights into the connection between…
  • These findings present a more nuanced understanding of…
  • While previous studies have focused on X, these results demonstrate that Y.

Step 4: Acknowledging the limitations

All research has study limitations of one sort or another. Acknowledging limitations in methodology or approach helps strengthen your credibility as a researcher. Study limitations are not simply a list of mistakes made in the study. Rather, limitations help provide a more detailed picture of what can or cannot be concluded from your findings. In essence, they help temper and qualify the study implications you listed previously.

Study limitations can relate to research design, specific methodological or material choices, or unexpected issues that emerged while you conducted the research. Mention only those limitations directly relate to your research questions, and explain what impact these limitations had on how your study was conducted and the validity of any interpretations.

Possible types of study limitations:

  • Insufficient sample size for statistical measurements
  • Lack of previous research studies on the topic
  • Methods/instruments/techniques used to collect the data
  • Limited access to data
  • Time constraints in properly preparing and executing the study

After discussing the study limitations, you can also stress that your results are still valid. Give some specific reasons why the limitations do not necessarily handicap your study or narrow its scope.

Phrase examples: Limitations sentence beginners

  • “There may be some possible limitations in this study.”
  • “The findings of this study have to be seen in light of some limitations.”
  •  “The first limitation is the…The second limitation concerns the…”
  •  “The empirical results reported herein should be considered in the light of some limitations.”
  • “This research, however, is subject to several limitations.”
  • “The primary limitation to the generalization of these results is…”
  • “Nonetheless, these results must be interpreted with caution and a number of limitations should be borne in mind.”

Discussion Part 5: Giving Recommendations for Further Research

Based on your interpretation and discussion of the findings, your recommendations can include practical changes to the study or specific further research to be conducted to clarify the research questions. Recommendations are often listed in a separate Conclusion section , but often this is just the final paragraph of the Discussion section.

Suggestions for further research often stem directly from the limitations outlined. Rather than simply stating that “further research should be conducted,” provide concrete specifics for how future can help answer questions that your research could not.

Phrase examples: Recommendation sentence beginners

  • Further research is needed to establish …
  • There is abundant space for further progress in analyzing…
  • A further study with more focus on X should be done to investigate…
  • Further studies of X that account for these variables must be undertaken.

Consider Receiving Professional Language Editing

As you edit or draft your research manuscript, we hope that you implement these guidelines to produce a more effective Discussion section. And after completing your draft, don’t forget to submit your work to a professional proofreading and English editing service like Wordvice, including our manuscript editing service for  paper editing , cover letter editing , SOP editing , and personal statement proofreading services. Language editors not only proofread and correct errors in grammar, punctuation, mechanics, and formatting but also improve terms and revise phrases so they read more naturally. Wordvice is an industry leader in providing high-quality revision for all types of academic documents.

For additional information about how to write a strong research paper, make sure to check out our full  research writing series !

Wordvice Writing Resources

  • How to Write a Research Paper Introduction 
  • Which Verb Tenses to Use in a Research Paper
  • How to Write an Abstract for a Research Paper
  • How to Write a Research Paper Title
  • Useful Phrases for Academic Writing
  • Common Transition Terms in Academic Papers
  • Active and Passive Voice in Research Papers
  • 100+ Verbs That Will Make Your Research Writing Amazing
  • Tips for Paraphrasing in Research Papers

Additional Academic Resources

  •   Guide for Authors.  (Elsevier)
  •  How to Write the Results Section of a Research Paper.  (Bates College)
  •   Structure of a Research Paper.  (University of Minnesota Biomedical Library)
  •   How to Choose a Target Journal  (Springer)
  •   How to Write Figures and Tables  (UNC Writing Center)

How to discuss a paper in groups

Georgios gousios, 09 september 2021, how to run our seminars, purpose of seminars.

The purpose of a seminar is to read and discuss papers critically :

  • Distinguish main contributions
  • Comment on the appropriateness of methods
  • Discuss the validity and generalizability of the results
  • Generate questions and discuss potential answers
  • Draw inferences and think of future work
  • Understand (retrospectively!) the paper’s importance

Discussing a paper: Moderator’s duties

  • Have the audience read the paper and come up with a list of questions
  • Prepare a short presentation of the paper
  • Prepare a list of questions about the paper
  • Ensure that everyone participates
  • Ensure that everyone’s opinion is being heard
  • Keep track of time per participant
  • Take notes of opinions and discussion points
  • After the discussion: summarize the main points discussed

Discussing a paper: participant’s duties

  • Read the paper before the discussion and come up with a set of questions or discussion points
  • Annotate parts of the paper (e.g., underline important sentences), especially those that are surprising to you
  • Write a short review / commentary about the paper
  • Ask clarification questions to the moderator
  • Actively think about, take notes and participate to the discussion

What is a good discussion question?

A good question:

  • Does not have a binary (i.e., yes/no) or quantitative (i.e., 15) answer
  • Encourages participants to explain “how”
  • Motivates participants to make connections to things they know already

Types of good questions:

  • Comparative: Contrast various approaches / aspects / opinions
  • Connective: Link examples, facts, theories etc
  • Critical: Break down an argument, provide counter arguments

Example questions

D Characterize the following questions:

  • What aspects of software complexity does the paper capture?
  • Using what techniques could the author have analyzed the results better?
  • How many projects did the author analyze?
  • Is statistical test X suitable for this paper?
  • How would you replicate this paper?

Role playing

In some cases, actually assigning roles may help the discussion:

  • Problem or Dilemma poser: The moderator
  • Reflective analyst: Keeps track of the discussion and periodically sums it up
  • Devil’s advocate: When consensus emerges, formulates an alternative view
  • Detective: Listens carefully for unacknowledged biases that seem to be emerging

Another form of role playing is debating . Groups are assigned two opposing views and try to defend them until an agreement is reached.

Tips for being moderator

Encourage everyone to participate:

  • Make arrangements so that everyone is heard
  • Ask questions to specific people
  • Never criticise any opinion. Welcome inadequate answers.

Help participants summarize and articulate what they ’ve learned

Be honest, open and inviting.

Most importantly: Keep notes!

Our reading sessions

Befor each session:

  • The moderator announces the papers to be discussed
  • The teacher randomly selects a group of 10 participants with whom the papers are shared with
  • The participants read the paper and prepare a list of questions

At the end of each session:

  • all materials are returned to the teacher
  • the moderators grade the participants and VV

A seminar example

We will discuss the paper by Zimmerman et al. “ Cross project defect prediction ” [1]

Why do this research?

  • Defect prediction saves time and money if done right
  • Can we train a defect predictor to work across projects?
  • Let’s evaluate this empirically

Research method

What did the authors do?

The authors took several versions of 12 projects, extracted features and trained a logistic regression model to predict whether a component is defect prone .

Then, they trained a model on a project version A to predict defect proness on project version B. They fail to do so with good prec / recal.

Then, they quantify the effect of project similarity on the prediction accuracy, and also attempt to rank the features in terms of how they contribute to cross-project prediction.

What did the authors find?

The paper authors argue (and present evidence) that cross-project defect prediction does not work

Through feature ranking, they find that the number of samples, use of specific technologies and average churn contribute the most to cross project predictive power.

Discussion / Implications

Why are the results important?

“ A consequence for research is that rather than increasing the precision and recall of models by some small percentage, it should focus on how to make defect prediction work across projects and relevant for a wide audience. We believe that this will be an important trend for software engineering in general. Learn from one project, to improve another. ”

A set of questions to discuss

  • Let’s say that you have to describe this paper to a collegue. How would you summarize it?

Defect prediction as a technique

  • Why is defect prediction a thing?
  • In which situations would you use defect prediction.
  • What is the motivation of the authors to compare firefox and IE?

Work method

Is the definition of defect proness satisfying; what could a more fine-grained instance of it look like?

If you where to extend the prediction model, what features would you use?

Why do the authors need to check similarity of features?

Are there any alternative ways to check feature similarity?

Implications

  • Can the results be degeneralized?
  • 3 key things to take away

Seminar discussion

by Thomas Kluiters

The discussion was opened by the moderator introducing the question on how one would summarize the paper.

Multiple students gave their summary, however, the moderator noted how a summary should be told like a story.

After summarizing the paper the moderator asked the students if there were any technical questions about the paper.

General questions

General questions asked:

  • “I wonder what technical defects are, what kind of technical defects are out there?”
  • “What kind of defects do the authors explore?”
  • “What types of defects can we actually predict?”

The moderator asked the first question to the audience and the group agreed that a technical defect is “Anything that’s a bug, something that doesn’t conform to the specification.”

The second question was shortly answered as it was a factual question and could be found in the paper, the authors explored post-release defects.

A remark was made on how these days we can apply patches to systems that contain defects and fix bugs much quicker.

On modeling / predicting

Another student asked another technical question: “Why did the authors choose to use logistic regression?”

The moderator agreed that this was debatable and asked the students first, “What is logistic regression?”

The students then defined logistic regression and agreed on it’s definition.

The follow-up question was “What other methods could the authors have used? Why would they use logistic regression?”

A student responded how logistic regression is very simple to apply and easy to explain, thus, in the interest of simplicity the authors used logistic regression.

The moderator noted the different ways we can classify data these days, going over SVMs, Random forests and decision trees.

A student formulated his opinion on the choice of logistic regression: “It’s an arguable decision to use logistic regression, as logistic regression does not seem fit.”

Another student disagreed: “It makes sense to use logistic regression as it’s interpretable by humans, in other words, ‘explainable’ to humans.”

A third student disagreed to this and argued that Neural Networks can be explained and will outperform logistic regression considerably.

The moderator raised a controversial opinion: “Perhaps the authors did not know any better?”

The instructor added to this opinion: “The paper was published in 2009, is it possible for the authors to know about neural networks then?”

The moderator continues: “The paper is published in 2009, is it possible for Neural Networks to not be as popular?”

A student answered: “They should have known, though, it would yield the best result.”

The instructor also mentions model fit: “What about the model fit? Did they report the model fit?” (A model fit explains how well a model fits into the data).

The students respond by saying how the paper does not meson the model fit.

On the features used for modeling

The moderator then raises a new question: “Now I have a question about the modeling used by the authors, they have used their own set of 40 features… Do you think there is any feature missing?”

Some students reply:

  • “I feel like the (project) age is missing”
  • “Introducing more features will make the logistic regression only more vague”
  • “The curse of dimensionality” (too many features will weaken the logistic regression).

The moderator continues to ask the students about the features: “Do they have any process features?”

Multiple students give answers, and agree on the fact that the authors could have chosen more process features.

A small discussion was held on what the difference is between a product feature and a process feature. The moderator makes a comment on the fact that the authors were constrained by the data they were given, instead of gathering their own data. Furthermore, the moderator continued how researchers either choose to use quantitative data or qualitative data.

The students agreed on the fact that the authors should form a hypothesis on what features would be deemed interesting to keep, instead of using all of them.

On generalizability

The moderator then raises the question: “In your opinion, can the results of this paper be generalized?”

  • “I think it’s very hard to generalist this over multiple projects and domains. Software is specific and targets specific use-cases, and I think these metrics do not allow for broader application.”
  • “I think they just made a model and tried to generalize it, and it didn’t work. Software engineering isn’t a manufacturing process, so this won’t work.” “The paper is honest about the results and admits that more research shoul be done.” (The moderator noted that this answer coud apply any emperical research).

Core message

Lastly, the moderator asks the students: “A a higher level of abstraction what’s the message of this paper.”

After a short discussions the moderator and students agree on the following: “The value of this paper is the message it conveys, doing cross-project research does not really work.”

Research Paper Guide

Research Paper Discussion Section

Barbara P

How To Write A Discussion For A Research Paper | Examples & Tips

Published on: Jan 19, 2024

Last updated on: Jan 18, 2024

how to write a discussion for a research paper

People also read

Research Paper Writing - A Step by Step Guide

Research Paper Examples - Free Sample Papers for Different Formats!

Guide to Creating Effective Research Paper Outline

Interesting Research Paper Topics for 2024

Research Proposal Writing - A Step-by-Step Guide

How to Start a Research Paper - 7 Easy Steps

How to Write an Abstract for a Research Paper - A Step by Step Guide

Writing a Literature Review For a Research Paper - A Comprehensive Guide

Qualitative Research - Methods, Types, and Examples

8 Types of Qualitative Research - Overview & Examples

Qualitative vs Quantitative Research - Learning the Basics

Psychology Research Topics - 220+ Ideas

How to Write a Hypothesis In 7 simple Steps: Examples and Tips!

20+ Types of Research With Examples - A Detailed Guide

Understanding Quantitative Research - Types & Data Collection Techniques

230+ Sociology Research Topics & Ideas for Students

How to Cite a Research Paper - A Complete Guide

Excellent History Research Paper Topics- 300+ Ideas

A Guide on Writing the Method Section of a Research Paper - Examples & Tips

How To Write an Introduction Paragraph For a Research Paper: Learn with Examples

Crafting a Winning Research Paper Title: A Complete Guide

Writing a Research Paper Conclusion - Step-by-Step Guide

Writing a Thesis For a Research Paper - A Comprehensive Guide

How To Write The Results Section of A Research Paper | Steps & Examples

Writing a Problem Statement for a Research Paper - A Comprehensive Guide

Finding Sources For a Research Paper: A Complete Guide

Share this article

Ever find yourself stuck when trying to write the discussion part of your research paper? Don't worry, it happens to a lot of people. 

The discussion section is super important in your research paper . It's where you explain what your results mean. But turning all that data into a clear and meaningful story? That's not easy.

Guess what? MyPerfectWords.com has come up with a solution. 

This blog is your guide to writing an outstanding discussion section. We'll guide you step by step with useful tips to make sure your research stands out.

So, let’s get started!

On This Page On This Page -->

What Exactly is a Discussion Section in the Research Paper?

In a research paper, the discussion section is where you explain what your results really mean. It's like answering the questions, "So what?" and "What's the big picture?" 

The discussion section is your chance to help your readers understand why your findings are important and how they fit into the larger context. It's more than just summarizing; it's about making your research understandable and meaningful to others.

Importance of the Discussion Section

The discussion section isn't just a formality; it's the heart of your research paper. This is where your findings transform from data into knowledge. 

Let's break down why it's so crucial:

  • Interpretation of Results : The discussion is where you get to tell readers what your results really mean. You go into the details, helping them understand the story behind the numbers or findings.
  • Connecting the Dots : You connect different parts of your research, showing how they relate. This helps your readers see the bigger picture.
  • Relevance to the Big Picture : You get to highlight why your research matters. How does it contribute to the broader understanding of the topic? This is your time to make your research significant.
  • Addressing Limitations : In the discussion, you can acknowledge any limitations in your study and discuss how they might impact your results.
  • Suggestions for Further Research : The discussion is where you suggest areas for future exploration. It's like passing the baton to the next researcher, indicating where more work could be done.

Order Essay

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

How to Write the Discussion Section of a Research Paper?

The Discussion section in a research paper plays a vital role in interpreting findings and formulating a conclusion . Given below are the main components of the discussion section:

  • Quick Summary: A brief recap of your main findings.
  • Interpretation: Significance and meaning of your results in relation to your research question.
  • Literature Review : Connecting your findings with previous research or similar studies.
  • Limitations: Discussing any study limitations, addressing potential concerns.
  • Implications: Broader implications of your findings, considering practical and theoretical aspects.
  • Alternative Explanations: Evaluating alternative interpretations, demonstrating a comprehensive analysis.
  • Connecting to Hypotheses : Summarizing how your result section aligns or diverges from your initial hypotheses.

Now let’s explore the steps to write an effective discussion section that will effectively communicate the significance of your research:

Step 1: Get Started with a Quick Summary

Start by quickly telling your readers the main things you found in your research. Don't explain them in detail just yet; just give a simple overview. 

This helps your readers get the big picture before diving into the details.

Step 2: Interpret Your Results

In the next step, talk about what your findings really mean. Share why the information you gathered is important. Connect each result to the questions you were trying to answer and the goals you set for your research.

Step 3: Relate to Existing Literature

In this step, link up your discoveries with what other researchers have already figured out. 

Share if your results are similar to or different from what's been found before. This helps give more background to your study and shows you know what other scientists have been up to.

Step 4: Address Limitations Honestly

Every study has its limitations. Acknowledge them openly in your discussion. This not only shows transparency but also helps readers interpret your results more accurately.

Step 5: Discuss the Implications

Explore the implications of your findings. How do they contribute to the field? What real-world applications or changes might they suggest?

Dig into why your discoveries are important. How do they help the subject you studied? 

This step is like looking at the bigger picture and asking, "So, what can we do with this information?"

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Step 6: Consider Alternative Explanations

After discussing the implications, challenge yourself by exploring alternative explanations for your results. 

Discuss different perspectives and show that you've considered multiple angles.

Step 7: Connect to Your Hypotheses or Research Questions

For the last step, revisit your initial hypotheses or research questions. Explain whether your results support what you thought might happen or if they surprised you. 

Examples of Good Discussion for a Research Paper

Learning from well-crafted discussions can significantly enhance your own writing. Given below are some examples to help you understand how to write your own.

Discussion for a Research Paper Example Pdf

Discussion for a Medical Research Paper

Discussion Section for a Qualitative Research Paper

Mistakes to Avoid in Your Research Paper's Discussion 

Writing the discussion section of your research paper can be tricky. To make sure you're on the right track, be mindful of these common mistakes:

  • Overstating or Overinterpreting Results

Avoid making your findings sound more groundbreaking than they are. Stick to what your data actually shows, and don't exaggerate.

  • Neglecting Alternative Explanations 

Failing to consider other possible explanations for your results can weaken your discussion. Always explore alternative perspectives to present a well-rounded view.

  • Ignoring Limitations 

Don't sweep limitations under the rug. Acknowledge them openly and discuss how they might affect the validity or generalizability of your results.

  • Being Overly Technical or Jargon-laden

Remember that your audience may not be experts in your specific field. Avoid using overly technical language or excessive jargon that could alienate your readers.

  • Disregarding the 'So What' Factor

Always explain the significance of your findings. Don't leave your readers wondering why your research matters or how it contributes to the broader understanding of the subject.

  • Rushing the Conclusion

The conclusion section of your discussion is critical. Don't rush it. Summarize the key points and leave your readers with a strong understanding of the significance of your research.

So, there you have it —writing a discussion and conclusion section isn't easy, but avoiding some common mistakes can make it much smoother. 

Remember to keep it real with your results, think about what else could explain things, and don't forget about any limits in your study.

But if you're feeling stuck, MyPerfectWords.com is here for you. 

Our team of experts knows their way around discussions. Whether you need some guidance or want someone to handle the writing for you, we've got your back.

Don't let discussion writing stress you out. Check out how the best essay writing service can make your academic life easier.

Barbara P (Literature, Marketing)

Dr. Barbara is a highly experienced writer and author who holds a Ph.D. degree in public health from an Ivy League school. She has worked in the medical field for many years, conducting extensive research on various health topics. Her writing has been featured in several top-tier publications.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Get Help

Keep reading

how to write a discussion for a research paper

We value your privacy

We use cookies to improve your experience and give you personalized content. Do you agree to our cookie policy?

Website Data Collection

We use data collected by cookies and JavaScript libraries.

Are you sure you want to cancel?

Your preferences have not been saved.

Writing Center Home Page

OASIS: Writing Center

Webinar transcripts, developing your writing: creating a paper from a discussion post.

Presented March 8, 2018

View the recording

Last updated 3/23/2018

Visual: The webinar begins with a PowerPoint title slide in the large central panel. A captioning pod, Q&A pod, and files pod are stacked on the right side.

The slide says “Housekeeping” and the following:

  • Webinar is being recorded and will be available online a day or two from now.
  • Polls, files, and links are interactive.
  • Use the Q&A box to ask questions.
  • Send to [email protected]
  • Choose “Help” in the upper right hand corner of the webinar room.

Audio: [not on the recording] Melissa: Hello, everyone. And welcome. I'm Melissa Sharpe, and I'm a writing instructor here at the Walden Writing Center. Before we begin and I hand the session over to Michael, I want to go over a few housekeeping items. First, we are recording this webinar. Although, it helps when you push the button. Okay.

Hi, everybody. We are now recording the webinar. And, so, you are welcome to access it at a later date through the webinar archive. In fact, note that we record all of our webinars so you are welcome to look through that archive for other recordings that may interest you. Also, whether you are attending this webinar live or watching the recording, you will find that we have some interactive elements like links and chats, as well as files which you can find in the file pod. If you look on the bottom of the screen, you'll see the PowerPoint slides Michael will be sharing today and you are welcome to download those. You can interact with all of the links and chats throughout tonight’s webinar. We also welcome questions and comments throughout the session, and you can use the Q & A box for these. Both Kacy and myself will be watching this Q & A box. And we are happy and excited to answer questions throughout the session as Michael is talking. You are also welcome to send any technical issues you have to us here as well. Although note, there is a help option in the top right corner of your screen. This is Adobe's technical support, so that is the best place to go if you need technical help. All right. And with that, I will hand it over to Michael.

Visual: Slide changes to the title of the webinar, “ Developing Your Writing: Creating a Paper From a Discussion Post” and the speakers name and information: Michael Dusek , Writing Instructor, Walden Writing Center

Audio: Michael: Great! Thank you, Melissa, for that lovely introduction. My name is Michael Dusek. I'm a writing instructor here at Walden University. You can see my picture there on this first slide. I think I'm contemplating if winter will ever end in the Midwest, but I can’t be sure. Anyway, today the webinar that I'm going to be delivering, the topic for this webinar about developing your writing and really creating a paper from a discussion post. Now, I guess I want to couch this. Before we get going, I just want to couch our discussion here or my lecture here in the idea that academic writing, all parts of academic writing, all genres of academic writing share certain conventions. So, taking something like a discussion post, there's going to be a main idea. There's going to be some paint points that are elaborated upon briefly there, and this webinar is really about expanding that discussion post and making it into a more formal academic essay or course paper. Sure. But again, before I move on, I want you to kind of think that the elements that are present within an academic essay are also present within a discussion post and vice versa. And this can even be extrapolated to something like a doctoral project or a dissertation.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Learning Objectives

  • Talk about the role a discussion post and paper has in a course
  • Understand how a discussion post can be a basis for a course paper
  • Identify the steps for developing a paper from a post

Audio: Yeah, today in this webinar, we're going to talk about the role of a discussion post and paper that these two elements have in a course. Kind of how they fit into a general course. We're going to be looking to understand how a discussion post can be a basis for a course paper. So, yeah, as I've mentioned, kind of using the discussion post as a jumping off point to expand on those ideas and craft it into a more formal academic paper or course paper. And lastly, we're going to identify the steps for developing a paper from a post. So, we're not just going to talk about how to do this, we're going to give you guys some steps for actually doing this should you choose to.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Weekly Course Assignment and Writing Process

  • Course resources
  • Begin: Discussion post and responses
  • Take the Next Step: Research, explore, & learn
  • Expand: Write your paper
  • Instructor feedback

Audio: So, here's kind of where these two elements fit into your general weekly course here at Walden. You start on top by looking at some course resources, you know, digging into some of this research, some of the course content that your professor has laid out for you. As a way of interacting with that course content, you're going to write a discussion post oftentimes, and you're often going to be required to respond to the post of your colleagues. Obviously, here, this is about cultivating a kind of an academic intellectual discussion around the content of the course that's delivered that week. Next, when you're looking at perhaps expanding this into a larger piece, into an academic essay, you're going to then return to the research, explore this topic, and learn as much as you can about it. Generally, you can think of the course content as kind of a jumping off point if you're going to focus in on this topic and write an essay. If that's something you choose to do, you're going to need to return to your research to bring depth and breadth to your knowledge on that subject. Next step from there, is you're going to expand these ideas, go into more detail, elaborate on some of the points being made in that content area and write actually a paper. Lastly, you're going to turn this in for some instructor feedback, perhaps a grade on this. But, yeah, these are kind of how these two elements are situated within a Walden course.

Yeah, as you can see, going from a post to a paper as this webinar is titled, this is going to be kind of the middle steps, right? You can see on the top, we start with kind of the instructor driven course resources, and we end with this instructor feedback. So, the loop comes all the way around.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Chat

How do you develop ideas for your academic writing – what techniques do you use or how do you get your ideas?

Audio: Okay, then, let's talk about this as a group. In the chat box, you can see this just come up. I want to you to offer your answer and let's talk amongst ourselves. So, what I'm looking for is how develop ideas for academic writing? What techniques do you use or how do you get your ideas? Yes, so when you're looking in that idea generation point within your writing when you're just starting off, how do you get your ideas? Where do you get these from and what techniques do you pull them out of your head to write about? I'm going to mute here for a second, but I'll return in couple of minutes and we can talk about some of these different techniques that you guys use.

[Pause as students type]

All right, I'm seeing really, really great responses here. Some people are saying they enjoy brainstorming. One that I thought was particularly good was this person who talked about looking within the course resources and thinking about what interest them. That's a great way to do it. You know, follow your interest. A lot of research and a lot of academic writing is really curiosity-based. So, following your own interest is a really great way to find topics to write about. The assignment prompt. So, because I'm directed to do so would be kind of that answer.

Sure, that's a good practical answer. Reading and brainstorming, okay, great. Past experiences. That's an interesting way to let your own interest or your own experiences kind of guide you. Yeah. I think we've covered kind of the big ones here. I mean, when I sit down to write an essay, I think brainstorming is a really good way to go about this. Mind mapping which would be somewhere between a brainstorm and outline is a great way to do this. Outlining was mentioned in this chat also. I would certainly recommend that for larger pieces.

One that I didn't see that I would offer to you guys is a method pioneered by composition scholar Peter Elbow. He would say that freewriting is a great way to kind of come to a topic that interest you or find something to write about, which is kind of funny, you know. Writing about anything, leading you to write about something, but I think freewriting is another really good technique to use when you're trying to generate ideas. Cool, thanks for that, guys.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Begin: Writing and Responding to a Discussion Post

Submit your Assignment by Day 4

To participate in this Assignment.

Audio: So, yes, to begin, looking at crafting a discussion post into a course paper. Let's look at Writing and Responding to Discussion Posts. This is going to be a really elemental part of your time at Walden and your studies here. Being that we are in an asynchronous environment, posting your thoughts about a topic and responding to the thoughts of your colleagues about that topic is really our main form of interaction. So, this is kind of, think of it as getting a discussion going. Right? That's why we call them discussion post. But, again, we're going to look at writing and responding to discussion post here in the next few slides.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Students write discussion posts to…

  • Evaluate authors
  • Develop ideas and arguments
  • Show understanding of resources
  • Explore questions
  • All to prepare for papers

Audio: Students write discussion posts for a number of reasons here. right? One, it is to evaluate the author. Sure, you're looking at some of the minds within your field who are offering their take or their findings of their research, evaluating that and looking perhaps for gaps in research would be the next step there. Students write discussion posts to develop ideas and arguments. Yeah. This is a really interesting idea, because the conversations that arise from discussion posts are from intellectual conversation in general often have a way of sharpening our ideas and even refining it into something like an argument, right? Having an intellectual or informed discussion with a colleague about an idea can really tell you what you think about that idea in an interesting way. We use discussion post or students write discussion post to show understanding of resources. Yeah, to show that you've gained this knowledge and a discussion post in that context would be displaying this knowledge. And lastly, students write discussion posts to explore questions. Yeah, to look into these questions that are within your field and from the course resources perhaps offer some sort of solution to that, right?

Now, what maybe obvious here but maybe not, is that all of these intellectual activities really lead up to writing a paper. Right? This all have to do with having your ideas challenged, refining your ideas, and really coming to a point where you know what is out there that's said about your topic, and what you want to argue, or how you want to lend your voice to this larger conversation that goes on in each field. So, again think of it like this, think about the discussion post as in some ways, laying the foundation, this intellectual foundation for you to actually write a paper of your own and add your voice to this larger discussion.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: In the post….

  • Make a claim
  • Organize logically & develop paragraphs
  • Support with evidence
  • Proof for grammar and APA
  • Avoid informal language
  • Reflect on your own experience
  • Apply the learning resources to a new context
  • Analyze and critique what you’re learning

More tips: “Writing and Responding to Discussion Posts”

Audio: Yeah, in a post, there are some other things going on here, right? In terms of practicing academic writing, how this relates to perhaps a larger piece, you're making claims. You're offering your opinion, right? Or the opinion that's based on the resources that you've encountered. You're going to organize logically and develop paragraphs. Yeah, this is still within a discussion post context here. You're going to craft full paragraphs. You're going to support your point with evidence. Absolutely. This is elemental in academic writing. We need to support our points with strong evidence so that the reader beliefs what we're talking about and recognizes that we are an authority in this topic area. It will help you proof for grammar and APA. Yeah, absolutely. This is kind of a low stakes way for you to try on using APA formatting or some grammar concepts that may not be super familiar to you, right? Before we go into a large academic essay, it's nice to be able to try on some of these rules if you don't know them by heart.

And practice academic writing, it also includes avoiding informal language. We want to speak with a scholarly authoritative tone. Yeah, as many things within academic writing, this builds your authority to the reader. It shows to the reader that you know what you're talking about, and they can believe what you're saying. Yeah. In terms of testing out ideas within a discussion post, it really gives you some space to reflect on your own experience. Whereas, your experience might be less applicable in a course paper, a discussion post lets you bring that in. That is a more anecdotal area that you can use your own experience in. Sure. Apply the learning resources to a new context. Absolutely. So, taking some of the resources that the professor has given you and applying them to new situations, the application of that knowledge is definitely something that happens within a discussion post. And it allows you to analyze and critique what you've learned. And this is, again, absolutely elemental thing within academic writing and academic thought. Being a critical thinker and analyzing the content that you ingest is what we do both in discussion post, but to a larger extent in course papers as well.

For some more resources about Writing and Responding to Discussion Post, you can take a look at this link in the bottom right hand corner here. This is another resource that’s offered by the Walden Writing Center. If you would like to get a little bit more in-depth with this specific idea, go ahead and check that out.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Think of posts as dipping your toes into the pool in preparation for jumping into your paper.

[Image of someone dipping their feet into a pool of water]

Audio: Yeah, think of a discussion post as dipping your toes into a pool in preparation for jumping into the water. Now, this might seem a little metaphorical. Right? And this picture illustrates that idea of dipping a toe. But this is really kind of what it is. Right? You're trying on these ideas, you're thinking through a specific bit of course content before you go on to lend your voice to this larger scholarly community. Again, at the bottom right here, if you’d like to delve further into the idea of writing and responding to discussion post, that is available for you right there. Feel free to click on that link, hopefully after this webinar.

Think about a time when a discussion post has been helpful to you in your thinking or writing process. Complete the following sentence:

The discussion post was helpful in my thinking or writing process because _____________.

Audio: Okay, then, let's talk again. I want to think about a time when a discussion post has been helpful to you in your thinking and writing process. Then, complete the following sentence. The discussion post was helpful in my thinking or writing process because... offer your interpretation there. What was helpful to you about it? I'm going to go on mute for a minute or two, and we'll come back and we’ll talk about this more as a larger group.

All right. Cool. We have some of our first answers coming in here. The first, few of them have to do with gaining a new perspective. Yeah, this is what's really interesting about discussions and intellectual conversation in general is, it allows you to see what other people think about this and to try on their views, to think critically about them, and to even to respond to them. Sure. Yeah, I learned a lot from my classmates in terms of new ideas. Yeah, great. Absolutely!

I see another response here. It gave me an idea how to organize my thoughts. Sure. This is again a low stakes area for you to start getting a coherent organization to your thoughts. That's awesome! I see a few more people typing.

I'm just going to give you guys a little bit more time for those of you who wish to participate.

Okay. Yeah, this has been some really good participation. So, thank you, guys. But I think overwhelmingly, I saw people were able to try on new ideas and new perspectives for a topic area. Which is what discussion in academic interchange or conversation is really all about. Some of the other points that I saw here that are really good is working with in-text citation and APA formatting. Absolutely. Or gave me an idea of where to start. Some much of writing, I think there's a real anxiety in writing around, where do I start? Where do I even begin to discuss this large idea that I have so many thoughts about? Discussion posts can kind of lead you into that. Right? Thank you, guys.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: The Continuum

  • Discussion Post: Post by Day 2 an evaluation of what you think is the most significant positive aspect and most significant negative aspect of Schmitt’s classroom management strategies. Give examples of where Schmitt’s methods might be effective in your classroom and why.

Application Paper:

Consider a scenario in which you are recommending your entire school take on a classroom management approach from your course readings. Submit by Day 7 a 3- to 4-page paper that includes the following:

An explanation of the method you would use to educate fellow faculty on your approach including:

how you would manage meetings,

what materials you would provide,

and how you would take resistance into consideration.

Audio: So, then looking at a bit of how to expand this. Let's take a look at couple of different assignment prompts here. The top one is about a discussion post. And this should be, for those of you who aren't new to Walden, who’ve been students for a while, this is going to sound kind of familiar. So, the prompt goes as follows. Post by day 2 and evaluation of what you think is the most significant positive aspect and most significant negative aspect of Schmitt's classroom management strategies. Give examples of where Schmitt's method might be effective in your classroom and why. So, what this discussion post is calling for is for the student to look at Schmitt's writing about classroom management strategies and to offer what they believe is the most significant positive and the most significant negative. Yeah, that seems pretty straightforward. Expanding this then into a paper that ask you to apply this knowledge the prompt changes quite a bit. Here's what an assignment prompt could sound like for a short essay that would ask you to expand upon this discussion post.

Consider a scenario in which you are recommending your entire school take on a classroom management approach from your course readings. Submit by day 7, a 3 to 4-page paper that includes the following: An explanation of the method you would use to educate fellow faculty on your approach including how would you manage meetings? What materials you would provide, and how you would take resistance into consideration.

So, one thing that becomes clear here is that you need to expand on your discussion from the discussion post. The prompt itself goes into more depth. Instead of asking for significant positive aspects and specific negative aspects or significant -- excuse me, negative aspects. It's really getting into more details with that. It's asking how would you manage meetings? So that this could possibly be either/or. Right? What materials you would provide? So, it talks about preparation for these classroom management approaches. And, again, how you would take resistance into consideration. So, it's more nuanced, right? There's more detail that's required to answer the second prompt than there would be to answer the second. It's calling for more.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Research: Find more evidence

[Illustration of books in a library]

Audio: Okay. Before we look at research and find more evidence and returning to our research from a discussion post that we want to expand and do a course paper. I'm going to pause here and see, Kacy, Melissa, are there any questions that the group could benefit from?

Melissa: Sure. We actually had couple of questions come in regarding the length of discussion post. We had students wondering if there was a limit to word count on discussion post? Or how do they know if they’ve included too much in their discussion post? So, could you speak to maybe the length or content differences between posts and assignments?

Michael: Yeah, absolutely. So, how long should a discussion post be? I'm going to give you a very writing instructor answer here. It should be as long as it takes to fully discuss your point. Okay? [Chuckles] Now again, I know that's not kind of a concrete thing. But in a discussion post, you want to be more direct, more to the point, and get your ideas out there so that people can respond to them and you can respond to their ideas vice versa, sure. Discussion posts are going to, in general, have less detail, you're going to elaborate less on the ideas that you’re putting forth. When looking at a course paper, you're really breaking up parts of your discussion post and you're expanding upon them. Something that would be a sentence in a discussion post could easily be turned into a whole paragraph within a short course paper. So how long is too long? I would say if you're repeating yourself, if you find that you’re making the same point that you've already made. Or that you're just being overly wordy. Those are your indications that maybe you're getting too, you're getting a discussion post that's too long. Yeah, did that answer your question, Melissa?

Melissa: That did. Thank you. We have just one more question which is about the formatting of the discussion post. We had a question about how a discussion post should be formatted.

Michael: Okay. Yeah. There's some pretty significant APA guidelines when you're looking at writing an essay, right? You need to have a title page. You need to have page numbers. Your reference, entry list needs to be on a page of its own. Within the discussion post, kind of platform, it doesn't really allow for you to do that. Right? It doesn't give you a lot of space to include things like page breaks or a title page, or these kind of conventional formatting needs from a course paper. So, it's looser just in general. When I think about using APA in a discussion post as a writing instructor, my mind generally goes to citation and references. You still need to incorporate this kind of APA citation formatting and reference entry formatting into a discussion post. But the larger more general formatting things that you would apply to a course paper, you're not able to put them in essentially. So, I wouldn't worry too much about omitting those.

Melissa: Okay, thank you, those are all the questions we have for now.

Michael: Okay, great. Then I will move on.

Audio: As a reminder, we were looking at two different assignment prompts. And thinking about expanding our discussion post into an actual course paper, a short course paper.

Audio: From there, as our circle mentioned in the beginning of the webinar, you really need to delve in and find more evidence. You need to return to your research. In the writing, in the composition community, we talk a lot about research writing as being a really recursive or iterative process. Right? You are returning to your research at multiple times throughout your essay writing, or throughout your research process. You might start with a group of sources and then find that maybe half of them don't really speak to the topic that you're writing about. Then you return to your research and you find some more and you start writing your draft, and you find that hey, this is a really strong piece of evidence that I have here, or strong point that I’d like to make, but I have no evidence for it. And then you need to, again, return to your research to find something that supports that idea. When crafting a course paper from a discussion post, this works similarly well. You need to, again, return to your research and deepen your knowledge on the topic that you posted on for your discussion post.

Visual: Slide changes to the following: Outline Discussion Post

Do a reverse outline of the discussion post where you make a bulleted list of main points.

  • Schmitt’s strategies, summary
  • Positive—creates trust between teacher and students
  • Negative—could isolate students

Ask yourself: What parts of my post could I use in my paper?

Audio: Yeah, outlining a discussion post. Yeah, do a reverse outline of a discussion post where you make a bulleted list of the main points. Reverse outlines are great, what you’re doing is you’re picking apart a discussion post or even a paper and looking at its main points. Similar to a traditional outline, you're looking at how these ideas work together in terms of their organization. A reverse outline as the title would suggest goes in reverse from a normal outline. Oftentimes you outline a paper before you write it. A reverse outline is done after you write it. When you’re trying to, once again, pull the main ideas out. An example of this is as follows. First paragraph or first few sentences of a discussion post is looking at Schmitt's strategies and summary of what Schmitt had to say.

Moving on, this hypothetical discussion post would then talk about some of the positive things. Creates trust between the teachers and students. And, again, talking about these classroom management strategies. And the discussion post could then end by talking about some of these negative, some of these significant negative attributes of Schmitt's theory of classroom management. Perhaps it could isolate students, perhaps it could isolate students yes. This is how a discussion post could look if we were pulling out some of the main ideas. Ask yourself: What parts of my post could I use in my paper? Absolutely. This format, this organization is really effective and could easily be expanded into a larger paper. As you're looking at crafting a academic piece, you know, a larger academic paper, this is kind of how -- excuse me. This can inform your organization. Starting with kind of a summary of Schmitt's strategies, then looking at a number of positive attributes of these strategies or of this theory, and then looking at some of the negative attributes. It informs a potential organization, if you were to expand it. That's why a reverse outline can be really useful when looking at a discussion post.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following: Outline Discussion Post Practice

Sample paragraph:

I have used many of Schmitt’s (2016) classroom management strategies in my own classroom. One strategy that has worked well for me is allowing students to decide which assignment they will complete from a list of choices. This approach ensures students are engaged in the assignment while still maintaining high standards (Schmitt, 2016). I have observed a negative result of this strategy, however. Sometimes this strategy can isolate students since each student is working on a different project. Another strategy Schmitt recommended is sending summary reports home to students’ guardians. While this strategy creates more work for me, it also ensures students’ guardians are engaged in the classroom too.

Chat box:  What are the main points of this paragraph that we

can keep aside for a later assignment?

Audio:  Let's take look at this sample paragraph. I'm going to read this, but then once we're done in the chat box, I want you to really pick apart the main points that are here, right? The question that I want you to keep in mind as I read this discussion post is this. What are the main points of the paragraph that we can keep aside for a later assignment? So, yes, without, further ado.

I have used many of Schmitt's 2016 classroom management strategies in my own classroom. One strategy that has work well for me is allowing students to decide which assignment they will complete from the list of choices. This approach ensures students are engaged in the assignment while maintaining high standards. They have a hypothetical citation there. I have observed a negative result of this strategy. Sometimes, this strategy can isolate students since each student is working on a different project. Another strategy Schmitt recommended is sending summary reports home to students’ guardians. While this strategy creates more work for me, it also ensures the student's guardians are engaged in the classroom too.

So, again, in the chat box, let's talk about some of these main points. What are the main points of this paragraph that we can keep aside for a later assignment. What from this discussion post can we expand upon? I'm going to mute myself for a couple of seconds here and wait for you to offer your analysis.

Awesome. I'm seeing some great responses here. If you're still working on this, no rush. By all means, take your time. I'm going to go on mute again. But, again, you guys are doing a great job!

Okay, cool. I'm seeing great answers here, talking about engaging guardians. Talking about teaching methods here. Student engagement certainly is an idea that this gets at. Multiple strategies use as a subtopic for a final paper. Absolutely, that's a great way to do this. Classroom strategies, classroom management, students can be isolated. Sure. As I look at a paragraph like this. I think that there are really 3 main things that can be expanded upon here. One, is right at the beginning when they talk about Schmitt's classroom management strategies. In what follows they discuss two of these strategies, but as a reader, I'm thinking to myself I’d like to hear more about this. What other strategies does Schmitt have? Then we're looking at specific strategies, one about course assignments and giving the students choices about to choose an assignment from. Here, we see a positive and a negative. One, it can engage students more, because they can follow their interest. Two, it can isolate them, because each student is working on a different project. Yeah. The last thing I think can be expanded upon here is this second strategy of sending summaries home to a student’s guardian. This again has some positive and negative attributes. It talks about how the guardians or the student's support system at home is going to be more engaged in their learning but it's also more work for the teacher to do so. So, as I’m looking at these three, these would be the points that I would pick out to then possibly to expand upon. Good work, you guys. You guys most of them right off the bat.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following:  Research:  Identify Gaps

  • Review learning resources
  • Visit the Library
  • Follow the reference list of what you’ve read
  • Consider your own experience (as applicable)
  • Ask a Librarian : [email protected]

Audio:  So, from though then, as I've mentioned before, we need to return to our research to deepen our understanding. If to use our example of Schmitt's classroom management strategies, we need to learn more in-depth about these strategies and about some of the positive and negative outcomes of them. If I were to be researching this, I would go to the library and really look who else is studying these classroom management strategies. What do those studies find? Are these thought of as being positive? Are these thought of as being perhaps negative or less useful? To find this information though, you need to, again, return to your research and identify gaps. You want to review your learning resources before you do this, then visit the library, this is a great place to find academic scholarly research, which should always be the backbone of your academic argumentation. You can follow the reference list of what you’ve read. Oh, this is such a great strategy. A lot of the pieces that you're going to encounter as scholars have extended reference lists, right?

Where they layout the publication information of the sources that they use. These are just solid gold for doing research because you can take those ideas and look up the actual piece that the piece you're looking at used, and really engage with that piece then as well. It kind of can point you in the right direction for other voices within that conversation. Lastly, considering your own experience as applicable. Sure, your own experience can kind of inform your research. Yeah. As you can see on the right-hand side of this slide though, we have a link there to ask a librarian. This is something I really can't stress enough. Research librarians, think of them as professional researchers, right? When my in-person students come to me and ask for research help. I'm pretty good. I can't point them in the direction of some good resources. But the librarians at any university, particularly at Walden are going to be able to find you the best sources to use, within your topic area. They are experts at finding these. So, by all means, I would really encourage you to use research librarians. Again, they're pros at doing this and they can find anything for you. So, take advantage of them.

  • Student choice in assignment = engaged students
  • Student choice can also lead to isolation
  • Summary reports to guardians = engaged guardians
  • Summary reports = more work for the teacher

More Research:

  • How could I avoid student isolation when giving students choice in assignment?
  • Is there a way to make summary reports quicker to create?
  • Is there research to show how  not  using these strategies negatively affects student and guardian engagement?

Audio:  Continuing our discussion about identifying gaps and expanding our research then, let's return to this kind of Schmitt's classroom management strategies. If we're looking at student choice in assignments, this can kind of relate to the idea of engaging students that can open up a further vein of research for you and potentially even a gap that have not been researched. Which is what we're always looking for to add our voice to these larger academic discussions. Student choice can also lead to isolation. So, this is another potentially a gap within the research. The only way to find out if it's a gap is to go and look at the research that's been done in this topic area, to actually pound the pavement and see what's been published out there. Summary reports to guardians engage guardians. Yeah, again, this works similarly well. Summary reports equal make more work for teachers. Yeah. Totally. These, again, can be potential gaps in literature. After more research, you know, looking at developing these research questions to guide our research. You can think about how can I avoid student isolation when giving students a choice in assignments? Yeah. This would be a perfectly good question to guide your research. As always, we want to start with research questions and look for answers to those questions. We don't want to start with a perspective thesis and then try to prove that thesis. We want to let our research guide our writing. Be open to where your research takes you. Another possible research question could be, is there a way to make summary reports quicker to create? Sure. This could be something that you then turn to the databases, turn to the librarians, and really try to find an answer to. Lastly, is there research to show how not using these strategies negatively affect students and guardian engagement? Yeah. Again, the point I'm getting at here is that from these specific main points in a discussion post, if you were to expand this into a larger research paper, you would then take some of these, or gather some of these research questions, maybe one, maybe two that are really good, and look for the answer to those to then inform your research as you move forward.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following:  Explore:  Generate more ideas

            [Image of a compass and a camera]

Audio:  And this exploration, as I just mentioned is really the next step here, right? You need to generate more ideas, follow your research, see what's out there, explore the scholarly world as it relates to that topic.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following:  Explore  Ideas

What strategies do you currently use

to brainstorm, develop, and expand your ideas?

Audio:  So, yeah, let's chat again. In the chat box, I want you to respond to this question. What strategies do you currently use to brainstorm, develop, and expand your ideas? So, once you've kind of got a notion in your mind of I want to write about this idea, how do you expand on that? How do you bring -- yeah, I'll just leave it there. How do you expand on that? Brainstorm and develop and expand those ideas to then put them into a larger paper. I'll give you guys couple of minutes to respond here.

Okay. I'm seeing some really, really awesome answers come in here. I'm going to give you guys one more minute before I start discussing the trends I'm seeing for those who are writing. So, don't rush. You've got another minute.

All right. Cool. I'm seeing really good responses here. One that particularly catches my eyes is about mind mapping and how it's a great approach because you break the idea into sub-ideas and look at the organizational principles and themes that emerge that can inform the structure of your paper. That kind of took the words right out of my mouth there, absolutely. Breaking things down into certain buckets, right? Mind mapping these things into subtopics can really help to inform your overall essay organization. Before this process, if you're earlier in the process, another response that really kind of caught my eye would be to Google search this topic. Google this idea and see what pops up. You know, although this isn't scholarly, and a lot of what you find might not be appropriate to use in an academic essay, it's going to give you a pretty good idea of some of the conversations that are out there in this topic area. That some of the things that come up in this Google search, this general open Internet search is going to be some of the things most likely that the scholars are actually writing about. The difference is the popular sources that you find on Google are going to be summaries of some of these larger conversations. While the scholarly sources you find at the library are going to be the people who are actually doing the research. They are actually lending their voice to this conversation. So, they're not commenting on the conversation, they are joining the conversation. There's kind of a big difference there. But, again, these are really good strategies. From there then, this general Google search, you can move into the library database and look for some evidentiary research or some research, some scholarly research, excuse me, scholarly research is the way to put that, that is addressing these same ideas that you found in a Google search. So, yeah, those are some great strategies. Thanks for participating, you guys.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following:  Explore  Ideas

  • Take a break
  • Learn more:
  • “Prewriting Techniques: Taking the Next Steps”  and  Prewriting page

Audio:  Here are some other methods that some I've mentioned, some I haven't, about exploring your ideas. One, and this is one I love. I use all the time with my in-person students. Freewriting. Freewriting is simply sitting down and forcing yourself to write non-stop for 10 minutes. Now, Peter Elbow would say, that if you can't think of anything more to write, that you should just repeat the last word you wrote over and over again. Or write I have nothing to say. Or no, no. This is a good strategy in my opinion, because it kind of takes some of these ideas that are in your brain and gets them on paper without you having to worrying about some of the mechanical trapping of academic writing. When you're freewriting, you're not worried about where that comma goes, you're not worried about if I’m creating complete sentences or complete thoughts. This is not what you’re doing. This is not the focus is. You're just taking what's in your mind and getting it on the page. Elbow would say that freewriting is a vehicle to show us what we already know. It's a way of articulating our views on paper and getting them from in our head onto a page. I know we've spent a lot of time talking about this, but it’s very close to my heart. I would recommend freewriting to anyone, absolutely.

Outlining, or mind mapping very similar. Thinking about some of these subpoints and subtopics within this topic that you're working with. And seeing maybe how they can fit together. Sure. Take a break is another good way to explore these ideas. There could be kind of this like Eureka moment, right? Where you sit down to do something completely unrelated to writing, and you realize, that hey, I want to make this point. This is perhaps my strongest point. Or this is an idea I definitely need to expand upon in my research. Taking a break and moving away from your writing is a really good way to generate new ideas and to kind of recharge your batteries as a scholar. I've often found that my best ideas, my most poignant writing comes from a place when I'm doing something that has nothing to do with writing. Right? And I'm just doing that kind of intellectual work to be able to then return to my writing and articulate those on paper.

For some more or another couple of resources that is we have that discusses these kind of freewriting techniques are in the bottom right-hand corner here. We have one that talks about pre-writing techniques, taking the next steps and one that’s just a pre-writing page. So, it has number of other resources there. For those of you who are interested in kind of how these works and learning more about freewriting techniques, I would definitely encourage you to take a look at these. Walden has a number of resources to help you as you get started.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following:  Explore  Idea

New Paper Outline

Thesis:  Schmitt’s (2016) strategies of student choice in assignment and summary reports lead to increased student and guardian engagement in the classroom.

  • Summary, description (Schmitt, 2016; Carter, 2017)
  • Advantages (engagement, better learning)
  • Mitigating isolation—Refer to new articles I found (Soto & Gonzalez, 2016)
  • Summary, description (Schmitt, 2016; Mathur, 2015)
  • Advantages (engagement, better informed)
  • Mitigating more work (Department of Education suggestions)

Audio:  Exploring your ideas. So here, we have kind of a paper outline. And, we're going to return again to this Schmitt's theory or Schmitt's strategies of classroom management. To break this up into a larger, maybe end of the week style course paper, this is perhaps an effective outline for this. Thesis could be something like Schmitt's 2016 strategies of student choice in assignment and summary reports lead to increase student and guardian engagement in the classrooms. So, this is making the point that Schmitt's strategies lead to more engagement. Right? And what it's doing here, as you can see in the organization, is it's breaking these into two. It's breaking them up by allowing student choice and one by sending these reports home to the guardian. This is a perfectly good way to break this up. In both of these then, it's going to breakdown some of the advantages, some of the disadvantages, and it also includes some of the sources that this author is going to bring to these paragraphs. Yeah. This is a good way to go about outlining. I often encourage my students to include source material in their outline, because then you don't have to go searching for it when it comes time to actually write. I think part of the battle with writing is looking at things logistically, right? Saving yourself time becomes an important writing skill and a larger research piece. So, if you can do that by cataloging some of your sources in an outline, that's a great move and I would definitely recommend it. The other advantage that an outline gives you, it allows you to change things, big things, like organization or paragraph placement around in a really small low stake place. As I'm looking at this, if I wanted to switch these two paragraphs around and see if that was more or less effective for my overall argument, I can do that really easily. As opposed to when you write the whole essay out, you then need to, you know, work on your transitions and work on working this information that was once towards the end of your paper in towards the beginning. And this can be trickier, right? This can take longer to do that in an eloquent and succinct way. When you use an outline, it's just a copy and paste. You can easily do that and look at how your line of thought is being developed in that essay. So, I really like outlines for that reason.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following:  Expand:  Write!

Audio:  As you write, you will expand on these ideas. Right? Offering your own analysis. Working with source material that supports your point. Showing the reader how you mean for them to interpret the source material. And really expanding on your ideas and what you think. This is what writing is really about. Right? We're elaborating on our views.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following: Write your Paper

  • Use your mind mapping, outlining, freewriting, notes, etc.
  • Be sure to include an introduction, body, and conclusion
  • Take time to revise and proofread
  • Return to your discussion post if needed
  • Ask your instructor questions

Learn more:  Life Cycle of a Paper  and  Revising

Audio:  In writing your paper, yeah, use your mind mapping, outlining, freewriting notes, etcetera. Once you turn to write, it doesn't mean that you have to throw your outline away. Right? You can always refer back to that. If you’re forgetting, what I was going to say in paragraph 3? I remember, I had something that I needed to do here, there you go, you can just look back at your notes, Right? And see exactly what you meant to accomplish there. Be sure to include an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. Yeah, this is good advice for any academic piece, especially, a course paper. You want to have a beginning, a middle, and an end for your reader. You want to lead your reader in with an introduction, show them the main argument at the end of your introduction and your thesis statement, then expand upon these sub points in your body and lastly lead the reader out in a conclusion giving them that kind of that circular feel that you’ve talked about this topic at length and I'm ready to not talk about it anymore, because I covered it fully. Take time to revise and proofread. Absolutely. Revision, proof reading, returning to your draft once you’ve got it on paper. This is how you make a good essay. I think students often think that writers will wake up in the morning and be really, really happy with what they have to say and be confident with their message and sit down from beginning to end and write this. But, this is really not how it goes. The best writers that you know the best writers that you read, return and revise and proofread at length. Sometimes for months on end. So, don't think that you need to write something perfect the first time. Be ready to revise and proofread.

You can return to your discussion post if needed, if you had like a really good point that you made there, that you think is getting buried as your drafting this larger piece, by all means return and you can always ask your instructor questions. They're going to be a good resource for you and for clarification. You know? But I'm sure that it would be okay to run some of these ideas by your instructor. They are going to be the authority in their field. Right? So, if you're thinking about does this point really fit within this discussion, that would be a question that you could ask your instructor.

For those of you interested in more and learning more about crafting a paper, we have a link here at the bottom right corner that talks about the lifecycle of a paper and another one talks about revising and some important things to keep in mind as you return to your draft to make it better.

Visual : Slide changes to the following:  Final Recommendation : Give yourself Time

  • Begin:  Discussion post and responses
  • Take the Next Step:  Research, explore and learn
  • Expand:  Write your paper

Audio:  Final recommendation. Give yourself time. Time is the word that’s right back there behind the top little course resources box. Yeah. As I've mentioned, one of the big challenges of writing is logistical. It's thinking about time. It's fitting that in. So, in going from your course resources to your discussion post, to your research, and expanding into a paper to turn into your instructor, think about time here. Right? When can I find the time to do this? When am I fitting this into my life? And be ready to return to certain steps throughout the process to expand your knowledge base to remind yourself of where you wanted to go with this piece and then to eventually craft something that you feel strongly about and you feel is an effective piece of writing.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following: Activity & Chat

  • Consider a discussion post you wrote recently--last week or the week before.
  • Did you use it to develop ideas or complete that week’s paper?
  • If so, how did you use it? If not, how could you use this webinar’s strategies to use it?

Audio:  Okay. Lastly. Let's take about two to three minutes to do this one so that we have a little bit of time for questions at the end. But I want you to consider a discussion post you wrote recently, last week or the week before. Did you use it to develop ideas or complete that week's paper? If so, how did you use it? If not, how could you use this webinar, the webinar strategies, the webinar I’ve been delivering to use that, and expand that into your week's paper? So again, think about a discussion post that you crafted. Did you expand that into a paper? If yes, how? If no, how could have you done that? We're going to think about this and we'll be back in couple of minutes here.

Okay, then in the interest of time, we're going to move on here. But I see many of you have never done this. You haven’t taken a discussion post and expanded it.  I’d recommend doing this. You're deepening your knowledge to do this. I'm seeing some people saying they would create an outline or return to their research before they do so. Yeah, this is kind of what this question was meant to get after. Returning to your research, deepening your knowledge about what you wrote about in your discussion post and then crafting that, picking that apart into subtopics and expanding upon those subtopics. Sure.

Visual:  Slide changes to the following:  Questions

Now:  Let us know!  ·           Anytime:  [email protected]

Continue the conversation on Twitter with 

Looking for more tips on writing a discussion post? 

Check out the recorded webinar  “Writing and Responding to Discussion Posts”  and  “Life Cycle of a Paper”

Audio:  So, if have your questions, go ahead and put those in the Q & A box at the moment. I'll field a couple of them in the last few minutes here in this webinar. If you have questions after the webinar, feel free to reach out to us at [email protected]. This is our general writing support email and we will respond to you with a thoughtful answer or perhaps a resource that can be helpful to you in exploring ideas of academic writing. For more tips, for more resources regarding writing discussion posts, you can take a look at the webinar on Writing and Responding to Discussion Posts. That would be a great one to listen to. Or Lifecycle of a Paper. I think both of these were linked to earlier in this webinar, but I'm going to pitch them again here because they're really good resources. And if this is something you struggle with or like to learn more about, I would point you in this discretion.

Melissa: Thank you so much.

Michael: Go ahead, Melissa. Sorry.

Melissa: We have just two questions for you if you have time.

Michael: Sure.

Melissa: The first one is about are there any, I guess, maybe not rules, but recommendations for how many sources you should use in a discussion post versus a course paper?

Michael: Sure. That's a great, great question. In looking at the place of a discussion post within a Walden course, oftentimes you're going to be using the course resources that were provided to you that week, right? You're going to be responding to, analyzing, critiquing those course resources. So, it's appropriate to kind of stay on just those course resources there, maybe bringing in one or two more resource that is you've done the research on yourself. As you're expanding into a course paper, you want to bring in more sources, right? You want to expand your knowledge in this topic area. I'm not going to give you a number, because that's just not my style. But I would say this needs to be significantly more. So maybe twice as many? Or maybe something like that for those of who you really want to pin this down. But, again, discussion posts are really meant to engage you with the course content and to cultivate a discussion with your peers and colleagues about that course content. When you're moving into writing a paper, you need to expand your resources and gather more, to become more informed on that topic.

Melissa: Thank you. And on the topic of expanding a post into a full paper, we had few questions come in about using a discussion post as part of a later assignment. Can students take a discussion post and recycle it as maybe the beginning or middle of some other assignment?

Michael: Thank you, Melissa, this is a good question. Right? But the answer is no. No, you can't. So, here's how this works, right? When you turn a piece of writing to a class for a grade, this is technically considered a publication, right? This is kind of on the books as it were as something that you've submitted. So, if you were to take that and recycle that, put that into a larger piece, not changing it at all or expanding upon it, that is considered a form of plagiarism, right? So again, if you want to, if you're going to use a discussion post in a course paper, you want to expand upon that and bring in more critical thought, bring in more sources and elaborating more on the ideas that you kind of touched on in your discussion post. I'll point you back to the slide about dipping your toe versus jumping in. This is a good way to think about this. Yeah. I'll leave it there.

Melissa: Okay, that's a great answer. Thank you so much for clearing that up. Well, Michael, I want to thank you for your time presenting tonight. This was such a useful webinar about developing a paper moving from your post to that course paper. And I want to thank everybody for attending. The recording will be part of our webinar archive if you want to come back and view this at a later date and as Michael said, if you have any questions, please feel free to use that email address  [email protected] . Thanks! Have a great day, everyone.

[End Transcript]

  • Previous Page: Demonstrating Critical Thinking in Writing Assignments
  • Next Page: Grammar for Academic Writers: Identifying Common Errors
  • Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

  • Academic Residencies
  • Academic Skills
  • Career Planning and Development
  • Customer Care Team
  • Field Experience
  • Military Services
  • Student Success Advising
  • Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

  • Center for Social Change
  • Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
  • Office of Degree Acceleration
  • Office of Research and Doctoral Services
  • Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

  • Doctoral Writing Assessment
  • Form & Style Review
  • Quick Answers
  • ScholarWorks
  • SKIL Courses and Workshops
  • Walden Bookstore
  • Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
  • Student Safety/Title IX
  • Legal & Consumer Information
  • Website Terms and Conditions
  • Cookie Policy
  • Accessibility
  • Accreditation
  • State Authorization
  • Net Price Calculator
  • Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

  • PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
  • EDIT Edit this Article
  • EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
  • Browse Articles
  • Learn Something New
  • Quizzes Hot
  • This Or That Game New
  • Train Your Brain
  • Explore More
  • Support wikiHow
  • About wikiHow
  • Log in / Sign up
  • Education and Communications
  • College University and Postgraduate
  • Academic Writing

How to Write a Discussion Essay

Last Updated: June 27, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Jake Adams . Jake Adams is an academic tutor and the owner of Simplifi EDU, a Santa Monica, California based online tutoring business offering learning resources and online tutors for academic subjects K-College, SAT & ACT prep, and college admissions applications. With over 14 years of professional tutoring experience, Jake is dedicated to providing his clients the very best online tutoring experience and access to a network of excellent undergraduate and graduate-level tutors from top colleges all over the nation. Jake holds a BS in International Business and Marketing from Pepperdine University. There are 14 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 437,794 times.

Jake Adams

Discussion Essay Outline and Example

paper discussion you tube

Planning Your Essay

Step 1 Work through the...

  • For instance, maybe the question is, "Immigration has been a heated topic on the national level for many years. With issues like the DREAM Act and President Trump's stances on policy, it's likely to remain a central issue. Using authoritative resources to back up your argument, take a stance on immigration policy, establishing whether you think it should be more or less strict and why."
  • You can establish that the main topic is immigration policy from the sentence, "Take a stance on immigration policy."
  • If you're having trouble understanding the question, don't be afraid to talk to the professor. They can help you better understand what they're asking for.

Step 2 Perform initial research to understand the issue.

  • If your essay will be based off a discussion had in class, ask your instructor if you can use class notes as a primary source.
  • Look for respected news sources, as well as websites with ".edu" and ".gov" extensions.
  • You may need to look up information on the DREAM Act or President Trump's policies to help you understand the question, for example. For this part, you don't need to take extensive notes, as you're just trying to get a feel for the subject.

Step 3 Take a side on the issue to begin outlining your essay.

  • If you were given a text to base your essay on, make sure that text has enough evidence to support your chosen position.

Step 4 Add the main points you'd like to cover to your outline.

  • Use Roman numerals on your page to mark your main ideas. Write a main point by each Roman numeral. You should only cover 3 to 4 main points in a relatively short essay, such as one that's 3 to 5 pages.

Step 5 Find research to support your points.

  • Your main sources should be books or ebooks, journal articles from academic journals, and credible websites. You can also use high quality news articles if they're applicable to your topic.

Step 6 Take notes that include citations.

  • For a book, you should include the author's name, the editor's name (if applicable), the title of the book, the publication year, the publication city, the edition, and the title of the book chapter in an anthology by multiple authors.
  • For a journal, include the author's name, the journal title, the article title, the digital object identifier (DOI), the ISSN, the publication date, the volume (if applicable), the issue (if applicable), and the page numbers for the journal article.
  • If you're searching in a database, you can often ask the database to save this information for you, but you should include identifiers on your notes.

Step 7 Fill in your outline to finish planning your essay.

  • For example, if one of your main points is "Immigration increases diversity," some of your points underneath might be "Brings in new cuisines," and "Brings in new art."
  • Find examples from your research, and add notes to each point to fill them in.

Writing the Introduction

Step 1 Begin with a hook such as a quotation or anecdote to engage readers.

  • For an example or anecdote, start by telling a short story about something relevant to your topic. For instance, you might write the following for an essay on immigration, "When I was 4-years-old, my parents told me we were going on a long trip. After a bus ride, we spent nights walking, my dad carrying me most of the way. One day, we crossed a river. That day marked our first day in our new country."

Step 2 Introduce your topic in your transition sentences.

  • For example, you might write, "Immigration is a highly-debated issue. It is controversial because some people fear how it affects the resources of the country the people are immigrating to, while others believe the improved quality of life for immigrants is what’s most important."

Step 3 Work on a thesis statement to establish your argument.

  • For instance, your thesis statement might be, "Immigration is good for the country because it increases diversity, infuses the country with new talent, and broadens the population's perspective, and it should be encouraged with a few basic safeguards in place."

Composing the Body of Your Essay

Step 1 Limit each paragraph to 1 idea.

  • For instance, if you're writing a short research paper, one paragraph might be your main point "Immigration increases diversity," where you cover all your bullet points in that paragraph.
  • If you're digging deeper, you might create a section about diversity, and then use a paragraph to cover "brings in new cuisines," another to cover "brings in new art," and so on.

Step 2 Acknowledge the other side of the issue.

  • Try not to set up a "straw man" argument, where you don't give the other side a fair chance. You should be able to support your position without purposefully creating a weak position on the other side.

Step 3 Keep your whole argument in mind as you write.

  • For instance, maybe you want to transition between a section about increasing diversity to one about bringing in new talent. You might write a sentence like, "Increasing diversity in our country doesn't just bring in new cuisines and art, it also brings in hard workers that have fresh perspectives on old problems in the workforce."

Step 4 Support your ideas with research.

  • You can paraphrase other ideas or use direct quotes, but only use a direct quote if the author said something in a unique way. Otherwise, put it in your own words.
  • You may want to begin body paragraphs with a quote from a relevant source. Then, explain or provide commentary on the quote and show how it supports your position.
  • You can also use statistics to back up your research. For instance, if one of your arguments is that immigration doesn't increase crime, use statistics to back that up.

Concluding Your Essay

Step 1 Synthesize the information from your essay.

  • For instance, you might write, "A truly great country is one that celebrates differences and welcomes new ideas and perspectives. While immigration has some negative effects on a country, overall, allowing people from other countries to come in helps to spark new ideas and make the country a better and more interesting place to live. Rather than being a drain on society, immigrants are motivated to work hard and our citizens can only benefit from listening to their perspectives."

Step 2 Avoid restating your introduction.

  • Once you have the flow down, read it again to check for grammatical mistakes and typos. It can help to read it aloud, as it slows you down and forces you to read every word.

Expert Q&A

Jake Adams

  • Remember you can't research forever. Often, the research stage absorbs a student so fully that the upcoming submission date seems unimportant. Make sure to leave yourself at least a few days to write your essay. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

You Might Also Like

Write an Essay

  • ↑ Jake Adams. Academic Tutor & Test Prep Specialist. Expert Interview. 20 May 2020.
  • ↑ https://student.unsw.edu.au/answering-assignment-questions
  • ↑ https://student.unsw.edu.au/essay-and-assignment-planning
  • ↑ https://opentextbc.ca/writingforsuccess/chapter/chapter-11-developing-a-convincing-argument/
  • ↑ https://student.unsw.edu.au/organising-your-ideas
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/introductions/
  • ↑ https://www.umgc.edu/current-students/learning-resources/writing-center/writing-resources/parts-of-an-essay/essay-introductions
  • ↑ https://wts.indiana.edu/writing-guides/how-to-write-a-thesis-statement.html
  • ↑ https://www.student.unsw.edu.au/writing-your-essay
  • ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/establishing_arguments/organizing_your_argument.html
  • ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/establishing_arguments/research_and_evidence.html
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/conclusions/
  • ↑ https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/conclusion
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/editing-and-proofreading/

About This Article

Jake Adams

To write a discussion essay, start by taking a side on the issue you're writing about, like "Immigration is good for the country." Then, outline the main points that made you decide to take that position and do research to find evidence that backs them up. Look for credible sources that can help you make your argument, and don't forget to cite them. Then, when you're writing your essay, devote 1 paragraph to each main point and include your evidence. For help writing the introduction and conclusion to your essay, scroll down! Did this summary help you? Yes No

  • Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Ellie Foster

Ellie Foster

Sep 28, 2021

Did this article help you?

Ellie Foster

Apr 27, 2016

Am I a Narcissist or an Empath Quiz

Featured Articles

Learn to Say No

Trending Articles

How to Take the Perfect Thirst Trap

Watch Articles

Wrap a Round Gift

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Info
  • Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Develop the tech skills you need for work and life

  • Mobile Site
  • Staff Directory
  • Advertise with Ars

Filter by topic

  • Biz & IT
  • Gaming & Culture

Front page layout

Pics and it didn't happen —

Openai collapses media reality with sora, a photorealistic ai video generator, hello, cultural singularity—soon, every video you see online could be completely fake..

Benj Edwards - Feb 16, 2024 5:23 pm UTC

Snapshots from three videos generated using OpenAI's Sora.

On Thursday, OpenAI announced Sora , a text-to-video AI model that can generate 60-second-long photorealistic HD video from written descriptions. While it's only a research preview that we have not tested, it reportedly creates synthetic video (but not audio yet) at a fidelity and consistency greater than any text-to-video model available at the moment. It's also freaking people out.

Further Reading

"It was nice knowing you all. Please tell your grandchildren about my videos and the lengths we went to to actually record them," wrote Wall Street Journal tech reporter Joanna Stern on X.

"This could be the 'holy shit' moment of AI," wrote Tom Warren of The Verge.

"Every single one of these videos is AI-generated, and if this doesn't concern you at least a little bit, nothing will," tweeted YouTube tech journalist Marques Brownlee.

For future reference—since this type of panic will some day appear ridiculous—there's a generation of people who grew up believing that photorealistic video must be created by cameras. When video was faked (say, for Hollywood films), it took a lot of time, money, and effort to do so, and the results weren't perfect. That gave people a baseline level of comfort that what they were seeing remotely was likely to be true, or at least representative of some kind of underlying truth. Even when the kid jumped over the lava , there was at least a kid and a room.

The prompt that generated the video above: " A movie trailer featuring the adventures of the 30 year old space man wearing a red wool knitted motorcycle helmet, blue sky, salt desert, cinematic style, shot on 35mm film, vivid colors. "

Technology like Sora pulls the rug out from under that kind of media frame of reference. Very soon, every photorealistic video you see online could be 100 percent false in every way. Moreover, every historical video you see could also be false. How we confront that as a society and work around it while maintaining trust in remote communications is far beyond the scope of this article, but I tried my hand at offering some solutions  back in 2020, when all of the tech we're seeing now seemed like a distant fantasy to most people.

In that piece, I called the moment that truth and fiction in media become indistinguishable the "cultural singularity." It appears that OpenAI is on track to bring that prediction to pass a bit sooner than we expected.

Prompt: Reflections in the window of a train traveling through the Tokyo suburbs.

OpenAI has found that, like other AI models that use the transformer architecture, Sora scales with available compute . Given far more powerful computers behind the scenes, AI video fidelity could improve considerably over time. In other words, this is the "worst" AI-generated video is ever going to look. There's no synchronized sound yet, but that might be solved in future models.

How (we think) they pulled it off

AI video synthesis has progressed by leaps and bounds over the past two years. We first covered text-to-video models in September 2022 with Meta's Make-A-Video . A month later, Google showed off Imagen Video . And just 11 months ago, an AI-generated version of Will Smith eating spaghetti went viral. In May of last year, what was previously considered to be the front-runner in the text-to-video space, Runway Gen-2, helped craft a fake beer commercial full of twisted monstrosities, generated in two-second increments. In earlier video-generation models, people pop in and out of reality with ease, limbs flow together like pasta, and physics doesn't seem to matter.

Sora (which means "sky" in Japanese) appears to be something altogether different. It's high-resolution (1920x1080), can generate video with temporal consistency (maintaining the same subject over time) that lasts up to 60 seconds, and appears to follow text prompts with a great deal of fidelity. So, how did OpenAI pull it off?

OpenAI doesn't usually share insider technical details with the press, so we're left to speculate based on theories from experts and information given to the public.

OpenAI says that Sora is a diffusion model, much like DALL-E 3 and Stable Diffusion . It generates a video by starting off with noise and "gradually transforms it by removing the noise over many steps," the company explains. It "recognizes" objects and concepts listed in the written prompt and pulls them out of the noise, so to speak, until a coherent series of video frames emerge.

Sora is capable of generating videos all at once from a text prompt, extending existing videos, or generating videos from still images. It achieves temporal consistency by giving the model "foresight" of many frames at once, as OpenAI calls it, solving the problem of ensuring a generated subject remains the same even if it falls out of view temporarily.

OpenAI represents video as collections of smaller groups of data called "patches," which the company says are similar to tokens (fragments of a word) in GPT-4. "By unifying how we represent data, we can train diffusion transformers on a wider range of visual data than was possible before, spanning different durations, resolutions, and aspect ratios," the company writes.

An important tool in OpenAI's bag of tricks is that its use of AI models is compounding . Earlier models are helping to create more complex ones. Sora follows prompts well because, like DALL-E 3 , it utilizes synthetic captions that describe scenes in the training data generated by another AI model like GPT-4V . And the company is not stopping here. "Sora serves as a foundation for models that can understand and simulate the real world," OpenAI writes, "a capability we believe will be an important milestone for achieving AGI."

One question on many people's minds is what data OpenAI used to train Sora. OpenAI has not revealed its dataset, but based on what people are seeing in the results, it's possible OpenAI is using synthetic video data generated in a video game engine in addition to sources of real video (say, scraped from YouTube or licensed from stock video libraries). Nvidia's Dr. Jim Fan, who is a specialist in training AI with synthetic data, wrote on X, "I won't be surprised if Sora is trained on lots of synthetic data using Unreal Engine 5. It has to be!" Until confirmed by OpenAI, however, that's just speculation.

reader comments

Channel ars technica.

COMMENTS

  1. How to Write the Discussion for a Scientific Paper

    Many scientific writers find the discussion section of a journal paper to be the most difficult to write. In this video, I provide a basic formula for struct...

  2. How To Write A Research Paper: Discussion (PROVEN Template)

    How to write a DISCUSSION for scientific research papers | Step-by-step breakdown Butler Scientific Communications 13K views 3 years ago How to write the discussion chapter (and what NOT to...

  3. How to Write the Discussion

    1.26K subscribers Subscribe Subscribed L i k e 25K views 5 years ago How to Write Research Papers in APA Style | UC San Diego Psychology Want to write a Discussion section? Here's how! For more...

  4. How to write the Discussion part 2

    This video continues how to write the discussion section of a research paper, looking at the language used: particularly tenses and hedging.Here is a link to...

  5. GATE 2024

    GATE 2024 | Complete Paper Discussion | Biotechnology | IFASIFAS: India's No. 1 Institute for the CSIR NET, SET & GATE Examination!! Dear Aspirants, Want to ...

  6. Online Paper Discussion

    Online Paper Discussion (OPD) is a discussion program conducted from the year 2020. This program is conducted by the boys (2k22 O/L) of C.W.W. Kannangara Central College - Mathugama....

  7. Paper Discussion

    Share your videos with friends, family, and the world

  8. PDF How to Give a Good Paper Discussion

    discussion, your audience's capacity to absorb multiple points is even more limited. I try to present no more than three comments in a single discussion. If you have 10 minutes to discuss a paper, that's less than three minutes per point if you leave 30-60 seconds to summarize the paper and 30-60 seconds to recap your points at the end. If you

  9. Big Paper: Building a Silent Conversation

    This discussion strategy uses writing and silence as tools to help students explore a topic in depth. In a Big Paper discussion, students write out their responses to a stimulus, such as a quotation or historical document. This process slows down students' thinking and gives them an opportunity to focus on the views of others.

  10. How to Write Discussions and Conclusions

    the results of your research, a discussion of related research, and a comparison between your results and initial hypothesis. Tip: Not all journals share the same naming conventions. You can apply the advice in this article to the conclusion, results or discussion sections of your manuscript.

  11. How to Write the Discussion?

    The idea of a discussion is to communicate to the readers the importance of your observations and the results of all your hard work. In this section, you are expected to infer their meaning and explain the importance of your results and finally provide specific suggestions for future research [1, 2].

  12. How to structure the discussion of your scientific paper

    The discussion of a scientific paper is the resolution of its story: Everything comes together to shed light on the question that motivated the research. A well-written discussion leaves the reader inspired and satisfied—a noble goal and a difficult one to achieve.

  13. How to Write a Discussion Section

    Step 1: Summarize your key findings Step 2: Give your interpretations Step 3: Discuss the implications Step 4: Acknowledge the limitations Step 5: Share your recommendations Discussion section example Other interesting articles Frequently asked questions about discussion sections What not to include in your discussion section

  14. How to write a discussion section?

    The discussion section can be written in 3 parts: an introductory paragraph, intermediate paragraphs and a conclusion paragraph. For intermediate paragraphs, a "divide and conquer" approach, meaning a full paragraph describing each of the study endpoints, can be used. In conclusion, academic writing is similar to other skills, and practice ...

  15. How to Write a Discussion Section for a Research Paper

    What is the Discussion section of a research paper? In a nutshell, your Discussion fulfills the promise you made to readers in your Introduction. At the beginning of your paper, you tell us why we should care about your research.

  16. How to discuss a paper in groups

    The discussion was opened by the moderator introducing the question on how one would summarize the paper. Multiple students gave their summary, however, the moderator noted how a summary should be told like a story. After summarizing the paper the moderator asked the students if there were any technical questions about the paper.

  17. (PDF) How to Write an Effective Discussion in a Research Paper; a Guide

    Discussion is mainly the section in a research paper that makes the readers understand the exact meaning of the results achieved in a study by exploring the significant points of the research,...

  18. How To Write a Discussion for a Research Paper in 7 Steps

    Connecting to Hypotheses: Summarizing how your aligns or diverges from your initial hypotheses. Now let's explore the steps to write an effective discussion section that will effectively communicate the significance of your research: Step 1: Get Started with a Quick Summary.

  19. Developing Your Writing: Creating a Paper From a Discussion Post

    Whereas, your experience might be less applicable in a course paper, a discussion post lets you bring that in. That is a more anecdotal area that you can use your own experience in. Sure. Apply the learning resources to a new context. Absolutely. So, taking some of the resources that the professor has given you and applying them to new ...

  20. Discussing your findings

    Your discussion should begin with a cogent, one-paragraph summary of the study's key findings, but then go beyond that to put the findings into context, says Stephen Hinshaw, PhD, chair of the psychology department at the University of California, Berkeley. "The point of a discussion, in my view, is to transcend 'just the facts,' and engage in ...

  21. How to Write a Discussion Essay (with Pictures)

    1 Planning Your Essay 2 Writing the Introduction + Show 2 more... Other Sections Video Expert Q&A References Article Summary Co-authored by Jake Adams Last Updated: June 27, 2023 Fact Checked A discussion essay, also known as an argumentative essay, is one where you take a position on an issue.

  22. How to Write a Good Discussion Paper?

    Step 1. How to Get the Discussion Essay Plan You probably know that your writing should start with a decent essay plan. The thing is the structure of your essay usually depends on your topic, so you can't get any pre-written ready-to-use essay outline. However, the most common argumentative essay outline format is: Introduction

  23. A Content Analysis in the Studies of YouTube in Selected Journals

    This paper provides a review of research trends and content analysis of studies in the field of YouTube that were published in seven major journals: Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology (TOJET), Educational Technology & Society (ET&S), Educational Technology Research & Development (ETR&D), Computers & Education (C&E), Learning and I ...

  24. OpenAI collapses media reality with Sora, a photorealistic AI video

    The prompt that generated the video above: "A movie trailer featuring the adventures of the 30 year old space man wearing a red wool knitted motorcycle helmet, blue sky, salt desert, cinematic ...

  25. paper sizes system do you all use in the UK

    when I realized uk might use different paper sizes and charts might not be easy to read . am correct in assuming standards sizes are a3 the bigger one and a4 standard printer sizes? A3: 297 mm x 420 mm (11.69 in. x 16.54 in.) A4: 210 mm x 297 mm (8.27 in. x 11.69 in.) if this correct let me know?