Hello everyone.

I'm writing my second year report at the moment, and need to include a draft structure plan for my thesis. It's only an early draft so not set in stone, but the way I frame it now could really help me - my study has the potential to become fearsomely complicated and confusing if I don't get this right. So does anyone have any comments on what seems like the most logical way to proceed?

It's difficult to explain without giving away my topic, but here goes. I have 2 organisations that I'm studying. In each organisation, I'm asking about two distinct aspects of what they do. I'm also using both quantitative and qualitative methods in both organisations (and I have a methodological question I want to answer). And at present I also have 3 main research questions I want to answer. (Following that?!) It seems to me that there are 3 ways I can structure the thesis:

1.) Study of organisation 1, discussing both qualitative and quantitative methods
Study of organisation 2, discussing both methods and drawing comparisons with org 1
Discussion chapter(s) looking at 2 aspects of what they do and also answering research and methodological questions

2.) Quantitative study, discussing org 1 then org 2 and comparing, including answering methodological question
Qualitative study, discussing org 1 then org 2 and comparing
Discussion chapter(s) drawing together qual and quant, looking at 2 aspects and answering research questions

3.) Discussion of research questions, methodological question and 2 aspects over several chapters, bringing in quant and qual for both organisations as required

I think option 3 could be a bit of a nightmare to get my head around, but each chapter would probably work well as a journal article/conference paper. Options 1 and 2 might be more logical, or might end up feeling really repetitive. Or maybe there's another way combining some of these approaches. Does anyone have any suggestions?

Thanks!

no doubt others can advise better but my immediate thoughts were, no matter how many organisations, methods etc you are studying and using, you are producing one thesis so you need to tell a coherrant, logical story. Your methods, be they mixed, qual or quant are the tools you use to answer your research ques[s]. I know it's a bare-bones sketch you gave us but I think you need a context chapter, perhaps beyond what your introduction will cover. Also if you cover mixed methods and the whys and wherefores of that in your methodolgy chapter, is that not enough about 'why' you chose the methodological approach you did? You will probably re-visit it in your conclusion (perhaps when you reflect on possible limitations of your research) but must it be re-visited anywhere else?

Hate to say it but for me, based on what you have said here, I think option 3 (albeit developed further) would be the approach I would take. Remember your thesis should tell the story of what you have done and discovered from A-Z.

What do I know though; I'm proofing for the last few weeks and sometimes I read my own material and go "what on earth is the point I'm trying to make...?" :$

hmmm if it were me (bearing in mind my sup has just asked me to re-structure lol), I would do...

Methods chapter - which would include justification of mixed methods and the 2 contexts (i.e. organisations)
Study 1 in org 1
Study 2 in org 2
Study 3 - comparing methods.

Its a tricky one though!

Yes, you're right about needing the one story running through, thanks for that. Where I've said I'm discussing the methods I meant the results really (sorry, I wasn't clear). I'd have the intro, lit review and methodology chapters before these. But you're probably right about option 3. darnit! :p

argh. Okay, more thought needed...

======= Date Modified 01 Aug 2011 14:30:58 =======
Hi Batfink, here's my suggestion, but please bear in mind that I am not from your discipline - I'm humanities:

I think you need to identity the big question you are asking and use that as the lead character in your discussion - as the previous poster suggests, there has to be a strong continum in your thesis, an overall point.

1. Context chapter: what has lead you to this question, why are you asking it? (perhaps this would be lit review - only you know that)
2. Methods chapter - how are you going to answer this question and why are you doing it the way you are, what would the alternatives have been.
3. Discussion of organisation 1.
4. Discussion of organisation 2.
5. Conclusion drawing all of the above together - comparison of organisations 1 and 2, and exploration of how your findings therein effect methods and future questions.

I hope this helps

p.s. I don't actually have a clue about your subject so have just made this up... so please be forgiving if it's (down)

Thanks everyone for the comments - they've all been really helpful. I've gone back and thought about the key questions I'm trying to answer, and I think I have a rough structure now. Like this:

Introduction (with background to the topic and overarching question)
Lit review (discussing the state of applied knowledge in this field)
Methodology (discussing current theoretical/methodological approaches and why I chose the approach I'm taking)
Background to study (the 2 organisations and their broader context)
Methods (what, why, how they were developed)
Study 1 in org 1 (discussing qual and quant results)
Study 2 in org 2 (discussing qual and quant results, and results of question only asked in this org)
Research question 1 (which naturally requires comparing org 1 and org 2)
Research question 2
Methodological/theoretical question (which seems to fit the flow here)
Research question 3 (which takes the work in a slightly different direction so naturally comes last)
Discussion and conclusions

I hope that seems a sensible structure. It seems to fit my study, anyway, and potentially could flow well. So, thanks for the input!

to me, that seems spot on:-)