When I review my dissertation, I often think of the difficulties of graduate students. Therefore, I point out as many problems as possible and write comments impolitely. However, the review conclusion is "it is suggested to reply after modification". I also know that some dissertations really need to be revised according to the corresponding opinions, which is almost equivalent to rewriting, and the workload is very heavy. My wish is to at least give graduate students a direction and leave a way back.

There are exceptions to everything. I occasionally judge the reviewed dissertation as "not meeting the requirements and level of master's dissertation". At this time, I am naturally very painful and worried that the corresponding graduate students can't bear such a review conclusion. Therefore, how I hope graduate students can know the writing norms of dissertation and engage in thesis writing according to the writing norms. In fact, the writing standard of dissertation is a lens. What we see through it involves not only thesis writing, but also important issues such as theoretical basis, research design, research methods and so on.

To learn a skill, you can start from the front, you can start from the back, and you can also combine the front and the back. It is also a way to learn and master the methods of engaging in scientific research and writing dissertations. Here, I will provide my opinion on a master of education thesis I have reviewed for the reference of teachers and students in need. Similarly, in order to avoid hurting the author of the paper, I did some technical treatment.

This paper takes the application of mind mapping in prose reading teaching in junior middle school as the topic, which meets the professional requirements and has practical significance. However, the author of this paper does not really understand the value and function of mind mapping, nor does he really grasp the method and process of applying mind mapping to prose reading teaching, nor does he have the ability to carry out professional research at the level of master of education and write master of education thesis. Therefore, there are many problems in this paper, especially in the following aspects:

First, the structure of the paper is unreasonable. This paper has five chapters and a conclusion, but it does not write according to the idea of "problem raising method result discussion conclusion". At present, the structure of the paper is unreasonable, especially the content of "the significance of the application of thinking map in Chapter 3 for prose reading teaching" should appear in Chapter 1 or chapter 2, not in Chapter 3, It should not be an independent chapter. In fact, due to the unreasonable structure of the paper, the paper does not put forward specific problems to be solved. Chapter 4 is just a simple accumulation of three teaching cases, and Chapter 5 is just an old saying about prose teaching - especially inappropriate, Chapter 5 begins to talk about "the limitations of the application of mind mapping in Chinese prose reading teaching", which almost negates the research significance of the paper.

Second, the research method is not clear. This paper points out that "research is carried out through literature research, observation, interview, practical inquiry and comparative research." however, the author does not understand the concept and function of research methods, nor does it know that research methods refer to the specific methods really used in this paper. Therefore, some methods are only listed, not used at all, at least not reflected in the paper, for example, Where are the observation and interview methods used? Where is the comparative study really used? Even the literature research method and practical inquiry method also seem to be improperly used.

Third, the research results are not specific. It is precisely because this paper does not put forward specific research problems, so it is difficult to obtain specific research results. In fact, this paper does not provide the materials on the deficiency of the so-called "traditional prose teaching in junior middle school", nor does it provide the materials on the effect of using mind mapping in prose teaching in junior middle school. Therefore, it is impossible to judge the role of mind mapping in prose teaching. In particular, in the "specific practice" part of Chapter 4, the author emphasizes that students should be taught to draw mind maps. However, all the mind maps presented in this paper are drawn by themselves, and there is no mind map drawn by students. How can this reflect the teaching effect of students using mind maps? "Chapter 5 thinking about the application of mind mapping in prose reading teaching", although there are many contents, it is only thinking about general Chinese teaching problems, and it is difficult to form useful teaching methods or teaching strategies for peers.

Fourth, the paper writing is not standardized. The main performance is: (1) the citation is not standardized. The article uses either no citation, two Citation Formats, or a very strange citation format. (2) The expression is not smooth. There are such problems throughout the paper. For some prominent places, see the page by page tips in the "shortcomings and suggestions of the paper". (3) The problems of multiple words, missing words and typos are serious, which occurs on almost every page. (4) There are irregularities in the list of references. (5) The writing of the appendix is not standardized. The appendix is not mentioned in the text, and the contents of the appendix cannot correspond to the text.

In short, this paper has not reached the requirements and level of master of education thesis. It is suggested that the author, under the further guidance of his tutor, seriously study relevant professional theories and technologies, effectively improve the ability of scientific research and language expression, carry out real professional research and write qualified thesis.

From my comments, it can be seen that the author of this article has not mastered the basic discipline theory, research methods and writing norms. Accordingly, there are no problems that can be studied, and there is no way to carry out real research work. As a master of education student, if you don't master the basic research methods, how can you carry out the research work required for writing a dissertation? How is it possible to write a qualified dissertation? How can we carry out research and solve practical problems in education and teaching in the future? Therefore, such a master of education thesis is unqualified.