Difficult to say without having seen the paper...

Dear Karol,

We teach students when writing conclusions to start by summarising their main findings which have already been presented. This could be considered as descriptive writing. However it provides a suitable platform for more critical/discursive writing. There are different things you could do afterwards:

• Combine several findings together into an integrated conclusion
• Evaluate how well you have achieved your original research aim(s)
• Evaluate the significance of your findings to the research community
• Discuss the generalizability of your findings to wider contexts
• Suggest subjects for future research

Conclusion should include summarizing the paper and focus possible future studies in broader perspectives of the paper. Discussions about results and findings in conclusions makes it descriptive.  However, one can suggest preciously only after going through the paper.

Fill in the blanks:

"In conclusion, this paper has presented a novel structure for tracking position in the area of electrical drives. The novelty has been demonstrated in the review of the literature and patents. The body of this paper has proven that .... This is important in the field of control engineering.

The structure should have useful application... This research did not .... and this is suggested for further research work. ..."

Hi there,

What I was advised was to keep summary of findings to the minimum but focus more on how your research has contributed to knowledge gaps i.e. what is your contribution to knowledge of your field and practice. Secondly you also describe research limitations for future research. Hope this helps. Best wishes. 

The reviewer comments probably indicate that the conclusions are not understandable and may be vogue. I prefer to write conclusion as ' The following results from present investigations seem worthy of emphasis'. Then list 

1.

2.

.

.