Richard Parncutt Revised March 2016 Structuring the argument of a Bachelor’s thesis in systematic musicology Common problems and how to solve them Richard Parncutt Revised March 2016

Title page Problem: Title is too short or too general Your title should reflect your specific approach. e.g. take the verb out of your main thesis and reformulate Problem: Missing information Include title of essay, your name, matriculation no., name of course, semester of course, name of instructor, name of university, date of draft Problem: A photo without a source Unnecessary! There is no need to decorate student essays You must state the source of any photo

Abstract (1) How to resolve common problems: Structure it like the main text (e.g. 1 sentence per heading) Don’t talk about the text’s structure (not “in the intro…”) Write grammatically complete sentences It is ok to reproduce phrases verbatim from main text Make abstract understandable independently of main text Make it as informative as possible about your topic Include main keywords for electronic literature search

Abstract (2) Problem: Abstract has introductory character should instead summarize main results, theses, arguments should be more concise than the introduction usually does not cite literature every point in abstract should be expanded in main text! last sentence: implications if main finding/thesis is correct

Abstract (3) Problem: Abstract is monolingual Generally write two abstracts! One German, one English Same content but different linguistic structures About half a page or 1000 characters each Give both abstracts a title  title in 2 languages for Zeugnis in Uni Graz Online

Headings (1) Problem: Text contains no headings Your text must contain several main headings (centered): “Introduction” one of more headings describing the content of the main section (but not “Main section”) a heading for the final section (e.g. “Conclusion”, “Discussion”, “Implications” etc.) Subheadings are also possible (on the left margin) Sub-sub-headings: avoid them

Headings (2) Problem: Text under heading is about something else Fix it! Problem: Sections are numbered (e.g. 2.1) APA does not use numbers for sections

Citation style Problem: Unclear or inconsistent citation style Use international standard styles (psychology: APA; humanities: Chicago/MLA; see Wikipedia “citation style”) In my courses: only APA Read the style guidelines and implement them!

Writing style (1) Problem: Writing is not informative Tip: avoid negative statements, e.g. “According to the Institute of Y there is no universally accepted definition of X”. Instead, talk about what X really is (in your opinion - and in accordance with relevant literature) Problem: “Bla bla” Get to the point. No need for e.g. “Throughout the years, the scientific interest in this topic grew, and several researchers investigated the effects of …”. Either write directly about the research or skip it.

Writing style (2) Problem: Text wanders, lacks direction Solution: a clear hierarchical structure (your “argument”) A clear narrative structure (superposed on the hierarchy) Problem: Poor paragraph structure Clarify the topic of each paragraph in the first sentence. The rest of the paragraph should address only that topic. A good paragraph has about 3 long or 6 short sentences. Never just one sentence! The next paragraph should have a different topic. Similar principles apply to sections (next hierarchical level).

Writing style (3) Problem: Unnecessary superlatives The word “very” usually says nothing. Delete it! Avoid exclamation marks too!! For the same reason;-) Tip: It’s acceptable to use exclamation marks in teaching guidelines, but not in academic texts!!! Problem: Journalistic rather than academic style Don’t spice up your text with linguistic tricks and clichés Instead, write (or construct) direct, clear sentences Make your text interesting by talking about interesting things

Example Problem: too general Problem: addresses the background An example is the opposite of general. E.g. a specific incident or a specific person Problem: addresses the background The example should illustrate your main question (explain what happened & ask why/how without answering) If you return to the example at the end, use it to illustrate your thesis (e.g. why or how the things happened that you described in the introduction)

Main content Problem: reads like a summary of relevant literature Focus on your thesis! Cite current literature primarily to introduce your thesis and to list and evaluate arguments for and against your thesis

Your main question Problem: Answer can only be yes or no There should be many possible answers to your question as formulated (e.g. start with “how” or “why”) Yes/no questions are appropriate for statistical questions, but not for theoretical papers

Your main thesis Problem: Identical to a claim in the literature Depart in some way from the literature Justify departure by comparing sources Problem: Does not answer a “how” or “why” question You know what to do Problem: Attempt to “prove”/“verify” the thesis In general, you can support a thesis but not prove it The aim is instead to investigate possible theses Look for arguments for and against each one After that, conclude that one is (more) correct

Subtheses Common problems: Subtheses are too trivial Subtheses don’t support main thesis Subtheses are not clearly different One subthesis is similar to main thesis You know what to do!

Possible theses Problem: list of possible theses is too trivial, e.g. The mentioned effect is positive The effect is negative There is no effect The above is ok for an empirical paper. For a theoretical paper you might instead ask why? Reason or process no. 1? Reason or process no. 2? (etc.) Intro: Present and explain this list in narrative text. Main part: Refer somewhere to each possible thesis. Conclusion: One of them becomes your main thesis.

Terminology from this guideline Problem: Unnecessary reference to “my thesis”, subtopic 1”, “thesis implications”… Avoid this terminology as far as possible Headings should generally reflect content not structure In the main section, the main headings are the subtopics Convert all lists from tabular argument into narrative text

Structure (1) Problem: Paper talks about its own structure Your text should implement the structure of the tabular argument without talking about it E.g. avoid talking about “defining terms,” just do it! Don’t write e.g. “At the beginning of this part two terms have to be defined” Don’t write “As mentioned already earlier in this paper, …”. Just get to the point! Exception: at end of the introduction, describe the structure of the rest of the paper

Structure (2) Problem: Too much summarising of sources Your own argument should make up most of the text It is ok to occasionally and briefly summarize the main points of a primary source (e.g. in < 100 words) See my page on academic independence See ppt guidelines to SE “music psychology” on topic-driven (PS) versus thesis-driven (SE) work

Introduction (1) Problem: Inappropriate order of material Illustrative examples should be early General background should be early (e.g. social, cultural, political, historic context) Explanation of structure of main part: only at the end

Introduction (2) Problem: No background in relevant disciplines Don‘t just list the relevant disciplines Make concrete claims about your main question that most people in those disciplines would support Refer to literature Background is not background Address background to the main question, not the question itself “Approach” is too complicated Clarify by organising material according to a simple principle

Main section Problem: Main section not detailed enough Read the literature! Organise material according to your structure Build up a detailed, tightly organised account Details do not refer directly to stated theses Think about every noun, verb and adjective in your own thesis. What evidence might there be for or against it?

Conclusion Problem: Arguments for and against your thesis do not refer to the thesis as formulated Make sure your thesis is well formulated. Refer only to that formulation! Problem: Discussion of methodological limitations of sources is too superficial If there are no obvious problems, don’t invent any E.g. it is almost a cliché to write “not enough participants”

Further research Problem: Suggestions for further research do not address exact formulation of your thesis Omit general suggestions about research on your topic Refer only to the exact formulation of your thesis Same applies to possible research methods

Figures and tables Problem: Copied/scanned from published paper Prepare your own graph or table based on data from one or more (!) articles relevant to your specific question We are learning to write academic articles for publication in which figures and tables must be original! Problem: not academic/APA style Heading and caption must be self-explanatory Every figure or table must be referred to (e.g. “see Figure 1”) and discussed in the main text

The process of researching and writing Problem: Talking about this process The reader is interested in content, not what you did Not e.g. “It was hard to find literature on topic X”

Literature (1) Problem: Not enough good literature cited (“good” = peer-reviewed or frequently cited) Find out if your literature is “good” If not, consider changing or revising your topic Generally cite “good” literature more often Your final literature list should be about 3 pages – much longer than for the preceding seminar!

Literature (2) Problem: Unclear origin of ideas Make the origin of your main ideas clear Usually every paragraph contains at least one reference - from the start of the introduction to the end of the conclusion But don’t refer repeat the same reference in one paragraph Problem: Referring to research without citing it Don’t write “research shows…” or “many researchers have found…”. Instead, cite the literature directly

Literature (3) Problem: Text reads like a series of summaries Put your argument in the foreground Support each element of your argument with material from different sources

Tabular argument (1) Problem: Table is missing You worked hard on it! Include it as an appendix Problem: Table is incomplete It must include introduction, main part and final part and most ingredients of each part Problem: Table does not correspond to text Everything in the tabular argument should be expanded in the main text (that includes the example at the start) When writing the text you will get ideas for revising the table. So move back and forth between text an table E.g. you may revise a subthesis or the main thesis this way

Tabular argument (2) Problem: Table is not concise enough Should be less than one page each for Introduction, Subtopic 1, Subtopic 2, …, Conclusion Problem: Illogical structure of thesis, subtheses… Present the structure in class! We will discuss Not enough good, diverse evidence for thesis Search literature again - or change thesis

Length N.B.: There is no length guideline for theses/dissertations in Satzung, Studienrecht or Curriculum Musikologie Content is more important than length Theses in the sciences are typically about 20% shorter If your table is 4 pages, you can count it as up to 8 pages You can count the abstract as part of the text Instead of 30-40 pages for main text you can submit 20 The length of full-length journal article is certainly enough A longer thesis is ok if you solved all problems in this guideline

Submission Problem: Only electronic copy submitted Please also print it, with two pages reduced onto one side (I also like double-sided) and staple the pages together Problem: Only paper copy submitted Please also send an email attachment (preferably pdf) I may later put your Bachelor‘s or Master‘s thesis in the internet if we both agree, e.g. here: http://www.uni-graz.at/~parncutt/fk2_mitglieder.html I may recommend that you revise according to my comments before publication