how best to organize the summary?

[kareina]

Ok, oh great LJ hive mind, I need to do a summary of all of my thesis results for the final chapter before going on to say what they all mean. I can think of ever so many ways to organize this information. I’ve got six different regions for which data has been acquired, two with lots of data, and information in every category, four with only a little data, and only covering some categories of information (and not necessarily the same categories). The categories include:



*Timing of peak metamorphism from monazite dating

*Timing of other episodes of monazite growth, which may or may not be related to metamorphism of the rocks the minerals are in at the moment

*differences in the chemical composition of the monazite of different ages, and what we can infer about the pressure/temperature at which it grew, and what other minerals would have been growing at the same time (and so competing for specific elements)

* timing of zircon growth (for only two samples) and how it relates to the monazite results

*pressure and temperature calculated for the conditions at which the garnet cores started growing

*pressure and temperature calculated for the “peak metamorphism” e.g. when the garnet rims finished growing

*pressure and/or temperature inferred from compositional trends in the minerals, but not calculated due to missing information (much broader guess-based information than the numbers of the two above)

*some structural information of folding within the sample which may relate to one or more of the deformations associated with the above times/pressures/temperatures.



The thesis itself is organized with three regional chapters (one each for the two main regions, and one for all of the other regions for which there is less data) covering all of the P/T results and one chapter talking about all of the timing/monazite/zircon results.

For the final Discussion and Conclusion chapter, am I better off echoing that layout:



Region 1 results
Garnet core conditions
Garnet rim conditions
Other information revealed in mineral chemistry/structure of rock

Region 2 results
Garnet core conditions
Garnet rim conditions
Other information revealed in mineral chemistry/structure of rock

Other regions results (repeat times three)
Garnet rim conditions
Other information revealed in mineral chemistry/structure of rock

Timing results
Region 1
Region 2
Region 3
Region 4
Region 5



Or, would it be better to keep it by region, but include the timing information in each region rather than keeping it separate from the temperature and pressure? Or, would it be better to discuss each topic (garnet core formation conditions, peak metamorphic conditions, other information) on its own, and address each region under those headings? Or is there an even better organizational system of which I’ve not yet thought?

Thanks for any suggestions you may have, my clock is ticking, the end of the month, by which the thesis needs to be complete, printed, bound, and submitted, is drawing nigh…

Comments

[sismith42.livejournal.com]

what is it your phd is trying to prove again? you should summarize in the best way to set up for the main thesis, eg if it's something on the regions, sumarize by each region, if its something on the categories go by category... does that make sense or am i too sleep deprived for logic?

[kareina.livejournal.com]

It does make sense. The trouble is that the working title for this project has been "the metamorphic history of Tasmania", and in the process I've done investigations into certain, key regions, and gathered certain categories of data, and, really, I'm so close to it now, it is hard to see how it all ties together and what is the best way to look at it. The main thesis is, I think, "here is as much information as is now known about when and at what pressure and what temperature these metamorphic rocks formed" (and, by extension, what that tells us about the processes which were happening at the time, and how it relates to the global tectonics then, and what places on earth today are reasonable analogues for those processes)

[sismith42.livejournal.com]

so basically, it's on 'how (incl T & P info) & when the metamorphic rocks of tas formed'? in that case, i think your option of 'discuss each topic (garnet core formation conditions, peak metamorphic conditions, other information) on its own, and address each region under those headings' would work v well... esp if the timing results could be scattered with the other results like the regions are...

though if you are finding yourself too close to see the big pic, could you work on something else for a day or so and then come back w a fresh eye?

[kareina.livejournal.com]

I wish I had the time to spare for that--but I"ve got to get this chapter together ASAP so that I can write a draft abstract, so I can turn it in to the Uni so that they can make arrangements for the examiners whilst I go back and fill in the minor gaps in the rest of the thesis, get the rest of the figures camera-ready and all the other details that must be done before printing and binding, and the deadline is the end of the month, and the binders want 5 to ten business days once I've printed it...

[colletteshorses.livejournal.com]

Sismith42's views are the approach I would take, since your conclusion chapter should lead your audience to your conclusion on their own before you have finished presenting your conclusion, so they can follow along easily.

Another thing you really should consider is changing your title to agree more tightly with your conclusion. As it is, if I were to read your thesis and you came to the conclusion you have stated above, I would be very irritated because the title is misleading and I would be looking for the information to back up the thesis' title as I am reading the ENTIRE thesis. People want to know where you are heading with your paper, and your title should correctly direct them without giving everything away. (So don't tell them your end result, but let them know where you are looking for your end result by using your title.)

Organization

[darttn.livejournal.com]

May I assume your bottom line is to show the dating/formation of the various regions in Tasmania? Are all regions the same, or if not, do they relate to each other? How do they differ? What is your conclusion? I'd state that first, then explain how you came to it.

So much for my common sense approach about something of which I know nothing!