Having shifted our attention from the product to the process allows us to use analytical skills developed in undergraduate studies. This is important to remember because if we have no starting point it is very difficult to know when where and how to begin, so all postgraduates have the starting point of considering what strategies they tend to use when needing to analyse something:

define it, consider its key characteristics, distinguish between it and other similar things, consider its reason for being, wonder why it has significance,and just generally break it down into its major parts and see how they all fit together.

So lets apply that analytical method to the document called ‘The Lit Review’!

Definition of the Lit Review: Like all academic writing, a literature review must have an i

Structure of a Lit Review: Introduction, body, and conclusion.

” The introduction should include:

• the nature of the topic under discussion (the topic of your thesis)
• the parameters of the topic (what does it include and exclude)?
• the basis for your selection of the literature

The conclusion should include:

• A summary of major agreements and disagreements in the literature
• A summary of general conclusions that are being drawn.
• A summary of where your thesis sits in the literature

The body paragraphs could include relevant paragraphs on:

• historical background, including classic texts;
• current mainstream versus alternative theoretical or ideological viewpoints, including differing theoretical assumptions, differing political outlooks, and other conflicts;
• possible approaches to the subject (empirical, philosophical, historical, postmodernist, etc);
• definitions in use;
• current research studies;
• current discoveries about the topic;
• principal questions that are being asked;
• general conclusions that are being drawn;
• methodologies and methods in use;”
From the:

University of Canberra website: www.canberra.edu.au/studyskills/learning/reading.html

( accessed March 2005)

Another way to consider this is:
• ” Define terms
• Justify selection of literature
• Justify omissions
• Forecast sections of review
• Signal structure
• Link your work to the literature
• Critique the literature
• Define the gap”

from Murray, R. 2002 How to Write a Thesis, Open University Press

Tip of the day

Look at a recently completed thesis in your discipline area, at your postgrdauate level that your supervisor recommends as a good example and analyse it.

The point of this particular task is to focus on the structure of the document so don’t get caught up in close reading for meaning and information.

Start with the map of the document: the contents page.

How is the contents page structured ? Are there different sections? how many chapters ? Are there subheadings included in the contents page? Is a numbering system used?

Consider the Abstract, How long is it? Where is the key point of the research stated? How much detail on the results is given? Does it motivate you to read more of the thesis?

Look at the Introduction: where is the background/context of the research given? Is there a separate review of the literature or is it part of the Introduction? How long is this section? How has the author avoided the ’shopping list’ syndrome of a literature review? Does the introduction set out a ‘map’ of the overall thesis?

Building your review of the literature involves taking copious notes as you read vast quantities of articles, texts, books, webpages and even perhaps blogs!

What do you do with these notes that you have taken?

One technique is to use ‘Julia’s method of note analysis’:

The key point of this method is that you spend time classifying your comments and questions on the reading that you have done.

Begin with an article that you have read, and which you have possibly highlighted parts of it, summarised some of the paragraphs, perhaps written in your own words what you consider to be the key points made in the article and even written a few questions directed to the content of the article.

If when you look at the article all you have done is use a highlighter; then you need to take a pen ( or write into a word doc on the laptop) and make comments and questions. If you have lots of comments written but no questions turn those comments into a question.

The next part of the process is a fun bit called: making a list!

List all the questions you have written and put them into the following 4 categories:

Are they ‘what’ type questions?

are they “why’ type questions?

are they ‘how’ type questions?

are they ’so what does this mean and how might it be useful for my research issue’ type question?

How many questions do you have in these 4 categories ?

You may find that you have more questions in the ‘what’ category than in the ‘why’ or ’so what’ categories.

That tells you that the focus of your reading at this stage is still around building knowledge and comprehension of the material. When you begin to analyse, synthesis and evaluate the material the types of questions that you ask will change. So this method is a useful and quick way for you to keep track of the development of your own understanding. This is based on a way of thinking about cognition developed by Benjamin Bloom called Bloom’s taxonomy.

Bloom’s Taxonomy divides the way people learn into three domains. One of these is the cognitive domain which emphasizes intellectual outcomes. This domain is further divided into categories or levels. The key words used and the type of questions asked may aid in the establishment and encouragement of critical thinking, especially in the higher levels. The following prompt questions were developed by the ‘Critical thinking across the curriculum project, 1997, Longview Community College, Lee’s Summit, Missouri - U.S.A. Inquiries to: connelly@Longview.cc.mo.us. Linda G. Barton, Quick flip questions for critical thinking, based on Bloom’s Taxonomy. Contributed by Barbara Fowler, Longview Community College.

Level 1: Knowledge
Key words: who, what, why, when, omit, where, which, choose, find, how, define, label, show, spell, list, match, name, relate, tell, recall, select.
Questions:
What is . . . ? How is . . . ?
Where is . . . ? When did _______ happen?
How did ______ happen? How would you explain . . . ?
Why did . . . ? How would you describe . . . ?
When did . . . ? Can you recall . . . ?
How would you show . . . ? Can you select . . . ?
Who were the main . . . ? Can you list three . . . ?
Which one . . . ? Who was . . . ?

Level 2: Comprehension
Key words: compare, contrast, demonstrate, interpret, explain, extend, illustrate, infer, outline, relate, rephrase, translate, summarise, show, classify.
Questions:
How would you classify the type of . . . ?
How would you compare . . . ? contrast . . . ?
Will you state or interpret in your own words . . . ?
How would you rephrase the meaning . . . ?
What facts or ideas show . . . ?
What is the main idea of . . . ?
Which statements support . . . ?
Can you explain what is happening . . . what is meant . . .?
What can you say about . . . ?
Which is the best answer . . . ?
How would you summarise . . . ?

Level 3: Application
Key words: apply, build, choose, construct, develop, interview, make use of, organise, experiment with, plan, select, solve, utilise, model, identify.
Questions:
How would you use . . . ?
What examples can you find to . . . ?
How would you solve _______ using what you have learned . . . ?
How would you organise _______ to show . . . ?
How would you show your understanding of . . . ?
What approach would you use to . . . ?
How would you apply what you learned to develop . . . ?
What other way would you plan to . . . ?
What would result if . . . ?
Can you make use of the facts to . . . ?
What elements would you choose to change . . . ?
What facts would you select to show . . . ?
What questions would you ask in an interview with . . . ?

Level 4: Analysis
Key words: analyse, categorise, classify, compare, contrast, discover, dissect, divide, examine, inspect, simplify, survey, take part in, test for, distinguish, list, distinction, theme, relationships, function, motive, inference, assumption, conclusion.
Questions:
What are the parts or features of . . . ?
How is _______ related to . . . ?
Why do you think . . . ?
What is the theme . . . ?
What motive is there . . . ?
Can you list the parts . . . ?
What inference can you make . . . ?
What conclusions can you draw . . . ?
How would you classify . . . ?
How would you categorise . . . ?
Can you identify the difference parts . . . ?
What evidence can you find . . . ?
What is the relationship between . . . ?
Can you make a distinction between . . . ?
What is the function of . . . ?
What ideas justify . . . ?

Level 5: Synthesis
Key Words: build, choose, combine, compile, compose, construct, create, design, develop, estimate, formulate, imagine, invent, make up, originate, plan, predict, propose, solve, solution, suppose, discuss, modify, change, original, improve, adapt, minimise, maximise, delete, theorise, elaborate, test, improve, happen, change.
Questions:
What changes would you make to solve . . . ?
How would you improve . . . ?
What would happen if . . . ?
Can you elaborate on the reason . . . ?
Can you propose an alternative . . . ?
Can you invent . . . ?
How would you adapt ________ to create a different . . . ?
How could you change (modify) the plot (plan) . . . ?
What could be done to minimise (maximise) . . . ?
What way would you design . . . ?
What could be combined to improve (change) . . . ?
Suppose you could _______ what would you do . . . ?
How would you test . . . ?
Can you formulate a theory for . . . ?
Can you predict the outcome if . . . ?
How would you estimate the results for . . . ?
What facts can you compile . . . ?
Can you construct a model that would change . . . ?
Can you think of an original way for the . . . ?

Level 6: Evaluation

Key Words: award, choose, conclude, criticise, decide, defend, determine, dispute, evaluate, judge, justify, measure, compare, mark, rate, recommend, rule on, select, agree, interpret, explain, appraise, prioritise, opinion, ,support, importance, criteria, prove, disprove, assess, influence, perceive, value, estimate, influence, deduct.
Questions:
Do you agree with the actions . . . ? with the outcomes . . . ?
What is your opinion of . . . ?
How would you prove . . . ? disprove . . . ?
Can you assess the value or importance of . . . ?
Would it be better if . . . ?
Why did they (the character) choose . . . ?
What would you recommend . . . ?
How would you rate the . . . ?
What would you cite to defend the actions . . . ?
How would you evaluate . . . ?
How could you determine . . . ?
What choice would you have made . . . ?
What would you select . . . ?
How would you prioritise . . . ?
What judgment would you make about . . . ?
Based on what you know, how would you explain . . . ?
What information would you use to support the view . . . ?
How would you justify . . . ?
What data was used to make the conclusion . . . ?
Why was it better that . . . ?
How would you prioritise the facts . . . ?
How would you compare the ideas . . . ? people . . . ?

Possible Outcomes

Some of the outcomes of this process might be that it helps you to identify further ’search areas’. It makes you realise that you need more information about a particular point /area and therefore need to spend time searching in the data bases for relevant readings. Analysing your notes in this way also helps you to pay attention to the structure of the article and identify ways in which that structure might be similar ( or different) to the way that you want to write your research. Finally, this method can assist you to gain clarity as to what is the key focus of your research.

This is just one method of analysing your notes from your readings in the seminar that I just ran participants had other approaches which were very useful. Ida’s method was to break down each article into its sections: results /discussion etc and under those heading begin to compile information from a number of different articles. A particularly useful method when reading the synthesis and evaluation stage of your review of the literature. Maya’s method was to brainstorm a series of questions about her topic using the question prompts of what how why so what and then using that list of questions to interrogate the article she was reading and see if there were any answers or responses to the questions she had come up with.

All of these methods are useful in different ways and will generate different insights into understanding, and evaluating literature which is your focus of your research.

What methods do you currently use?

Which of the above methods would suit you at the moment?

Why would you use this particular method?

Do you have a method you could share with us?

In the first week of the workshop on ‘writing the literature review’ I went through the importance of separating out the process from the product

Part of the difficulty especially for students in honours and postgraduate studies for the first time is that they are asked to write this document cryptically referred to as a lit review and hand in to their supervisor by such and such a date

“Is this an essay? a report ? a completely new sort of document?’ wonder the students.

But most importantly they wonder what should it contain?

Well, the answer to that question is that it needs to stop being thought of as a product and approached as a process.

The ‘lit review’ sounds like a thing , like a noun naming this document: ‘The Lit Review’,

when in fact it is a process and an action, a reviewing of what other people have published about this area issue question. We need to remember that this phrase we use so lightly ‘a lit review’ is a verb not a noun!

What does that mean then when we stop to think about the process of reviewing literature in an area?

we need to identify the area, (search techniques)

we need to read a great deal of literature in the area ( reading techniques)

we need to keep track of a great deal of reading (referencing and filing techniques)

we need to be able to say something about what we have read ( note taking techniques)

and these techniques are workshopped through the postgraduate writing seminar series as we also consider the writing of the document.

Welcome to this blog, in which you are invited to post your responses and thoughts; comments and ideas about the process of researching, reading and writing as a postgraduate student at Murdoch University. I look forward to reading them.