1. L ITERATURE R EVIEW

2. P URPOSE OF THE LITERATURE REVIEW (R UDESTAM AND N EWTON )  To provide a context for your study  To explain the importance of your study  To explain the timeliness of your study  To clarify the relationship between your study and previous work in the field  To demonstrate that your study is worthwhile and distinctive  Ie – it is not just a demonstration of your knowledge of the existing literature!

3. P URPOSE OF L ITERATURE R EVIEW offer new ideas, perspectives, and approaches Help to know researchers who worked in your research area for advice or contact Inform methodological and design issues used by others Indicate sources of data which are not known to you

4. C ONT ’ D introduce you with measurement tools dealing with problem situations Help to link your finding with others Bolster your confidence as others valued as important research problem Help to develop your argumentation and analytical skills

5. R OLE OF LITERATURE REVIEW IN EMPIRICAL STUDIES  Set out state of thinking /research in topic area  Identify gaps/flaws in existing knowledge  Consider methods used in topic area  Identify key questions to be studied and methods of enquiry likely to be effective From Arksey and Knight (1999)

6. R OLE OF LITERATURE REVIEW IN LIBRARY - BASED DISSERTATIONS  Particular importance of critical analysis  Greater depth  Policy context  Implications for practice  Requires originality deriving from new perspective/ policy critique/creative synthesis – examples?

7. C ONTENTS OF LITERATURE REVIEW (R IDLEY )  Historical background to study  Definition of key terms and use in context of work (could be in introduction)  Discussion of relevant theories and concepts underpinning research  Contemporary debates, issues and questions in field  Discussion of related research, demonstrating how study will extend/challenge this  Supporting evidence for issues you are addressing

8. P LANNING THE LITERATURE REVIEW  Systematic searches by key words  Read the papers you collected  Start writing informally early: it will help develop plan and save panic later!  Cyclical process: SearchingReadingWriting

9. M APPING THE LITERATURE REVIEW O PPORTUNITY AND MOTIVATION IN INSTRUMENTAL AND SINGING TUITION : WHY DO CHILDREN TAKE UP AND GIVE UP MUSIC LESSONS ? Music Why study music? Cognitive, social and emotional benefits of music education Motivation Theories of motivation Motivation in education and music Children’s motivation Opportunity Historical perspective Status of music education Current policy Availability of tuition

10. A PPROPRIATE SOURCES  Use original sources, not secondary sources or reviews wherever possible  Beware ‘soft’ sources eg internet/ unauthored  Balance of ‘front-line’ literature  theoretical work  reports of original research  accounts of current practice  policy statements

11. S ELECTING SOURCES  Read widely, then ask: 1. What is the relevance of this piece for my topic/research? 2. What information do I need to get from this piece that feeds into my writing?  ‘build an argument, not a library’ (Rudestam 2001: 59)  Select literature to serve your purposes  to avoid becoming overwhelmed  to enhance criticality over description

12. C RITICAL READING The critical reader evaluates the arguments of others:  What evidence does the author produce for their claims?  Does the author’s reasoning lead logically to the conclusions drawn?  What values or assumptions are made explicitly or implicitly?  How do the author’s claims relate to those of others?  How do the author’s claims relate to the reader’s own research or knowledge?

13. C ODE LITERATURE YOU HAVE READ Keep records of reading and code for future reference: (1) Return to this for detailed analysis (2) Important general text (3) Of minor importance (4) Not relevant Ensure you keep full citations (including page numbers for future reference) from the outset!

14. R EQUIREMENTS OF ACADEMIC WRITING 1. Writing for building knowledge 2. All claims backed up by evidence 3. All sources of information acknowledged 4. Relatively formal style 5. Clear structure

15. C RITICAL WRITING  The critical writer constructs their own argument  Arguments have 2 components:  A set of claims or assertions (conclusions)  The warrant (backing) for them (evidence) OPINION = UNWARRANTED CONCLUSION ARGUMENT = CONCLUSION + WARRANT (Wallace and Wray 2006)

16. D EVELOPING A COHERENT ARGUMENT Rudestam (2001: 57) the literature review is ‘not a compilation of facts but a coherent argument that leads to the description of a proposed study’ Anticipate reader’s (or marker’s) comments:  What is your evidence for this?  What point are you trying to make here?  So what? What are the implications?  Where is this leading? Why does it matter?

17. D ON ’ T REPORT - CRITIQUE  Assess the status of existing knowledge  Give both or all sides of the argument  Take a stance  Where does weight of argument fall?  Where are gaps in the knowledge base?  Convince reader of legitimacy of assertions by sufficient logical and empirical evidence

18. O RIGINALITY : A NALYSIS AND SYNTHESIS  Analysis : systematic extraction of ideas / theories / concepts / assumptions from the literature  Synthesis : making of connections between elements derived from analysis to demonstrate patterns not previously produced

19. V OICE AND AUTHORSHIP  Foregrounding of writer voice  Make connections between sources  ‘X...whilst Y.....’; ‘furthermore, A contends...’  Summarise source text(s) then evaluate  ‘but B’s research does not extend to consideration of...’  ‘these examples demonstrate the significance of...’)  Summarise state of play at end of section

20. M AINTAIN YOUR AUTHORITY Rudestam 2001, Ridley 2008  Develop your argument, and cite work of others to evidence /buttress points/ provide examples...  ‘Care leavers can be remarkably resilient (Dixon et al 2006)’  …Rather than hiding behind authority of cited texts  ‘Dixon et al (2006) found that care leavers can be remarkably resilient’ tends to shift focus from your argument to work of others  Use your own words  Overuse of quotations will deflect your ownership of the argument

21. A CKNOWLEDGING SOURCES  APA system of referencing  Partial references in text (Fortin 2009: 81)  Full references in Reference List  Fortin, J. (2009 3rd edition) Children’s Rights and the Developing Law Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

22. O RGANIZATION OF S OURCES Group related studies together. Review briefly any weaker studies or studies that share similar methods. Devote more attention to groundbreaking, stronger studies. Organize studies by findings. Organize by methodology. Organize by theory.

23. O RGANIZATION …

24. O RGANIZATION BY CONCEPTS Identify Keywords of your research topics Design Literature Map Organize your literatures by literature map Summarize the most relevant articles Include precise reference

25. L ITERATURE R EVIEW O RGANIZATION Organize topics Ease of use SW use usefulness Organizationa l support Training troubleshootin g Organizatio n strategy

26. O VERCOMING WRITING AVOIDANCE STRATEGIES  Don’t wait until you have ‘something to write’  You will end up with more reading than you can cope with  Write as you go!  Start literature review as soon as you have started reading...  Most of us can’t organise thoughts in head – do it on paper  First draft is hardest – then you have something to work on  Work on several sections at a time – if you get blocked/bored, a change is as good as a rest  Don’t start at the beginning  leave the introduction until you know what you are introducing See Allison and Race (2004)

27. R EVISION OF DRAFTS  Leave first draft a while before returning to read it afresh and revise  Read aloud for sense and flow  Read through quickly for overview of message  Check for grammatical construction and spelling  Remove extraneous words and repetition  If over the word limit, ask – how does this section contribute to answering my research question?

28. W HAT MAKES A GOOD LITERATURE REVIEW ?  Demonstrates understanding of key issues in field  Provides context and justification for research question(s)  Critical evaluation  Contributes to rationale for methodology  Well-developed logical argument  Clarity of expression and presentation  Accurate references  [Clear linkage to findings and conclusions]

29. 29 L ITERATURE R EVIEW : H OW TO COMBINE, SYNTHESIS, AND DEMONSTRATE DIRECTION ?

30. T HINGS THAT TEND TO GO WRONG  Research question not grounded in literature review (empirical study)  Literature review descriptive, not analytical  Lack of originality arising from inadequate synthesis  Poor balance between review of theoretical work, empirical research, policy and practice  Linkage: literature review – methods - findings  Lacking multi-disciplinary perspective (Child Studies)

31. J UDGING THE LITERATURE REVIEW (H ART 1998/B OOTE AND B IELE 2005) 1. Coverage Justified criteria for inclusion and exclusion from review. 2. Synthesis Distinguished what has been done in field from what needs to be done. Placed topic or problem in broader scholarly literature Placed research in historical context of field. Acquired and enhanced subject vocabulary. Articulated important variables and phenomena relevant to topic. Synthesized and gained a new perspective on the literature.

32. 3 Methodology Identified main methodologies /techniques in field; advantages and disadvantages. Related ideas and theories in field to research methodologies. 4. Significance Rationalized practical significance of research problem. Rationalized the scholarly/theoretical ignificance of research problem. 5. Rhetoric Written with coherent, clear structure that supported the review.

33. L ITERATURE R EVIEW CONCLUSION Show deficiency Is there missing variables Previous studies did not see this variable Missing population groups Previous study did not address this software type Replication of the study to a new context Software usability study was not made in Ethiopian context Can get research gap from previous journal articles

34. S UMMARY Ensures that you are not "reinventing the wheel". Gives credits to those who have laid the groundwork for your research. Demonstrates your knowledge of the research problem. Demonstrates your understanding of the theoretical and research issues related to your research question. Shows your ability to critically evaluate relevant literature information.

35. C ONT ’ D Indicates your ability to integrate and synthesize the existing literature. Provides new theoretical insights or develops a new model as the conceptual framework for your research. Convinces your reader that your proposed research will make a significant and substantial contribution to the literature (i.e., resolving an important theoretical issue or filling a major gap in the literature).

36. P ROBLEMS WITH S TUDENTS Lacking organization and structure Lacking focus, unity and coherence Being repetitive and verbose Failing to cite influential papers Failing to keep up with recent developments Failing to critically evaluate cited papers Citing irrelevant or trivial references

37. R EVIEW QUESTIONS Select on Internet how literature review is conducted Pick an article and evaluate its literature review sections What patterns used – time or conceptual criteria Search on Internet and read examples what paraphrasing means? When do you plagiarism? Why? What was they gap they identified? Why it is gap?

38. A SSESS THE 3 ARTICLES  Originality of contribution  Critical evaluation of literature  Policy/ practice/ research implications  Author’s voice  Structure  Coherence and writing style