The Literature Review Six Steps to Success 3rd
I have mixed feelings nigh this book. On the one hand, information technology contains a wealth of interesting information, ways of thinking about literature reviews, and some useful tools. On the other hand, information technology suffers from a number of problems that I will hash out beneath. I do not urge students to steer away from this book - there are non a lot of great works existing on how to exercise a literature review, and this book does contain valuable information. But the reader should see this every bit being one possible approach rather than "the style" to go about a literature review. I will warn the reader that as I accept done a number of literature reviews before tackling the "how to do a lit review" literature, I hold some strong opinions both about how lit reviews are done also as how they should be taught. The beginning problem is that the volume does not fully or fairly address the cardinal trouble that students face when doing a lit review for the start time. Namely, where does one begin? How does one navigate a field with, at best, a very rudimentary conceptual map? I have been unfortunate enough to have to practice lit reviews of subjects in which I have non taken a single class. The more courses 1 takes in a discipline, of form, the easier it becomes to navigate a field. All that nevertheless, the first, I repeat, first thing that a student needs to do when approaching a lit review is to starting time building a map in their head of a field. This is a map that will start out very unproblematic and get more circuitous as the review makes his or her way through the reading listing. Until that happens, none of the other steps outlined in this volume is going to become very well. Moreover, this map making is perhaps THE central step in a lit review in the first identify. Machi and McEvoy cover the after aspects of this mapmaking, only it needs to be made more than fundamental and fleshed out. A 2nd event that I have is that the later parts of the system scheme that they outline, and in particular the "Literature Survey Tally Matrix" (Figure iv.2 on folio ninety), is inordinately complex. I agree for the most part with their focus on the demand for organization, summary notes, judicious skimming at appropriate times, mind-maps, and other tools upwardly until Affiliate 4. I have no incertitude that if correctly used, the tally matrix could be very powerful, but it also seems difficult to use and perhaps idiosyncratic. Personally, I think its besides much effort for the reward. Remember, any endeavour spent organizing and diagramming is going to be cutting against time spent reading. Well done organization and summation *helps* reading and comprehension *immensely* but there is ever a balance betwixt time spent on one and the other that has to be advisedly negotiated. The tertiary issue, connected to bespeak 2 above, is the at times overbearing discussion on argument. On the one hand, I found this discussion interesting and potentially useful. Yet, I wonder if logical consistency has become a distraction for these authors. From the start of Chapter iv onwards, the defining benchmark of literature reviews appears to be how correctly specified the statement is. I have no incertitude that correct argumentation is hugely important, just it is just a part of the overall analysis. I worry that students could become bogged downwardly in this section trying to decide if an argument is "from authority" or is "means-end" , "population to sample" and so forth. I remember the authors should definitely flag useful texts for readers to look upward regarding arguments - but I think this pace could become *very* awry. After all, some very badly argued books and articles have gone on to have real influence whereas more argumentatively "perfect" pieces take fallen into obscurity. A fourth critique, post-obit from the 2 prior ones, is that the authors present a system as a universally valid method. I think, by contrast, that as with woodworking (a hobby of mine), the best approach is a medley of tools and techniques precisely because the inputs (articles and books) are heterogeneous as are the possible outcomes (annotated bibliography, term paper, masters thesis, doctoral exam, doctoral thesis, etc). A flexible arroyo is more realistic and more than valuable. These authors, even so, have a view of their methods and the chore that is highly pedantic. For case, on page 142, they advocate for the utilize of outlining. They practise non make it articulate whether or not this is the traditional blazon of outline that many of usa learned in schoolhouse, or is a broader range of diagramming that goes nether the "outlining" rubric. At present, at this stage in my life and career, I have get convinced of the value of the traditional outline. However, not everyone wants to use the traditional outline and many have worked out systems that they seem to exercise well by. Hence, I am unsettled past the highly specific system advocated in this book. Many other contemporary methodology books, by contrast, usually practice specify a range of potential practices, tools, and techniques. Fifth, I cannot overcome the feeling that this is something of a "pigment by the numbers" or "milkshake and bake" system. This point relates back to my earlier comment virtually this work lacking a strong sense of how students make conceptual maps. I can meet someone trying to utilise this organization and beingness very frustrated because the key process - the transformation of random information into clear networks of interrelated concepts - has non been sufficiently explained or explored. Sixth, on pages 49-50, the authors discuss "skimming" the fabric and on page 51 they discuss "mapping the material". While skimming *is* a valid arroyo and I wish I knew how to practise it improve (I am existence forced into it by printing of time and getting older), but I am uncomfortable by how they primarily focus on skimming rather than asking the question: "when is it valid to skim and when is it more important to read information technology through?" This to me is the proper fashion to gear up out the chore. For my own part, I oft skim early on in the search process to determine whether or not an article or book is relevant to me or not. Now, this depends on where it comes from. When working from a provided listing, as with many doctoral exams, many of the works *accept* to be read through. When building a new list for a journal article or other original research, skimming becomes more important. Information technology is critical for a first pass, and can be valuable for second passes and and then on. But to only talk about skimming is, I discover, making a critical omission. As I accept said before, despite the fact that the field of literature how-to texts has expanded since the tardily 1990s, good works remain thin, and I cannot say that I have canvassed the field. I picked upwardly this book based on citations and online reviews. Although imperfect, it may correspond one of the better efforts out there. I would therefore recommend this book to a novice, just with the cautions I have outlined above. Mine this book for useful ideas, but don't permit it become a straitjacket.
This volume was a adept introduction into writing a literature review. Sometimes it seems to become confused betwixt writing a literature review and writing a full book. Machi went to great lengths to dissect the dissimilar types of arguments a author tin make, creating the impression that the literature review is solely formulaic. For a start writer this might be necessary and helpful, but for graduate level work this is a bit overbearing. This volume is a pretty piece of cake read. I was able to amend ideas well-nigh outlining and formatting to fit my personal fashion for visualizing my work in a way that was helpful. Machi also gives writers permission to skim the literature to be synthesized, even giving helpful ideas about how to do this. I am a person who needed permission to not read every word of every article every bit I ofttimes feel guilty when I run out of fourth dimension to do an in depth written report of each slice. Having official endorsement to read the abstracts and key paragraphs of the bodies relieved some of my anxiety surrounding the literature review on which I am currently working.
This was a surprisingly readable and very applied book. Information technology certainly shows that the scope of a lit review for a PhD is a huge chore, just information technology lays out the steps very practically. The arroyo to organizing the research material looks and then useful, I actually desire to practice a "test run" of the method for a shorter research paper I need to do.
I constitute this to be a rather puzzling volume. The championship seems articulate plenty: The Literature Review. And pedagogy master's and doctoral students, I often hear variants of the question, "What is a literature review supposed to be?" It's a difficult question considering I don't like cookie-cutter, template-driven theses and dissertations; I prefer each project to cover the required ground in its own distinctive way. But that's not helpful for students who are just looking for a template, at least to guide their work initially. So this volume sounds similar it would exist exactly what I need. However... Strangely, it doesn't offer a clear answer to the bones "What is a literature review, anyway?" question. Instead, information technology's more of a guide to the enquiry project overall. I have other texts and means of pedagogy my students how to create and arts and crafts a research projection; what they're asking with the literature review is just "What does a expert literature review expect like? How many words? How many sources? How much text about each source? What kind of comparing and contrasting among all the sources? How much do I give away about the conclusions in the literature review?" etc. It'due south only on page 141 (out of 156) that we finally go the subheading "Literature Review Format." And and so the authors give some basic guidelines on the sections of a literature review. But information technology'south still non very specific, and nowhere is in that location just an example of a good literature review. Information technology feels sometimes like the authors probably know what a literature review is, but they don't want to give information technology away to just anyone. Late in the book, they're meandering around writing tips that are very full general and very below my grad students—for case, "When editing, arrange the content and menstruum of the composition and correct its system and grammer" (136). [[facepalm]] There is skillful information in the book, only it's mistitled, and it's non what I demand for my students.
I plant this book generally unhelpful. It seems geared towards those wanting to do quantitative research in their dissertation. The strategies offered seem very complicated and disruptive to me. I did get a handful of helpful tips from information technology tho.
Machi, L. A., & McEvoy, B. T. (2012). The literature review: Six steps to success. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage. The author'southward breakup the elusive literature review. All successful research starts with serious enquiry and reflection. The researcher should prepare and exist set up to spend countless hours reading, investigating and critically reflecting on the topic, problem and issues surrounding information technology. Program you time and simply write allowing your ideas to flow. You must selection a topic that you tin can get immersed in considering you lot volition need to know everything around that issue. "Preparation equals efficiency" p. 30. There were tons of examples of mapping so yous can make up one's mind which research came first and which authors are most important to the field. Exist diligent, focused and above all else be organized. "I who seeks, finds; one who perseveres, wins" p. 87 Research is not to be feared; it is to be embraced. The problem has been identified, the answers are just waiting to be institute. Keep your research problem and questions in listen at all times. You take to stay focused in society to critique the literature needed for your problem. The writing process: write, audit and edit. This is a practical and easy to read guide on the bones elements of a literature review. The authors take away the mystery of preparing the literature review. The six steps are: 1) select a topic; 2) search the literature; three) develop the argument; 4) survey the literature; 5) critique the literature; and 6) write the review.
In contrast to Christopher Hart's "Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Scientific discipline Research Imagination", this volume is a much easier read. It'due south compacter, uses easier language, and quite a number of examples to motivate people struggling with the basics of writing a literature review. It uses a number of references including Hart's book to present argumentative techniques, which a struggling student/academician tin use. In this way it follows the aforementioned strategy as another skillful book virtually writing academic papers Graf & Birkenstein'south "They Say/I Say: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing". A major weakness of this book, as compared to "They Say/I Say..." is the lack of model articles. Besides a few more examples in the beginning chapters could have made the text much more practical. My recommendation is to add together 2-three Model Articles in the appendices, and refer to them as examples within the text. However, in spite of this shortcoming, the book does well in introducing writers to the basics of writing a literature review, and encourages them in doing so without overwhelming them with the philosophical basics of writing.
I've been told that I'one thousand a great writer of literature reviews, and in preparation on instruction a workshop for others on the topic, I idea I would read this. In particular, I was hoping for systemic and step-by-step advice that I could pass on. Frankly, I found more that confused me than that I thought I could use. To be clear, there is a lot of good advice here, and the authors certainly chart a more systemic course than I could articulate on my ain. However, many of their charts seemed needlessly complex, and there weren't plenty examples to understand how they would extrapolate their ideas in the context of actually writing a review.
Detect a different book. Or employ some of those awesome search skills you lot've honed doing your academic research to find a few really great internet resource on doing a lit review, print them out at the student computer lab, and use that fancy stapler side by side to the printer to brand them into your very ain volume. Scrawl your proper name and the words "STUFF THAT Volition Really HELP ME FINISH THIS Process WITHOUT LOSING MY MIND" on the front end, and sleep with information technology under your pillow. I mean, yous will have to refer to information technology sometimes besides, probably--but even if yous don't, it might be more than useful than this book.
Talk about simplifying (and demystifying) the literature review! Why didn't I read this BEFORE my publications? Here's hoping I tin apply this stuff to my dissertation...
Displaying 1 - x of 39 reviews
Source: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4063211-the-literature-review
0 Response to "The Literature Review Six Steps to Success 3rd"
Postar um comentário