Academic Skills Advice

Reviewing Literature

This workshop will:

-Explain what completing a review of literature involves

-Offer tips on how to manage the reviewing process

-Show you basic strategies for taking a critical approach to literature at degree-level.

Teaching Points:

Why review literature? What’s the point?

How to begin: tips for the first steps of reviewing

Managing yourreviewing

Working critically with the literature

Summary of the review of literature process

1.Why review literature? What’s the point?

Reviewing literature is something that might be done for a set assignment or as part of a dissertation or project.

Together we will consider why you are asked to review literature and agree on a list of all the reasons why someone would be asked to review literature in their field of study/future profession.

What reviewing the literature gives you and your marker…

A landscape of knowledge and key issues (Bell: 2005)
It ‘locates’ your topic within a much larger field of information (Blaxter et al., 2006):
It is “…a small piece in a complicated jigsaw puzzle; it does not stand alone.” (Ridley, 2008: 5)

2.How to begin: tips for the first steps ofreviewing

These are ideal places to begin, rather than simply going straight for a general search. Using open search engines, i.e. simply ‘Googling’, is no guarantee that what is found will be of an appropriate degree- level standard. Keep your searching as focused as possible from early on in the process.

Next, you might want to expand your searching: try using Google Scholar, Summon and the library catalogue. If all else fails – ask someone! Other students, your subject lecturers, and your subject librarian will all have ideas.

Be efficient – longer pieces of work need you to review more literature before finally selecting the papers that will appear in the written up literature review. So, you might find and analyse 70 articles and books over a number of weeks but only 30 of these may be useful in addressing the literature review brief you have been set.

Make sure that you devise a way to keep track of your searching so that you can repeat the same keyword/phrase searches across platforms and search engines. This also means if you are searching for literature over time that you do not accidentally repeat yourself or go back over searches you have already successfully or unsuccessfully tried. Try a journal, log, spreadsheet, post-it notes, whatever suits you.

Here is an example…

The proposed topic of research: plagiarism trends in higher education
Core search terms & searching criteria: plagiarism; HE; higher education; university; academic misconduct; academic malpractice.
Search criteria: Journals only / 2000 onwards / HE only / quantitative studies only
Searched: / Terms or combinations of terms searched for / Results of search (e.g. articles or books located) / Date of search
ERIC / plagiarism + HE / 21 -LarkhamManns (2002); Ercegovac & Richardson (2004)… / 22/9/14
Summon / plagiarism + HE OR university / 11 - / 23/9/14
Google Scholar / trends+plagiarism / 7 - / 24/9/14

Adapted from Ridley (2008: 43)

3.Managing yourreviewing

Reviewing is about more than just reading. Reviewing involves:

Once you have found potentially useful papers or other sources through literature searching, the first job will be to engage in preliminary reading.This is using your skimming and scanning skills to make some early decisions if more literature is required or whether what you have retrieved so far is potentially useful. Preliminary reading also helps in terms of ‘ideas generation’ – it can begin the process of identifying topics, themes or key debates that youmight decide to work with in detail.

This in turn leads on to more focused , i.e. in-depth, reading where you are now trying to understand theory, evidence, data and the implications of study designs in the sources you have gathered together. This is where the pattern/theme finding begins to become more detailed. Connections and disconnects between sources and their researchers will begin to emerge, helping you to understand what the current state of ‘knowledge’ is within the topic under review.

Tasks for in-depth reading:

4. Working critically with the literature.

The processes outlined in section 3 require you to work with the literature you have gathered in a critical way but it’s not always obvious how to do this. The main tip here is to make sure you ask questions of the texts you are reading.

-take notes

-map the texts

-annotate

Transformwhat you are reading into a convenient format (Cottrell, 2005).

Now take the same set of studies and classify each one using a different grouping. Which are experimental studies? Which are randomised control trials? Which are based on interview data?

Does this offer fresh insights? Is there anything different that you now notice? How can you tell? What does that mean for the ‘state’ of literature within the topic you are investigating?

Find a strategy that works for you and follow it when engaging in focused reading.

For example, when using journal articles always read them in the following order:

abstractconclusions>introduction>findings/results

And apply similar steps to all/most literature you find, such as following a set of questions:

What is the purpose of the study?
What is the scope of the study?
What is the focus of the study?
What are the units of analysis?
What is the sampling strategy?
What types of data were collected?
How were the data managed?
What analytical approach was used?
How is validity addressed in the study?
When did the study occur?
How is the study justified?
How are ethical issues handled?
How are logistics handled?

(Hart, 1998: 49)

Findand using a critiquing tool, either a general one or one specific to your discipline, can be very helpful to take a strategic approach to critically engaging with the literature.

What do we think a critiquing tool is?

Activity 2:Using a critical tool

Using the blank example on the next page, work in pairs to apply the critiquing tool to the article on the separate sheets.What are the tool’s strengths? What are its weaknesses?If a specific tool does not work for your discipline is there another that will? Where can these be found?

Critical Notes: Articles & Papers (Cottrell, 2005)

Authors/Source
Article Title
Journal Title
Date Year / Date Month
Publisher/provenance / Place of publication
Volume / Issue
E-version info (URL etc.)
Hypotheses/questions:
What is the paper aiming to prove?
What is the theoretical position? Type of theory
What key literature is used as a basis?
Research methods used?
What sample/population is used?
Key results
Key conclusions or recommendations
Strengths:
How does it advance understanding of topic or how to research it?
Are hypotheses, methods to test hypotheses, sample sizes or types, variables control and recommendations appropriate?
Ethical considerations apparent?
Weaknesses:
In what ways limited? When/where would the findings not apply?
Flaws in research? In research design, hypotheses, methods, sampling, conclusions and interpretations?

Of course, in the absence of a ready-made critiquing tool, you could always develop your own – especially if it is for something highly specialised such as a MA/MSc dissertation!

5.Summary of the reviewing literature process

References

Bell, J. (2005) Doing your research project. 4th ed. Maidenhead, Open University Press.

Blaxter, L., Hughes, C. & Tight, M. (2006) How to research.3rd ed. Buckingham, Open University Press.

Cottrell, S. (2005) Critical thinking skills. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.

Hart, C. (1998) Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination. London, SAGE Publications Ltd.

Ridley, D. (2008) The literature review: a step-by-step guide for students. London, SAGE Publications Ltd.

Student Services. (2014) Why do I have to have a literature review? Brisbane St. Lucia, University of Queensland. Accessed 16 October 2014.

Thomas, G. (2013) How to do your research project.2nd ed. London, SAGE Publications Ltd.

Answers

Why do a literature review?

To check your research has not been done before so you do not waste your time.
For ideas on how to approach your research, what methods are appropriate to obtain the type of information you want (NOT the answers you want!)
Justifies the reason for your research – to show there is a gap in the field.
To ensure you have a full understanding of the subject.

What do we think a critiquing tool is?

A critiquing tool is a method that enables you to systematically critically analysis a piece of text. A tool will provide either a set of questions or ideas for you to be able to describe, breakdown and evaluate a piece of written work.

Activity 1:Using a critical tool

Authors/Source / Gikandi, Morrow, Davis
Article Title / Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature
Journal Title / Computers and Educaton
Date Year / 2011 / Date Month / June
Publisher/provenance / Elsevier / Place of publication
Volume / 57 / Issue / Pp2333-2351
E-version info (URL etc.) / Elsevier.com/locate/compedu
Hypotheses/questions:
What is the paper aiming to prove? / (1.INTRODUCTION end) Fill the gap [regarding a review of online formative assessment] with a focus on how formative assessment support learners in developing…content knowledge and professional skills in an online environment (and) enhance understanding of the core assessment concepts of validity and reliability …in online contexts.
What is the theoretical position? Type of theory / The overarching theoretical position is one of blended learning in pedagogy (& note, pedagogy not andragogy). Their theory is articulated as being that blended learning involves developing effective communities. Paras 1 & 2 contain the opening, broad theory.
What key literature is used as a basis? / (1.INTRODUCTION)
Oosterhof et al re online and web enhances courses provide…opportunities to…interact with and assess learners,…which are enhanced through formative assessment.
Hattie and Timperly, and Nicol and Macfarlane…indicated…effective formative feedback is not only based on monitoring progress…bit also promotes students to develop effective learning strategies.
Sorenson and Takle (state) effective integration of formative assessment in online environments (could) offer a …structure for …interactions among learners and the teach, and foster development of…learning communities to facilitate…learning and assessment.
Pachler et al and Wang et al recommended a refocused emphasis on online formative assessment…to create learner and assessment centered [sic] learning environments
Research methods used? / (METHODOLOGY: 2.2 REVIEWING THE LIT) Systematic qualitative (secondary) review of studies using following criteria:
Thematic in accordance with relevance to formative assessment: embedding/variety/ongoing feedback/clarity of outcomes.
What sample/population is used? / (METHODOLOGY: 2.3.1 THE KEY STUDIES AND TABLE 1) 18 key studies (mainly case studies, plus 2 surveys and an experimental study) related to online contexts; online contexts; blended contexts; and blended and online context.
Key results / (ABSTRACT) Effective online formative assessment can foster a learner and assessment centered [sic] focus through formative feedback and enhanced learner engagement with valuable learning experiences.
(5.DISCUSSION) Online formative assessment can provide a means to align assessment with teaching and learning, and change how learning and assessment occur.
Key conclusions or recommendations / (6.CONCLUSIONS) Formative assessment…needs further research and…implementation (to) increase self regulation by learners. However…such inquiry is likely to require improved professional development for faculty.
Strengths:
How does it advance understanding of topic or how to research it?
Are hypotheses, methods to test hypotheses, sample sizes or types, variables control and recommendations appropriate?
Ethical considerations apparent? / It proves that there’s a paucity of research understanding about formative assessment in the literature.
It is theory-lite and instead focuses as much as possible on practicalities.
Its samples are other articles rather than ‘people’ (or other objects of scientific interest) and they have taken a methodical approach to working with them rather than doing a ‘free’ review of literature. This is a strength of a systematic review.
The findings are presented thematically, rather than as a catalogue of what different studies said.
Weaknesses:
In what ways limited? When/where would the findings not apply?
Flaws in research? In research design, hypotheses, methods, sampling, conclusions and interpretations? / The research is not conducted in a ‘real-world context’ – i.e. it has identified key findings from other studies but not proven anything itself.
A strength (that it is theory-lite) is also its weakness – there is missing detail about the underpinning concepts of blended learning and how these contribute to the overall theory of ‘good assessment in HE’.
The discussion is mishandled, potentially lacking in balance, and relies too heavily on quoting.