A useful outline shows how you plan to address your research question. A list of introduction, main body and conclusion is only a starting point. This original planning example develops a complete chapter structure. The twelve pages of text are a freely chosen working frame, rather than a university requirement. The example is neither a finished paper nor a report of research findings.
1. Decide on the question and material before the chapters
Our illustrative topic is “Study apps and planning a study week”. The working question is: “Which weekly-planning functions of study apps do the selected academic publications describe for first-year university students?” The focus is on described functions, rather than proving an improvement in grades.
The proposed project is a literature-based paper using a justified selection of academic publications. Before using this structure, check that suitable literature is actually available. Under your own question, record the material, its selection and the claims it can support. Useful chapters follow from those decisions.
2. Use the complete example outline as a working plan
This plan covers twelve pages of the main text. It excludes the title page, contents, reference list and any appendices. Check your particular assignment to establish what counts towards its length. The numbers help you allocate space and may change as you work.
| Chapter | Planned length | Contribution to the question |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Introduction | 1 page | Set out the problem, working question, boundaries and approach. |
| 2. Concepts and comparison criteria | 2 pages | Define study apps and weekly planning for this paper; justify relevant functions as comparison dimensions. |
| 3. Literature selection and approach | 1 page | Explain search locations, terms, selection and analysis of the publications actually used. |
| 4. Functions in the selected publications | 4 pages | Compare findings by planning goals, organising tasks and feedback. |
| 5. Discussion of the comparison | 3 pages | Interpret similarities, differences and limitations in relation to the working question. |
| 6. Conclusion | 1 page | Answer the question using your analysis and identify what remains open. |
3. Justify the sequence instead of collecting headings
Chapter 2 provides the concepts your comparison needs. A history of all digital education would belong here only if it contributes to your particular question. Chapter 3 explains the basis of the comparison. Without this information, readers cannot tell why you included certain publications and excluded others.
Chapter 4 arranges the material by your comparison dimensions. Possible subchapters are 4.1 “Planning the goals of a study week”, 4.2 “Organising tasks” and 4.3 “Feedback on study progress”. These are provisional: if the selected literature supports different categories, revise the outline and explain the decision.
Chapter 5 brings the observations together rather than summarising each publication again. The plan therefore reserves more space for comparison and discussion than for background. This is a choice for this example, rather than a universal percentage rule.
4. Connect the outline to a working matrix
Create one row for each publication you have actually read and record its full reference. Note its context, participant group, described app functions, approach and stated limitations. Add a precise source location to each note so that you can later connect a claim to its evidence.
Keep the source’s claim separate from your interpretation. Two texts may use the same term for different functions. Counting mentions alone establishes neither effectiveness nor importance. Leave room in the outline to discuss those differences clearly.
5. Replace vague headings with recognisable tasks
After revising, check that the text under each heading delivers what its title promises. Divide a chapter only where the parts perform distinct, necessary tasks. A single subheading under a main chapter is a reason to reconsider the hierarchy.
| Too vague | More specific in this example | Why it helps |
|---|---|---|
| Background | Study apps and weekly planning: concepts and comparison criteria | Limits the background to what this investigation needs. |
| Analysis | Planning functions in the selected publications | Identifies the object of study and the material actually analysed. |
| Problems | Limits of transfer to the first year of university | Shows which limitation the chapter addresses. |
6. Adapt the structure to the work you are actually doing
An empirical interview study would need to explain how original data are collected and analysed. Its structure should cover justified choices about selection, procedure and handling the material. Summarising academic publications cannot replace reporting your own investigation.
Law, history and literary studies may use different forms of argument and organisation. Transfer the purpose of the chapters rather than copying their names. Discuss the structure with your supervisor once the question, material and initial evidence are clear.
7. Check your draft outline
- Can you explain each chapter’s contribution to the question in one sentence?
- Are the origin of the material and your approach clear?
- Does the plan leave enough space for analysis and interpretation?
- Are definitions limited to what your question requires?
- Can you identify repeated arguments or overlapping chapters?
- Do chapter numbers, levels and headings match the contents?
- Will the conclusion answer the same question as the introduction?
- Have you considered course requirements and your supervisor’s feedback?
Sources and editorial approach
These university resources explain the working principles discussed here. Skriptovia created the examples, checklists and explanations; the universities are not partners or reviewers of this article.
- University of Vienna · Geschichte OnlineGliederung (outlining, in German)
Explains the relationship between a research question, an argument and chapter structure. The examples in this guide were created by Skriptovia.
- Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin · Institute for Library and Information ScienceLIS Study Guide: Wissenschaftliches Arbeiten (in German)
Describes the basic parts of academic papers and distinguishes literature-based work from empirical research.
Feedback or corrections for this guide: support@skriptovia.com
Discuss your own outline with a clear purpose
Bring the assignment, working question, current outline and available literature. Coaching can help you clarify structural choices before you continue the work yourself.
