thesis study groups

Study Groups

• Categories: Strategies for Learning

Study groups can be an excellent way to strengthen your understanding of course material and build accountability into your week. Study groups are safe spaces where you can ask questions, practice participation, and get to know your classmates in a smaller setting.  

What are the benefits of joining a study group?

• Being in a group with a common goal supports and encourages focus on the work at hand. 
• Knowing that you are accountable to others can help you get past procrastination. 
• Taking advantage of everyone’s unique strengths helps mitigate weaknesses. 
• Having the opportunity to explain concepts in your own words helps solidify your understanding of those concepts. 
• Listening to concepts explained multiple ways increases the odds of learning them deeply. 
• Monitoring how your explanations of concepts land with your listeners improves your communication skills.  
• Participating in a study group develops confidence in speaking and sharing ideas in other group settings.  
• You will become a stronger learner, teacher, and listener! 

Interested in creating your own study group? Here are some things to keep in mind:  

Some courses provide a structure for joining a study group, while others will expect you to coordinate your own. There are lots of ways you can find students to study with: 

• Ask your course instructor or TF to distribute an email to course participants. 
• Reach out to classmates when you are in small groups. 
• Use Canvas by making your own post to a discussion page or asking your course instructor or TF to consider using the “Student Groups” tool on Canvas. 
• Go to office hours or other support structures for your course and communicate directly with students you see there. 
• Many student organizations facilitate study group connections, so check in with organizations that you already engage with. 

Dedicate some portion of your first meeting to making sure everyone in the group is on the same page. Make sure you are clear on: 

• Where you will meet (in-person location, Zoom, Slack, etc.). 
• How often and how long you will meet. 
• Expectations around participation. 
• Course collaboration policies. 
• Processes around admitting new members. 
• Whether you will have “roles” during the sessions (leader, organizer, note-taker). 

Decide as a group what activities you will do to best meet your study goals for each session. Before setting these goals, make sure to read your course’s collaboration policy, which will indicate what kinds of work can and cannot be completed collaboratively. Here are some ideas for activities you can likely do: 

• Complete practice tests. 
• Go over practice tests. 
• Review course lectures and reading materials. 
• Tackle questions and problems group participants encountered while engaging with course lectures, reading materials, and problem sets. 
• Explain concepts to one another to ensure mastery of material. 
• Take turns teaching course materials to one another. 

Consider how to create a safe, collaborative environment for your study group. Studying involves vulnerability: if participants cannot admit when they do not understand something, the group cannot serve its primary goal of increasing understanding. Here are some things your group might consider establishing to ensure all participants benefit from your meetings: 

• No single person should dominate study sessions (try using a timer or taking turns in different roles to prevent this). 
• Take the time to learn everyone’s preferred names and pronouns. 
• Treat all questions with dignity and seriousness.  
• Respect all levels of understanding and familiarity with course materials. 
• Poll the group and see if there are common topics that people need assistance with. Try to prioritize areas of concern/problems based on how many are struggling with the same concepts. 
• Set a norm around how long you will spend reviewing any particular area of confusion. If a person in your group is still having trouble after that time has passed, this is a great moment to take advantage of the ARC’s Peer Tutoring program. Your study group doesn’t need to do everything! 

Search Website Search

Running an Effective Writing Group

Dissertation and Thesis Support: Writing Groups and Resources This workshop video covers strategies and best practices for organizing writing groups for thesis and dissertation writing. The presentation focuses on independent writing groups organized by graduate students and offers tips on establishing meeting rules and structures for running meetings effectively. The workshop also addresses other campus resources available to support dissertation and thesis writers. This workshop was recorded in 2020. (Approx. 20 mins.)

Tips for Successful Writing Groups —A blog post written by Chris Golde who works in the Graduate Education office at Stanford University. The post offers concise guidelines for setting expectations, developing ground rules, using time effectively, building trust, giving feedback, and dealing with other common challenges.

Making a Thesis or Dissertation Support Group Work for You [pdf]—From the Horace H. Rockham School for Graduate Studies, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Advice drawn from dissertation-writing advice books and from a focus group of doctoral students with experience in writing groups. The article suggests answers to common questions about forming and running a writing group. It includes advice for groups focused on the writing process and for those focused on the content of the thesis or dissertation.

Resources for Writing Groups —From UNC Chapel Hill. Includes guidelines for giving and receiving feedback, creative activities for writing groups to do, and a collection of worksheets to help groups get started (see “ Writing Groups Starter Kit ”).

Belcher, W. L. (2019). Writing your journal article in twelve weeks: A guide to academic publishing success . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. (2nd edition) Belcher advises students to form writing partnerships or groups in order to increase their motivation and productivity. She recommends making a written commitment to a writing partner or group and provides sample forms and provides sample commitment forms (see forms associated with the book introduction). Belcher's book contains numerous exercises, many of which can be used to elicit specific feedback from writing partners. In the first edition (2009), the “Week 9” chapter contains a form for sharing feedback.

To report a broken link, please email the GWC at [email protected] .

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

What is a thesis | A Complete Guide with Examples

Table of Contents

A thesis is a comprehensive academic paper based on your original research that presents new findings, arguments, and ideas of your study. It’s typically submitted at the end of your master’s degree or as a capstone of your bachelor’s degree.

However, writing a thesis can be laborious, especially for beginners. From the initial challenge of pinpointing a compelling research topic to organizing and presenting findings, the process is filled with potential pitfalls.

Therefore, to help you, this guide talks about what is a thesis. Additionally, it offers revelations and methodologies to transform it from an overwhelming task to a manageable and rewarding academic milestone.

What is a thesis?

A thesis is an in-depth research study that identifies a particular topic of inquiry and presents a clear argument or perspective about that topic using evidence and logic.

Writing a thesis showcases your ability of critical thinking, gathering evidence, and making a compelling argument. Integral to these competencies is thorough research, which not only fortifies your propositions but also confers credibility to your entire study.

Furthermore, there's another phenomenon you might often confuse with the thesis: the ' working thesis .' However, they aren't similar and shouldn't be used interchangeably.

A working thesis, often referred to as a preliminary or tentative thesis, is an initial version of your thesis statement. It serves as a draft or a starting point that guides your research in its early stages.

As you research more and gather more evidence, your initial thesis (aka working thesis) might change. It's like a starting point that can be adjusted as you learn more. It's normal for your main topic to change a few times before you finalize it.

While a thesis identifies and provides an overarching argument, the key to clearly communicating the central point of that argument lies in writing a strong thesis statement.

What is a thesis statement?

A strong thesis statement (aka thesis sentence) is a concise summary of the main argument or claim of the paper. It serves as a critical anchor in any academic work, succinctly encapsulating the primary argument or main idea of the entire paper.

Typically found within the introductory section, a strong thesis statement acts as a roadmap of your thesis, directing readers through your arguments and findings. By delineating the core focus of your investigation, it offers readers an immediate understanding of the context and the gravity of your study.

Furthermore, an effectively crafted thesis statement can set forth the boundaries of your research, helping readers anticipate the specific areas of inquiry you are addressing.

Different types of thesis statements

A good thesis statement is clear, specific, and arguable. Therefore, it is necessary for you to choose the right type of thesis statement for your academic papers.

Thesis statements can be classified based on their purpose and structure. Here are the primary types of thesis statements:

Argumentative (or Persuasive) thesis statement

Purpose : To convince the reader of a particular stance or point of view by presenting evidence and formulating a compelling argument.

Example : Reducing plastic use in daily life is essential for environmental health.

Analytical thesis statement

Purpose : To break down an idea or issue into its components and evaluate it.

Example : By examining the long-term effects, social implications, and economic impact of climate change, it becomes evident that immediate global action is necessary.

Expository (or Descriptive) thesis statement

Purpose : To explain a topic or subject to the reader.

Example : The Great Depression, spanning the 1930s, was a severe worldwide economic downturn triggered by a stock market crash, bank failures, and reduced consumer spending.

Cause and effect thesis statement

Purpose : To demonstrate a cause and its resulting effect.

Example : Overuse of smartphones can lead to impaired sleep patterns, reduced face-to-face social interactions, and increased levels of anxiety.

Compare and contrast thesis statement

Purpose : To highlight similarities and differences between two subjects.

Example : "While both novels '1984' and 'Brave New World' delve into dystopian futures, they differ in their portrayal of individual freedom, societal control, and the role of technology."

When you write a thesis statement , it's important to ensure clarity and precision, so the reader immediately understands the central focus of your work.

What is the difference between a thesis and a thesis statement?

While both terms are frequently used interchangeably, they have distinct meanings.

A thesis refers to the entire research document, encompassing all its chapters and sections. In contrast, a thesis statement is a brief assertion that encapsulates the central argument of the research.

Here’s an in-depth differentiation table of a thesis and a thesis statement.

Now, to craft a compelling thesis, it's crucial to adhere to a specific structure. Let’s break down these essential components that make up a thesis structure

15 components of a thesis structure

Navigating a thesis can be daunting. However, understanding its structure can make the process more manageable.

Here are the key components or different sections of a thesis structure:

Your thesis begins with the title page. It's not just a formality but the gateway to your research.

Here, you'll prominently display the necessary information about you (the author) and your institutional details.

• Title of your thesis
• Your full name
• Your department
• Your institution and degree program
• Your submission date
• Your Supervisor's name (in some cases)
• Your Department or faculty (in some cases)
• Your University's logo (in some cases)
• Your Student ID (in some cases)

In a concise manner, you'll have to summarize the critical aspects of your research in typically no more than 200-300 words.

This includes the problem statement, methodology, key findings, and conclusions. For many, the abstract will determine if they delve deeper into your work, so ensure it's clear and compelling.

Acknowledgments

Research is rarely a solitary endeavor. In the acknowledgments section, you have the chance to express gratitude to those who've supported your journey.

This might include advisors, peers, institutions, or even personal sources of inspiration and support. It's a personal touch, reflecting the humanity behind the academic rigor.

Table of contents

A roadmap for your readers, the table of contents lists the chapters, sections, and subsections of your thesis.

By providing page numbers, you allow readers to navigate your work easily, jumping to sections that pique their interest.

List of figures and tables

Research often involves data, and presenting this data visually can enhance understanding. This section provides an organized listing of all figures and tables in your thesis.

It's a visual index, ensuring that readers can quickly locate and reference your graphical data.

Introduction

Here's where you introduce your research topic, articulate the research question or objective, and outline the significance of your study.

• Present the research topic : Clearly articulate the central theme or subject of your research.
• Background information : Ground your research topic, providing any necessary context or background information your readers might need to understand the significance of your study.
• Define the scope : Clearly delineate the boundaries of your research, indicating what will and won't be covered.
• Literature review : Introduce any relevant existing research on your topic, situating your work within the broader academic conversation and highlighting where your research fits in.
• State the research Question(s) or objective(s) : Clearly articulate the primary questions or objectives your research aims to address.
• Outline the study's structure : Give a brief overview of how the subsequent sections of your work will unfold, guiding your readers through the journey ahead.

The introduction should captivate your readers, making them eager to delve deeper into your research journey.

Literature review section

Your study correlates with existing research. Therefore, in the literature review section, you'll engage in a dialogue with existing knowledge, highlighting relevant studies, theories, and findings.

It's here that you identify gaps in the current knowledge, positioning your research as a bridge to new insights.

To streamline this process, consider leveraging AI tools. For example, the SciSpace literature review tool enables you to efficiently explore and delve into research papers, simplifying your literature review journey.

Methodology

In the research methodology section, you’ll detail the tools, techniques, and processes you employed to gather and analyze data. This section will inform the readers about how you approached your research questions and ensures the reproducibility of your study.

Here's a breakdown of what it should encompass:

• Research Design : Describe the overall structure and approach of your research. Are you conducting a qualitative study with in-depth interviews? Or is it a quantitative study using statistical analysis? Perhaps it's a mixed-methods approach?
• Data Collection : Detail the methods you used to gather data. This could include surveys, experiments, observations, interviews, archival research, etc. Mention where you sourced your data, the duration of data collection, and any tools or instruments used.
• Sampling : If applicable, explain how you selected participants or data sources for your study. Discuss the size of your sample and the rationale behind choosing it.
• Data Analysis : Describe the techniques and tools you used to process and analyze the data. This could range from statistical tests in quantitative research to thematic analysis in qualitative research.
• Validity and Reliability : Address the steps you took to ensure the validity and reliability of your findings to ensure that your results are both accurate and consistent.
• Ethical Considerations : Highlight any ethical issues related to your research and the measures you took to address them, including — informed consent, confidentiality, and data storage and protection measures.

Moreover, different research questions necessitate different types of methodologies. For instance:

• Experimental methodology : Often used in sciences, this involves a controlled experiment to discern causality.
• Qualitative methodology : Employed when exploring patterns or phenomena without numerical data. Methods can include interviews, focus groups, or content analysis.
• Quantitative methodology : Concerned with measurable data and often involves statistical analysis. Surveys and structured observations are common tools here.
• Mixed methods : As the name implies, this combines both qualitative and quantitative methodologies.

The Methodology section isn’t just about detailing the methods but also justifying why they were chosen. The appropriateness of the methods in addressing your research question can significantly impact the credibility of your findings.

Results (or Findings)

This section presents the outcomes of your research. It's crucial to note that the nature of your results may vary; they could be quantitative, qualitative, or a mix of both.

Quantitative results often present statistical data, showcasing measurable outcomes, and they benefit from tables, graphs, and figures to depict these data points.

Qualitative results , on the other hand, might delve into patterns, themes, or narratives derived from non-numerical data, such as interviews or observations.

Regardless of the nature of your results, clarity is essential. This section is purely about presenting the data without offering interpretations — that comes later in the discussion.

In the discussion section, the raw data transforms into valuable insights.

Start by revisiting your research question and contrast it with the findings. How do your results expand, constrict, or challenge current academic conversations?

Dive into the intricacies of the data, guiding the reader through its implications. Detail potential limitations transparently, signaling your awareness of the research's boundaries. This is where your academic voice should be resonant and confident.

Practical implications (Recommendation) section

Based on the insights derived from your research, this section provides actionable suggestions or proposed solutions.

Whether aimed at industry professionals or the general public, recommendations translate your academic findings into potential real-world actions. They help readers understand the practical implications of your work and how it can be applied to effect change or improvement in a given field.

When crafting recommendations, it's essential to ensure they're feasible and rooted in the evidence provided by your research. They shouldn't merely be aspirational but should offer a clear path forward, grounded in your findings.

The conclusion provides closure to your research narrative.

It's not merely a recap but a synthesis of your main findings and their broader implications. Reconnect with the research questions or hypotheses posited at the beginning, offering clear answers based on your findings.

Reflect on the broader contributions of your study, considering its impact on the academic community and potential real-world applications.

Lastly, the conclusion should leave your readers with a clear understanding of the value and impact of your study.

References (or Bibliography)

Every theory you've expounded upon, every data point you've cited, and every methodological precedent you've followed finds its acknowledgment here.

In references, it's crucial to ensure meticulous consistency in formatting, mirroring the specific guidelines of the chosen citation style .

Proper referencing helps to avoid plagiarism , gives credit to original ideas, and allows readers to explore topics of interest. Moreover, it situates your work within the continuum of academic knowledge.

To properly cite the sources used in the study, you can rely on online citation generator tools  to generate accurate citations!

Here’s more on how you can cite your sources.

Often, the depth of research produces a wealth of material that, while crucial, can make the core content of the thesis cumbersome. The appendix is where you mention extra information that supports your research but isn't central to the main text.

Whether it's raw datasets, detailed procedural methodologies, extended case studies, or any other ancillary material, the appendices ensure that these elements are archived for reference without breaking the main narrative's flow.

For thorough researchers and readers keen on meticulous details, the appendices provide a treasure trove of insights.

Glossary (optional)

In academics, specialized terminologies, and jargon are inevitable. However, not every reader is versed in every term.

The glossary, while optional, is a critical tool for accessibility. It's a bridge ensuring that even readers from outside the discipline can access, understand, and appreciate your work.

By defining complex terms and providing context, you're inviting a wider audience to engage with your research, enhancing its reach and impact.

Remember, while these components provide a structured framework, the essence of your thesis lies in the originality of your ideas, the rigor of your research, and the clarity of your presentation.

As you craft each section, keep your readers in mind, ensuring that your passion and dedication shine through every page.

Thesis examples

To further elucidate the concept of a thesis, here are illustrative examples from various fields:

Example 1 (History): Abolition, Africans, and Abstraction: the Influence of the ‘Noble Savage’ on British and French Antislavery Thought, 1787-1807 by Suchait Kahlon.

Example 2 (Climate Dynamics): Influence of external forcings on abrupt millennial-scale climate changes: a statistical modelling study by Takahito Mitsui · Michel Crucifix

Checklist for your thesis evaluation

Evaluating your thesis ensures that your research meets the standards of academia. Here's an elaborate checklist to guide you through this critical process.

Content and structure

• Is the thesis statement clear, concise, and debatable?
• Does the introduction provide sufficient background and context?
• Is the literature review comprehensive, relevant, and well-organized?
• Does the methodology section clearly describe and justify the research methods?
• Are the results/findings presented clearly and logically?
• Does the discussion interpret the results in light of the research question and existing literature?
• Is the conclusion summarizing the research and suggesting future directions or implications?

Clarity and coherence

• Is the writing clear and free of jargon?
• Are ideas and sections logically connected and flowing?
• Is there a clear narrative or argument throughout the thesis?

Research quality

• Is the research question significant and relevant?
• Are the research methods appropriate for the question?
• Is the sample size (if applicable) adequate?
• Are the data analysis techniques appropriate and correctly applied?
• Are potential biases or limitations addressed?

Originality and significance

• Does the thesis contribute new knowledge or insights to the field?
• Is the research grounded in existing literature while offering fresh perspectives?

Formatting and presentation

• Is the thesis formatted according to institutional guidelines?
• Are figures, tables, and charts clear, labeled, and referenced in the text?
• Is the bibliography or reference list complete and consistently formatted?
• Are appendices relevant and appropriately referenced in the main text?

Grammar and language

• Is the thesis free of grammatical and spelling errors?
• Is the language professional, consistent, and appropriate for an academic audience?
• Are quotations and paraphrased material correctly cited?

Feedback and revision

• Have you sought feedback from peers, advisors, or experts in the field?
• Have you addressed the feedback and made the necessary revisions?

Overall assessment

• Does the thesis as a whole feel cohesive and comprehensive?
• Would the thesis be understandable and valuable to someone in your field?

Ensure to use this checklist to leave no ground for doubt or missed information in your thesis.

After writing your thesis, the next step is to discuss and defend your findings verbally in front of a knowledgeable panel. You’ve to be well prepared as your professors may grade your presentation abilities.

Preparing your thesis defense

A thesis defense, also known as "defending the thesis," is the culmination of a scholar's research journey. It's the final frontier, where you’ll present their findings and face scrutiny from a panel of experts.

Typically, the defense involves a public presentation where you’ll have to outline your study, followed by a question-and-answer session with a committee of experts. This committee assesses the validity, originality, and significance of the research.

The defense serves as a rite of passage for scholars. It's an opportunity to showcase expertise, address criticisms, and refine arguments. A successful defense not only validates the research but also establishes your authority as a researcher in your field.

Here’s how you can effectively prepare for your thesis defense .

Now, having touched upon the process of defending a thesis, it's worth noting that scholarly work can take various forms, depending on academic and regional practices.

One such form, often paralleled with the thesis, is the 'dissertation.' But what differentiates the two?

Dissertation vs. Thesis

Often used interchangeably in casual discourse, they refer to distinct research projects undertaken at different levels of higher education.

To the uninitiated, understanding their meaning might be elusive. So, let's demystify these terms and delve into their core differences.

Here's a table differentiating between the two.

Wrapping up

From understanding the foundational concept of a thesis to navigating its various components, differentiating it from a dissertation, and recognizing the importance of proper citation — this guide covers it all.

As scholars and readers, understanding these nuances not only aids in academic pursuits but also fosters a deeper appreciation for the relentless quest for knowledge that drives academia.

It’s important to remember that every thesis is a testament to curiosity, dedication, and the indomitable spirit of discovery.

Good luck with your thesis writing!

Frequently Asked Questions

A thesis typically ranges between 40-80 pages, but its length can vary based on the research topic, institution guidelines, and level of study.

A PhD thesis usually spans 200-300 pages, though this can vary based on the discipline, complexity of the research, and institutional requirements.

To identify a thesis topic, consider current trends in your field, gaps in existing literature, personal interests, and discussions with advisors or mentors. Additionally, reviewing related journals and conference proceedings can provide insights into potential areas of exploration.

The conceptual framework is often situated in the literature review or theoretical framework section of a thesis. It helps set the stage by providing the context, defining key concepts, and explaining the relationships between variables.

A thesis statement should be concise, clear, and specific. It should state the main argument or point of your research. Start by pinpointing the central question or issue your research addresses, then condense that into a single statement, ensuring it reflects the essence of your paper.

You might also like

5 Tools zur Literaturrecherche für die optimale Recherche (+2 Bonustools)

5 outils de revue de littérature pour réussir vos recherches (+2 outils bonus)

人工智能在系统文献综述中的作用

How To Write A Dissertation Or Thesis

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) Expert Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2020

How To Write A Dissertation: 8 Steps

• Clearly understand what a dissertation (or thesis) is
• Find a unique and valuable research topic
• Craft a convincing research proposal
• Write up a strong introduction chapter
• Review the existing literature and compile a literature review
• Design a rigorous research strategy and undertake your own research
• Present the findings of your research
• Draw a conclusion and discuss the implications

Step 1: Understand exactly what a dissertation is

This probably sounds like a no-brainer, but all too often, students come to us for help with their research and the underlying issue is that they don’t fully understand what a dissertation (or thesis) actually is.

So, what is a dissertation?

At its simplest, a dissertation or thesis is a formal piece of research , reflecting the standard research process . But what is the standard research process, you ask? The research process involves 4 key steps:

• Ask a very specific, well-articulated question (s) (your research topic)
• See what other researchers have said about it (if they’ve already answered it)
• If they haven’t answered it adequately, undertake your own data collection and analysis in a scientifically rigorous fashion
• Answer your original question(s), based on your analysis findings

In short, the research process is simply about asking and answering questions in a systematic fashion . This probably sounds pretty obvious, but people often think they’ve done “research”, when in fact what they have done is:

• Started with a vague, poorly articulated question
• Not taken the time to see what research has already been done regarding the question
• Collected data and opinions that support their gut and undertaken a flimsy analysis
• Drawn a shaky conclusion, based on that analysis

If you want to see the perfect example of this in action, look out for the next Facebook post where someone claims they’ve done “research”… All too often, people consider reading a few blog posts to constitute research. Its no surprise then that what they end up with is an opinion piece, not research. Okay, okay – I’ll climb off my soapbox now.

The key takeaway here is that a dissertation (or thesis) is a formal piece of research, reflecting the research process. It’s not an opinion piece , nor a place to push your agenda or try to convince someone of your position. Writing a good dissertation involves asking a question and taking a systematic, rigorous approach to answering it.

If you understand this and are comfortable leaving your opinions or preconceived ideas at the door, you’re already off to a good start!

Step 2: Find a unique, valuable research topic

As we saw, the first step of the research process is to ask a specific, well-articulated question. In other words, you need to find a research topic that asks a specific question or set of questions (these are called research questions ). Sounds easy enough, right? All you’ve got to do is identify a question or two and you’ve got a winning research topic. Well, not quite…

A good dissertation or thesis topic has a few important attributes. Specifically, a solid research topic should be:

Let’s take a closer look at these:

Attribute #1: Clear

Your research topic needs to be crystal clear about what you’re planning to research, what you want to know, and within what context. There shouldn’t be any ambiguity or vagueness about what you’ll research.

Here’s an example of a clearly articulated research topic:

An analysis of consumer-based factors influencing organisational trust in British low-cost online equity brokerage firms.

As you can see in the example, its crystal clear what will be analysed (factors impacting organisational trust), amongst who (consumers) and in what context (British low-cost equity brokerage firms, based online).

Need a helping hand?

Attribute #2:   Unique

Your research should be asking a question(s) that hasn’t been asked before, or that hasn’t been asked in a specific context (for example, in a specific country or industry).

For example, sticking organisational trust topic above, it’s quite likely that organisational trust factors in the UK have been investigated before, but the context (online low-cost equity brokerages) could make this research unique. Therefore, the context makes this research original.

One caveat when using context as the basis for originality – you need to have a good reason to suspect that your findings in this context might be different from the existing research – otherwise, there’s no reason to warrant researching it.

Attribute #3: Important

Simply asking a unique or original question is not enough – the question needs to create value. In other words, successfully answering your research questions should provide some value to the field of research or the industry. You can’t research something just to satisfy your curiosity. It needs to make some form of contribution either to research or industry.

For example, researching the factors influencing consumer trust would create value by enabling businesses to tailor their operations and marketing to leverage factors that promote trust. In other words, it would have a clear benefit to industry.

So, how do you go about finding a unique and valuable research topic? We explain that in detail in this video post – How To Find A Research Topic . Yeah, we’ve got you covered 😊

Step 3: Write a convincing research proposal

Once you’ve pinned down a high-quality research topic, the next step is to convince your university to let you research it. No matter how awesome you think your topic is, it still needs to get the rubber stamp before you can move forward with your research. The research proposal is the tool you’ll use for this job.

So, what’s in a research proposal?

The main “job” of a research proposal is to convince your university, advisor or committee that your research topic is worthy of approval. But convince them of what? Well, this varies from university to university, but generally, they want to see that:

• You have a clearly articulated, unique and important topic (this might sound familiar…)
• You’ve done some initial reading of the existing literature relevant to your topic (i.e. a literature review)
• You have a provisional plan in terms of how you will collect data and analyse it (i.e. a methodology)

At the proposal stage, it’s (generally) not expected that you’ve extensively reviewed the existing literature , but you will need to show that you’ve done enough reading to identify a clear gap for original (unique) research. Similarly, they generally don’t expect that you have a rock-solid research methodology mapped out, but you should have an idea of whether you’ll be undertaking qualitative or quantitative analysis , and how you’ll collect your data (we’ll discuss this in more detail later).

Long story short – don’t stress about having every detail of your research meticulously thought out at the proposal stage – this will develop as you progress through your research. However, you do need to show that you’ve “done your homework” and that your research is worthy of approval .

So, how do you go about crafting a high-quality, convincing proposal? We cover that in detail in this video post – How To Write A Top-Class Research Proposal . We’ve also got a video walkthrough of two proposal examples here .

Step 4: Craft a strong introduction chapter

Once your proposal’s been approved, its time to get writing your actual dissertation or thesis! The good news is that if you put the time into crafting a high-quality proposal, you’ve already got a head start on your first three chapters – introduction, literature review and methodology – as you can use your proposal as the basis for these.

Handy sidenote – our free dissertation & thesis template is a great way to speed up your dissertation writing journey.

What’s the introduction chapter all about?

The purpose of the introduction chapter is to set the scene for your research (dare I say, to introduce it…) so that the reader understands what you’ll be researching and why it’s important. In other words, it covers the same ground as the research proposal in that it justifies your research topic.

What goes into the introduction chapter?

This can vary slightly between universities and degrees, but generally, the introduction chapter will include the following:

• A brief background to the study, explaining the overall area of research
• A problem statement , explaining what the problem is with the current state of research (in other words, where the knowledge gap exists)
• Your research questions – in other words, the specific questions your study will seek to answer (based on the knowledge gap)
• The significance of your study – in other words, why it’s important and how its findings will be useful in the world

As you can see, this all about explaining the “what” and the “why” of your research (as opposed to the “how”). So, your introduction chapter is basically the salesman of your study, “selling” your research to the first-time reader and (hopefully) getting them interested to read more.

Step 5: Undertake an in-depth literature review

As I mentioned earlier, you’ll need to do some initial review of the literature in Steps 2 and 3 to find your research gap and craft a convincing research proposal – but that’s just scratching the surface. Once you reach the literature review stage of your dissertation or thesis, you need to dig a lot deeper into the existing research and write up a comprehensive literature review chapter.

What’s the literature review all about?

There are two main stages in the literature review process:

Literature Review Step 1: Reading up

The first stage is for you to deep dive into the existing literature (journal articles, textbook chapters, industry reports, etc) to gain an in-depth understanding of the current state of research regarding your topic. While you don’t need to read every single article, you do need to ensure that you cover all literature that is related to your core research questions, and create a comprehensive catalogue of that literature , which you’ll use in the next step.

Reading and digesting all the relevant literature is a time consuming and intellectually demanding process. Many students underestimate just how much work goes into this step, so make sure that you allocate a good amount of time for this when planning out your research. Thankfully, there are ways to fast track the process – be sure to check out this article covering how to read journal articles quickly .

Literature Review Step 2: Writing up

Once you’ve worked through the literature and digested it all, you’ll need to write up your literature review chapter. Many students make the mistake of thinking that the literature review chapter is simply a summary of what other researchers have said. While this is partly true, a literature review is much more than just a summary. To pull off a good literature review chapter, you’ll need to achieve at least 3 things:

• You need to synthesise the existing research , not just summarise it. In other words, you need to show how different pieces of theory fit together, what’s agreed on by researchers, what’s not.
• You need to highlight a research gap that your research is going to fill. In other words, you’ve got to outline the problem so that your research topic can provide a solution.
• You need to use the existing research to inform your methodology and approach to your own research design. For example, you might use questions or Likert scales from previous studies in your your own survey design .

As you can see, a good literature review is more than just a summary of the published research. It’s the foundation on which your own research is built, so it deserves a lot of love and attention. Take the time to craft a comprehensive literature review with a suitable structure .

But, how do I actually write the literature review chapter, you ask? We cover that in detail in this video post .

Step 6: Carry out your own research

Once you’ve completed your literature review and have a sound understanding of the existing research, its time to develop your own research (finally!). You’ll design this research specifically so that you can find the answers to your unique research question.

There are two steps here – designing your research strategy and executing on it:

1 – Design your research strategy

The first step is to design your research strategy and craft a methodology chapter . I won’t get into the technicalities of the methodology chapter here, but in simple terms, this chapter is about explaining the “how” of your research. If you recall, the introduction and literature review chapters discussed the “what” and the “why”, so it makes sense that the next point to cover is the “how” –that’s what the methodology chapter is all about.

In this section, you’ll need to make firm decisions about your research design. This includes things like:

• Your research philosophy (e.g. positivism or interpretivism )
• Your overall methodology (e.g. qualitative , quantitative or mixed methods)
• Your data collection strategy (e.g. interviews , focus groups, surveys)
• Your data analysis strategy (e.g. content analysis , correlation analysis, regression)

If these words have got your head spinning, don’t worry! We’ll explain these in plain language in other posts. It’s not essential that you understand the intricacies of research design (yet!). The key takeaway here is that you’ll need to make decisions about how you’ll design your own research, and you’ll need to describe (and justify) your decisions in your methodology chapter.

2 – Execute: Collect and analyse your data

Once you’ve worked out your research design, you’ll put it into action and start collecting your data. This might mean undertaking interviews, hosting an online survey or any other data collection method. Data collection can take quite a bit of time (especially if you host in-person interviews), so be sure to factor sufficient time into your project plan for this. Oftentimes, things don’t go 100% to plan (for example, you don’t get as many survey responses as you hoped for), so bake a little extra time into your budget here.

Once you’ve collected your data, you’ll need to do some data preparation before you can sink your teeth into the analysis. For example:

• If you carry out interviews or focus groups, you’ll need to transcribe your audio data to text (i.e. a Word document).
• If you collect quantitative survey data, you’ll need to clean up your data and get it into the right format for whichever analysis software you use (for example, SPSS, R or STATA).

Once you’ve completed your data prep, you’ll undertake your analysis, using the techniques that you described in your methodology. Depending on what you find in your analysis, you might also do some additional forms of analysis that you hadn’t planned for. For example, you might see something in the data that raises new questions or that requires clarification with further analysis.

The type(s) of analysis that you’ll use depend entirely on the nature of your research and your research questions. For example:

• If your research if exploratory in nature, you’ll often use qualitative analysis techniques .
• If your research is confirmatory in nature, you’ll often use quantitative analysis techniques
• If your research involves a mix of both, you might use a mixed methods approach

Again, if these words have got your head spinning, don’t worry! We’ll explain these concepts and techniques in other posts. The key takeaway is simply that there’s no “one size fits all” for research design and methodology – it all depends on your topic, your research questions and your data. So, don’t be surprised if your study colleagues take a completely different approach to yours.

Step 7: Present your findings

Once you’ve completed your analysis, it’s time to present your findings (finally!). In a dissertation or thesis, you’ll typically present your findings in two chapters – the results chapter and the discussion chapter .

What’s the difference between the results chapter and the discussion chapter?

While these two chapters are similar, the results chapter generally just presents the processed data neatly and clearly without interpretation, while the discussion chapter explains the story the data are telling  – in other words, it provides your interpretation of the results.

For example, if you were researching the factors that influence consumer trust, you might have used a quantitative approach to identify the relationship between potential factors (e.g. perceived integrity and competence of the organisation) and consumer trust. In this case:

• Your results chapter would just present the results of the statistical tests. For example, correlation results or differences between groups. In other words, the processed numbers.
• Your discussion chapter would explain what the numbers mean in relation to your research question(s). For example, Factor 1 has a weak relationship with consumer trust, while Factor 2 has a strong relationship.

Depending on the university and degree, these two chapters (results and discussion) are sometimes merged into one , so be sure to check with your institution what their preference is. Regardless of the chapter structure, this section is about presenting the findings of your research in a clear, easy to understand fashion.

Importantly, your discussion here needs to link back to your research questions (which you outlined in the introduction or literature review chapter). In other words, it needs to answer the key questions you asked (or at least attempt to answer them).

For example, if we look at the sample research topic:

In this case, the discussion section would clearly outline which factors seem to have a noteworthy influence on organisational trust. By doing so, they are answering the overarching question and fulfilling the purpose of the research .

Step 8: The Final Step Draw a conclusion and discuss the implications

Last but not least, you’ll need to wrap up your research with the conclusion chapter . In this chapter, you’ll bring your research full circle by highlighting the key findings of your study and explaining what the implications of these findings are.

What exactly are key findings? The key findings are those findings which directly relate to your original research questions and overall research objectives (which you discussed in your introduction chapter). The implications, on the other hand, explain what your findings mean for industry, or for research in your area.

Sticking with the consumer trust topic example, the conclusion might look something like this:

Key findings

This study set out to identify which factors influence consumer-based trust in British low-cost online equity brokerage firms. The results suggest that the following factors have a large impact on consumer trust:

While the following factors have a very limited impact on consumer trust:

Notably, within the 25-30 age groups, Factors E had a noticeably larger impact, which may be explained by…

Implications

The findings having noteworthy implications for British low-cost online equity brokers. Specifically:

The large impact of Factors X and Y implies that brokers need to consider….

The limited impact of Factor E implies that brokers need to…

As you can see, the conclusion chapter is basically explaining the “what” (what your study found) and the “so what?” (what the findings mean for the industry or research). This brings the study full circle and closes off the document.

Let’s recap – how to write a dissertation or thesis

You’re still with me? Impressive! I know that this post was a long one, but hopefully you’ve learnt a thing or two about how to write a dissertation or thesis, and are now better equipped to start your own research.

To recap, the 8 steps to writing a quality dissertation (or thesis) are as follows:

• Understand what a dissertation (or thesis) is – a research project that follows the research process.
• Find a unique (original) and important research topic
• Craft a convincing dissertation or thesis research proposal
• Write a clear, compelling introduction chapter
• Undertake a thorough review of the existing research and write up a literature review
• Undertake your own research
• Present and interpret your findings

Once you’ve wrapped up the core chapters, all that’s typically left is the abstract , reference list and appendices. As always, be sure to check with your university if they have any additional requirements in terms of structure or content.

You Might Also Like:

How To Review & Understand Academic Literature Quickly

Learn how to fast-track your literature review by reading with intention and clarity. Dr E and Amy Murdock explain how.

Dissertation Writing Services: Far Worse Than You Think

Thinking about using a dissertation or thesis writing service? You might want to reconsider that move. Here’s what you need to know.

Triangulation: The Ultimate Credibility Enhancer

Triangulation is one of the best ways to enhance the credibility of your research. Learn about the different options here.

The Harsh Truths Of Academic Research

Dr. Ethar Al-Saraf and Dr. Amy Murdock dive into the darker truths of academic research, so that you’re well prepared for reality.

Dissertation Paralysis: How To Get Unstuck

In this episode of the podcast, Dr. Ethar and Dr. Amy Murdock dive into how to get unstuck when you’re facing dissertation paralysis

📄 FREE TEMPLATES

Research Topic Ideation

Proposal Writing

Literature Review

Methodology & Analysis

Academic Writing

Referencing & Citing

Apps, Tools & Tricks

The Grad Coach Podcast

20 Comments

thankfull >>>this is very useful

Thank you, it was really helpful

unquestionably, this amazing simplified way of teaching. Really , I couldn’t find in the literature words that fully explicit my great thanks to you. However, I could only say thanks a-lot.

Great to hear that – thanks for the feedback. Good luck writing your dissertation/thesis.

This is the most comprehensive explanation of how to write a dissertation. Many thanks for sharing it free of charge.

Very rich presentation. Thank you

Thanks Derek Jansen|GRADCOACH, I find it very useful guide to arrange my activities and proceed to research!

Thank you so much for such a marvelous teaching .I am so convinced that am going to write a comprehensive and a distinct masters dissertation

It is an amazing comprehensive explanation

This was straightforward. Thank you!

I can say that your explanations are simple and enlightening – understanding what you have done here is easy for me. Could you write more about the different types of research methods specific to the three methodologies: quan, qual and MM. I look forward to interacting with this website more in the future.

Thanks for the feedback and suggestions 🙂

Hello, your write ups is quite educative. However, l have challenges in going about my research questions which is below; *Building the enablers of organisational growth through effective governance and purposeful leadership.*

Very educating.

Just listening to the name of the dissertation makes the student nervous. As writing a top-quality dissertation is a difficult task as it is a lengthy topic, requires a lot of research and understanding and is usually around 10,000 to 15000 words. Sometimes due to studies, unbalanced workload or lack of research and writing skill students look for dissertation submission from professional writers.

Thank you 💕😊 very much. I was confused but your comprehensive explanation has cleared my doubts of ever presenting a good thesis. Thank you.

thank you so much, that was so useful

Hi. Where is the excel spread sheet ark?

could you please help me look at your thesis paper to enable me to do the portion that has to do with the specification

my topic is “the impact of domestic revenue mobilization.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Submit Comment

• Print Friendly

• Academic Leadership

How Many Focus Groups are Enough: Focus Groups for Dissertation Research

• September 7, 2022
• Donna Graham, PhD, and John Bryan, DBA

The purpose of this article is to present an overview of the use of focus groups as a source of data in higher education, especially in doctoral programs. The need for emerging scholars to develop experience in using focus groups to collect data is important to their development of their research study. The challenges that emerging researchers have in securing focus group participants may lead to a need for more guidance and practice in conducting focus groups. One focus group conducted well may be better than two or more that are less effective. A quality focus group has participants who are individually and collectively eager and willing to share (Mathena, 2017). A focus group should be a dialogue between participants. Focus groups are best when anticipating comprehensive discussion (Duwe, 2017). Such dialogue may improve when participants are socially and intellectually homogeneous (Lorrain, 2020).

A focus group is an interview format consisting of multiple participants assembled for a specific purpose (Krueger & Casey, 2000). Emerging researchers may use a focus group protocol to guide the data collection. Focus group data consists of transcripts, commonly analyzed thematically. A focus group can be more structured or less structured, depending on the purpose. The purpose of a focus group is to explore the phenomenon of a research study. The focus group as a data source for a dissertation may explore different aspects of the phenomenon from individual interviews. The focus group may probe details that emerged from the individual interviews. In this article, we present guidelines for doctoral learners to use focus groups effectively in data collection for the dissertation.

Focus groups in general

A focus group can consist of any number that the researcher defines as a group, from three to 12 participants being common. As with individual interviews, focus group sessions generally last no more than 90 minutes out of consideration for the participants’ time. A focus group should be, in keeping with the name, focused; trying to cover too much material or too many topics will reduce the depth and breadth of the discussion. A researcher who needs to cover more material or more topics should use more than one focus group. The structure of a focus group should enable answering each of the research question in a study (Reifer, 2001).

A focus group can provide a researcher with an opportunity to probe more deeply ideas or themes that emerged from individual interviews and is useful for gathering data from difficult populations or those that might feel unsafe (Anderson, 2020). A focus group may also be useful in trying to reconcile conflicting ideas from individual interviews or responses from questionnaires or surveys. Researchers also use one or more focus groups to discover perspectives from the interaction between participants that would not emerge from individual interviews (Tsan et al., 2022).

Focus group questions have a collective rather than an individual focus (Bourgeois, 2016). A focus group may address research questions distinct from other data sources (Cron, 2020). The questions can emerge from responses from other data sources (Isome & Filtz, 2018). Focus groups can help refine other data sources (Aiman, 2020) or uncover different interpretations of questions (Williams, 2020).

Focus groups provide an opportunity to expand on data gathered previously by the researcher for the dissertation. Focus groups may provide more depth in response to questions than individual interviews (Weaver, 2007). Focus group questions can allow participants to expand on interview question responses (Sedlock, 2020).

Interaction between participants can yield data not available through other data sources (Isome & Filtz, 2018). The direction of a focus group can shift based on the responses and reactions of the participants (Markantonakis, 2019). Focus groups should balance the need for homogeneity among participants that increases comfort in speaking up within the group. However, diversity of opinions, interest, and involvement with the topic is necessary to achieve a sense of data saturation and may lead to variability in the level of participant contribution (Kitzinger & Barbour, 2001; Morgan, 1998).

Moderating focus groups

Effective moderation of a focus group requires training and practice. Although the moderator may have passion and excitement for the topic, the purpose of the focus group is to extract the perceptions of the participants and not to provide a platform for the moderator to try to impress the participants. An effective moderator facilitates discussion by the participants and does not allow one or more participants to dominate the discussion or to unreasonably sway the other participants. The number of themes that may emerge from a focus group will be fewer than from individual interviews. Findings will tend to be subjective opinions, particularly if the researcher does not maintain neutrality in reporting the data (Krueger & Casey, 2000; Morgan, 1998).

The collective nature of a focus group may seem unnatural, in part because the discussion has a formal moderator (Kitzinger & Barbour, 2001). Some participants may not have extensive experience in group discussions with potential strangers. As a result, the collective discussion within some focus groups may suppress deep expression of experiences and opinions found in individual interviews (Kitzinger & Barbour, 2001; Morgan, 1998) and enhance those expressions in others. The moderator has less control in a focus group environment than in individual interviews. The moderator, who is often the researcher, may need to reiterate or rephase the original question to mitigate digressions in the conversation (Ho, 2006). The experience of the moderator may be a factor in the robustness of the data from the focus group (Ho, 2006). Moderators need to be skilled at getting participation from all members, which will help avoid one or more participants feeling that the participation was a waste of time.

Conducting doctoral-level focus groups

A doctoral dissertation is a unique form of academic research. This type requires skills that may not be present in novice researchers. Some of these missing skills may include leading group discussions, gathering data in a group setting, and getting all members to participate. Doctoral researchers may also struggle with keeping the focus group discussion moving along and knowing when to move on to a new topic. A focus group provides an opportunity for participants to discuss and debate new ideas and perspectives and create new approaches (Young, 2018). A more structured focus group protocol establishes a sense of flow to the discussion.

Focus group protocols

A focus group protocol should anticipate generic questions likely to arise from the completion of other data collection such as interviews. However, as the researcher analyzes those earlier data sources, the protocol should be refined to reflect what has just emerged. A focus group protocol should include prompts to moderate continued discussion and aid saturation. The academic literature supports the concept of data saturation in focus groups as the point when a researcher has collected sufficient data.

The focus group protocol should have a maximum of 12 primary questions, not including probing or follow-up questions (Duwe, 2017). Once the researcher senses that the participants are growing weary of the current discussion, it may be beyond the point at which the researcher should have moved to the next topic. A focus group protocol may not be finalized until after earlier data collection steps are complete.

Data saturation

Data saturation within a focus group may appear within a topic rather than in the broader discussion. For the doctoral researcher, recognizing data saturation is challenging. The focus group discussion should continue past where saturation is first perceived (Cron, 2020). However, saturation may only be noticed during coding of the focus group transcripts (Franks, 2020). The mood of the focus group participants may be the most practical indication of data saturation.

The researcher can confirm data saturation by reading and re-reading transcripts and developing initial codes. Data saturation may be harder to detect across multiple focus groups than single focus groups. Data saturation within one focus group can be obtained when participants have no additional ideas to contribute (Cron, 2020). During thematic analysis, coding stops when no new codes emerge (Duwe, 2017) and may indicate data saturation. It is possible, that the researcher may realize that the initial set of generated codes may not be sufficient to address the research questions, so the researcher may want to have an alternate focus group available.

Size and number of focus groups

A focus group should be small enough to allow for rich and deep data analysis. To prepare for the focus group, the researcher should over-recruit by 20% to 50% to allow for attrition, including an allowance for needing more than one focus group, if necessary, to reach data saturation. If more data is needed after one focus group, the researcher may need to do at least one more (Lorrain, 2020). Focus groups that are too small may have domination problems and larger focus groups are difficult for novice researchers to moderate.

Focus groups should last between 60 and 90 minutes to capture robust data (Joyner-Payne, 2020). A focus group consisting of two to 12 participants seems to be typical for dissertation research. Larger focus groups can become unwieldy for the novice researcher. The researcher will want to make sure that every participant has a chance to contribute.

The purpose of a focus group is to contribute rich data to answer the research questions. Novice researchers need to understand that the number of focus groups is less important than the quality of the data from the focus group. Sufficient data can be extracted from one focus group if that focus group is structured and moderated appropriately.

Dr. Donna Graham is a university professor and dissertation chair. Dr. Graham holds a BA in psychology and education from Rosemont College, a MS in counseling from Villanova University, a MEd in educational technology from Rosemont College, and a doctorate in philosophy from Capella University. 

Dr. John Bryan is a university professor, editor, and dissertation chair. Dr. Bryan holds a BA in chemistry from University of California, San Diego, an MBA in operations and marketing from Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, and a DBA in leadership from the University of Phoenix.

References :

Aiman, M. E. (2020). Examination of implicit curriculum of the United States Air Force Academy (Master’s thesis, Minot State).

Anderson, K. M. (2020). Inclusive education: Educator preparedness and student success (Doctoral dissertation, William Woods University).

Bourgeois, E. D. (2016). Behavioral interventions utilized with middle-school children with autism spectrum disorder (Doctoral dissertation, Capella).

Cron, T. D. (2020). Engagement: A case study of online undergraduate students (Doctoral dissertation, GCU).

Duwe, B. E. (2017). A collective case study: Student voice and the implications for partnership, activism and leadership (Doctoral dissertation, University of Denver).

Franks, L. A. (2020). Stakeholder involvement and management in non-public, independent, not-for-profit schools  (Doctoral dissertation, Wilmington University).

Ho, D. G. (2006). The focus group interview: Rising to the challenge in qualitative research methodology. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics , 29(1), 5-1.

Isome, J., & Filtz, J. W. (2018). A comprehensive review of threat assessment at a community college commuter campus in north Mississippi (Doctoral dissertation, University of Mississippi).

Joyner-Payne, S. (2020). How communication content, media type, and timing influence emotions for acquired employees in a post-acquisition integration (Doctoral dissertation, GCU).

Kitzinger, J., & Barbour, R. S. (eds.). (2001). Developing Focus Group Research: Politics, Theory, and Practice . Sage.

Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2008). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (4th ed.). Sage.

Lorrain, S. E. (2020). Technostress from eMail: A case study (Doctoral dissertation, GCU).

Markantonakis, A. (2019). How does the online educational mode of course delivery impact the success of high school seniors participating in early college and career and college promise programs? (Doctoral capstone, Wingate University)

Mathena, A. A. (2017). Understanding the impact of online grading and standards-based report cards: A phenomenological study on teacher instruction at the elementary level (Doctoral dissertation, Liberty University).

Morgan, D. L. (1998). The Focus Group Guidebook . Sage.

Reifer, C. J. (2001). Using focus group methodology to develop diabetes screening, education, and prevention programs for African American women (Doctoral dissertation, Texas Women’s University).

Sedlock, R. (2020). Probation as a referral source: How macro level social work impacts change (Doctoral dissertation, Capella).

Tsan, J., Coenraad, M., Crenshaw, Z., Palmer, J., Eatinger, D., Beck, K., Weintrop, D., & Franklin, D. (2022, February). Reimagining professional development for K-8 CS teachers: Evaluating a virtual, diffuse model. In Proceedings of the 53rd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 530-536).

Weaver, D. J. (2007). Resilience of direct care workers in adolescent residential treatment facilities: An exploratory study (Doctoral dissertation, Capella).

Williams, J. C. (2020). T he different political worlds of women and men (Doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado).

Young, P. A. (2018). Perceptions of obese African American women regarding altering traditional soul food preparation (Doctoral dissertation, Walden University).

Stay Updated with Faculty Focus!

Get exclusive access to programs, reports, podcast episodes, articles, and more!

• Opens in a new tab

Welcome Back

Username or Email

Remember Me

Already a subscriber? log in here.

While Sandel argues that pursuing perfection through genetic engineering would decrease our sense of humility, he claims that the sense of solidarity we would lose is also important.

This thesis summarizes several points in Sandel’s argument, but it does not make a claim about how we should understand his argument. A reader who read Sandel’s argument would not also need to read an essay based on this descriptive thesis.  

Broad thesis (arguable, but difficult to support with evidence) 

Michael Sandel’s arguments about genetic engineering do not take into consideration all the relevant issues.

This is an arguable claim because it would be possible to argue against it by saying that Michael Sandel’s arguments do take all of the relevant issues into consideration. But the claim is too broad. Because the thesis does not specify which “issues” it is focused on—or why it matters if they are considered—readers won’t know what the rest of the essay will argue, and the writer won’t know what to focus on. If there is a particular issue that Sandel does not address, then a more specific version of the thesis would include that issue—hand an explanation of why it is important.  

Arguable thesis with analytical claim 

While Sandel argues persuasively that our instinct to “remake” (54) ourselves into something ever more perfect is a problem, his belief that we can always draw a line between what is medically necessary and what makes us simply “better than well” (51) is less convincing.

This is an arguable analytical claim. To argue for this claim, the essay writer will need to show how evidence from the article itself points to this interpretation. It’s also a reasonable scope for a thesis because it can be supported with evidence available in the text and is neither too broad nor too narrow.  

Arguable thesis with normative claim 

Given Sandel’s argument against genetic enhancement, we should not allow parents to decide on using Human Growth Hormone for their children.

This thesis tells us what we should do about a particular issue discussed in Sandel’s article, but it does not tell us how we should understand Sandel’s argument.  

Questions to ask about your thesis 

• Is the thesis truly arguable? Does it speak to a genuine dilemma in the source, or would most readers automatically agree with it?  
• Is the thesis too obvious? Again, would most or all readers agree with it without needing to see your argument?  
• Is the thesis complex enough to require a whole essay's worth of argument?  
• Is the thesis supportable with evidence from the text rather than with generalizations or outside research?  
• Would anyone want to read a paper in which this thesis was developed? That is, can you explain what this paper is adding to our understanding of a problem, question, or topic?
• picture_as_pdf Thesis

Utility Navigation

• New Students
• Graduate Organizations
• Graduate Alumni

Secondary Nav Penn GSC

• Your Space on Campus
• Support Our Work

Primary Nav Penn GSC

• Resource Guide
• Funding and Finances
• Navigating the Academy
• Graduate Student Life

Drawer Menu Penn GSC

• Back to main menu
• Join Our Team
• Accessibility
• Grad Center Spaces
• Reserve a Room
• Building Hours
• Mission and Vision
• Engage with Us
• Grad Center Advising and Support
• Penn Grad News
• About & Submissions
• New Student Orientation Hub
• For International Students
• Online Sessions for New Students
• Student Accounts & Technology
• Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion
• Campus Activities
• Graduate Student Groups
• Conduct and Safety
• Living in Philadelphia
• Funding & Finances
• Safety and Campus Conduct
• Alumni Resources
• Graduate Grants
• Graduate Emergency Fund
• Insurance Grants for PhD Students
• PhD Family Grants
• Dissertation Boot Camp
• Writing Groups
• Writers Rooms and Retreats
• Highlighted Opportunities
• About the Fontaine Society
• Resources for Current Fellows
• Fontaine News
• Teaching and Mentoring
• Resources & Support
• Language Programs
• Community Impact Fund
• Graduate Leadership Awards

Basic Page Sidebar Menu Penn GSC

Need motivation to write? Having trouble reaching your writing goals on time?  Joining a writing accountability group may help!

Whether you’re working on a dissertation, journal article, or other writing project, forming a group with other students working on writing projects is a great way to help one another make progress and meet deadlines, by providing accountability and encouragement along the way.

Check out our resources for existing writing groups or fill out the group matching form below and we will help connect you with a writing group or partner! 

This program is for current Penn graduate and professional students only. Others are welcome to use the writing group resources below, however we do not have capacity to match or support faculty or postdoc writing groups. 

To sign up for or register your writing group, please use one of the following Peer Accountability Group forms: 

Accountability Group Registration Form Use this form to register a group you have established 

Peer Writing Accountability Group Matching Form  (Form will be active when registrations open) Submit this form to be matched with a new or existing accountability group.

We conduct two rounds of matching each semester, please submit a form by the deadlines below and attend a Writing Accountability Group Introductory Workshop  (workshops will run before semester matching deadlines) to be matched (or re-matched) with a WAG. 

Whether you’re working on a dissertation, journal article, or other writing project, writing groups are a great way to help one another make progress and meet deadlines, by providing accountability and encouragement along the way.

Set Expectations and Ground Rules

We encourage you to schedule a meeting with the group to discuss why you joined and what you hope to gain from participating in a writing group. You may also want to share the challenges or habits that affect your writing. Finally, you should discuss preferences for how – and how often – the group with meet. If it’s helpful (we think it is), you can write up a set of “ground rules” and a set of shared goals for the group. These steps will help set the tone and clarify shared expectations for future sessions.

Your group may decide to schedule a regular meeting time or you may close each meeting by scheduling the next meeting. We recommend setting a rough agenda for each meeting (what goals you hope to reach, what you will be discussing, location/format), you will make it easier for group members to start helping each other with setting – and reaching – clear writing goals.

• How often will you meet as a group? 
• When will you meet? What days and times - and for how long? 
• Where will you meet? You may choose to meet in person (in a coffee shop, the library, etc.) or virtually via Zoom or a similar video chat. 
• Writing silently together
• Reporting on goals and progress
• Setting and discussing goals
• Exchanging and providing feedback on your written materials
• Sharing challenges and tips related to productivity and writing habits
• Social or personal conversations 
• How will you track and measure the success of the group? 
• Would you like assistance or support from the Grad Center? 

The Graduate Student Center partners with other academic centers on campus to provide support for academic writing through different series held each semester. View the current schedule at the links below.

Strategies for Success in Graduate Studies Series The Strategies for Success in Graduate Studies Series is a joint program from the Weingarten Center and the Graduate Student Center where learning specialists facilitate discussion-based workshops to support graduate and professional students in their coursework and scholarly projects!

Support for Publishing Series The Support for Publishing Series is hosted by the Libraries in collaboration with the Grad Center at Penn. Each workshop focuses on an element of the research or publishing process. During the semester, take part in in-person or virtual workshops covering citation management, impact metrics, promoting your work, selecting the right publishing venue, fair use, and more.

Research Communication Series The Research Communication series focuses on engaging and accessible communication to a wide audience through workshops facilitated by expert staff in Penn Libraries, Communication within the Curriculum, and the Grad Center. It also prepares students to participate in the  Penn 3 Minute Thesis  cosponsored by Career Services, GAPSA, and the Graduate Student Center.

Graduate Student Center University of Pennsylvania 3615 Locust Walk Philadelphia PA 19104 215-746-6868

[email protected]

Footer Menu

• Penn Provost Education Division
• Valuing Graduate Students

Preparing, Starting, and Conducting a Thesis Study: Do this before you start!

Writing a thesis study is the pinnacle of your academic education. This guide explains how to decide your thesis question and plan for, begin, and conduct your thesis study.

Best practices

Your relationship with your supervisor is crucial to your academic success.

Build relationships

It is essential to develop a good working relationship with your supervisor , secondary supervisors, other Ph.D. students, and support staff. There will be days when you feel frustrated and want to give up. Talking to your peers will provide encouragement. This is also a great way to troubleshoot any problems you may have been unable to resolve. For example, if an experimental technique is not working, other students may be experiencing the same issue, and collaboration can quickly resolve it.

Relationships with support staff are just as valuable as those with academic staff. Treat them with respect, and they will be willing to go the extra mile for you (e.g., fixing the copy machine when they are about to go home). Without a doubt, the most important relationship is with your Ph.D. supervisor. As an expert in their field, they have a working knowledge of your subject area and are up to date with the latest developments. You will meet regularly for formal one-on-one meetings to discuss your research progress, where you will receive guidance and constructive feedback. Informal discussions are also appropriate when you have an immediate concern, so feel free to pop by their office or drop a quick email if you need some advice. Remember, your success reflects on theirs, and they expect you to come to them if you have a pressing issue.

Participate in department or research group activities

Build relationships with fellow Ph.D. students and staff members in your department by attending research seminars, field trips, and journal clubs. Also, attend any organized social events; they are great networking opportunities.

What if I don’t get along with my supervisor?

Your relationship with your supervisor is crucial to your academic success. They are the first point of contact if you encounter problems with your thesis study, and you should be comfortable working with them. Address any communication issues as soon as possible. Often, they may be unaware that there is an issue and will appreciate you bringing it to their attention. Usually, a frank and open discussion will resolve the problem. For example, let your supervisor know if you feel that you are not receiving enough feedback or that they are micromanaging you. Do not feel intimidated—supervisors were also Ph.D. students at one time!

If you can’t resolve the issue between yourselves, ask one of your secondary supervisors, another staff member, or your head of department to act as a mediator. A change in supervisors must be the last resort. You are likely to encounter this person again; be cordial, and don’t burn bridges.

Steps for writing a thesis study

Refine your research question.

Once you have identified a field that interests you, narrow it down to decide exactly what you want to research. Research questions can be practical (e.g., a process that does not work properly or an issue faced by a specific group of people) or theoretical (e.g., relationships or opposing theories that have not been evaluated).

Your supervisor may already have projects in mind where they need a Ph.D. student to build on existing work in their research group. Alternatively, you might identify a gap or contradiction in the literature that you think requires further investigation, or you might be continuing your existing research by building on the findings of your Master’s degree.

Plan your thesis study

Planning is the cornerstone of successful research. You may have already written a research proposal , which you can use to plan your research steps. Perform a literature review to familiarize yourself with your field of research. If you are aiming for a Ph.D. degree after your Master’s degree, you may already have done this, but you should still check for new publications in the field since your last literature review.

Plan your thesis study using the SMART objectives:

• Your research question must be specific and not vague.
• Your research results must be measurable, either quantitatively or qualitatively, in a practical and cost-effective manner.
• You need to complete your thesis study within the set timeframe and budget.
• Don’t set a goal that you are incapable of achieving. Ensure that your objective addresses your thesis question.
• Create an achievable timeline and set specific milestones with dates (e.g., collect all specimens by 7 July).

Find a suitable working environment

You will need a suitable working environment for drafting your thesis paper. Your workspace should have all the resources (e.g., computer, stable internet connection) for you to plan and write up your work and should be as free from distractions as possible. If you can, plug a second monitor into your laptop so that you can read your references while writing. This will also save a lot of time and money on printing. A coffee maker is an added bonus!

Start your thesis study

Complete your induction.

New Ph.D. students undergo an induction program. This involves:

• Meeting academic staff, support staff, and fellow Ph.D. students
• Receiving details of meetings, journal clubs, and seminars held by the department or your research group
• Receiving training on health and safety and the standard operating procedures (SOPs ) of the lab where you will be working
• Completing any other relevant courses (e.g., radiation safety course, training on animal handling)

Start writing

The sooner you start work on your thesis study, the better. Before you begin, you may need to write grant applications, research proposals , or an application to upgrade your Master’s degree. You will need to perform a literature review to complete these activities. Some of this information will be used later when you write the Introduction section of your thesis study.

Conduct your research

Start your research for your thesis study as soon as you can. Although your final results may only be generated in year 2 or 3 of your study, with good planning, you can begin preliminary experiments or pilot studies early. Get into the habit of regularly and meticulously recording all experiments in your lab notebook as you go, analyzing the outcomes, and saving all data.

What if my study focus changes?

Your research focus may change during the course of your investigations. This happens more than you think. Because you will be investigating new concepts and ideas or untested hypotheses, expect difficulties and setbacks. For example, your focus may need to change due to problems with experimental techniques, unexpected results, limited financial resources, or unforeseen limitations.

What if my research is poor or doesn’t work?

Expect to encounter problems early in your research. This is part of the research process. Use these experiences to explore other approaches. Remember that negative results are still results. You may even end up including them in your final thesis.

Speak to your supervisor if your research is not going according to plan. They have vast experience and may suggest alternative approaches to solve your problem. Try problem-solving with fellow Ph.D. students or researchers in your lab. Some of the best ideas come from a good brainstorming session.

Thesis studies are hard work, but nothing beats the satisfaction of completing your PhD! Spend time formulating your thesis question. Careful planning is vital so that you complete your thesis on time. Ensure that you have the necessary approvals and certifications to conduct your research. Check out our site for more tips on how to write a good thesis/dissertation, where to find the best thesis editing services , and more about thesis editing and proofreading services .

Editor’s pick

Get free updates.

Subscribe to our newsletter for regular insights from the research and publishing industry!

Review Checklist

BEFORE YOU START

Chose a topic that interests you

Pick a supervisor

Meet with your supervisor to discuss your proposed research

Define your research question

Define your study objectives

Plan your research methodology

Write a timeline for your project and include specific milestones

Find a suitable workspace

STARTING YOUR RESEARCH

Obtain the necessary ethical approvals from your institution

Research participants must be fully aware of why you are conducting your research, how it will be done, and the end-use of the results. Participation must be voluntary, and participants can withdraw from the study at any time

If your research involves animals, you will need to follow the relevant institutional guidelines for animal care

Complete all training/certification necessary to perform your research

Write research applications and grant proposals

Perform a literature review

CONDUCTING YOUR RESEARCH

Adhere to all institutional protocols

Ensure that all participants have given written consent

Repeat experiments to ensure reproducibility

Record everything in your lab notebook

Regularly update your supervisor of your progress

Store all electronic data safely and make more than one backup (e.g., a USB drive and cloud storage)

Stick to your timelines

Don’t be afraid to ask for help

How do I choose a suitable research topic? +

Most importantly, chose a subject that interests you. You will be working on this project for a number of years, and if it does not excite you, you will not feel motivated and will find it hard to finish.

How do I choose a supervisor? +

As an undergraduate, you may have already formed good relationships with some of the academic staff at your institution. Your supervisor should be an expert in your academic field. They should have a publication record and supervision experience. If you are unsure, chat with other students about their experience with the supervisor(s) that you are considering.

What should I use as a starting point to perform my literature review? +

There are many literature databases (e.g., Google Scholar , PubMed , Scopus , Web of Science , Cochrane Library , and Embase ) as well sources of gray literature (information produced by government agencies and the for-profit sector that is not controlled by commercial publishers) that can be used.

Should I reference as I write? +

Although it may seem tedious, commit to referencing your writing as you go. An easy way to do this is to use reference managers, such as Mendeley , Zotero , or EndNote .

Reference management. Clean and simple.

How to structure a thesis

A typical thesis structure

1. abstract, 2. introduction, 3. literature review, 6. discussion, 7. conclusion, 8. reference list, frequently asked questions about structuring a thesis, related articles.

Starting a thesis can be daunting. There are so many questions in the beginning:

• How do you actually start your thesis?
• How do you structure it?
• What information should the individual chapters contain?

Each educational program has different demands on your thesis structure, which is why asking directly for the requirements of your program should be a first step. However, there is not much flexibility when it comes to structuring your thesis.

Abstract : a brief overview of your entire thesis.

Literature review : an evaluation of previous research on your topic that includes a discussion of gaps in the research and how your work may fill them.

Methods : outlines the methodology that you are using in your research.

Thesis : a large paper, or multi-chapter work, based on a topic relating to your field of study.

The abstract is the overview of your thesis and generally very short. This section should highlight the main contents of your thesis “at a glance” so that someone who is curious about your work can get the gist quickly. Take a look at our guide on how to write an abstract for more info.

Tip: Consider writing your abstract last, after you’ve written everything else.

The introduction to your thesis gives an overview of its basics or main points. It should answer the following questions:

• Why is the topic being studied?
• How is the topic being studied?
• What is being studied?

In answering the first question, you should know what your personal interest in this topic is and why it is relevant. Why does it matter?

To answer the "how", you should briefly explain how you are going to reach your research goal. Some prefer to answer that question in the methods chapter, but you can give a quick overview here.

And finally, you should explain "what" you are studying. You can also give background information here.

You should rewrite the introduction one last time when the writing is done to make sure it connects with your conclusion. Learn more about how to write a good thesis introduction in our thesis introduction guide .

A literature review is often part of the introduction, but it can be a separate section. It is an evaluation of previous research on the topic showing that there are gaps that your research will attempt to fill. A few tips for your literature review:

• Use a wide array of sources
• Show both sides of the coin
• Make sure to cover the classics in your field
• Present everything in a clear and structured manner

For more insights on lit reviews, take a look at our guide on how to write a literature review .

The methodology chapter outlines which methods you choose to gather data, how the data is analyzed and justifies why you chose that methodology . It shows how your choice of design and research methods is suited to answering your research question.

Make sure to also explain what the pitfalls of your approach are and how you have tried to mitigate them. Discussing where your study might come up short can give you more credibility, since it shows the reader that you are aware of its limitations.

Tip: Use graphs and tables, where appropriate, to visualize your results.

The results chapter outlines what you found out in relation to your research questions or hypotheses. It generally contains the facts of your research and does not include a lot of analysis, because that happens mostly in the discussion chapter.

Clearly visualize your results, using tables and graphs, especially when summarizing, and be consistent in your way of reporting. This means sticking to one format to help the reader evaluate and compare the data.

The discussion chapter includes your own analysis and interpretation of the data you gathered , comments on your results and explains what they mean. This is your opportunity to show that you have understood your findings and their significance.

Point out the limitations of your study, provide explanations for unexpected results, and note any questions that remain unanswered.

This is probably your most important chapter. This is where you highlight that your research objectives have been achieved. You can also reiterate any limitations to your study and make suggestions for future research.

Remember to check if you have really answered all your research questions and hypotheses in this chapter. Your thesis should be tied up nicely in the conclusion and show clearly what you did, what results you got, and what you learned. Discover how to write a good conclusion in our thesis conclusion guide .

At the end of your thesis, you’ll have to compile a list of references for everything you’ve cited above. Ideally, you should keep track of everything from the beginning. Otherwise, this could be a mammoth and pretty laborious task to do.

Consider using a reference manager like Paperpile to format and organize your citations. Paperpile allows you to organize and save your citations for later use and cite them in thousands of citation styles directly in Google Docs, Microsoft Word, or LaTeX:

🔲 Introduction

🔲 Literature review

🔲 Discussion

🔲 Conclusion

🔲 Reference list

The basic elements of a thesis are: Abstract, Introduction, Literature Review, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, and Reference List.

It's recommended to start a thesis by writing the literature review first. This way you learn more about the sources, before jumping to the discussion or any other element.

It's recommended to write the abstract of a thesis last, once everything else is done. This way you will be able to provide a complete overview of your work.

Usually, the discussion is the longest part of a thesis. In this part you are supposed to point out the limitations of your study, provide explanations for unexpected results, and note any questions that remain unanswered.

The order of the basic elements of a thesis are: 1. Abstract, 2. Introduction, 3. Literature Review, 4. Methods, 5. Results, 6. Discussion, 7. Conclusion, and 8. Reference List.

Select language

Students UU

Thesis groups.

Working on your thesis together instead of alone? Join a thesis group of Skills Lab. You determine the content of this group: exchange tips, discuss your weekly goals, learn more about planning or motivate each other to get started. 

Date & registration

For the time being, no thesis groups are organised. However, you can make an appointment with one of our writing tutors. Together with the tutor you can discuss whether it makes sense to make a series of appointments to keep up the momentum. Make an appointment with a writing tutor via the yellow button below. 

General information thesis groups

Who is it for.

You want to have more regular contact with other thesis writers while writing your thesis. You want to exchange experiences with others and actively contribute to the success of the group.

Students from all academic programmes working on a bachelor's thesis or a master's thesis are welcome.

You may have different reasons for joining. Maybe your thesis is not going so well and you want to learn how to plan better and how to stay focused and motivated. Maybe you find it more pleasant and sociable not to work on your own and want to get in touch with other thesis writers. It is enlightening and motivating to talk about your writing process with others.

What do the thesis groups involve?

You will be assigned to a group with about 8 to 10 other students who are also working on their thesis. Everyone contributes to keep the group running. The success of the groups depend on the commitment of all participants .

Each week, you meet at the same time. In total, there are four meetings under the guidance of a peer coach. The summer thesis groups in July and August run longer and consist of eight meetings . After the last meeting with the peer coach, you can decide to continue independently.

You decide on the exact programme together with the group. You look at what your contribution to the group can be and decide, together with the others, which topics will be discussed in the following weeks. Based on those decisions, you make an overall planning for the next meetings. You can also delve into specific writing strategies together, with the help of the coach.

In addition, it is always possible to arrange a one-to-one meeting with one of the writing tutors from Skills Lab.

Practical information

• The four meetings take place on location and last 1.5 hours.
• In the first meeting, you get to know each other, receive an explanation from the peer coach, and decide together on the content of the following meetings.
• Finished your thesis earlier? No problem, we will give your place to the next on the waiting list.
• You can also stay in contact with each other outside the regular meeting, for instance in a joint WhatsApp group. There are also groups that work on their thesis together in the University Library.
• Participating in the thesis groups is free of charge but not free of obligations. Please make sure you are able to attend each session of the thesis group you sign up for. 

Thesis support newsletter

Do you want to be kept informed about support for thesis writers? Then sign up for our thesis support newsletter and receive an email up to 6 times per academic year.

Contact Skills Lab

• Mail to [email protected]  or call +3130 253 630
• University Library Utrecht Science Park | Room 2.45
• Heidelberglaan 3, 3584 CS Utrecht

Follow Utrecht University

Utrecht University Heidelberglaan 8 3584 CS Utrecht The Netherlands Tel. +31 (0)30 253 35 50

Thoughtful Teaching

Humanities for the ne(x)t generation

Thesis writing in groups

When it was first introduced a couple of years ago, the idea to form thesis-writing groups and replace individual tutorials with group sessions struck me as a bad idea. I could not conceive of thesis writing in any other way than as an individual process. It was the final stage of the senior year when, after all the mass lectures and large seminars, students finally had a chance to discuss their ideas thoroughly in one-to-one meetings with the supervisors of their choice. Coaching students with their research and writing and following closely their growth as young scholars has always been the most satisfying part of my job. It seemed that the new system abolished a fundamentally important and precious dimension of our work with students.

I saw it as yet another example of a neoliberal approach to higher education where speed and quantity outweigh profundity and quality. The goal was – according to the official motivation – to increase ‘productivity’ and ‘study success’ and ‘facilitate’ students to write their thesis faster so they could graduate on time. It was presented as a win-win situation for everybody: students could enter the job market or the graduate school earlier, instead of being stuck in a thesis-writing limbo and a study delay period that could last for a year or more, while the university would receive its funding from the government on the basis of every diploma granted. The problem was that none of these official communications ever mentioned quality. It was all management-speak without a single hint at the core business of higher education; refined critical thinking, thorough knowledge of a certain field, enhanced learning abilities, scholarly justification of research, and improved analytic, writing, and presentation skills all seemed to be of secondary importance. All that mattered was efficiency and speed.

During the past few years while experimenting with thesis groups, I tried to develop some ways to use the dynamics of group work for the individual benefit of each student. The challenge was to figure out some method that would explore the potential of the group as a learning unit, instead of just viewing it as a random gathering of individuals with different research interests who had not much in common besides the fact that they were all working on their thesis. I tried to think of strategies that would keep all the students involved all the time during the two-hour-long group sessions. I wanted to avoid a problem I encountered in the beginning, namely that while I moved around to discuss the progress of students or pairs of students individually, the rest of the group tended to chat about other matters than their thesis. Though the usual techniques of peer-review and general feedback on the technicalities of writing worked well enough, they could not sustain their attention for two hours, which made the sessions repetitive and often boring.

This year I had six students in my group. As a first step, I defined each of the five sessions in terms of a theme related to the current stage of writing of my students:

1. “Clarity” – The first session was dedicated to “clarity” and focused on finding a good thesis question or statement and writing a clear proposal. 2. “Solidity” – The second session focused on the “solidity” of their proposal and the relationship between their proposal, the sources, and their case study. 3. “Analysis” – The third session was devoted to “analysis” and discussed their case studies. 4. “Originality” – The fourth session was about “originality” and scrutinized their methodology and the scholarly “frame” of their research. 5. “Coherence” – The fifth and last session focused on “coherence” and compared their introductions with their conclusions to check how the case study was presented and developed for the sake of the research question, and if the research question was answered in their conclusion.

Students were required to come to the first session (“clarity”) with a research question and a thesis proposal. In the first session everybody had to fill in a so-called “ thesis generator form ” which asked some basic questions about the feasibility, originality, and importance of their proposed research. As a model for this form I used a worksheet I found on the website of The Chicago Metro History Education Center . On the thesis generator form students had to complete the following sentences: 1) “I want to learn from this project …” , 2) “I want to prove that …”, 3) “I support my claims with …”, 4) “You should care about my research because …”, 5) “My thesis is …”, 6) “The main arguments/claims of my thesis are …”. After they filled in this form they were divided into groups of two. I asked them to read each other’s proposals and to fill in the thesis generator form again based on their peer’s proposal. Then their task was to compare their own thesis form with the one filled in by their fellow student to see what the differences were and what caused these differences. As a last step they had to reformulate their own thesis proposals in a more convincing way to convey the most important issues they had mentioned in the thesis form with well-structured and clear arguments. For the next session they were asked to write and comment on each other’s first chapter, which was a piece devoted to literature review. I read all the chapters and gave them feedback before the second session.

In the second session (“solidity”) they were first asked to share their experiences about writing the first chapter and then they discussed their papers while I was rotating among the groups and joined their discussions. We did this exercise in every session, just to make sure that students understand the comments and know how to integrate the feedback into the rewritten version of their chapter. As a next step I asked them to write an inverted outline of their chapter to see if it still made sense and if their arguments were logically organized. Finally, as the last task of the second session I tried to prepare them for their case study and make them think of the story they want to tell in their thesis. Their assignment was to imagine their topic as a movie for which they have to write a screenplay . What makes it interesting? What sort of characters do they have? What is the sequence of the plot? It did not have to be long, just a few paragraphs. Then each student read their script out loud and they realized that by letting their imagination run wild about their topic they not only had lots of fun, but also made them aware that they all actually do have an interesting and solid story to tell.

We started the third session (“analysis”) with discussing the feedback on their chapter examining their case study. The following exercise was to experiment and think of another case study which would fit their main statement or question, and see if they could analyze another similar case with the same results. Then I asked them to use “ cubing ” (a method I found on the website of University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Writing Center full of useful writing exercises tips and practices) to gain a different perspective on their topics. They had to 1) describe, 2) compare, 3) associate, 4) analyze, 5) apply, and 6) argue for and also against their own thesis statement. This helped them to see their own work from a fresh point of view and hopefully gave them new ideas to take up in their following chapters.

In the fourth session (“originality”), after discussing the feedback on their following chapter, they were asked to talk about the difficulties they had faced so far and the solutions they found for overcoming these obstacles. Then I asked them to find a perfect cover illustration (either by browsing the internet or using their imagination) as if it were to be published. This was great fun and students enjoyed letting their imaginations loose on their research. Afterwards they had to draw a timeline positioning all the secondary literature about their topic and indicate where they would place themselves in this diagram and how they differ from all the other scholars named in the chart. Finally, they drafted a preliminary conclusion which they saved to compare with their final conclusion in the next session.

The fifth and last meeting (“coherence”) started as usual with reviewing the feedback on their last concluding chapter. Next they had to write two letters : the first one was addressed to the editor of a famous journal and was written by somebody who 1) praises their thesis and 2) another person who disagrees and is furious about their research. The second letter was written by themselves to a family member, to whom they had to explain in everyday language what their thesis is about and why it is important. The inspiration for this exercise I found again on the website of the University of North Carolina Writing Center . Then I asked them to come up with five keywords related to their thesis. Finally, they had to finish the following sentence “ The most important advice I received regarding writing was … ” which we discussed together and drew conclusions about the process of writing and the way the group dynamics shaped their writing experiences.

These activities made the group meetings more fun and created a mindset defined by writing and thinking about writing. I am not suggesting that all these exercises are necessary or that they could help every group throughout every discipline, but they proved to be useful for my group of students who were required to be actively and intensively engaged with their research. It also proved to me that thesis groups could function well if the teacher takes a creative and active approach. I still believe that thesis writing (in the humanities) is not meant to be a group activity, and that students do need the individual attention of the supervisor. Yet I am also convinced that thesis groups could have beneficial effects: they set a pace for structuring the research, improve self-discipline, enhance creativity, and contribute to keeping students engaged with writing. Once they are used to reading critically their own and their peers’ work, they will also become more confident writers. After all, thesis groups could indeed turn a period of writing agony into a win-win situation.

Share this:

Looking across the landscape of contemporary culture

Covering the intersection of digital technology and research, teaching, and learning in the humanities, including search, data mining, website development and design, and programming.

Liberal Education in a Networked World

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Types of Theses

Three types of gallatin ma theses.

Each graduate student in the Gallatin School completes a final thesis as the culmination of their work toward a Master of Arts degree. The thesis may take one of three forms: a research thesis, an artistic thesis, or a project thesis. In each case, the thesis represents a synthesis of the student’s accumulated knowledge and skill and an opportunity to display the ideas, practices and skills learned through the program. While the master’s thesis, unlike a doctoral dissertation, does not have to create new knowledge or break new ground, it does display the student’s ability to go beyond the mere collection of information into synthesis, analysis, judgment and interpretation. Moreover, it should demonstrate the student’s familiarity with a substantial body of thought and literature and illustrate mastery of some self-chosen field of study.

Below you will find descriptions of the three types of theses: 

Research Thesis

Artistic thesis, project thesis.

Current MA students who are interested in seeing sample theses should consult the Gallatin Master's Thesis Archive , which is accessible with an NYU Net ID.

Students pursuing the research option produce and defend a substantial research essay, the thesis of which is demonstrably related to the student’s course of study and ongoing conversations with the primary adviser. The adviser and defense panelists are the ultimate arbiters of whether the thesis satisfies a reasonable understanding of a project worthy of the master’s degree. However, in general and at minimum, a successful Gallatin MA research thesis demonstrates sufficient mastery of relevant academic fields as well as a critical grasp of the scholarship and methods that currently define those fields. The thesis essay is a logically-constructed argument that presents its central points on the basis of research and critical interpretation. The sources and objects of study may cover the spectrum from archival materials to critical theory to statistical surveys and personal interviews, but the student should carefully choose sources in consultation with the primary adviser, and with reference to questions about what constitutes legitimate source within the student’s field(s). The research thesis essay must be more than a "review of the literature" but the demand for original findings is lower than that faced by doctoral candidates. Significantly original contributions are of course highly commendable, but the excellence of an MA research thesis essay may lie in its critical and creative synthesis, articulation of a fresh perspective on the work of others, or identification of new, research-based questions that themselves shed light on existing problems within fields. Generally speaking, the final research thesis essay should be at least 50 pages and not exceed 80 pages (not including appendices and bibliographic material). Students and advisers are encouraged to talk with the program's academic directors about these expectations whenever necessary.

back to top

The artistic thesis is appropriate for those students who wish to display the creative process in the performing, visual or literary arts. A student might make a film or video; choreograph an evening of dance; act in a play; mount an exhibit of paintings; write a screenplay, novel, play or collection of short stories; or choose another artistic endeavor. The artistic thesis represents the culmination of a Gallatin arts concentration in which the student has studied the genre under consideration.

The artistic thesis comprises both the artistic project and three accompanying essays. Therefore, you should conceive of the artistic thesis as a unified piece composed of the creative work and the essays which enhance it. Members of the faculty committee will assess both the artistic work and the essays. The essays include:

• an academic research paper related to the field of artistic work;
• an essay on artistic aims and process;
• a technical essay.

Please note: The technical essay does not apply to those students who are submitting a literary work.

Some General Advice

Be careful to keep records and a log of the artistic project as it evolves. This information can be used in the Technical Essay.

If a student is writing a work of fiction, poems, a play, etc., for the thesis, the student will submit this work to their adviser and other readers along with the essays. However, if the student is presenting a performance, they will need to arrange to have their adviser and other members of their committee see the performance. The student is responsible for coordinating schedules and for notifying committee members so that everyone can view the piece. The student should notify the thesis reviewer of the date of the performance at least one month in advance. In the event that one or more of the committee cannot attend the scheduled event, the student should arrange to have the performance videotaped so people can see it later. Except in unusual circumstances, the student must submit the first draft of the thesis to their adviser no more than three months after the performance.

Essays for the Artistic Thesis

Background Research Essay

As stated above, this essay follows the description for the standard research essay. It is a scholarly endeavor and differs from the standard essay in terms of length and focus. The length is approximately 25 to 40 pages. The focus of the essay is related to the artistic work and explores some aspect of that work that the student wishes to study and develop through outside research. The essay might take the form of an analysis of a performance or literary genre; a history of an art form or phenomenon; a philosophical study of an aesthetic concept; or a critical/biographical analysis of the work of an influential artistic figure.

Artistic Aims Essay

In this essay, the student is required to articulate their goals in mounting their particular artistic project. For example, what was the student trying to accomplish in writing short stories, a screenplay, a novel, presenting an evening of dances or songs, making a film or mounting an art exhibit? What were the aesthetic choices made and why?  The student should also explain their approach to the artistic work (their style, genre, or school), any relevant influences on the work, how the student's training influenced their artistic choices, and the student's intentions for particular elements of the creative work. After the student has carefully and clearly articulated these goals, they need to explain how their actual artistic work meets the stated goals. The student should use examples from their artistic project to illustrate these ideas. This essay should be approximately 10-15 pages in length.

Technical Essay

This essay is a description of the steps the student actually took to physically mount their production.  The student will need to include such technical details as arranging for rehearsal and performance space; choosing the performers; finding/creating, costumes, materials, lights; raising funds and getting institutional support. This essay should be approximately 10 pages in length.

Students may submit a portfolio, if appropriate. This would consist of any material, such as photos, slides, fliers, programs, videotapes, audiotapes etc. which might constitute an appendix and which might be helpful to a fuller understanding of the thesis.

The project thesis consists of two elements: (1) the project, a professional activity designed and executed primarily by the student as a way of solving a problem, and (2) an accompanying essay about the project. This thesis is especially appropriate for students in such fields as business, education, social work or public administration. The project thesis may appeal to those students who are active in their profession and who take responsibility for the creation of some kind of program or practice.

Students should understand that the project cannot simply propose a professional activity; the design for such an activity must actually be carried out (at least in a pilot version) and evaluated. Some examples of projects: a student in education may develop and apply a new strategy for teaching reading to recent immigrants; a person working in a corporation may construct new methods for managing financial information; or a community worker in a settlement house may organize a group of local residents to combat drug abuse.

At each step, the student should be careful to keep in touch with their adviser and with any other expert who can help them in their process. The student should keep careful records of the process by taking detailed notes of conversations, meetings, interviews, etc.  If at all possible, the student should arrange to have the members of their committee, especially their adviser, witness the project first-hand: Visit the site, talk with key actors, watch the program in operation. (This direct contact is highly recommended, but not required.)

Essays for the Project Thesis

The project thesis essay may take a number of forms and include a range of information. It ought to discuss at least the following elements:

Consider the institutional or social context within which the project takes place. Describe the organization, the potential clientele or participants, and the larger environment (social, economic and political conditions surrounding the problem and the project).

Describe the particular problem or need that you address in the project. What causes that problem? How extensive is it? Have other attempts to solve the problem been made; if so, what were their shortcomings, and why are you trying another approach? Place the problem in its professional and academic context by referring to the appropriate literature. Program

Describe the goals and objectives of the project and what the student hoped to accomplish. Describe how the program was designed and structured; for example, what kinds of activities did participants engage in, and in what sequence? What kinds of resources and techniques were used? Justify the strategies and tactics used by citing appropriate professional and academic literatures.

Implementation

Describe how the plan was carried out. Use as much detail as needed to give the reader a sense of what actually happened, and to indicate the extent to which the reality matched the plan.

Describe the criteria for assessing the project and evaluation methods used. Justify the criteria and methods by referring to appropriate literatures. To what extent did the project accomplish the goals and objectives identified earlier?

Citing relevant literature and the practical contingencies of the project, explain why the project did or did not achieve its stated purposes. Describe the factors (political, social, organizational, financial, psychological, etc.) that contributed to the process and to the outcomes. What changes--either conceptual or practical--would the student make if they were to repeat or extend the project? What would the student leave in place? Describe what was learned from the project about the original problem and about the student's strategy and tactics. Also consider the professional and theoretical implications of the project.

If necessary, put relevant documentary materials (flyers, important correspondence, budgets, etc.) in appendices.

• Privacy Policy

Home » Thesis – Structure, Example and Writing Guide

Thesis – Structure, Example and Writing Guide

Table of contents.

Definition:

Thesis is a scholarly document that presents a student’s original research and findings on a particular topic or question. It is usually written as a requirement for a graduate degree program and is intended to demonstrate the student’s mastery of the subject matter and their ability to conduct independent research.

History of Thesis

The concept of a thesis can be traced back to ancient Greece, where it was used as a way for students to demonstrate their knowledge of a particular subject. However, the modern form of the thesis as a scholarly document used to earn a degree is a relatively recent development.

The origin of the modern thesis can be traced back to medieval universities in Europe. During this time, students were required to present a “disputation” in which they would defend a particular thesis in front of their peers and faculty members. These disputations served as a way to demonstrate the student’s mastery of the subject matter and were often the final requirement for earning a degree.

In the 17th century, the concept of the thesis was formalized further with the creation of the modern research university. Students were now required to complete a research project and present their findings in a written document, which would serve as the basis for their degree.

The modern thesis as we know it today has evolved over time, with different disciplines and institutions adopting their own standards and formats. However, the basic elements of a thesis – original research, a clear research question, a thorough review of the literature, and a well-argued conclusion – remain the same.

Structure of Thesis

The structure of a thesis may vary slightly depending on the specific requirements of the institution, department, or field of study, but generally, it follows a specific format.

Here’s a breakdown of the structure of a thesis:

This is the first page of the thesis that includes the title of the thesis, the name of the author, the name of the institution, the department, the date, and any other relevant information required by the institution.

This is a brief summary of the thesis that provides an overview of the research question, methodology, findings, and conclusions.

This page provides a list of all the chapters and sections in the thesis and their page numbers.

Introduction

This chapter provides an overview of the research question, the context of the research, and the purpose of the study. The introduction should also outline the methodology and the scope of the research.

Literature Review

This chapter provides a critical analysis of the relevant literature on the research topic. It should demonstrate the gap in the existing knowledge and justify the need for the research.

Methodology

This chapter provides a detailed description of the research methods used to gather and analyze data. It should explain the research design, the sampling method, data collection techniques, and data analysis procedures.

This chapter presents the findings of the research. It should include tables, graphs, and charts to illustrate the results.

This chapter interprets the results and relates them to the research question. It should explain the significance of the findings and their implications for the research topic.

This chapter summarizes the key findings and the main conclusions of the research. It should also provide recommendations for future research.

This section provides a list of all the sources cited in the thesis. The citation style may vary depending on the requirements of the institution or the field of study.

This section includes any additional material that supports the research, such as raw data, survey questionnaires, or other relevant documents.

How to write Thesis

Here are some steps to help you write a thesis:

• Choose a Topic: The first step in writing a thesis is to choose a topic that interests you and is relevant to your field of study. You should also consider the scope of the topic and the availability of resources for research.
• Develop a Research Question: Once you have chosen a topic, you need to develop a research question that you will answer in your thesis. The research question should be specific, clear, and feasible.
• Conduct a Literature Review: Before you start your research, you need to conduct a literature review to identify the existing knowledge and gaps in the field. This will help you refine your research question and develop a research methodology.
• Develop a Research Methodology: Once you have refined your research question, you need to develop a research methodology that includes the research design, data collection methods, and data analysis procedures.
• Collect and Analyze Data: After developing your research methodology, you need to collect and analyze data. This may involve conducting surveys, interviews, experiments, or analyzing existing data.
• Write the Thesis: Once you have analyzed the data, you need to write the thesis. The thesis should follow a specific structure that includes an introduction, literature review, methodology, results, discussion, conclusion, and references.
• Edit and Proofread: After completing the thesis, you need to edit and proofread it carefully. You should also have someone else review it to ensure that it is clear, concise, and free of errors.
• Submit the Thesis: Finally, you need to submit the thesis to your academic advisor or committee for review and evaluation.

Example of Thesis

Example of Thesis template for Students:

Title of Thesis

Table of Contents:

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

Chapter 4: Results

Chapter 5: Discussion

Chapter 6: Conclusion

References:

Appendices:

Note: That’s just a basic template, but it should give you an idea of the structure and content that a typical thesis might include. Be sure to consult with your department or supervisor for any specific formatting requirements they may have. Good luck with your thesis!

Application of Thesis

Thesis is an important academic document that serves several purposes. Here are some of the applications of thesis:

• Academic Requirement: A thesis is a requirement for many academic programs, especially at the graduate level. It is an essential component of the evaluation process and demonstrates the student’s ability to conduct original research and contribute to the knowledge in their field.
• Career Advancement: A thesis can also help in career advancement. Employers often value candidates who have completed a thesis as it demonstrates their research skills, critical thinking abilities, and their dedication to their field of study.
• Publication : A thesis can serve as a basis for future publications in academic journals, books, or conference proceedings. It provides the researcher with an opportunity to present their research to a wider audience and contribute to the body of knowledge in their field.
• Personal Development: Writing a thesis is a challenging task that requires time, dedication, and perseverance. It provides the student with an opportunity to develop critical thinking, research, and writing skills that are essential for their personal and professional development.
• Impact on Society: The findings of a thesis can have an impact on society by addressing important issues, providing insights into complex problems, and contributing to the development of policies and practices.

Purpose of Thesis

The purpose of a thesis is to present original research findings in a clear and organized manner. It is a formal document that demonstrates a student’s ability to conduct independent research and contribute to the knowledge in their field of study. The primary purposes of a thesis are:

• To Contribute to Knowledge: The main purpose of a thesis is to contribute to the knowledge in a particular field of study. By conducting original research and presenting their findings, the student adds new insights and perspectives to the existing body of knowledge.
• To Demonstrate Research Skills: A thesis is an opportunity for the student to demonstrate their research skills. This includes the ability to formulate a research question, design a research methodology, collect and analyze data, and draw conclusions based on their findings.
• To Develop Critical Thinking: Writing a thesis requires critical thinking and analysis. The student must evaluate existing literature and identify gaps in the field, as well as develop and defend their own ideas.
• To Provide Evidence of Competence : A thesis provides evidence of the student’s competence in their field of study. It demonstrates their ability to apply theoretical concepts to real-world problems, and their ability to communicate their ideas effectively.
• To Facilitate Career Advancement : Completing a thesis can help the student advance their career by demonstrating their research skills and dedication to their field of study. It can also provide a basis for future publications, presentations, or research projects.

When to Write Thesis

The timing for writing a thesis depends on the specific requirements of the academic program or institution. In most cases, the opportunity to write a thesis is typically offered at the graduate level, but there may be exceptions.

Generally, students should plan to write their thesis during the final year of their graduate program. This allows sufficient time for conducting research, analyzing data, and writing the thesis. It is important to start planning the thesis early and to identify a research topic and research advisor as soon as possible.

In some cases, students may be able to write a thesis as part of an undergraduate program or as an independent research project outside of an academic program. In such cases, it is important to consult with faculty advisors or mentors to ensure that the research is appropriately designed and executed.

It is important to note that the process of writing a thesis can be time-consuming and requires a significant amount of effort and dedication. It is important to plan accordingly and to allocate sufficient time for conducting research, analyzing data, and writing the thesis.

Characteristics of Thesis

The characteristics of a thesis vary depending on the specific academic program or institution. However, some general characteristics of a thesis include:

• Originality : A thesis should present original research findings or insights. It should demonstrate the student’s ability to conduct independent research and contribute to the knowledge in their field of study.
• Clarity : A thesis should be clear and concise. It should present the research question, methodology, findings, and conclusions in a logical and organized manner. It should also be well-written, with proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
• Research-Based: A thesis should be based on rigorous research, which involves collecting and analyzing data from various sources. The research should be well-designed, with appropriate research methods and techniques.
• Evidence-Based : A thesis should be based on evidence, which means that all claims made in the thesis should be supported by data or literature. The evidence should be properly cited using appropriate citation styles.
• Critical Thinking: A thesis should demonstrate the student’s ability to critically analyze and evaluate information. It should present the student’s own ideas and arguments, and engage with existing literature in the field.
• Academic Style : A thesis should adhere to the conventions of academic writing. It should be well-structured, with clear headings and subheadings, and should use appropriate academic language.

Advantages of Thesis

There are several advantages to writing a thesis, including:

• Development of Research Skills: Writing a thesis requires extensive research and analytical skills. It helps to develop the student’s research skills, including the ability to formulate research questions, design and execute research methodologies, collect and analyze data, and draw conclusions based on their findings.
• Contribution to Knowledge: Writing a thesis provides an opportunity for the student to contribute to the knowledge in their field of study. By conducting original research, they can add new insights and perspectives to the existing body of knowledge.
• Preparation for Future Research: Completing a thesis prepares the student for future research projects. It provides them with the necessary skills to design and execute research methodologies, analyze data, and draw conclusions based on their findings.
• Career Advancement: Writing a thesis can help to advance the student’s career. It demonstrates their research skills and dedication to their field of study, and provides a basis for future publications, presentations, or research projects.
• Personal Growth: Completing a thesis can be a challenging and rewarding experience. It requires dedication, hard work, and perseverance. It can help the student to develop self-confidence, independence, and a sense of accomplishment.

Limitations of Thesis

There are also some limitations to writing a thesis, including:

• Time and Resources: Writing a thesis requires a significant amount of time and resources. It can be a time-consuming and expensive process, as it may involve conducting original research, analyzing data, and producing a lengthy document.
• Narrow Focus: A thesis is typically focused on a specific research question or topic, which may limit the student’s exposure to other areas within their field of study.
• Limited Audience: A thesis is usually only read by a small number of people, such as the student’s thesis advisor and committee members. This limits the potential impact of the research findings.
• Lack of Real-World Application : Some thesis topics may be highly theoretical or academic in nature, which may limit their practical application in the real world.
• Pressure and Stress : Writing a thesis can be a stressful and pressure-filled experience, as it may involve meeting strict deadlines, conducting original research, and producing a high-quality document.
• Potential for Isolation: Writing a thesis can be a solitary experience, as the student may spend a significant amount of time working independently on their research and writing.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Findings – Types Examples and Writing...

Research Topics – Ideas and Examples

Appendices – Writing Guide, Types and Examples

Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing...

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and...

Evaluating Research – Process, Examples and...

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• How to Write a Thesis Statement | 4 Steps & Examples

How to Write a Thesis Statement | 4 Steps & Examples

Published on January 11, 2019 by Shona McCombes . Revised on August 15, 2023 by Eoghan Ryan.

A thesis statement is a sentence that sums up the central point of your paper or essay . It usually comes near the end of your introduction .

Your thesis will look a bit different depending on the type of essay you’re writing. But the thesis statement should always clearly state the main idea you want to get across. Everything else in your essay should relate back to this idea.

You can write your thesis statement by following four simple steps:

• Start with a question
• Write your initial answer
• Develop your answer
• Refine your thesis statement

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What is a thesis statement, placement of the thesis statement, step 1: start with a question, step 2: write your initial answer, step 3: develop your answer, step 4: refine your thesis statement, types of thesis statements, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about thesis statements.

A thesis statement summarizes the central points of your essay. It is a signpost telling the reader what the essay will argue and why.

The best thesis statements are:

• Concise: A good thesis statement is short and sweet—don’t use more words than necessary. State your point clearly and directly in one or two sentences.
• Contentious: Your thesis shouldn’t be a simple statement of fact that everyone already knows. A good thesis statement is a claim that requires further evidence or analysis to back it up.
• Coherent: Everything mentioned in your thesis statement must be supported and explained in the rest of your paper.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

The thesis statement generally appears at the end of your essay introduction or research paper introduction .

The spread of the internet has had a world-changing effect, not least on the world of education. The use of the internet in academic contexts and among young people more generally is hotly debated. For many who did not grow up with this technology, its effects seem alarming and potentially harmful. This concern, while understandable, is misguided. The negatives of internet use are outweighed by its many benefits for education: the internet facilitates easier access to information, exposure to different perspectives, and a flexible learning environment for both students and teachers.

You should come up with an initial thesis, sometimes called a working thesis , early in the writing process . As soon as you’ve decided on your essay topic , you need to work out what you want to say about it—a clear thesis will give your essay direction and structure.

You might already have a question in your assignment, but if not, try to come up with your own. What would you like to find out or decide about your topic?

For example, you might ask:

After some initial research, you can formulate a tentative answer to this question. At this stage it can be simple, and it should guide the research process and writing process .

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Now you need to consider why this is your answer and how you will convince your reader to agree with you. As you read more about your topic and begin writing, your answer should get more detailed.

In your essay about the internet and education, the thesis states your position and sketches out the key arguments you’ll use to support it.

The negatives of internet use are outweighed by its many benefits for education because it facilitates easier access to information.

In your essay about braille, the thesis statement summarizes the key historical development that you’ll explain.

The invention of braille in the 19th century transformed the lives of blind people, allowing them to participate more actively in public life.

A strong thesis statement should tell the reader:

• Why you hold this position
• What they’ll learn from your essay
• The key points of your argument or narrative

The final thesis statement doesn’t just state your position, but summarizes your overall argument or the entire topic you’re going to explain. To strengthen a weak thesis statement, it can help to consider the broader context of your topic.

These examples are more specific and show that you’ll explore your topic in depth.

Your thesis statement should match the goals of your essay, which vary depending on the type of essay you’re writing:

• In an argumentative essay , your thesis statement should take a strong position. Your aim in the essay is to convince your reader of this thesis based on evidence and logical reasoning.
• In an expository essay , you’ll aim to explain the facts of a topic or process. Your thesis statement doesn’t have to include a strong opinion in this case, but it should clearly state the central point you want to make, and mention the key elements you’ll explain.

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

• Choosing Essay Topic
• Write a College Essay
• Write a Diversity Essay
• College Essay Format & Structure
• Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

A thesis statement is a sentence that sums up the central point of your paper or essay . Everything else you write should relate to this key idea.

The thesis statement is essential in any academic essay or research paper for two main reasons:

• It gives your writing direction and focus.
• It gives the reader a concise summary of your main point.

Without a clear thesis statement, an essay can end up rambling and unfocused, leaving your reader unsure of exactly what you want to say.

Follow these four steps to come up with a thesis statement :

• Ask a question about your topic .
• Write your initial answer.
• Develop your answer by including reasons.
• Refine your answer, adding more detail and nuance.

The thesis statement should be placed at the end of your essay introduction .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, August 15). How to Write a Thesis Statement | 4 Steps & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 25, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/thesis-statement/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write an essay introduction | 4 steps & examples, how to write topic sentences | 4 steps, examples & purpose, academic paragraph structure | step-by-step guide & examples, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Impact of Group-study and Self-study on Learning Abilities of Students at the University Level

The universities around the world are adopting various forms and patterns of teaching methods to inculcate the students with the good understanding of knowledge in the relative course of studies. Some universities lead students towards individual studies pattern and some universities leads students to follow group studies approach and some universities are directing the students to follow both pattern of studies. Hence, students in the universities around the world are conducting their studies in groups as well as individually. This research study is aimed at exploring the impact of self-study on learning abilities of the students and as well the impact of group study on learning ability at the university level of the study. The purpose of this study is to explore that as to what extent the self-study or group study is helpful in enhancing their learning abilities at the university level. In this research study, the unit of study is postgraduate students of NIDA. The study has taken on study from 5 different schools of the university. The data is collected from the target population by using semi-structured questionnaire during the group interviews. This research has adopted qualitative research approach. Furthermore, the research study has also explored the motivating factors in adopting Group-study or either self-study approach during the course study at the university level.

RELATED PAPERS

Higher education

Stanley Mutsotso

Ibnu Putra Darmawan

Edi Saputra

Mahnaz Modanloo

Journal of Psychology in Africa

Henry Mason

Research Journal of Agricultural Science

Cristina Tulbure

Una Crowley

Frontiers in Psychology

Enayat Abbasi

Thuraiya Mohd

Education and Human Development Journal

florentino nabi

The International Journal of Indian Psychology

Jusuf Blegur

keir pasquin

Review of Education, Administration & Law

Dr. Bashir Hussain

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences

Journal of Education Research and Evaluation

Gede Suwardika

British Journal of Educational Psychology

awal tjalla

Journal of Research Development in Nursing and Midwifery

Noel Entwistle

Robbayani Shoghiro

Springer eBooks

Vicki LaBoskey

Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction

Prof Dr Lilia Halim

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here .

Loading metrics

Open Access

Peer-reviewed

Research Article

Demographic isolation and attitudes toward group work in student-selected lab groups

Contributed equally to this work with: Mitra Asgari, Amy E. Cardace

Roles Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliation Division of Biological Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, United States of America

Roles Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation School of Education, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, New Jersey, United States of America

Roles Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – review & editing

Affiliation Investigative Biology Teaching Laboratories, Department of Neurobiology and Behavior, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America

• Mitra Asgari, 
• Amy E. Cardace, 
• Mark A. Sarvary

• Published: September 24, 2024
• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918
• Peer Review
• Reader Comments

Small group work has been shown to improve students’ achievement, learning, engagement, and attitudes toward science. Previous studies that focused on different methods of group formation and their possible impacts mainly focused on measures of students’ academic ability, such as GPA, SAT scores, and previous familiarity with course content. However little attention has been given to other characteristics such as students’ social demographic identities in research about group formation and students’ experiences. Here, we studied the criteria students use to form lab groups, examined how the degree of demographic isolation varies between student-selected and randomly-formed groups, and tested whether demographic isolation is associated with group work attitudes. We used a pre-post survey research design to examine students’ responses in a large-enrollment biology laboratory course. Descriptive analyses showed that “students sitting next to me” (57%) followed by the combination of “students sitting next to me” and “friends” (22%) were the two most common criteria students reported that they considered when forming research groups. Notably, over 80 percent of students reported forming groups with those who sat nearby. We studied instances where students were isolated by being the only members of a historically marginalized population in their lab groups. The prevalence of demographic isolation in student-selected groups was found to be lower than in the simulated randomly assigned groups. We also used multilevel linear regression to examine whether being an isolated student was associated with attitudes about group work, yielding no consistent statistically significant effects. This study contributes to growing knowledge about the relationship between students’ demographic isolation in groups and group work attitudes.

Citation: Asgari M, Cardace AE, Sarvary MA (2024) Demographic isolation and attitudes toward group work in student-selected lab groups. PLoS ONE 19(9): e0310918. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918

Editor: Gabriel Velez, Marquette University College of Education, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Received: April 4, 2024; Accepted: September 9, 2024; Published: September 24, 2024

Copyright: © 2024 Asgari et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Data Availability: This study involves human research participant data. All relevant data that were used in analyses are first de-identified and then provided as Supporting Information files to allow to replication of the results of the study.

Funding: The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Introduction

How the demographic composition of small groups influences students’ experiences has received increasing attention in recent years. Previous research has addressed group dynamics, students’ affective outcomes (i.e., attitude, feeling), or learning in college classrooms [e.g., 1 – 3 ]. Compared to competitive learning environments, working in collaborative learning settings could improve the opportunities for participation of historically marginalized groups in STEM, such as students who self-identify as female, African American, and Hispanic, among other identities [ 4 – 7 ]. However, poor group dynamics may lead to academic intimidation, where students may feel less competent [ 8 ], more anxious, quieter during group discussions [ 9 ], or underperform in the presence of their peers [ 10 ] due to phenomenon such as stereotype threat [ 11 ].

Cooperative learning, also known as small group work [ 12 , 13 ], is philosophically rooted in social interdependence theory [ 14 ] and has become one of the most used and well-studied student-centered instructional practices [ 15 ]. In cooperative learning, students often work in small groups focusing on a set of shared learning goals and being assessed by the instructor both at the individual and the group level [ 16 ]. By incorporating small group work in classrooms, instructors can provide students with opportunities to discuss their ideas and perspectives with each other, provide and receive peer feedback, and develop and improve skills such as scientific reasoning, argumentation, communication, and teamwork [ 17 , 18 ]. The value of group work for students’ learning and attitudes toward science has been studied and promoted for years [ 19 – 21 ]. Meta-analyses of group work studies have shown improvement in students’ learning, interest in the subject, self-esteem, acceptance of diversity [ 22 ], academic achievement, persistence in coursework, and attitude toward learning [ 23 ]. More recent research has also shown enhancement of students’ overall achievement and learning [ 24 – 26 ], engagement [ 27 ], use of high-order cognitive skills, attitudes toward science and persistence in STEM courses related to using group work [ 16 , 26 , 28 , 29 ].

When permanent or long-term small group work is incorporated in classrooms, sometimes referred to as formal group work [ 16 , 30 ], often one of the following group formation strategies is used. Groups can be formed by students, sometimes referred to as self-selected, student-selected, or student-formed groups, with little or no interference from an instructor. Alternatively, students can randomly be assigned to groups, where no criteria other than final group size are used [ 23 ]. Finally, groups could be created by using one or multiple criteria, often referred to as instructor-formed or instructor-assigned groups [ 31 ]. Based on existing literature in STEM education, the most common criteria instructors use when forming groups are measures of students’ academic ability, such as GPA, SAT scores, prior related courses, previous familiarity with course content [ 32 – 36 ] or learning styles [ 37 – 39 ]. However, little attention has been given to other students’ characteristics such as their social demographic identities and background when thinking about group formation.

Previous studies that have investigated group work quality, dynamics, and students’ learning in relationship to the demographic composition of the groups mainly focused on students’ gender identity. When working in small groups in STEM college classrooms, female students expressed less comfort than male students [ 8 ]. In an introductory psychology course, in groups of three, female students were less task-oriented in mixed-gender groups than in same-gender groups and they were less talkative when they were solo in groups compared to male students [ 10 ]. In another study, female engineering students showed more anxiety in female-minority groups in their first year of college. Findings of the same study indicated less verbal participation of female students in female-minority groups regardless of their academic year in college compared to the sex-parity groups and female majority groups [ 40 ]. Student collaboration, observed as equitable group work processes, was stronger in gender-balanced groups compared to all-male or solo-male groups [ 41 ], although no difference was observed in students’ performance [ 10 , 41 ]. In another study, researchers found that grouping by gender mostly impacts students’ attitudes toward instruction rather than their performance and that gender-balanced and female-only groups are the most effective [ 42 ].

These findings suggest the possibility of similar experiences by other social minority groups when it comes to group work. A study of small groups in STEM college classrooms showed that students identified as Underrepresented Minority (URM) students reported higher levels of social-comparison concern than the majority students [ 8 ]. During peer discussions in a large introductory biology course, underserved American and Asian-American students showed a stronger preference for the role of listener over leader/explainer when compared to white Americans [ 9 ]. In an introductory sociology course, when the associations between leadership, sex, race, and course performance were investigated in teams created by the instructor, researchers found that white students had more leadership roles in teams, received higher grades, and were evaluated higher than students of color [ 43 ]. The research findings related to students from other social minority groups such as first-generation college students or international students are even more scarce. During peer discussions, international students also showed a stronger preference for having the role of listener over the leader/explainer role when compared to white Americans, and they reported experiencing higher anxiety during peer discussions [ 9 ].

In addition to the above findings, a body of research shows that when given the opportunity, students in science classrooms tend to create more homogenous groups based on gender and ethnicity [ 29 ] and based on a combination of gender identity, academic, and personality characteristics [ 44 ]. We were eager to explore similar questions in a smaller learning setting, the laboratory part of a large-enrollment science course. This study was conducted to understand the students’ considerations when forming groups, the frequency of demographic isolation in student-formed groups, and the relationships between group compositions and students’ attitudes about group work. We used a pre-post survey approach and included questions to learn about students’ demographic identities, criteria considered when forming their groups, and group work attitudes. We assessed the frequency of students’ demographic isolation in self-selected groups compared to hypothetical randomly-formed groups. We use the term demographic isolation to describe the situation where a student is the only member from a particular demographic group in their lab group (e.g., the only female or ethnic minority student in a group). We also investigated whether this isolation is associated with differences in students’ attitudinal group work scores. Our research questions are listed below:

• Q1. What criteria do students report that they consider when forming lab groups?
• Q2. How does the composition of student-selected groups differ in terms of demographic isolation when compared to hypothetical randomly-formed groups?
• Q3. Do students’ attitudes toward group work vary between students who were demographically isolated in groups and those who were not?

Materials and methods

Study context, course setting/information..

We conducted our study in an introductory biology course at a large research university in the northeastern United States. This two-credit-hour inquiry-based laboratory course is required across many biology-focused majors. Approximately 400 first- and second-year students enroll in the course each semester. The course consists of a weekly 50-minute lecture [ 45 , 46 ] and a 3-hour laboratory (hereafter lab) session [ 47 ], both using evidence-based teaching practices. In this course, the students could enroll in any of the twelve lab sections offered each semester. Group formation and group work take place in the lab sessions, which were held in multiple small rooms with traditional fixed tables and movable seating, each hosting a maximum of 18 students. Labs were led by graduate teaching assistants (hereafter GTA) and offered guided inquiry learning environment throughout the semester [ 48 , 49 ]. In both lecture and lab environments, students were free to self-select both their seats and their lab groups.

Group formation and group work in the lab.

For the first three weeks of the semester, students worked together informally during labs on activities that were graded and assessed at an individual level. During the fourth week in the lab, GTAs asked students to form groups of three (hereafter student-selected groups). Students usually stayed in these groups for the rest of the semester. In cases where the number of students per lab was not perfectly divisible by three, a few groups of 2 were allowed to be formed. For the rest of the semester, students were expected to work with their group members on various activities such as designing and conducting an experiment, collecting and analyzing data, and group presentations. After group formation in week 4, students were assessed and graded both at the individual and group levels for the rest of the semester.

Study design and data collection

We used a survey research approach to quantitatively address three questions about (1) the criteria students considered when forming their lab groups, (2) the prevalence of students being demographically isolated in their self-selected groups compared to randomly-formed groups, and (3) relationships between being demographically isolated and attitudinal outcome measures. The course and survey administration timelines are summarized in Fig 1 , specifying when groups were formed and the related data were collected. To account for possible variation between semesters, we studied these questions for two consecutive semesters, Spring and Fall 2019. The pre-and post-surveys were conducted online via Qualtrics (Seattle, WA). In the pre-survey, participants responded to a combination of questions asking about their demographics, academic backgrounds, and attitudes toward group work. In the post-survey, in addition to the same pre-survey questions, students were asked to share the criteria they used to form a formal lab group in week 4.

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.g001

Ethics statement

This project was approved by the Cornell University Institutional Review Board and has been granted an exemption from IRB review (#1901008516).

Participant recruitment

Participants were students who enrolled in the course. To recruit participants, we used the course learning management system (LMS) at the beginning and end of each semester to share a message providing the project summary information, with a link to the survey and a written consent form with students. A few bonus course credits for responding to each of the pre-and post-surveys were also provided to students. Responses from students who did not provide consent or were minors were removed from the study before the analyses.

Survey measures

Students’ demographic information..

The demographics we examined in this study were students’ gender and ethnic-racial identities, college generation status, and international student status. We focused on the first two demographics due to the vast evidence about the historical marginalization of individuals who identify as female, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx, and Native American/American Indian/Indigenous American in STEM higher education [ 50 ]. Previous research also shows that first-generation college students, individuals whose parents do not have a 4-year bachelor’s degree, face various academic challenges in STEM courses [ 51 – 53 ]. We also focused on international students because they are often in the minority in US undergraduate college classrooms, and there is little published research about this population in the groupwork STEM education literature [see 9 ]. In this context, international students are referred to citizens of other countries who came to the United States for post-secondary education [ 54 ]. These data helped us assess the demographic composition of student-selected groups and were used as independent variables in multi-level regression analyses predicting groupwork attitudes.

Criteria students considered when forming lab groups.

In addition to demographic information, a multiple-choice question was included in the post-survey each semester to learn about the criteria students considered when forming their group during the fourth week of the lab. Students could select more than one option from a list of twelve responses including the following: “friends”; “students sitting next to me in the lab”; “students’ GPA and familiarity with the biological concepts”; “students’ gender identity”; “students’ race/ethnicity”; “students’ year in college.” This survey question with full list of response choices provided to students, can be found in the supporting information document. In terms of the logic behind the answer choices selected, when the survey questions were being developed the authors considered the most probable choices such as “friends”, “proximity in the lab” and explored the STEM education literature for the most common visible and hidden identities and characteristics students may identify with and commonly studied. We thought of identities that could be visible from the first day of the class when students meet each other like “racial/ethnic identity” and the ones that may be less evident or hidden but students could possibly share with each other in the first 3 weeks of the lab and before forming groups, such as “being an international student or not”. In the post-survey before students see this multiple-answer question, they were also asked to respond to an open-ended question of “Which criteria did you use to form your research group?”. The preliminary coding of students’ responses for the open-ended version of this question yielded similar findings and no additional themes. Thus, to avoid redundancy, here we only present outcome of the multiple-choice question.

Student attitudes about group work.

We adapted and re-validated an item set from the Student Attitudes towards Group Environments (SAGE) survey [ 55 ] to assess students’ group work attitudes in this context. The original questionnaire had 54 five-point Likert survey items (strongly agree, agree, undecided, disagree, strongly disagree) categorized by four factors: quality of product and process, peer support, student interdependence, and frustration with group members.

Our process of evaluating the original SAGE items and selecting a subset for current use leveraged strategies for improving validity during instrument design [ 56 ]. We mapped the factors of interest to particular items and engaged content and course experts (M.A and A. E. C) to check the items for student accessibility. Considering previously reported relationships between demographic group composition and student group processes or performance noted above [ 10 , 41 , 43 ], we chose to focus on two particular factors, work quality and interdependence. Researchers affiliated with the course screened the items to make sure they were logically related to the students’ lab group activities (M.A and M. A. S).

This process yielded fourteen items that were most relevant to our study (see S1 Table ). We analyzed data from all respondents who replied to all 14 items, using a generalized Rasch model for polytomous data [ 57 ]. We found that the14-item instrument showed strong internal consistency statistics of 0.79 for the pre-test (n = 547) and 0.84 for the post-test (n = 281). In addition to establishing content validity as noted above, we also checked estimates from the model for expected patterns; all weighted mean square fit statistics were within the expected range (0.77–1.33) and the response category thresholds within each item were ordered from low to high as theorized [ 57 ].

Participant demographics

The data set included 1148 responses, including pre-and post-surveys for both semesters. The response rate of students after data cleaning was 74% and 80% for the spring and fall semesters, respectively. The participation rates and the demographic breakdowns of participants were generally consistent between the two semesters ( Table 1 ). In both semesters, females outnumbered males by almost two to one. The responses of students who selected non-binary or prefer not to say options had to be eliminated from the quantitative analysis due to their small sample size (0.7% and 0.6% in Spring and Fall 2019). White and Asian students comprised the majority of students in both semesters. Due to the relatively small number of students who self-identified with historically marginalized races and ethnicities, we pooled their responses as a single category for the quantitative analyses. This group included students identifying as (1) Black/African American, (2) Hispanic/Latinx, (3) Native American/American Indian, (4) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, (5) Middle Eastern or North African, or (6) Some Other Race, Ethnicity, or Origin. We represent this combined group with an acronym to identify the primary groups, BHN+. As discussed by previous studies [cf. 9 , 58 – 60 ], student populations from these backgrounds share historical marginalization and present underrepresentation in American post-secondary STEM environments [ 61 ]. Although we acknowledge these subgroups may have varying experiences, exploring those differences is outside the scope of this study. The first-generation college students and international students constituted less than 20% and less than 10% of the participants, respectively ( Table 1 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.t001

Statistical analyses

We conducted three types of data analyses to address the research questions. All data used are shared as supporting information ( S2 – S4 Files ). First, descriptive analyses were used to explore the criteria that students reported they considered when forming their lab groups and to analyze the demographic composition of student-selected groups of three. During this descriptive phase, we checked for the frequency of isolation of female students, BHN+ students, first-generation students, and international students. Second, to examine whether student-selected groups yielded the same degree of student isolation as randomly assigned groups, we simulated random groupings by randomly assigning students to hypothetical groups of three within their lab sections with 100 iterations, yielding 100 possible versions of the random group assignments. We calculated the percentage of isolated students in each iteration and created a mean percentage for all 100 iterations for each demographic variable (female, BHN+, first-generation, and international students). We also compared the sample of 100 simulated percentages of isolated students to the actual percentage from student-selected groups and tested for a statistically significant difference using two-tailed one-sample t-tests.

Finally, we used three-level linear regression models (sometimes referred to as HLM or MLM) to examine whether students’ demographic isolation status influenced their group work attitude scores. Given the clustered nature of our data set, we used random variables to more accurately account for variation due to the students’ assigned GTAs, and lab group [ 62 , 63 ]. In addition to student demographics, we included binary variables showing whether students were isolated in their lab group by gender, BHN+, first-generation, or international status.

Given that this study required both the estimation of student scores and the use of those scores as the dependent variable in linear regression, we used item response theory (hereafter IRT) and specifically a partial-credit model to estimate item difficulties and student scores [ 57 ]. We analyzed two types of student scores, Expected A Posteriori (EAP) scores that average multiple estimates, and plausible values (PV) that include a wider range of possible student scores to account for error more accurately. More details about these statistics can be found in the supporting information document ( S1 File ).

Given the continuous nature of the EAP and PV scores, we used a three-level linear regression with the xtmixed command in Stata15 [ 64 ], where each student (i) has a particular group (j) under a particular GTA (k):

Attitudes-post score ijk = β 0 + β 1 (Attitudes-pre score ijk ) + β 2 (Isolated-Female ijk ) + β 3 (Isolated-First-generation ijk ) + β 4 (Isolated-International ijk ) + β 5 (Isolated-BHN+ ijk ) + β 6 (Female ijk ) + β 7 (First-generation ijk ) + β 8 (International ijk ) + β 9 (BHN+ ijk ) + B 10 (Semester ijk ) + u 1 (GTA) jk + u 2 (group) jk + ε ijk

• ○ Attitudes-post score is group work attitudes post plausible value score
• ○ Attitudes-pre score is group work attitudes overall pre plausible value score
• ○ Isolated-Female, Isolated-first-generation, Isolated-International, and Isolated-BHN+, are four binary variables reflecting if a student with these demographics were isolated in their lab group (0 = not isolated, 1 = isolated)
• ○ Female, First-generation, International, and BHN+ are four binary variables describing whether a student was from any of these demographics (0 = no, 1 = yes)
• ○ Semester is the semester a student took the course (1 = spring, 2 = fall)
• ○ GTA identifies the GTA-led lab section, and the group identifies the lab group

NOTE: The estimated random coefficients for GTA and lab groups are represented by u 1 and u 2 , respectively. The estimated error is represented by ε.

Question 1: What criteria do students report that they consider when forming lab groups?

In response to the post-course survey question about the criteria considered when forming their lab groups, a majority of students reported forming groups with peers sitting next to them in the lab (59% in Spring 2019 when n = 236; 54% in Fall 2019 when n = 208). The next common criteria selected were peers sitting next them plus friends (27% in Spring2019 and 16% in Fall 2019), followed by people sitting around them, friends, and other criteria (11% in Spring 2019 and 25% in Fall 2019) and only friends (3% in Spring19 and 5% in Fall 2019) ( Fig 2 ). In the Fall 2019 post-course survey a few additional questions were asked to better understand the stability of lab groups and seating choices. Most students (93%) reported that they stayed in their original lab groups for the rest of the semester and did not change their groups. Students also stated that on the first day of class, they chose the first available lab seat (74%) or sat by their friends (21%) in response to the questions on how they decided where to sit in the lab. Most students (87%) also reported that they did not change where they sat in the lab between the first week of class and when forming their groups in week four.

The “sitting next to me (only)” or “Friends (only)” represents the students who only selected one of these two items as criteria to form groups. Students’ selection of more than one criterion is shown with a + sign.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.g002

Questions 2. How does the composition of student-selected groups differ in terms of demographic isolation when compared to hypothetical randomly-formed groups?

If students’ processes for selecting groups were not influenced by demographics, then we would expect to see similar demographic compositions for both self-selected and randomized groupings. To examine these compositions, we first analyzed the responses of students for whom data was available for all students in their group. This subsample included 303 students in 101 groups of 3 over the two semesters. The analysis of these data showed that 18% of these groups had isolated female students, 29% of groups had isolated BHN+ students, 31% of groups had isolated first-generation students, and 12% of groups had isolated international students. In terms of the number of students rather than groups, 6% of female students, 10% BHN+ students, 10% of first-generation students, and 4% of international students were isolated in their lab groups.

Among the 303 students included in this analysis, the distribution of demographic categories generally mirrors that of the larger sample: female students comprised 62%; BHN+ students comprised 28%, first-generation students comprised 12%, and international students comprised 6%. Given that these demographic groups were not equally prevalent in the course, the social ramifications of being isolated would vary depending on the particular demographic. We examined this variation by calculating the percentage of students in each demographic group who were isolated. These adjusted percentages show a relative increase in the prevalence of isolation yielding 9% for female students, 33% for BHN+ students, 79% for first-generation college students, and 71% for international students.

Comparing the percentages of isolated students in hypothetical randomly assigned groups to the actual percentages presented in Table 2 , we found more isolation in the randomly assigned groups among female and BHN+ students. The percentage of groups with an isolated female student rose from 18% in actual self-selected groups to 24% in simulated random groups. The percentage of groups with an isolated BHN+ student rose from 29% in the actual self-selected groups to 38% in the simulated random groups. In both cases, one-sample t-tests show statistically significant differences (females: t = 25.07, d.f. = 99, p <0.001; BHN+: t = 27.45, d.f. = 99, p <0.001). However, the percent of groups with isolated first-generation and international students did not show the same degree of variation between actual student-selected groups and simulated random groups (see Table 3 ). Examining the data for international students, there was a very small difference between the simulated mean percentage (12.8%) and the actual mean percentage (12.0%). This small difference would only generally affect one student in a class of one hundred students, yet it was statistically significant (t = 7.50, d.f. = 99, p<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between the actual and simulated percentages for first-generation students (t = -1.71, d.f. = 99, p = 0.09).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.t002

The values are grand-means for each demographic variable which are the average percentages of isolated students over 100 simulations.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.t003

At the individual student level, these differences between self-selected and hypothetical random groups yielded measurable differences in the percentages of female and BHN+ students who were demographically isolated shown in Fig 3 . These differences were even higher when adjusting for the proportion of students from each demographic group in the course. (See the last columns in Tables 2 and 3 ).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.g003

Question 3: Do students’ attitudes toward group work vary between students who were demographically isolated in groups and those who were not?

We used two multi-level regression models to test for statistically significant relationships between demographic isolation and students’ group work attitude scores (see S2 Table ). Model 1 regressed the pretest attitudinal scores on the demographic and isolation variables and random variables that identified each student’s teaching assistant and lab group. This model addressed whether students entered the course with group work attitudes that varied by isolation status. Model 2 regressed the posttest attitudinal scores on the pretest estimates and the other independent variables used in the first model. This model addressed the degree to which student scores showed pre-post change, and whether students exited the course with group work attitudes that varied by isolation status after controlling for their pretest scores.

Overall, the regression analyses showed no consistent negative associations between demographic isolation and students’ groupwork attitudes, both as they began coursework and at the end of the course ( Table 4 ). For the first model that used the pretest group work score outcome variable, the only statistically significant effect was a positive effect for students who were isolated as BHN+ students in their lab groups (see S2 Table ). This effect was not consistent across the regressions we ran on plausible values, which better account for measurement error (see S3 Table ). In the models we ran to examine associations with the posttest group work scores, there was no statistically significant effect of any demographic isolation variable. While the female and international demographic variables did show statistical significance using EAP scores, those effects were not consistent across the more accurate plausible value trials. The only independent variable that showed a consistent and statistically significant relationship with the group work post-test score was the pretest score (coeff. = 0.69; p<0.001).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.t004

Group work is a commonly used student-centered pedagogical approach in college classrooms. Given concerns about the social-emotional challenges some students face when isolated by particular identities, educators can benefit from a better understanding of student behaviors and related social experiences in these group work settings. In this examination of student survey data, we found that the majority of students reported casually forming groups with peers who were sitting around them and that their process yielded groups with less demographic isolation than would have resulted from randomly-formed groupings. Further, while demographic isolation has been identified in previous studies as presenting a variety of challenges for students, our quantitative analyses did not show that demographic isolation was associated with variation in students’ group work attitudes.

Students mainly reported choosing groups based on peers sitting close to them in the lab, selected as the sole factor or in addition to others such as friends. We acknowledge that current study cannot tease apart the conscious and unconscious biases that students’ likely hold when locating themselves in group settings, interacting with new people, and navigating student-selected group formations. We also note that students may not be entirely forthcoming about their considerations. Yet, there was a consistent trend in students’ responses that proximity and friendship were relevant for their choice of lab partners. Further, very few students reported that they intentionally considered demographics in their group choice. In the second semester post-survey, to better understand the consideration behind seating choices, when we asked students where in the lab, they decided to sit on the first day of class, most students (74%) mentioned choosing the first available seat they found or sat by their friends (21%); majority of them also reported not changing their seat between week 1 and when forming their lab groups in week 4. However, where students reported to sit could be related to the conscious and unconscious biases that students’ likely hold which were beyond the scope of this study. Furthermore, we did not investigate the relationship between criteria students reported considering when forming groups and their attitude about group work. However, previous research that focused on informal group composition and group work, found that having a friend in a group was the main predictor of students’ comfort in groups, a tendency reflected in our findings as well [ 65 ].

In our study, student-selected groups yielded another benefit for students, less demographic isolation when compared to hypothetical randomly formed groups. A previous study looking at the composition of informal groups in a large-enrollment biology classroom also showed students mostly formed homogenous groups in terms of ethnicity and gender [ 29 ]. This phenomenon is known as “homophily” [ 66 ] and is defined as the inclination of individuals to move toward and work with others who are like themselves. Our findings show this phenomenon even in lab settings where students are only forming groups from a small pool of peers (n ~ 15–18). Further, the prevalence of an identity group in the course related to the degree of isolation. Because the proportion of students who identified as first-generation or international was low in the course, there was more likelihood for those students to be isolated in lab groups, whether they self-selected or were randomly assigned. In contrast, females were consistently over-represented in this course, which led to fewer possibilities of being the only female in a lab group. The degree of isolation will always be dependent on the demographic composition of a particular context. Thus, we do not know if the statistical significance of gender and racial-ethnic demographics in this case will also be evident in other settings where the demographic composition of the cohort is meaningfully different. There must be a large enough number of students in a demographic category so that they have opportunities to change the composition of their group, and enough instances of that change to show measurable effects in a quantitative analysis.

Our findings indicate that allowing students to choose their groups can serve a self-protective purpose because they can avoid demographic isolation. While this study does not explain the mechanism by which self-selected groupings yield less isolation, the fact that there were statistically significant reductions in isolation when students self-selected warrants further inquiry. This is extremely important when we aim to support historically marginalized groups in STEM. Further, we note the difference between demographic traits that are visually evident to other students and those traits that are hidden. Henning et al. (2019) [ 67 ] noted the particular challenges that small-group coursework presents for students with particular political, religious, gender, and sexual identities. Given the hidden nature of some of these identities, instructors are typically unable to systematically avoid isolating students by assigning groups based on identities that are visually evident or commonly tracked. Student-selected groups could allow students to choose peers they perceive to be allies in their groups even in the case of hidden identities by considering only those identities that seem important to them. This can be facilitated by providing time for students to get to know each other and form trust before forming groups, such as the first 3 weeks of informal group interaction in this study. In these conditions students can choose groups to avoid the types of demographic isolation that they perceive as negative. For that reason, we estimate that the impact of any measurable demographic isolation that remains after students form groups may be minimized.

Other studies show the benefit of student-selected groups compared to randomly-formed groups when it comes to team experience [ 68 ]; student satisfaction and grades [ 69 ]; and conflict resolution, communications, enthusiasm, and overall group work attitude [ 70 ]. Students who self-select their groups spent the most amount of time outside the classroom working on course materials with their group members and felt more connected to their group members than the students in instructor-designed groups or randomly-formed groups [ 44 ]. A more recent study that assessed the impact of different group formation types on students’ attitudes towards group work in large biology classrooms, found that heterogeneous groups in terms of competence have higher group work attitudes and groups formed by students were as heterogeneous as groups formed by the instructor [ 2 ].

One argument against student-selected groups is that they are often less diverse, either demographically or academically. It has been argued that more homogenous groups could negatively influence students’ performance or attitudes. While students may often form more demographically homogenous groups ([ 29 , 44 ], current study), these groups do not necessarily show lower outcomes [ 2 , 44 , 69 – 70 ]. We also considered the argument that people do not get to choose with whom they work in professional workspaces, and by allowing students to self-select groupmates, we are preventing our students from learning how to work with people from diverse backgrounds. While this is a valid concern and educators should help students develop skills to work with people from diverse backgrounds, we reason that making students work in particular groups without considering their preferences also does not reflect most workplace conditions where groups typically work together over longer periods of time and employees have some degree of self-selection.

These arguments may not adequately account for the potential harm of group formation methods that ignore student preferences, including the tendency for assigned groups to have negative impacts related to satisfaction, trust, and divisiveness [ 71 ]. this study suggests intentionally offering opportunities for students to build trust with others before allowing them to select their own groups. Building on this idea, we suggest that instructors’ multiple goals may require multiple distinct actions. Specifically, some goals, such as promoting student satisfaction and avoiding demographic isolation can be targeted by allowing student-selected groups. Other goals, such as improving students’ cultural competency skills, may require other instructional support. In practice, teaching students to work well with diverse groups of people likely requires actions beyond assigning the particular group compositions that instructors have adequate data to prescribe. While cultural competency courses can influence student attitudes in positive ways [ 72 ], we suggest there are also simple strategies instructors can use to allow student-selected groups while also providing opportunities for students to practice cultural competency skills by creating course activities that require inter-group collaboration.

The multilevel regression findings suggested that students’ attitudes towards group work did not vary with being demographically isolated in lab groups. Yet, given prior research about the interpersonal challenges that isolated students sometimes face, we acknowledge that this lack of effect may not hold for all students in all contexts. Regression findings are inherently generalizations, so they are not useful for explaining the unique experiences of individual students. Further, this study took place in a particular setting where students may have been less likely to struggle with being demographically isolated for several reasons: this sample of students was from a highly competitive institution where they were overwhelmingly high-achieving students with strong academic identities which likely minimizes both the range of academic behaviors within groups and the range of group work attitudes; student-selected groups allowed students to avoid being isolated in ways that would have felt challenging for them; and there was pedagogical support explicitly about effective group work throughout the course. Regarding the attitudinal measure, there was only a small degree of pre-post change during a course with a great deal of group work, which suggests this particular outcome measure may not be very prone to change. It is also crucial to note that these findings do not dispel concerns about other ways demographic isolation negatively influences students. Relationships between demographic isolation and other outcome measures in other contexts need to be explored as well.

Conclusions

This study provides unique evidence about how students form groups and how their choices reduce the chances of being demographically isolated in groups. In this work, we focused on comparing the composition of student-selected groups with hypothetical randomly-formed groups. Our study shows that when given the opportunity, students mostly form groups with peers sitting near them in the classroom while a much lower proportion of students reported only considering friendship as a criterion to form groups. Groups that were formed by students led to less isolation of students identified as female and BHN+ compared to randomly-formed groups. While demographic isolation has been identified in previous studies as presenting a variety of challenges for students, our quantitative analyses did not show that demographic isolation was associated with variation in students’ group work attitudes. Although instructors can implement group formation systems to create groups with particular characteristics, students may benefit more from self-selected working groups based on identities that seem important to them with other instructional supports for practicing collaboration with diverse peers. If the student-selected group formation approach is used, as educators, we recommend doing frequent check-ins to learn about group dynamics during the semester and designing activities that encourage within and between-group interactions to enhance the engagement of students with diverse identities. Comparing our findings with other group formation methods in other settings and teasing apart the conscious and unconscious biases that students’ likely hold in group selection and interactions go beyond the scope of this current study and would be a valuable next step to be explored.

Supporting information

S1 table. groupwork attitude items..

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.s001

S2 Table. Multi-level linear regression output for group work EAP pretest and posttest scores.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.s002

S3 Table. Multi-level linear regression output for group work plausible values across five trials to check for accuracy.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.s003

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.s004

S2 File. Data used in group selection criteria.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.s005

S3 File. Data used in randomized grouping analyses.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.s006

S4 File. Data used in MLM analyses.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0310918.s007

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the students who agreed to participate in this study, especially for their time completing the survey and sharing their experiences. We also appreciate support from the Active Learning Initiative at Cornell University.

• View Article
• Google Scholar
• PubMed/NCBI
• 7. Hansen LD. Talking About Leaving: Factors Contributing to High Attrition Rates Among Science, Mathematics and Engineering Undergraduate Majors: Final Report to the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation on an Ethnographic Inquiry at Seven Institutions (Elaine Seymour; Hewitt Nancy M.).
• 12. Johnson DW. The social psychology of education (pp. vi, 314). Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 1970
• 19. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Science for All Americans: Project 2061. Oxford University Press. 1989
• 20. National Research Council, Combining Information: Statistical Issues and Opportunities for Research, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1992
• 21. National Research Council, From Analysis to Action: Undergraduate Education in Science, Mathematics, Engineering, and Technology, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1996, pp. 5–6.
• 22. Johnson DW. Cooperation and competition: Theory and research. Interaction Book Company. 1989.
• 45. Asgari M, Miles AM, Lisboa MS, Sarvary MA. Copus, portaal, or dart? Classroom observation tool comparison from the instructor user’s perspective. InFrontiers in Education 2021 Nov 15 (Vol. 6, p. 740344). Frontiers Media SA.
• 50. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering: 2021 | NSF—National Science Foundation. https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf21321/
• 53. Cataldi EF, Bennett CT, Chen X. First-Generation Students: College Access, Persistence, and Postbachelor’s Outcomes. Stats in Brief. NCES 2018–421. National center for education statistics. 2018 Feb.
• 55. Kouros C, Abrami PC, Glashan A, Wade A. How do students really feel about working in small groups? The role of student attitudes and behaviors in cooperative classroom settings. Inannual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, California 2006 Apr.
• 57. Wilson M. Constructing measures: An item response modeling approach. Routledge; 2023 Jun 5.
• 62. Skrondal A, Rabe-Hesketh S. Multilevel and related models for longitudinal data. InHandbook of multilevel analysis 2008 (pp. 275–299). New York, NY: Springer New York.
• 64. StataCorp. (2017). Stata Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station, TX: StataCorp LLC.
• 67. Henning JA, Ballen CJ, Molina SA, Cotner S. Hidden identities shape student perceptions of active learning environments. InFrontiers in Education 2019 Nov 5 (Vol. 4, p. 129). Frontiers Media SA. https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/feduc.2019.00129

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 25 September 2024

Intragenic DNA inversions expand bacterial coding capacity

• Rachael B. Chanin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4625-356X 1   na1 ,
• Patrick T. West 1   na1 ,
• Jakob Wirbel   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-4073-3562 1 ,
• Matthew O. Gill   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0650-2450 2 ,
• Gabriella Z. M. Green   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8433-4264 1 ,
• Ryan M. Park 2 ,
• Nora Enright   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1557-6638 3 ,
• Arjun M. Miklos 1 ,
• Angela S. Hickey   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4407-6894 2 ,
• Erin F. Brooks   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-5834-0679 1 ,
• Krystal K. Lum   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7523-0420 4 ,
• Ileana M. Cristea   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6533-2458 4 &
• Ami S. Bhatt   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8099-2975 1 , 2  

Nature ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Archaeal genes
• Bacterial genes
• Genome informatics

Bacterial populations that originate from a single bacterium are not strictly clonal and often contain subgroups with distinct phenotypes 1 . Bacteria can generate heterogeneity through phase variation—a preprogrammed, reversible mechanism that alters gene expression levels across a population 1 . One well-studied type of phase variation involves enzyme-mediated inversion of specific regions of genomic DNA 2 . Frequently, these DNA inversions flip the orientation of promoters, turning transcription of adjacent coding regions on or off 2 . Through this mechanism, inversion can affect fitness, survival or group dynamics 3 , 4 . Here, we describe the development of PhaVa, a computational tool that identifies DNA inversions using long-read datasets. We also identify 372 ‘intragenic invertons’, a novel class of DNA inversions found entirely within genes, in genomes of bacterial and archaeal isolates. Intragenic invertons allow a gene to encode two or more versions of a protein by flipping a DNA sequence within the coding region, thereby increasing coding capacity without increasing genome size. We validate ten intragenic invertons in the gut commensal Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron , and experimentally characterize an intragenic inverton in the thiamine biosynthesis gene thiC .

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on SpringerLink
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

A bacterial pan-genome makes gene essentiality strain-dependent and evolvable

Intragenomic rDNA variation - the product of concerted evolution, mutation, or something in between?

Duplicated antibiotic resistance genes reveal ongoing selection and horizontal gene transfer in bacteria

Data availability.

Short-read adult stool sequencing data was previously published and is available under NCBI BioProject ID PRJNA707487 . Short-read paediatric stool sequencing data were previously published and are available under NCBI BioProject ID PRJNA787952 . Long-read metagenomic sequencing data were previously published and are available under BioProject PRJNA820119 and BioProject PRJNA940499 . Assembled metagenomic contigs are available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7662825 . A list of accession numbers for long-read isolate sequencing data are available in Supplementary Table 3 . Mass spectrometry raw files (.d) generated in this study have been deposited to the ProteomeXchange Consortium through the PRIDE partner repository 77 (project accession PXD054577 ). Long-read sequencing data for the locked thiC intragenic inverton strains and RNA-sequencing data are available under NCBI BioProject ID PRJNA1118344 . Accession codes for long-read datasets are listed in Supplementary Table 3 . The reference genome for B. thetaiotaomicron VPI-5482 is the NCBI reference sequence AE015928.1 . The reference genome for B. fragilis FDAARGOS_1225 is the NCBI reference sequence NZ_CP069563.1 .  Source data are provided with this paper.

Code availability

PhaVa is available at https://github.com/patrickwest/PhaVa . Long-read datasets were analysed with PhaVa (v0.1.0) with default parameters.

van der Woude, M. W. & Bäumler, A. J. Phase and antigenic variation in bacteria. Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 17 , 581–611 (2004).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Trzilova, D. & Tamayo, R. Site-specific recombination—how simple DNA inversions produce complex phenotypic heterogeneity in bacterial populations. Trends Genet. 37 , 59–72 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Zieg, J., Silverman, M., Hilmen, M. & Simon, M. Recombinational switch for gene expression. Science 196 , 170–172 (1977).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Stocker, B. A. Measurements of rate of mutation of flagellar antigenic phase in Salmonella typhimurium. J. Hyg. 47 , 398–413 (1949).

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Meydan, S., Vázquez-Laslop, N. & Mankin, A. S. Genes within genes in bacterial genomes. Microbiol. Spectr. 6 , rwr-0020-2018 (2018).

Article   Google Scholar  

Zhong, A. et al. Toxic antiphage defense proteins inhibited by intragenic antitoxin proteins. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120 , e2307382120 (2023).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Moxon, R., Bayliss, C. & Hood, D. Bacterial contingency loci: the role of simple sequence DNA repeats in bacterial adaptation. Annu. Rev. Genet. 40 , 307–333 (2006).

Sberro, H. et al. Large-scale analyses of human microbiomes reveal thousands of small, novel genes. Cell 178 , 1245–1259.e14 (2019).

Schlub, T. E. & Holmes, E. C. Properties and abundance of overlapping genes in viruses. Virus Evol. 6 , veaa009 (2020).

Medhekar, B. & Miller, J. F. Diversity-generating retroelements. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 10 , 388–395 (2007).

Andrewes, F. W. Studies in group-agglutination I. The Salmonella group and its antigenic structure. J. Pathol. Bacteriol. 25 , 505–521 (1922).

Goldberg, A., Fridman, O., Ronin, I. & Balaban, N. Q. Systematic identification and quantification of phase variation in commensal and pathogenic Escherichia coli . Genome Med. 6 , 112 (2014).

Sekulovic, O. et al. Genome-wide detection of conservative site-specific recombination in bacteria. PLoS Genet. 14 , e1007332 (2018).

Jiang, X. et al. Invertible promoters mediate bacterial phase variation, antibiotic resistance, and host adaptation in the gut. Science 363 , 181–187 (2019).

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Milman, O., Yelin, I. & Kishony, R. Systematic identification of gene-altering programmed inversions across the bacterial domain. Nucleic Acids Res. 51 , 553–573 (2023).

Komano, T. Shufflons: multiple inversion systems and integrons. Annu. Rev. Genet. 33 , 171–191 (1999).

Atack, J. M., Guo, C., Yang, L., Zhou, Y. & Jennings, M. P. DNA sequence repeats identify numerous type I restriction-modification systems that are potential epigenetic regulators controlling phase-variable regulons; phasevarions. FASEB J. 34 , 1038–1051 (2020).

Chatzidaki-Livanis, M., Coyne, M. J., Roche-Hakansson, H. & Comstock, L. E. Expression of a uniquely regulated extracellular polysaccharide confers a large-capsule phenotype to Bacteroides fragilis . J. Bacteriol. 190 , 1020–1026 (2008).

Taketani, M., Donia, M. S., Jacobson, A. N., Lambris, J. D. & Fischbach, M. A. A phase-variable surface layer from the gut symbiont Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron . mBio 6 , e01339-15 (2015).

Troy, E. B., Carey, V. J., Kasper, D. L. & Comstock, L. E. Orientations of the Bacteroides fragilis capsular polysaccharide biosynthesis locus promoters during symbiosis and infection. J. Bacteriol. 192 , 5832–5836 (2010).

Severyn, C. J. et al. Microbiota dynamics in a randomized trial of gut decontamination during allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. JCI Insight 7 , e154344 (2022).

Siranosian, B. A. et al. Rare transmission of commensal and pathogenic bacteria in the gut microbiome of hospitalized adults. Nat. Commun. 13 , 586 (2022).

Martens, E. C., Chiang, H. C. & Gordon, J. I. Mucosal glycan foraging enhances fitness and transmission of a saccharolytic human gut bacterial symbiont. Cell Host Microbe 4 , 447–457 (2008).

Martens, E. C., Roth, R., Heuser, J. E. & Gordon, J. I. Coordinate regulation of glycan degradation and polysaccharide capsule biosynthesis by a prominent human gut symbiont. J. Biol. Chem. 284 , 18445–18457 (2009).

Krinos, C. M. et al. Extensive surface diversity of a commensal microorganism by multiple DNA inversions. Nature 414 , 555–558 (2001).

Porter, N. T. et al. Phase-variable capsular polysaccharides and lipoproteins modify bacteriophage susceptibility in Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron . Nat. Microbiol. 5 , 1170–1181 (2020).

Round, J. L. et al. The Toll-like receptor 2 pathway establishes colonization by a commensal of the human microbiota. Science 332 , 974–977 (2011).

Neff, C. P. et al. Diverse intestinal bacteria contain putative zwitterionic capsular polysaccharides with anti-inflammatory properties. Cell Host Microbe 20 , 535–547 (2016).

Mazmanian, S. K., Liu, C. H., Tzianabos, A. O. & Kasper, D. L. An immunomodulatory molecule of symbiotic bacteria directs maturation of the host immune system. Cell 122 , 107–118 (2005).

Porter, N. T., Canales, P., Peterson, D. A. & Martens, E. C. A Subset of polysaccharide capsules in the human symbiont Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron promote increased competitive fitness in the mouse gut. Cell Host Microbe 22 , 494–506.e8 (2017).

Musumeci, O. et al. Intragenic inversion of mtDNA: a new type of pathogenic mutation in a patient with mitochondrial myopathy. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 66 , 1900–1904 (2000).

Smyshlyaev, G., Bateman, A. & Barabas, O. Sequence analysis of tyrosine recombinases allows annotation of mobile genetic elements in prokaryotic genomes. Mol. Syst. Biol. 17 , e9880 (2021).

West, P. T., Chanin, R. B. & Bhatt, A. S. From genome structure to function: insights into structural variation in microbiology. Curr. Opin. Microbiol. 69 , 102192 (2022).

van Kempen, M. et al. Fast and accurate protein structure search with Foldseek. Nat. Biotechnol. 42 , 243–246 (2024).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Casino, P., Rubio, V. & Marina, A. The mechanism of signal transduction by two-component systems. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 20 , 763–771 (2010).

Loenen, W. A. M., Dryden, D. T. F., Raleigh, E. A. & Wilson, G. G. Type I restriction enzymes and their relatives. Nucleic Acids Res. 42 , 20–44 (2014).

De Ste Croix, M. et al. Phase-variable methylation and epigenetic regulation by type I restriction-modification systems. FEMS Microbiol. Rev. 41 , S3–S15 (2017).

Chen, L. et al. Short- and long-read metagenomics expand individualized structural variations in gut microbiomes. Nat. Commun. 13 , 3175 (2022).

Maghini, D. G. et al. Quantifying bias introduced by sample collection in relative and absolute microbiome measurements. Nat. Biotechnol. 42 , 328–338 (2024).

Rodionov, D. A. et al. Micronutrient requirements and sharing capabilities of the human gut microbiome. Front. Microbiol. 10 , 1316 (2019).

Sharma, V. et al. B-vitamin sharing promotes stability of gut microbial communities. Front. Microbiol. 10 , 1485 (2019).

Yatsunenko, T. et al. Human gut microbiome viewed across age and geography. Nature 486 , 222–227 (2012).

Costliow, Z. A. & Degnan, P. H. Thiamine acquisition strategies impact metabolism and competition in the gut microbe Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron . mSystems 2 , e00116–17 (2017).

Martinez-Gomez, N. C. & Downs, D. M. ThiC is an [Fe-S] cluster protein that requires AdoMet to generate the 4-amino-5-hydroxymethyl-2-methylpyrimidine moiety in thiamin synthesis. Biochemistry 47 , 9054–9056 (2008).

Said, H. M. Intestinal absorption of water-soluble vitamins in health and disease. Biochem. J. 437 , 357–372 (2011).

D’Souza, G. et al. Less is more: selective advantages can explain the prevalent loss of biosynthetic genes in bacteria. Evolution 68 , 2559–2570 (2014).

Jurgenson, C. T., Ealick, S. E. & Begley, T. P. Biosynthesis of thiamin pyrophosphate. EcoSal Plus https://doi.org/10.1128/ecosalplus.3.6.3.7 (2009).

Rodionov, D. A., Vitreschak, A. G., Mironov, A. A. & Gelfand, M. S. Comparative genomics of thiamin biosynthesis in prokaryotes. J. Biol. Chem. 277 , 48949–48959 (2002).

Bacic, M. K. & Smith, C. J. Laboratory maintenance and cultivation of bacteroides species. Curr. Protoc. Microbiol. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780471729259.mc13c01s9 (2008).

Zhu, W. et al. Xenosiderophore utilization promotes Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron resilience during colitis. Cell Host Microbe 27 , 376–388.e8 (2020).

Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.3997 (2013).

Liao, Y., Smyth, G. K. & Shi, W. featureCounts: an efficient general purpose program for assigning sequence reads to genomic features. Bioinformatics 30 , 923–930 (2014).

Love, M. I., Huber, W. & Anders, S. Moderated estimation of fold change and dispersion for RNA-seq data with DESeq2. Genome Biol. 15 , 550 (2014).

Rice, P., Longden, I. & Bleasby, A. EMBOSS: the European Molecular Biology Open Software Suite. Trends Genet. 16 , 276–277 (2000).

Li, H. Minimap2: pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 34 , 3094–3100 (2018).

Yang, C., Chu, J., Warren, R. L. & Birol, I. NanoSim: nanopore sequence read simulator based on statistical characterization. Gigascience 6 , gix010 (2017).

Ono, Y., Asai, K. & Hamada, M. PBSIM2: a simulator for long-read sequencers with a novel generative model of quality scores. Bioinformatics 37 , 589–595 (2021).

Olm, M. R., Brown, C. T., Brooks, B. & Banfield, J. F. dRep: a tool for fast and accurate genomic comparisons that enables improved genome recovery from metagenomes through de-replication. ISME J. 11 , 2864–2868 (2017).

De Coster, W., D’Hert, S., Schultz, D. T., Cruts, M. & Van Broeckhoven, C. NanoPack: visualizing and processing long-read sequencing data. Bioinformatics 34 , 2666–2669 (2018).

Mirdita, M. et al. ColabFold: making protein folding accessible to all. Nat. Methods 19 , 679–682 (2022).

Meng, E. C. et al. UCSF ChimeraX: tools for structure building and analysis. Protein Sci. 32 , e4792 (2023).

Jones, P. et al. InterProScan 5: genome-scale protein function classification. Bioinformatics 30 , 1236–1240 (2014).

Aramaki, T. et al. KofamKOALA: KEGG ortholog assignment based on profile HMM and adaptive score threshold. Bioinformatics 36 , 2251–2252 (2020).

Eddy, S. R. Accelerated profile HMM searches. PLoS Comput. Biol. 7 , e1002195 (2011).

Article   ADS   MathSciNet   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Paysan-Lafosse, T. et al. InterPro in 2022. Nucleic Acids Res. 51 , D418–D427 (2023).

Benjamini, Y. & Hochberg, Y. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. 57 , 289–300 (1995).

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Prjibelski, A., Antipov, D., Meleshko, D., Lapidus, A. & Korobeynikov, A. Using SPAdes de novo assembler. Curr. Protoc. Bioinformatics 70 , e102 (2020).

Lin, Y. et al. Assembly of long error-prone reads using de Bruijn graphs. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113 , E8396–E8405 (2016).

Hyatt, D. et al. Prodigal: prokaryotic gene recognition and translation initiation site identification. BMC Bioinformatics 11 , 119 (2010).

Wood, D. E., Lu, J. & Langmead, B. Improved metagenomic analysis with Kraken 2. Genome Biol. 20 , 257 (2019).

Li, W. & Godzik, A. Cd-hit: a fast program for clustering and comparing large sets of protein or nucleotide sequences. Bioinformatics 22 , 1658–1659 (2006).

Skowronek, P. et al. Rapid and in-depth coverage of the (phospho-)proteome with deep libraries and optimal window design for dia-PASEF. Mol. Cell. Proteomics 21 , 100279 (2022).

Kong, A. T., Leprevost, F. V., Avtonomov, D. M., Mellacheruvu, D. & Nesvizhskii, A. I. MSFragger: ultrafast and comprehensive peptide identification in mass spectrometry-based proteomics. Nat. Methods 14 , 513–520 (2017).

Demichev, V., Messner, C. B., Vernardis, S. I., Lilley, K. S. & Ralser, M. DIA-NN: neural networks and interference correction enable deep proteome coverage in high throughput. Nat. Methods 17 , 41–44 (2020).

MacLean, B. et al. Skyline: an open source document editor for creating and analyzing targeted proteomics experiments. Bioinformatics 26 , 966–968 (2010).

Pino, L. K. et al. The Skyline ecosystem: informatics for quantitative mass spectrometry proteomics. Mass Spectrom. Rev. 39 , 229–244 (2020).

Perez-Riverol, Y. et al. The PRIDE database resources in 2022: a hub for mass spectrometry-based proteomics evidences. Nucleic Acids Res. 50 , D543–D552 (2022).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank D. Schmidtke, A. Natarajan, J. D. Shanahan, D. Maghini, M. Dvorak, A. Han, M. Chakraborty, X. Jin, E. Martens and Bhatt laboratory members for helpful conversations and scientific advice regarding this project; W. Zhu for plasmids (pNBU2_tet and pNBU2_erm); S. Winter for the DH5α strain; and D. Haft and F. Thibaud-Nissen for helpful discussion about accessing SRA long-read datasets. Funding was provided as follows: National Institutes of Health R01 AI148623 (A.S.B.), National Institutes of Health R01 AI143757 (A.S.B.), Stand Up 2 Cancer Foundation (A.S.B. and I.M.C.), National Institutes of Health R01 AI174515 (I.M.C.), National Institutes of Health T32 training Grant HG000044 (R.B.C.), The AP Giannini Foundation (R.B.C.), National Institutes of Health T32 training Grant HL120824 (P.T.W.), National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship (M.O.G., A.S.H. and N.E.), Stanford DARE fellowship (N.E.), and National Institutes of Health TL1 training Award TL1TR003019 (K.K.L.). Computing costs were supported, in part, by an NIH S10 Shared Instrumentation grant (1S10OD02014101).

Author information

These authors contributed equally: Rachael B. Chanin, Patrick T. West

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

Rachael B. Chanin, Patrick T. West, Jakob Wirbel, Gabriella Z. M. Green, Arjun M. Miklos, Erin F. Brooks & Ami S. Bhatt

Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

Matthew O. Gill, Ryan M. Park, Angela S. Hickey & Ami S. Bhatt

Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

Nora Enright

Department of Molecular Biology, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA

Krystal K. Lum & Ileana M. Cristea

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

R.B.C., P.T.W. and A.S.B. conceived and designed the study. Data acquisition and processing was performed by R.B.C., P.T.W., J.W., R.M.P., G.Z.M.G., A.S.H., M.O.G., E.F.B., A.M.M., N.E. and K.K.L. Data were visualized by R.B.C., P.T.W., J.W., R.M.P., K.K.L. and M.O.G. Data interpretation was done by R.B.C., P.T.W., J.W., M.O.G., K.K.L. and A.S.B. Funding acquisition was done by A.S.B. and I.M.C. Writing of the original draft was performed by R.B.C., P.T.W. and A.S.B. All authors contributed to the review and editing of this manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ami S. Bhatt .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

P.T.W. is a contract bioinformatician at Oxford Nanopore Technologies; this position started during the review process. The other authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information.

Nature thanks the anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work. Peer review reports are available.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Extended data figures and tables

Extended data fig. 1 inverton detection and confirmation in bth..

( A ) Inversion proportions of CPS loci in metagenomic samples measured with PhaseFinder (Top) and PhaVa (Bottom). Samples with no inversions in the five CPS invertons were removed. ( B ) Schematic of PCR confirmation. Forward and Reverse primers bind to regions of the genome upstream and downstream of the inverton on opposite strands. The Common primer binds the DNA inside of the inverton, between the inverted repeats. When the DNA is in the forward orientation (left), the Common and Forward primer will generate a PCR product. When the inverton flips, the Common and Reverse primer will generate a PCR product (right). HCT, hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Source Data

Extended Data Fig. 2 Taxonomic composition of short-read samples from Siranosian et al. 2020.

( A - B ) Taxonomic distribution for samples at the genus level. Individual reads were taxonomically classified with Kraken2 using a Genbank reference set. Relative abundances were estimated with Bracken. Genera that represented less than 2% estimated relative abundance in a given sample were collapsed into ‘other’ for plotting. ( A ) Samples without detected BTh intragenic inversions and ( B ) samples with detected BTh intragenic inversions are shown. ( C ) The distribution of genus level Shannon diversity calculated for individual samples. Samples are grouped by presence or absence of BTh intragenic inversions. Center line represents the mean Shannon diversity of grouped samples, boxes represent quartiles, and whiskers extend to the furthest datapoint in either direction within 1.5 times the interquartile range.

Extended Data Fig. 3 Developing and optimizing PhaVa, a long-read based, accurate inverton caller.

( A ) Schematic of the PhaVa workflow. Putative invertons are identified and long-reads are mapped to both a forward (highlighted by the black dashed lines) and reverse orientation (highlighted by the grey dashed lines) version of the inverton and surrounding genomic sequence. Reads that do not map across the entire inverton and into the flanking sequence on either side or have poor mapping characteristics are removed. See  methods for details. ( B - C ) Optimizing cutoffs for the minimum number of reverse reads, as both a raw number and percentage of all reads, to reduce false positive inverton calls with simulated reads. Cell color and number represent ( B ) the false positive rate per simulated readset and ( C ) the total number of unique false positives across all simulated datasets. ( D ) False positives in simulated data plotted per species. All measurements were made with a minimum of three reverse reads cutoff and varying the percentage of minimum reverse reads cutoff. Dashed line indicates the minimum reverse reads percent cutoff used for isolate and metagenomic datasets. Solid lines indicate sample mean while colored bands indicate 95% confidence interval. ( E ) Output tables of particular interest are labeled and shown below the diagram with example output.

Extended Data Fig. 4 Benchmarking PhaVa with pbsim2 simulated reads.

( A ) Density plot of false positive rate vs false negative rate for 100 bacterial species. Three 100x replicates were generated per species. ( B ) Scatterplot of simulated reads from 8 different E. coli genomes, with varying ANI to a singular reference E. coli genome, showing reduced coverage (and thus reduced detection) of invertons when mapping to a distant reference. Three 100x replicates were generated per genome. ( C ) False positive rate for read sets simulated for both E. coli and BTh and varying coverage levels. Three replicates were generated per coverage level. Error bars represent standard deviation between replicates. ( D ) False positive rates in readsets simulated from E. coli with varying mean read length. Three 100x replicates were generated per mean read length. Error bars represent standard deviation between replicates.

Extended Data Fig. 5 Very long (>750 bp), near perfect, inverted repeats can lead to false positives.

( A ) Alignment of inverton NZ_CP025371.1:2124719-2124870-2125316-2125467, with its invertible sequence flipped, against the B. pertussis genome leads to perfect alignment of flanking and IR regions as expected. ‘Reference genome’ refers to the B. pertussis reference genome sequence. ‘Inverton reversed’ refers to the putative inverton sequence and flanking sequence, with the invertible sequence inverted. Red dashed lines indicate boundaries of the invertible sequence, black dashed lines indicate boundaries of the inverted repeats as detected by einverted, and purple dashed lines indicate the true boundary of inverted repeats. ( B ) Alignment of the reverse complement of the entire inverton NZ_CP025371.1:2124719-2124870-2125316-2125467 with its invertible sequence inverted and flanking sequence, against the B. pertussis genome leads to near perfect alignment (6 mismatches) spanning far into the flanking sequence to the true boundary of the inverted repeats, allowing for reads to map regardless of inverton orientation. ( C ) Example with toy nucleotide sequences. Red nucleotides indicate mismatches.

Extended Data Fig. 6 Overview of SRA long-read isolate sequencing samples analyzed with PhaVa.

( A ) The number of unique species represented in the dataset, grouped by phylum. ( B ) The raw number of sequencing samples, grouped by phylum. ( C ) Histogram of sequencing samples per species. Species with large numbers of samples are labeled. ( D ) A histogram of sequencing depths for all long-read isolate sequencing samples.

Extended Data Fig. 7 Intragenic invertons that recode proteins are identified in long-read isolate datasets.

( A - C ) Genome diagrams for recoding intragenic invertons are shown. Grey boxes indicate annotated protein domains. Black lines indicate the region contained within the inverton. AlphaFold structure of the forward (dark blue) and reverse (light blue) are shown. Amino acids affected by the inverton are shown in pink. ( A ) slmA nucleoid occlusion factor Bordetella bronchiseptica . RMSD 26.287 angstroms across all pairs. pLDDT forward: 94.5. pLDDT reverse: 51.3. ( B ) barA two-component sensor histidine kinase in Aeromonas hydrophila . The Receiver and HPt domain are shown. RMSD 5.492 angstroms across all pairs. pLDDT forward: 83.4. pLDDT reverse: 76.2. ( C ) Type I restriction enzyme S subunit hsdS 1 and hsdS 2 in Mycoplasma hominis . RMSD 1.809 and 4.167 angstroms across all pairs, respectively. pLDDT hsdS 1 forward 90.8, reverse 87. pLDDT hsdS 2 forward 92.4, reverse 84.2. HTH, helix-turn-helix; HK, histidine kinase; HPt, histidine phosphotransfer domain; TRD, target recognition domains.

Extended Data Fig. 8 Intragenic invertons are rare across genomes yet consistently enriched in some Pfam clans.

( A ) Histograms showing the number of clades (genomes, species, or genera) at various numbers of invertons indicate that invertons are rare, as only one to three invertons can be detected in the majority of clades. Only clades with at least five invertons (red line; number of clades is indicated in the top-right corner of each subplot) were included for the subsequent enrichment analysis. ( B ) KEGG pathways and Pfam clans were tested for enrichment of intragenic (or partial intergenic) invertons in included clades, using a one-sided Fisher’s exact test per clade (see  Methods ). Enrichment was only calculated for sets with at least five invertons associated with genes in the set. Histograms show the number of sets with enrichment score at the number of included clades, showing that most enrichments could be calculated for single clades only. For example, all KEGG pathways associated with enough intragenic invertons for an enrichment analysis on genome-level were specific for each genome. Sets with enrichment scores across at least five clades (red line) are labeled with their corresponding identifiers. ( C ) Heatmap showing the log-odds ratio (effect size for the enrichment of intragenic invertons) across included clades for the six Pfam clans that have enrichment scores on genus-level (see panel B). Stars indicate significance of the enrichment as calculated by Fisher’s exact test and corrected for multiple hypothesis testing using the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure.

Extended Data Fig. 9 Locked thiC intragenic inverton construction and growth competition.

( A ) Generation of locked intragenic invertons. The forward and locked forward thiC inverted repeat (IR) nucleotide sequences are shown. When possible, the wobble position of each codon corresponding to the IR was mutated to increase mismatches between the two palindromic sequences while maintaining the amino acid sequence. ( B ) Mutated nucleotides are highlighted in grey. ( C ) Locked thiC strains were competed against each other in thiamine-containing media in a 1:1 ratio. After 40 h, the abundance of each strain was enumerated using selective agar. Black bars indicate the locked forward strain and white bars indicate the locked reverse strain. Recovered abundances shown here correspond with the competitive index shown in Fig. 4d . Left - the locked forward strain is marked with an erythromycin resistant cassette and the locked reverse strain is marked with a tetracycline resistant cassette. Right - the locked forward strain is marked with a tetracycline resistant cassette and the locked reverse strain is marked with an erythromycin resistant cassette. Geometric mean and geometric standard deviation are shown. Each dot represents an individual replicate. Experiments were done in biological duplicate or triplicate and repeated 4 or 6 times. A two-tailed ratio paired t test was performed on the locked forward and locked reverse abundances. ***, p < 0.001; **, p < 0.01; *, p < 0.05.

Extended Data Fig. 10 Detection of ThiC unique peptides in the forward and reverse orientation.

( A ) Schematic showing the ThiC protein sequence in the forward and predicted reverse open reading frames (ORF1, ORF2, ORF3). Arrows indicate the direction of transcription. Shared colors between the forward and reverse ORFs indicate identical amino acids. The dark orange box in ORF1 is the ThiC reverse specific peptide. ( B ) Mass spectrometry quantification, by data-independent acquisition, of ThiC tryptic peptides aligned with each ORF. N C PVPVGTVPIYQALEK includes cysteine carbamidomethylation. ( C ) Quantification of the unique ThiC tryptic peptides that align exclusively to the forward or reverse sequences. Representative extracted ion chromatograms show the identified fragment ions applied in the quantification of the forward and reverse peptides, as detected in WT and LR, respectively. Representative MS/MS spectra of the unique ThiC forward peptide GDVEQLPEITSEYGQMR detected in WT and unique ThiC predicted inverton peptide GDVEQLPEITSEYGQIR detected in LR. Spectra include the MS1 precursor ion (orange), as well as b - and y - fragment ions (blue and red, respectively). ND, not detected; WT, wild-type; LF, locked forward thiC intragenic inverton; UF, unlocked forward thiC intragenic inverton; LR, locked reverse thiC intragenic inverton; UR, unlocked reverse thiC intragenic inverton.

Extended Data Fig. 11 Effect of thiamine on BTh invertases and thiamine biosynthesis and uptake loci.

( A ) Log 2 RPKM values for all annotated invertases in BTh are shown across the thiC mutant backgrounds and thiamine concentrations. Axis is clustered with pheatmap’s default parameters (Euclidean). ( B ) Log 2 RPKM values for transcript levels of all genes in the thiamine biosynthesis pathway (BT0647-0653) and genes involved in uptake of thiamine (BT2390, BT2396) are denoted. ( C ) Intensity of ThiH protein as determined by mass spectrometry using data-independent acquisition. UR, unlocked thiC reverse; LR, locked thiC reverse.

Extended Data Fig. 12 Thiamine is not a strong driver of thiC intragenic inverton flipping.

( A ) Schematic denoting the generation of unlocked thiC strains and the experimental setup for the long-term thiamine exposure assay. ( B ) Results of the long-term thiamine exposure assay. Top – two replicates of the unlocked reverse thiC strain that were serially cultured in low thiamine (0.001 μM). Bottom – two replicates of the unlocked forward thiC strain that were serially cultured in high thiamine (10 μM). LOD, limit of detection; O/N, overnight culture; ND, not detected.

Supplementary information

Supplementary figure 1.

Full image of the gel from Fig. 4b.

Reporting Summary

Peer review file, supplementary table 1.

B. fragilis intragenic invertons identified from short-read metagenomic sequencing samples.

Supplementary Table 2

Sheet 1: NanoSim simulated read datasets. Sheet 2: pbsim2 simulated read datasets.

Supplementary Table 3

Sheet 1: Invertons identified from long-read isolate sequencing samples. Sheet 2: Intragenic invertons identified from long-read isolate sequencing samples. Sheet 3: List of accession numbers and associated metadata for long-read isolate sequencing samples. Sheet 4: Archaeal invertons identified from long-read isolate sequencing samples.

Supplementary Table 4

Dereplicated invertons identified from long-read metagenomic sequencing samples.

Supplementary Table 5

Differentially expressed genes across thiamine concentrations.

Supplementary Table 6

Sheet 1: Additional sequences. Sheet 2: Primers used in this study. Sheet 3: Strains used in this study Sheet 4: Recombinant DNA.

Supplementary Table 7

Variable isolation windows used in dia-PASEF method.

Source data

Source data fig. 1, source data fig. 2, source data fig. 3, source data fig. 4, source data extended data fig. 1, source data extended data fig. 2, source data extended data fig. 3, source data extended data fig. 4, source data extended data fig. 6, source data extended data fig. 8, source data extended data fig. 9, source data extended data fig. 10, source data extended data fig. 11, source data extended data fig. 12, rights and permissions.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Chanin, R.B., West, P.T., Wirbel, J. et al. Intragenic DNA inversions expand bacterial coding capacity. Nature (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07970-4

Download citation

Received : 05 September 2023

Accepted : 20 August 2024

Published : 25 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-024-07970-4

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.