A Metadiscourse Analysis on the Results and Discussions of Postgraduate Thesis

This study investigates how postgraduate students use metadiscourse in the Results and Discussion (RAD) chapters of their theses by examining how language is used to organize ideas, guide interpretation, and express stance. Guided by Hyland and Tse’s (2004) interpersonal model, the study analyzed 15 RAD chapters from three graduate programs: Master of English in Applied Linguistics (MEAL), Master of Arts in Education major in English (MAED), and Master of Education major in Language Teaching (MELT). A qualitative content analysis was conducted using both manual coding and MaxQDA24 to identify interactive and interactional metadiscourse features. The findings show that transitions, frame markers, evidentials, and hedges were the most frequently used resources, although their patterns varied across programs. MAED writers emphasized structural clarity and objectivity, MEAL writers demonstrated greater rhetorical engagement and diverse use of sources, while MELT writers highlighted instructional clarity and a balanced academic voice. These differences suggest that disciplinary orientation and rhetorical goals influence how postgraduate writers construct academic voice. The study contributes to academic writing pedagogy by highlighting the importance of explicit instruction in metadiscourse to support postgraduate students in producing clearer, more coherent, and reader-oriented research writing.