How to make your resume stand out
The goal of scientific work should be to obtain certain results, and not to indicate any areas of research. In other words, it is necessary to point out those provisions that should be substantiated as a result of the research, and not what the author will investigate. Hence it is clear that the wording of goals such as “Explore this that “Study this this and that this etc. is unsuccessful. Before writing this paper, the author, of course, must set research objectives. But in the scientific work itself, the entire research process remains “behind the scenes”.
The reader is interested in the results to be obtained by the researcher. And the purpose of the work should indicate what results will be presented to the reader, and not to what area the author will conduct his research, although the latter, if necessary, can also be mentioned. The content of a scientific work is both a reduction of the main question to auxiliary questions that have practically accessible answers, and deduction (elimination) of the main result from these answers. It is clear that it is impossible to give the desired answer directly, for otherwise there would be no need to write the work itself.
This leads to a specific methodology for organizing the content to answer the basic question, which consists in the sequential reduction of questions, starting with the basic one, for some reason, to such auxiliary questions that the requirement of the TOR will be fulfilled. Answers to auxiliary questions of a lower level should provide an opportunity to answer questions of a higher level, up to the main question, and thus should make it possible to substantiate the main result of scientific work through auxiliary results, i.e. answers to auxiliary questions. If we take the basic question as a zero-level question, then the auxiliary questions, to which it is directly reduced, should be taken as the first-level questions, etc. It is clear that not all questions need to be reduced to auxiliary questions and that such information should have a limit.
Usually a breakdown of the questions goes as long as the questions received at any level are sufficient for more or less substantiated and complete answers. Quite often in monographs, the auxiliary questions of the first level are called chapters, the second level paragraphs, the third level points, etc. The reduction of questions must be proportionate, which is why chapters (as well as paragraphs, etc.) should not be different. levels. For example, chapters cannot be simultaneously questions of the first and second, second and fourth levels, etc. 2. It is wrong to assume that the division of the content of the work into chapters, paragraphs, etc. should be uniform over the volume of these parts. Everything should depend not on the subjective attitudes, but on the importance and complexity of the answers to the questions posed in various chapters, paragraphs and points of work.