After thumbing through several theses in Marx library, I chose to analyze Does an inclusive setting affect reading comprehension in students with learning disabilities? by Iris Marie Thierry. This particular thesis piqued my interest as its study pertained directly to students with learning disabilities, much like how my intended thesis will study students with intellectual disabilities and social integration.Since the late 1980’s, deciding the appropriateness to include students with learning disabilities in a traditional classroom setting has fueled controversy. Thierry, a student majoring in elementary education, felt compelled to research the matter as she knew she would, at some point, teach exceptional, or special needs, children. Her purpose suits the reasoning for writing a research paper, which is chronicled in the first chapter of The Craft of Research. Not only does Thierry write to better understand her query, but she also writes to remember techniques for future use in the classroom and to assess thoughts more objectively (Booth et al., 2016). Thierry’s study provided a wealth of evidence in an effort to determine if inclusive settings yielded an outcome for students with learning disabilities. I found all data to be sufficiently justified through the use and explanation of visual aids, which consisted of various tables and figures. These aids were clearly and concisely displayed with the inclusion of a legend. Additional surveys, inventories, activities, and reading tests that Thierry used were also incorporated to assure the reader of the thoroughness and validity of the study.As mentioned in The Craft of Research, the writer must develop a conversation with the audience. However, to do so, the writer must acknowledge the interests or needs of her intended audience (Booth et al., 2016). Thierry stated that she hopes her research will considered by fellow educators to enhance learning for all students. Her objective was to present potentially influential evidence to other teachers. The expected audience was educators, therefore, Thierry employed technical vocabulary. Still, a list of abbreviations was provided in an attempt to alleviate confusion in deciphering acronyms for audience members who are less informed about the field of education.Like any writing piece, this thesis had both strengths and weaknesses. One of Thierry’s primary strengths was her ability to explicitly explain her study’s methodology. Another strength was addressing potential implications of the study in hopes of improving it. I also greatly admire the information presented in her introduction. Supplying background knowledge of the history of inclusion for people with disabilities was essential in understanding the situation and provided impetus to improve educational experiences for children with disabilities. Contrastly, I believe a major weakness in Thierry’s writing was her lack of in-depth data analysis. This also affected the overall impact of her conclusion. To better her thesis, I would recommend reassessing the presented data in hopes of posing additional questions.While I initially felt overwhelmed by the research process, analyzing another student’s thesis has squelched many of my concerns regarding structure and overall source information. Despite feeling slightly more assuaged, I fear that I have much more research to do as Thierry has more than twenty annotations while I have a mere five. Thankfully, I am invigorated with inspiration to continue my research in hopes of producing a potentially influential thesis.