So, you have collected your data. The interviews are transcribed, the surveys are complete, and your field notes are thick with detail. Now what? For too many postgraduate researchers, this is where the methodology quietly disappears, boxed up and forgotten like an old research tool. However, one mistake that postgraduate students often make is thinking their methodology doesn’t end when the data is in. In a strong, defensible thesis, methodology is not a one-chapter affair, but it is a golden thread that should weave through every layer of your analysis, your findings, and your final conclusions.
“Analysis is not a departure from methodology,” says Dr. Gilbert. “It’s the moment where your method reveals its depth or its gaps.”
For instance, if you claimed to use thematic analysis informed by Braun and Clarke’s framework, then your reader should see the six phases of analysis clearly applied in your study. From familiarisation and coding to generating themes and refining them. Skipping these steps not only weakens your analysis, it also breaks the chain of trust in your research design.
Dr. Muringa emphasises that your analytical choices must be as intentional as your data collection. “Too often, students code data without returning to the questions their methodology was meant to explore,” he notes. “That’s how you end up with findings that are descriptive, not analytical.”
This is where theory and method must dance together. If your methodology was grounded in, say, Critical Race Theory, your analysis should interrogate race, power, and inequality, not just report what was said. If you committed to Participatory Action Research, then your analysis should reflect collaborative meaning-making, not just individual interpretation.
The Methodological thread in the Discussion Chapter
The discussion chapter is not where you switch gears, it is where you close the loop. Your reader should feel the echo of your methodological choices in every interpretation you make.
“Your method does not disappear in Chapter Five,” says Dr. Gilbert. “It should come alive.” The discussion is your opportunity to test the strength of your approach. Did your methods allow you to answer your questions? Did they open up unexpected insights? Or did you encounter limitations that forced you to adapt along the way?
Dr. Muringa encourages students to reflect honestly on what worked and what didn’t. “A robust thesis isn’t flawless,” he explains. “It’s self-aware. It shows how the method shaped the findings and how the findings might challenge or stretch the method.”
That reflection is what separates a functional thesis from a scholarly contribution. It is not just about reporting your research it is about being in dialogue with your method, your participants, and your field.
The method is the message
Ultimately, methodology is not a technical checklist. It is the narrative backbone of your research. It shapes how you see, how you hear, how you think, and how you write.
A strong methodology is one you can defend, apply, reflect on, and return to. It is both your compass and your anchor. As Dr. Muringa puts it, “If you can’t trace your methodology from your questions to your conclusions, you haven’t written a coherent thesis you have written disconnected chapters.” So do not just design your methodology. Live it. Carry it. Let it carry you.
Leave a Reply