Since the volume of your work in printed form should be about 20 A4 sheets, it is clear that reviewers (with rare exceptions) will not read Your work in full. Usually subject to review material that describes in detail Your practical part and conclusions. In this regard, much attention is paid to the design of the introduction of work and conclusion. The first impression of your research is formed by the design and content of the introduction. Thus, it is necessary to properly formalize this part of the work. For this reason, I would like to make some recommendations.
On registration of introduction of work:
1. Introduction and conclusion should be made in accordance with the requirements of the teacher
2. The introduction should include the following components:
(a) Relevance of the work. Here it is necessary to show briefly what problems in the field of your research are not solved today. It is important to make references to scientific articles which mention the interest of scientists to the problem.
b) The purpose of the study. It should correspond to the declared research topic.
C) the Formulation of the subject and object of study. Remember that the object of study is formulated more broadly than the subject. In fact, the subject of research is what is studied in the object. (Example: the Object of study is the electrical properties of ferromagnetic fluid. The subject of research is the conductivity of a magnetic fluid in a uniform magnetic field).
d) research Objectives (what you will do to achieve this goal). It is necessary to put as many tasks as you can actually solve. It is enough to set 2-3 tasks. Usually each problem is solved in a separate Chapter or paragraph. At the same time, remember that the tasks should be research, not technical. Feel the difference: a) to find out the conditions of the interference pattern, b) to obtain a ferromagnetic liquid, C) to develop an experimental setup – these are all examples of technical points of work, such as “open the book on the 17th page and rewrite the formula from there in a frame”, not tasks. Research tasks are formulated as follows: a) to analyze the experimental data obtained taking into account the measurement errors, C) to determine the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed method in comparison with alternative ones, etc.
e) the formulation of the hypothesis of the study (what result is expected to be obtained). Many scientists and University professors believe that in physical research this item is not mandatory, but desirable. The fact is that it is not always possible to foresee the result of your research. This is the difference between real research and project work. And it’s not that you can get a negative result in relation to the alleged, but simply can not say what will happen in the end. Perhaps it is a feature of all natural Sciences.
(e) the Credibility of the study. You have to convince the expert Council that the results of your work can be trusted. Usually the reliability of the study is confirmed as follows: indication of errors; strict observance of the limits of applicability of the laws and formulas used; the use of modern computational methods; limiting the transition of the results you have already known; repeatability of the experiment, etc.
On registration of the conclusion of work:
a) in conclusion, you should list the main findings and results. To do this, once again look at the topic and purpose of the study, as well as on the tasks set By you, since all these items must be in unity and flow from each other.
b) it is Necessary to specify the possible applications of the results obtained by You (the practical significance of the study). If your work is not on pedagogy and does not concern the methodology of teaching any subject, then try to avoid indicating the possible application of the results obtained such as: “the results of the study can be used in lectures on physics and astronomy at Universities and in elective courses in classes of physical and mathematical profile of educational institutions.”
C) Write down the practical significance specified in the conclusion in the introduction, as the reviewer may not reach the conclusion.