Although literature reviews may vary according to discipline, their overall goal is similar. A literature review serves as a compilation of the most significant sources on a subject and relates the findings of each of these sources in a rational manner while supporting the literature review author’s own thesis. A literature review establishes which sources are most relevant to its author’s point and which sources are most credible to the discipline at hand. In a literature review, the results of previous research are summarized, organized and evaluated.
The aim of a literature review is to show your reader (your tutor) that you have read, and have a good grasp of, the main published work concerning a particular topic or question in your field. This work may be in any format, including online sources. It may be a separate assignment, or one of the introductory sections of a report, dissertation or thesis. In the latter cases in particular, the review will be guided by your research objective or by the issue or thesis you are arguing and will provide the framework for your further work.
It is very important to note that your review should not be simply a description of what others have published in the form of a set of summaries, but should take the form of a critical discussion, showing insight and an awareness of differing arguments, theories and approaches. It should be a synthesis and analysis of the relevant published work, linked at all times to your own purpose and rationale.
Activity2-1: Developing critical thinking
Did the student in the following example show critical thinking? Read the following paragraph and answer the two questions.
Nugent (2001) suggested that teachers for gifted learners should use a differentiated curriculum that provides greater depth, varied topics and an accelerated pace. They also claim that technology must be used to support program goals and address the individual needs of the gifted. This claim is accurate in that information and communications technology can be used effectively to assist the gifted learners... However, the positive results for the gifted are not solely from the integration of technology. These students will have likely learned well, even without the integration of technology into the curriculum. Technology is only one method of delivering information.
1. Underline the sentences that show critical analysis of the author’s work.
2. How would you understand the author’s use of the verbs “suggested” and “claim” in this paragraph? （See language focus to know more）
Activity2-2: Analyzing literatures
Below are four versions of an overview of the literature. As you read them, you may notice that they vary in a number of ways. Discuss in groups and complete the table which follows the text. (Also pay attention to different citation patterns used in these versions.)
Version A:
The readings provide conflicting evidence as to whether ESL students from different language backgrounds vary in performance and behavior. Kobayashi (1984) reports differences in writing rhetorical patterns. Huang (1985) concludes that good language learners in People’s Republic of China follow strategies adopted by good language learners elsewhere. Oller et al. (1970), as cited by Tesdell, found that spelling errors varied according to the L1 writing system, but Tesdell (1984) found no such variation.
Version B:
From a scientific perspective, recent studies aimed at investigating whether language and cultural background influence the learning of English are unsatisfactory. The available work (1-3) is small-scale and reported only in summary form. Weaknesses in experimental design and inadequacies in statistical tests mean that no conclusions can be drawn at the present time. Further research is necessary.
Version C:
There are at least four papers relevant to the question of background variation in ESL. The earliest found that the L1 writing system had an effect on spelling errors (Oller et al. 1970), but later work contradicts this finding (Tesdell 1984). Japanese may be influenced by their background in the way they organize their writing in English (Kobayashi 1984). On the other hand, good language learners may be similar all over the world (Huang 1985).
Version D:
Tesdell (1984) found that spelling did not vary according to language group, although he cites an earlier study (Oller et al. 1970) showing variation according to Roman/non-Roman writing systems. Specific rhetorical patterns in writing were identified for Japanese speakers by Kobayashi (1984). In apparent contrast, Huang (1985) seemed to show that at least good language learners in People’s Republic of China adopted similar strategies to those identified elsewhere (e.g., Rubin 1975). It is difficult to draw conclusions from these findings, except perhaps to speculate that background may affect performance but not learning style.
Analysis chart