Written by Bess Chan

Before submitting your dissertation, you’ll want to be sure you’re submitting the best version you can. Therefore, you really should set aside some time to edit and proofread the whole piece of work, as these steps matter just as much as drafting the chapters themselves. But what exactly should you do? Read on and find some tips that can help you refine your dissertation:

Revise your structure and content first

This is what we call “editing”, and it’s different from proofreading, which focusses on surface-level errors, such as spelling, grammar, punctuation, formatting, and consistency. Always edit your work before proofreading, as there’s no point perfecting the wording of a paragraph you’re about to delete.

Ask yourself the following questions when you’re revising your structure and content. Please note that these questions assume a dissertation with separate research methods, results, and discussion chapters. If your structure differs, adapt them to the conventions of your discipline.

a. Does my introduction state the research question clearly, and does it explain why the question is worth asking?

Readers should know what you set out to do and why it matters before they reach the literature review. Check that your research aim or question appears explicitly rather than being implied, and that you’ve established the gap or problem your study responds to.

Check this interactive presentation on writing the introduction for more information.

b. Am I reviewing the literature (synthesising, comparing, and critiquing) or just summarising it by reviewing each study separately?

A literature review should demonstrate your thorough understanding of the existing literature. Therefore, instead of listing and describing the studies, you should demonstrate how sources are related to each other and make evaluative comments, such as showing your own interpretation or explaining why the evidence is significant.

If you’re unsure about the differences between descriptive and analytical writing, access this interactive presentation on synthesising critical voice and evidence in written work.

Here is another interactive presentation on writing the literature review.

c. Have I justified my methodological choices rather than just described them?

In the research methods chapter, you’re required not only to describe the data collection process, but also to explain why your choices make sense. For each major decision regarding your sample, instruments, procedure, and analysis, check that you’ve stated the reason behind it, not just what you did.

To review how you should write the research methods chapter, check this interactive presentation on methodologies.

d. Am I only reporting findings in my results chapter and saving interpretation for the discussion, or have the two blurred together?

Struggling to differentiate the two chapters is a very common issue among students. Remember that the results chapter focusses on “What are the results?”, while the discussion answers “What do my findings mean?”

Access this interactive presentation on findings or results for more tips and strategies.

e. Have I explained why my findings matter and connected them back to the literature, rather than just restating what they were?

As mentioned in the previous point about the results chapter, the discussion mainly presents the meaning of your findings. In order to do this effectively, you need to establish connections between your present findings and the existing literature. You should also explain why your findings matter and what they imply.

Find out more about writing the discussion chapter by clicking on this interactive presentation on discussion sections.

f. Have I explained why my limitations matter and where future research should go, rather than just listing them?

These may sit at the end of your discussion chapter or in your conclusion, depending on your structure. Either way, check that you’ve explained why each limitation matters and how it likely affected your results, rather than listing them generically. Also, ensure that your suggestions for future research point to specific directions rather than a general statement that more research is needed.

g. Does my conclusion answer the research question directly, or does it just summarise the dissertation?

The conclusion should return to the question you posed in the introduction and state what your study allows you to say in response. A summary of each chapter is not an answer to your question; check that a reader who reads only your introduction and conclusion would understand what you found and what it contributes.

Have a look at this interactive presentation on conclusions for further information.

h. Does every chapter/section help answer the research question(s)?

Now step back and look at the dissertation as a whole. If there are any interesting but tangential parts that don’t actually advance the argument, consider deleting them. Remember that you have limited space in your dissertation, and you want to make sure that you make the best use of it.

i. Is every claim supported by evidence or a credible source, and have I included enough critical evaluation?

This applies at paragraph level throughout, not just in the literature review. Check each paragraph individually for the PEEL structure: it should make a point, support it, and evaluate the evidence rather than leaving it to speak for itself. Each paragraph should link back to your argument.

Check this interactive presentation on paragraph structure for details.

If you’re unsure how to use sources in your dissertation, click on this interactive presentation on using supporting evidence. For more information on presenting your evaluative comments, have a look at this interactive presentation on voice in academic writing.

j. Does each section flow logically into the next?

Given the length of your dissertation, it’s your responsibility to help your reader navigate the whole piece of work. Therefore, check whether there are explicit links between paragraphs, sections, and chapters; look for signposting language at the beginning or at the end of each part. Don’t assume that your headings and subheadings will do this job for you.

Access this interactive presentation on coherence and cohesion for more information.

Be mindful of the word limit

Adjusting your word count, whether that means trimming excess or deepening thin sections, is also part of the editing process. After you’ve revised your structure and content, check where you stand against the required word count and act accordingly.

If you’re over the word limit

Being over the limit is often a sign of repetition, over-inclusion, or inefficient wording, rather than a sign that your ideas are too ambitious for the limit. Try the following to cut the number of words while maintaining the quality of your dissertation:

    • Check whether there is progression in ideas in each paragraph, section, or chapter. Consider which part(s) should be merged or deleted.

    • Paraphrase or summarise an idea if you have quoted exact words from the source, especially if the quote is a lengthy one.

    • Look for over-inclusion in your literature review: as noted above, describing sources one by one is descriptive rather than analytical, and it costs far more words than synthesising them. You should consider grouping two sources that make a similar point into a single sentence rather than giving each its own.

    • Move any paragraphs or sections in the results chapter that are secondary to your main findings, rather than central to your research questions or hypotheses, to the appendices instead. Appendices, according to your dissertation handbook, are excluded from the word count, so this is a genuine saving.

    • Identify over-qualification in the discussion: while you should use hedging, such as “perhaps”, “tend to”, and “possibility”, in academic writing to show your cautious interpretation, its overuse, such as “it could perhaps be tentatively suggested that this might possibly indicate”, can hint at a lack of confidence.

You can also trim your work at the sentence level. If you’d like to learn more about this, check this set of PowerPoint slides on writing precisely and concisely.

If you’re under the word limit

Being under the limit is often a sign that your analysis needs to go deeper, not that you need to add more words for the sake of it. Try the following:

    • Expand your critical engagement in the literature review: instead of listing more sources, which may make this section more descriptive, add or expand your evaluation, especially when you have cited several sources in a paragraph.

    • Strengthen your methodological justification: rather than briefly stating your reasons, discuss why you chose your specific method over alternatives, the theoretical assumptions behind your approach, or the design decisions you made and why.

    • Deepen your discussion: try to add specific point-by-point comparisons instead of referring to the literature broadly. Address alternative explanations for your results and discuss the implications (theoretical, practical, or both).

    • Develop your limitations and future research suggestions: as mentioned above, both need explanation rather than a list. If they currently sit in a short generic paragraph, spelling out how each limitation affected your results, and why each future direction is worth pursuing, will add genuine depth.

Avoid padding with filler adjectives, adverbs, or repeated points just to inflate length. This can be spotted easily and can weaken, rather than strengthen, your dissertation. Any added length should come from genuine depth, not decoration.

Finally, whether you’ve cut or expanded, remember that you’ve just changed the shape of your dissertation. Re-read the sections you altered in context: a deleted paragraph can remove the link a later section depended on, and a newly expanded one may need signposting to connect it to what surrounds it. Check that your argument still runs from the introduction through to the conclusion before you move on to proofreading.

Proofread your work last

Before you start, put the dissertation aside for a day or two if you can. Proofreading fails when you re-read from memory instead of reading what’s actually on the page, so anything that makes the text look unfamiliar helps: change the font, read it on paper, read it aloud, or work backwards from the last paragraph. Then check your work against this list of questions:

    • Is my tense consistent within sections that should match (usually past tense in research methods and present tense in discussion)?

    • Are my sentences complete and easy to follow on a first reading, with no missing words, tangled clauses, or sentences that have run on so long they’ve lost their subject?

    • Have I used a word that’s correctly spelled but wrong for the context, such as “their” / “there” and “affect” / “effect”, the kind of error spell-check won’t catch?

    • Does every citation in my text appear in my reference list, and vice versa, with matching spelling of author names and years?

    • Do my figure/table numbers and any cross-references, such as “see Table 3” and “as discussed in Chapter 2”, actually point to the right place?

    • Do my headings, page numbers, and table of contents match the actual document, especially after edits that shifted page breaks?

---

Lastly, if you’d like more tips on checking your work, please access this interactive presentation on proofreading. Also, if you have any questions about dissertation writing skills, I encourage you to book 1-2-1 meetings with me, Bess Chan, your London-based EAP Tutor, via email or the booking form.