In the words of clare who just left a comment!
Sooooooo. I do not know the answer to this, of course. However I do know what I am doing and what my sup wants me to do, so will scribble that down if it helps anyone. I am sure it will help me in the future as I always forget and have to go back to my checklist of how to write a chapter :0) Oh, as well, I can only advise on humanities subjects as that is what I am doing.
Firstly, remember that this is a test of academic rigour, not trying to change the world. So whatever your thesis make sure your references, knowledge, reading and theory is tight - this is actually what you are being marked on, not how wonderful the idea is (although this obviously contributes to your success, but isn't the be-all-and-end-all). This is also not a test of journalism. You are trying to show the development of your ideas as well as your current knowledge. that some of the stuff you are talking about happened five years ago and doesn't seem relevant is actually a good thing. In your viva you will probably talk about how your ideas have developed - this shows your growth as an academic.
Okay. Big one this. Make sure your chapter is argument driven. I read back through an old one and realised that I had laid out the information, then stated my conclusion from it. This is Wrong. From the outset you need to say, 'this chapter is showing THIS and THIS'. 'It is argued that...' Be explicit! Examiners do not want to be kept guessing.
Which leads me to point two. Make sure your chapter is well signposted. State from the outset what you want to say. Then say how you are going to say it, who influences you (philosophy/theory/academic argument wise) and why it is important. As you go through your chapter you will have subheadings, make sure that at the end of each important section you summarise what you just said, and at the start of the next section say what that part is going to say. This may seem super repetitive but if what you are saying is quite complex it keeps your reader with you, and happy. It also helps you to summarise - it makes you realise if you can't summarise what you have just written it is most likely a stream of unreadable consciousness. You need to keep your reader with you, so clearly mark sections under subheadings (have lots to start with if it helps then narrow them down later if you want), write what is relevant under that subheading and move on. This will keep your info contained, neat and understandable. My last chapter had a whole load that read: 'and then so and so said this, and I found that and this shows this and this and that' and it was hard to follow. The arguments (even if I do say so myself) were grand but I felt out of breath reading it and a bit stressed. If you signpost and spoon feed the info to your reader they will love you for it and surely forgive lesser errors :0).
Bear in mind that your examiners will probably skim-read your thesis (so says my Sup, a Professor Emeritus), paying particular attention to your introductions and conclusions for the info. So these need to be tight, extremely clear and just wonderful. If there is a chance these are the only things your examiner might hope to read if they are good this could give them a wonderful impression of your nous and fabulous intellect and stop them reading too much of the meat (which would be ace!) ;0) It should tell them exactly what you are saying and why, and, as I said above, show off your knowledge by saying who you are drawing your argument from - such as: 'Drawing from foucault's contention that bla de bla, the chapter shows that...' Name drop shamelessly.
According to my sup, research and chapters never argue, they show/illustrate/demonstrate. I was always saying 'this chapter argues that'. No, apparently not.
Be aware of wordiness. Keep your own glossary/thesaurus of lovely words you come across. Do try and be accessible though, you don't want an examiner being suspicious that you are hiding behind fancy words, or even worse, read something you wrote out to you at the VIVA and you have no idea what it meant ;0)
Make sure you cross reference between your chapters. Remember if you explained something before/will elaborate something in the future and draw attention to this. This will bind the thesis together, make you look like you know what you are saying and is a nice way to show off that you knew something, somewhere, once. Cross referencing also refers to talking about stuff in you wrote in another chapter but with a new bent on it, or referring to a theoretical angle/philosophy etc again.
In your 'contentions' chapters (ones that aren't descriptive like the intro/concl are) make an effort to refer to your theory/principal contention/philosophy at least six times in an 8000 word piece. This will keep you focused on bringing it up and refering back to it while in the quagmire of relating fieldwork/discourse analysis etc. This makes you Well Clever and is most definitely necessary for PhD standard.
If your thesis is the standard 80-100,000 word length aim for each chapter to be 8,000 words.
Don't forget to ask yourself 'why' (does this matter) and then 'why', again. The second 'why' will automatically bring up your analysis to Clever levels :0
And make sure that the end of the chapter sums up and ties together the contentions made within. Else it will be all parts and no sum :0) and nonsense.
I can't think of much else.
So, when you have written a chapter ask yourself:
Is it argument driven?
Is it well signposted?
Are the intro and concl tight as tight can be?
Is it concise?
Have you cross referenced between chapters?
Have you paid attention to your theory/academic bent/philosophical influences?
Have you said 'why', and then 'why' again?
Are all the contentions tied together at the end?
And, by my reckoning, if you have these things down it should be a nicely written chapter methinks.
I am sure I have missed out something major but really can't remember what! Please feel free to add!
x J
