This document provides an agenda for a session on organizing a literature review for a post-graduate education. It discusses general outlines and pathways for structuring a literature review, including introducing relevant background information and theories, critically analyzing prior research, and identifying gaps to be addressed by one's own study. The document also provides tips for writing each chapter, such as introducing the problem statement in Chapter 1, critically analyzing the literature in Chapter 2, and outlining the research methodology in Chapter 3. Discussion questions are posed to help participants think about how to develop a strong literature review.

1. Exploiting Rapid
Change in Technology
Enhanced Learning
… for Post Graduate Education
Organize Your Literature Review: Part Two 2017

3. Agenda
1. Homework from last session
2. Quick overview of where this chapter fits in the logic
3. General outlines of pathways that work
4. Steps to consider in planning and writing
5. Quick analysis of award winners – possible exercise
6. What makes great reviews?
7. What makes poor ones?
8. Discussion questions to ponder
9. What’s coming up from your university and DN?

4. 1. Watch any 3 minute thesis –and record what
literature was needed to back this up
3MT – 3 minute thesis….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_dj-AtvR7U
2. Start building your spreadsheet.
That will set you up for next week for when we
move into organization and writing your lit up.
Homework from Last Week…

5. Chapter One
Introduction or Overview
Background
Theoretical &/or
Conceptual Framework
Problem Statement
Purpose of the Study
Research Question
Research Design
Structure
Said Another Way…
What should be studied (Problem
statement)
The theoretical framework
What is expected to achieve (Purpose)
What to answer or test (Research
question, hypothesis, or objective)
How answers will be looked for and
tests done (Research design)

6. Chapter Two
To discuss the literature in your field so that it
presents a CRITICAL, organized, articulated, and
supported view of:
1. the current knowledge about the research topic
and problem,
2. the variables involved,
3. the different explanations already provided,
4. your own position,
5. the gaps that still exist, and
6. how your study addresses them.
Purpose for writing the review of literature

7. Chapter Two
An introduction
The body of the discussion
Discussion of all the themes
Explanation of where the research questions/ objectives/
hypotheses come from.
Links your own study
Any theoretical elements needed
Structure for a critical analysis of what has come before

8. Chapter Two
This chapter is perilous – it is the reason people don’t pass defense of
proposal in the US.
You need to critically know and analyze your field
You need to structure your argument & then the lit that backs it up
Perform critical analysis in all sections of the literature review
chapter(s). Remember that you are expected to show deep
understanding of the elements discussed and that implies being able to
support and contradict points of view (including findings of research)
with solid arguments and evidence.
Hints

10. Chapter Three
Provide information:
1. Related to how the study is conducted
2. Needed to evaluate how valid the study is
3. Necessary to replicate the study
Purpose

11. Chapter Three
Think of it as a set of instructions or user guide
• Introduction:
• Population & Sample:
• Research Design:
• Data Collection:
• Data Analysis:
• Instruments:
• Limitations and Assumptions:
• Summary:
Structure

12. Chapter Two again
Hints
1. Analyze your models
2. Set up your headings
3. Analyze an award winner
4. Then write employing these principles
• Decide ahead of time how you will lead your
reader through your material
• Be clear in your use of headings/paragraphs and
points to be made
• Watch out for the killer problem – redundancy!

13. Pathways for Critical Analysis
ANALYZE OTHERS, DECIDE ON A PATHWAY THROUGH THE LIT YOU WANT TO DISCUSS,
THEN WRITE!

14. ORGANIZATION Pathway.1:
LET YOUR READER FOLLOW YOUR IDEAS DOWN THE FUNNEL
Context and background
The general ideas that lead to your study
What previous research has been done
Gaps To Be Filled By Your Study

15. ORGANIZATION Pathway.2:
Set up an argument
You are claiming that your methodology is the right one and that your study will
address the problem in the context you are writing about…
Your evidence is
1. Prior studies agree this problem…
2. Can be studied this way
3. Or have shown a gap and recommended someone study it in this way
4. Or that others have done this in other circumstances
Therefore…
Your warrant is that …
1. Because the things are true in #2 and have been demonstrated it is not that big
a jump to see that your study done in the way you are proposing (or in the way
you did it) is convincing.

16. ORGANIZATION.2:
Lay out the logic of your path
Analyze the holes or weak spots and plot how you will fill them

17. ORGANIZATION Pathway.4:
Critical
Idea – use smart art and diagram your lit review
Positions your studies logic as a development from the past
• Your study• Your Idea
• What
others did
• What
others
thought
Their
results
Outcomes
to this
point
How it
develops
the field
Outcomes
unknown

18. ORGANIZATION Pathway.4:
Chronological
Not all that useful in most fields for phd work – not “critical” enough

19. Chapter Two Pathways - Overview
Steps as you design and write …
1. Analyze your models
2. Set up your headings
3. Analyze an award winner
4. Then write employing these principles
• Decide ahead of time how you will lead your
reader through your material
• Be clear in your use of headings/paragraphs and
points to be made
• Watch out for the killer problem – redundancy!

20. Examples – Primarily
Qualitative Mixed Methods
• Topic: restructuring schools
to prepare students for the
future
• Problem: Public schools have
been shown not to
adequately develop the skills
needed for 21st century
employment
• Theoretical base:
constructivism, pragmatism,
positivism, systems theory
• RQ: To what extent do former
students of K-12 public
schools believe that their
education did not meet their
individual needs nor prepare
them with the skills needed
to be successful in a 21st
century ?
• Mixed methods case study –
interviews and survey data.

21. What takes a good review to become a
great one?
1. New or innovative interpretations or ideas clearly developed through
solid critical analysis
2. A provocative discussion of places where authors in the field disagree
3. Discussion of little known literature that clearly bears on this thesis.

22. Examples- Primarily
Quantitative Mixed Methods
• An exploration into the
bearing of language deficits
on math scores
• Problem statement – an
exploration is needed into the
amount to which language
deficits remain an influence
in low math scores
• Positivism, postpositivism
• 1: Does language acquisition and reading
comprehension affect mathematical
processing skills on high-stakes, state-
mandated testing?
• 2: Could students, who did not previously
show mathematic mastery, display content
mastery if the test vernacular was at their
comprehension level?
• 3: What effect does direct testing
vernacular instruction have on student
perception of the question? To what extent
do students show content mastery after
direct intervention?
• 4: Is teaching mathematics about teaching
state test terminology? Should this be the
teaching strategy for every single indicator?
Do content specific educators have a dual
role of teaching to the test and teaching
content?
Chapter 2: Lit Review
• Introduction
• Methodology and Theory Based
Research
– Applicability
– The Debate......
• Panorama of Historical and
Current Research Studies
– Math Scores and Reading Skills
– Math and Reading Skills of Students
With Math Disabilities
– Math and reading skills of students
with reading disabilities or ELL
students ...
– Phonological Short-Term Memory,
Language Acquisition and
Numeration ......
– Ideology Behind Study
• Gaps In Literature and Research
• Summary...

23. What takes a great review to become a
disappointing one?
1. Writing only states the obvious
2. Lit doesn’t back up or have relationship to the methodology
3. Writing falls into patterns = Author(year) states…. = little or
no synthesis of ideas across authors, timeframes, parts of the
world etc.
4. Little or no discussion of ideas that fall out of the clear path
towards the obvious goals – no surprises, no places where
the reader is required to think.

24. Discussion questions….
1. Should methodology and/or theoretical readings be in the lit review?
Answer it depends…..
2. How long should a review be?
3. Should you include history? Or the development of your topic area?
4. What is the boldest move you have ever seen in a lit review?

25. What’s Up at DoctoralNet?
1. Please take our survey about doctoral experience:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/socialization4graduatestudents
2. A full range of webinars in 2017 + groups for writing and one for lingering. Critical
writing/analysis and getting published coming up in Feb & March
3. Hundreds of #doctoralstudents have already gone through the 30 day writing
challenge - is this the month YOU should consider just 15-30 minutes a
day? http://www.doctoralnet.com/resources/phd-coaching-doctoral-coaching/30-
day-writing-challenge/48-jinbound-landing-pages/30-doctoral-writing-
challenge.html
4. Also a NEW 30 day challenge on improving your work life balance:
http://www.doctoralnet.com/resources/30-day-challenge-4-work-life-balance.html
5. Friday this week – Independence – will it make your or break you?