Some questions to keep in mind when reporting on data analysis include:

·Was transcription of the entire dataset necessary for coding, or was partial transcription acceptable? Is this clearly reported?

·Were reliability checks performed on transcriptions (and results reported)?

·Is it useful for the target readers if detailed information is provided on how many transcriptions and/or hours of data were used?

·Is information about transcription conventions necessary for the audience? If so, is this information provided in an appendix or notes to any examples used?

Discussion section can begin with a concise summary of the findings that were detailed in the results section and then move on to a more detailed discussion of each research question. It is also the provision of possible explanation for the results found in the study. Comparing the results of the present study with the results found in earlier studies is also a common element in discussion section. Comparisons of results have the effects of helping the reader understand how the findings relate to previous work. The findings may provide evidence, which supports and extends earlier findings, or they may indicate that existing frameworks need to be reconsidered and revised. Discussion sections also provide comments about the significance of the results or their implications for either pedagogy or theory, which can make it easier for readers to incorporate the findings into a framework they already know.

Once research projects have been concluded, the provision of a full set of limitation of a study is possible. This also may be included in the discussion section.

These sorts of comments help generate ideas for further research, point to areas that need to be addressed in order to advance the field, and, in general, serve as useful pointers for both novice and experienced researchers.

In sum, discussion sections delineated several common elements in the final sections.

·Summary of the results,

·Explanation of possible reasons for the results,

·Comparison of the results to these obtained in the other studies,

·Commentary on the significance or implications of the results,

·Discussion of limitation,

·Suggested area for further studies.

Activity 4-1: Identify the different elements in discussion section

The following are respective examples from the discussion section. Read and decide they depict which element in the final section.

(1) Ellis and He (1999) “The first research question asked about the relative effects of premodified input, interactionally modified input, and modified output on L2 learners’ comprehension. The results of this study indicate that reasonable levels of comprehension can be achieved in all three conditions” (p. 297).

(2) Williams (1999) “It appears that learners, at least at lower levels of proficiency, do not frequently focus on formal aspects of language. One logical reason for this is that lower-level learners may have enough to do just to maintain communications and they are therefore unable to focus on form to the same degree as the more proficient learners” (p. 612).

(3) Leow (2000) “[Although the findings] provide further empirical evidence for the association between awareness and subsequent processing of L2 data found in other classroom-bases studies, [they do not support] a dissociation between awareness and learning as espoused by some researchers” (p. 568).

(4) Berg (1999) “Findings in this investigation lend support to the view often expressed in the literature that training is important for successful peer response” (p. 230).

(5) Willett (1995) “The question we must ask is not which interactional routines and strategies are correlated with successful language acquisition. Rather, we must first ask what meaning routines and strategies have in the local culture and how they enable learners to construct positive identities and relations and manage competing agendas” (p. 499).

(6) Melzi and King (2003) “It would also be of interest to collect and analyse similar data among younger children in order to investigate the developmental trajectory [of diminutive affix use]” (p. 302).

(7) Philp (2003) “The majority of learners were educated to at least postsecondary level, most were socio-economically advantaged, and, in general, they were motivated to study the L2” (p. 118).

Answers