In the conclusion you answer your objectives one after the other. Then you write what your study adds and give future work another scholar can really start.
Mostly this is the shortest chapter in the thesis. Many scholars write it in the last week when everybody is tired, and the examiner can feel it. Still, examiners read the conclusion with attention, because here they see what you yourself think you found. Future scope is another weak spot. In most theses it is almost the same line, “this work can be carried to other districts”. In this guide we are taking one made-up engineering study as example. It is a solar dryer for fish in Kanyakumari district, and we keep coming back to it for each part of the chapter.
Start by answering the objectives, one by one
Take the objectives from Chapter 1 and copy them exactly. Below each one, write two to five sentences that answer it. Use your findings, but say them in words. Give a number only for the key figure.
For the dryer study, it looks like this.
Objective 1: To design and fabricate a low-cost solar tunnel dryer for fish.
“A tunnel dryer of 6 m × 2 m was built with locally available materials for about ₹38,000. It has a UV-stabilised polythene cover, and a DC fan runs on a 40 W panel.”
Objective 2: To compare drying time and quality with open sun drying.
“In the dryer, anchovy came down from about 75% to 15% moisture in 10 hours. Open sun drying took 22 hours for the same. Fish from the dryer had less sand content, and there was no fly infestation.”
See that both answers are small, and the words are simple only. Suppose somebody opens only the conclusion and reads nothing else. He should still come to know what the study found. Check each answer like that.
Say what the study adds, in a few sentences
Once the objectives are answered, add a small section on the contribution. Ask yourself what we know now that nobody knew before your study. You already gave the findings when you answered the objectives, no need to write them one more time in this part. Write only the one or two points you want the examiner to remember.
For our dryer study, the contribution can be written like this. “The study shows that a tunnel dryer costing under ₹40,000 can cut the drying time of small fish by half in coastal Kanyakumari. For a drying group of five members, the cost comes back in about two seasons. The study also gives drying curves for anchovy and sardine in local conditions. Earlier studies on the Tamil Nadu coast had not reported these.”
Write it modestly and exactly. If you write “this pioneering study makes a very significant contribution”, many times the examiner will put a doubtful remark in margin. A clear line on what you found and for whom does not get such remarks.
Recommendations: who should do what
Many Indian theses, mostly in management, commerce, social work, education and agriculture, have a section for recommendations or suggestions. Each of the recommendation should come from one of your findings. It should also say who can act on it.
Take a line like “The government should promote solar drying”. Now read this one. “The Fisheries Department could add tunnel dryers to its subsidy scheme for women’s fish-drying groups, since the payback period in this study was about two seasons.” The second line is linked to a finding. It names the office, and it gives the reason also. We would take five recommendations of this type over fifteen general ones.
In science and engineering theses the recommendations are mostly practical, for example a better material or a change in some setting or process step. Here also every recommendation must go back to a result you got.
Future scope that is more than a formality
Examiners already expect the future scope section to be boilerplate, and most of the time they are right. If you write it specifically, your thesis gets noticed for that itself. The table on this page has five vague lines we see again and again and a specific version of each.
Where do good future scope points come from? Look first at your limitations. Something you could not do may be possible for the next scholar. Then look at results that surprised you and that you could not explain. Each of them can become a separate study. Last, look at your method. Maybe you left out a technique because time, data or equipment was not available.
Three to six points are enough. For each point, write the question and roughly how somebody would study it. Remember that your examiners are also guides, and many times they are searching topics for their own scholars. When the future scope is specific, they read it properly.
| Vague future scope line | Specific version someone can start on |
|---|---|
| The study can be extended to other areas. | Test the same dryer design in a humid inland district like Thanjavur, where the drying load is mostly grain and not fish. |
| A larger sample can be used. | Repeat the survey with at least 400 units covering all three coastal taluks, so the results can be compared taluk by taluk. |
| Other variables can be studied. | Add fuel cost per kilogram dried as one more outcome, because in this study we looked at drying time and moisture content alone. |
| Advanced techniques can be applied. | Fit the drying curve with the Page model and compare its fit with the Newton model used in this study. |
| A longitudinal study can be done. | Measure the same 40 units again after two monsoon seasons and check whether the cover material has degraded. |
What doesn’t belong in the conclusion chapter
New results. Any analysis coming for the first time in the conclusion should go back to the results chapter.
New citations. Here you talk about your own study only. Comparison with other authors belongs to the discussion chapter.
The whole thesis again. A chapter-wise summary is common, but keep it to one short paragraph, because the answers to the objectives already do that job.
Sweeping claims. Your survey was in Kanyakumari district, so the result is for Kanyakumari. Writing “Indian fishermen will benefit” goes beyond that. Claim only as much as your data can carry.
Emotional closing lines. Examiners have read “It is hoped that this humble effort will be useful to society” in so many theses. End with your last future scope point, or with one simple line about the contribution.
Length, title and format
In a PhD thesis the conclusion chapter commonly comes to 8 to 20 pages. Some universities and departments join it with the summary of findings and make one longer final chapter. Many times that chapter is titled “Summary, Findings and Conclusion” or “Summary and Conclusions”.
See whether your university fixes the chapter title. Bangalore University is one case. In its 2024 PhD regulations, Appendix 7 gives the last chapter title as CONCLUSION, and scholars there have to use that. Most universities leave this to the department. Take a few recent theses from your own department. They will show you the local practice better than any general guide.
Go through this list before you send the chapter to your guide.
- Every objective from Chapter 1 has a short answer of its own, in the same order.
- No result, table or citation is coming for the first time in this chapter.
- The contribution is written in a few sentences, with no praise words.
- Each recommendation says who should act and what they should do.
- Every future scope point is clear enough for a new scholar to start working on it.
- The chapter title follows your university’s format, if the format fixes one.
Where this fits in the whole thesis
Whatever questions the introduction raised, the conclusion has to close them. Read your introduction chapter and the conclusion one after the other. The questions asked in the first one should get answers in the second one, in the same order. If that is not happening, one of the two chapters needs more work. We have separate guides for the introduction chapter and the discussion chapter also.
Many scholars are writing the conclusion in the last week before submission, with the format, the similarity check and the binding all pending at the same time. If that is your case, our thesis writing support can do the final read-through along with you. We check chapter against chapter together, so that no objective is left without answer.
Questions scholars ask
Is the conclusion the same as the summary of findings?
Not exactly. The summary of findings just lists your results. In the conclusion you say what those results mean together, by answering each objective and stating the contribution. Many Indian theses have both, mostly inside the same final chapter.
Can I write limitations in the conclusion chapter?
You can, if the discussion chapter has not covered them already. Many scholars put limitations just before the future scope. It works well, as the limits many times point to the next study.
How many future scope points should I give?
Usually three to six is enough, if each one is specific. Nobody can act on a long list of vague points.
Should the conclusion repeat statistics?
Give only the one or two figures that carry your main answer. Some readers skip the results chapter fully. For them the words matter more than the numbers.