The core of a thesis is a research question. It is usually derived from a complex problem that had to be - or is being - tackled. In other words: a thesis merely reflects a reproducible solution path - no more, but also no less.
The first hurdle in academic work is narrowing the research question down to the essentials. If the scope is drawn too wide, formulations such as "[...] were not examined within the scope of this work" are the result. Such statements imply that the author of such a thesis either invested too little time in it or did not possess the necessary competence. Both cases unnecessarily cast a poor light on the work. Moreover, a central research question supports the derivation of a rigorous line of argument.
But what distinguishes an academic paper from a class presentation, and what is behind the notion of academic rigor? Fundamentally, the foundation of an academic paper is a broad literature review. By referencing diverse authors (and/or delimiting yourself from them), your own explanations are developed into a concluding finding. This finding should - in some form - be connected to the results of other researchers who have dealt with a similar subject. However, an academic paper only delivers added value if other people can reproduce its results.
To be able to spot academic "weaknesses" already in the initial phase, you should always prepare an exposé of the intended research question in advance. Besides the problem statement and the associated objective, it also sets out the academic approach (including the results of a literature review conducted beforehand). Although producing such a document involves a great deal of effort, it is by no means wasted: the exposé can be reused one-to-one as the first chapter of the thesis. In addition, it yields a guideline that dictates all further steps of the work.
Computer scientists will notice that an academic approach is not all that different from the phases of the software development life cycle (SDLC). At the very least, most theses can be - analogously to the SDLC - abstracted into the following structure:
- Introduction ("Planning")
- Related Work ("Analysis")
- Concept ("Design")
- Implementation ("Implementation")
- Evaluation ("Test")
- Conclusion and Outlook ("Maintenance")
Naturally, you may choose different chapter headings for your own thesis. In the following, (personal) tips and tricks for academic writing are presented:
- As a rule, every statement or thesis must be substantiated, since otherwise it constitutes a mere assertion. Words such as "for example" offer an escape route for leaving one decision among several options uncommented. It should be noted, however, that using such words does not enhance the quality of an academic paper.
- The selection of criteria and their weighting likewise require justification - unless the criteria were prescribed, e.g. by a partner company. (This "loophole" should be avoided.)
- You should first write down all bullet points for every chapter before you start formulating texts. In all likelihood, you will have to adjust the outline of the work several times during this phase in order to gain and preserve the necessary "red thread". Generally, the initial outline of a thesis will not be set in stone.
- Every chapter should be readable on its own, which is why an introductory text should always precede it.
Finally, the final version of an academic paper should be reviewed as follows: first read the introduction, then the conclusion, and lastly a random page. If no connection can be recognized between the chapters mentioned, it should be added retrospectively. Furthermore, the core of an academic topic should also be comprehensible to readers from other disciplines, which is why it is advisable to have the work proofread by different people.