Chapter 6. DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Objective 1 – Give guidelines on how to write discussion section.

Objective 2 – Explain how to discuss the results with related studies in literature.

Objective 3 – Give guidelines on how to write conclusion section.

Objective 4 – Explain how to interpret the results as a conclusion.

Objective 5 – Give guidelines on how to write recommendations.

Objective 6 – Explain how to make recommendations to the other researchers and practitioners.  

Objective 7 – Give guidelines on how to report the study’s limitations.

The discussion section is where the researcher can explore the findings' meanings, implications, and limitations. It should provide an interpretation of how the results fulfill or fail to fulfill the expectations set out by previous literature (Hart, 1998). The purpose of the discussion section is to find answers to the questions asked in the research, to examine and interpret the meanings of the results obtained in terms of the research problem, and to use the results obtained based on the findings to support the answers to the questions of the research. This is the part where the researcher shows all his merit, creativity, theoretical and conceptual mastery of the field he works in, and his capacity to think analytically. The support and contribution of the obtained results to the studies in the field and the theoretical framework must be expressed. The most critical point in this section is to interpret what the results mean in that field and to reveal to what extent the study adds new information to the existing knowledge in that field and whether the study has critical importance for the future (Conn, 2017). As you can remember the hourglass structure metaphor from the structure of academic writing section, the triangle at the bottom starts from the discussion section to conclusion, and suggestions. Also, as it can be seen from Figure 9, the discussion section should be designed as a triangle too, from specific findings to general wrap-ups with the other related studies in the literature. 

Figure 9 describes the design of the discussion section. The discussion section in academic writing resembles an hourglass structure in which the triangular base extends from specific findings to broader implications and connections to relevant literature. Presented visually, the discussion section emphasizes the transition from detailed analysis to general conclusions and connections to relevant literature. This strategy is recommended as a triangle that extends from the specific findings of the research to broader conclusions and recommendations.

Paltridge and Starfield (2007) suggested strategies for writing discussion section as;   

• Write a sentence about all the things they (your audiences) know now that they didn’t know when they started their research.
• Sort the sentences into groups.
• Write headings for each of the groups of sentences.
• Write sub-headings for each sentence in each group.
• Use this as a framework for planning the Discussion chapter.

This framework can help present the results of the research in a more understandable and structured way. Additionally, relating the results to previous literature allows the findings of the study to be understood and interpreted within an overall context. This process can guide researchers in organizing the discussion section and presenting the results effectively. Also, because of discussion sections aim to discuss the study’s results with related studies in previous literature this framework can be designed as like Table 16.

This framework can be designed as in Table 16, as the discussion sections aim to discuss the results of the study with relevant studies in previous literature. The example in Table 16 includes studies associated with relevant outcomes, but also specifies studies associated with different outcomes.

Conclusions should succinctly summarize the main findings, directly answering the research questions posed at the study's outset (Creswell & Creswell, 2017). The conclusion section is the section that reads the entire article and relates the conceptual and theoretical framework of the article to the themes emerging in the discussion section. This section should be of a nature that can be understood, interpreted, and applied in practice by researchers interested in the field.

According to Thompson (2005) conclusion sections should include:

• introductory restatement of aims research questions;
• consolidation of present research (e.g. findings, limitations);
• practical applications/implications;
• recommendations for further research.

Some researchers may prefer to write the recommendation and implications as separate headings, or academic journals or institutes may request such a way of writing. If they write separate, recommendation section can include actionable steps for practitioners and policymakers and indicate the broader impact of the study (Smith, 2010). In implications the researcher can describe his experiences during the research process and reveal the lessons to be learned from these experiences. On the other hand, it can emphasize the research of new research findings added to the theoretical framework in the field and the issues that are felt to be lacking and that are thought to need to be added. In Table 17, Blair et. al. (2016)’s conclusion section analyzed in terms of its main parts with different colors.

This table analyzes the conclusion of Blair et al.'s (2016) study. Results include background information from the literature while restating the purpose of the study and research questions. It includes consolidation of existing research, findings, and limitations, and discusses practical applications or implications. It also provides suggestions for future research. The table provides a guide for structuring and understanding the results of the study. As a result, the conclusion of a scientific article/writing summarizes the main findings of the research and emphasizes the importance of these findings. It also identifies the limitations of the study, offers suggestions for future research, and indicates the study's unique contributions to the field. Results are conveyed clearly and concisely, avoiding complex language or unnecessary details. This section helps the reader understand the importance of the research and grasp the main message of the study.

Every study has limitations, such as sample size, methodology, or contextual factors, and acknowledging these is crucial (Leedy & Ormrod, 2015). Limitations may include the scope of the study, which was restricted to academics within a particular discipline or geographic region. In Table 18, Özdemir (2023)’s limitation section analyzed in terms of its main parts with different colors.

Every study faces limitations that may arise from factors such as sample size, methodology, or contextual constraints, and it is important to acknowledge these limitations. For example, the limitations of a study conducted by Özdemir (2023) are analyzed in Table 18, highlighting various issues such as methodology, sample size, contextual factors, and scope of the study. The qualitative nature of the research and its limitation to only eight students means that the findings cannot be generalized to a wider universe. Additionally, the focus of the study on a single course level prevents observations regarding the transferability of the results to subsequent levels or the development of the subjects over time. Additionally, since the course is delivered online, the lack of handwriting samples overlooks considerations of handwriting skills and paper layout. These limitations underscore the need for caution when interpreting the results of the study and suggest avenues for future research.