Assignment 3: Review Paper—Summary of Literature Findings

· M2

Assignment

3 Submission

Assignment

Updated

Top of Form

Due February 7 at 11:59 PM

Bottom of Form

Assignment 3: Review Paper—Summary of Literature Findings

Evaluate the evidence. Create a summary of the findings of the ten articles you have selected and how they contribute to our knowledge of this problem. Be sure to address each of the following items in your draft:

1. Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each article.

2. If the articles talk to each other (that is, if they support or contrast with one another), explain how and why.

3. What do the articles’ findings tell us?

4. Is there another possible explanation you can think of? Based on what you have read, what is your hypothesis? In other words, what is your explanation for the findings?

5. How can you refine your question or topic even further, now that you have described the findings?

Your paper should be double-spaced and in 12 point, Times New Roman font with normal one-inch margins, written in APA style, and free of typographical and grammatical errors. It should include a title page with a running head and a reference page. The body of the paper should be at least 5–6 pages in length. Submit your paper to the Submissions Area by the due date assigned.

You will submit your Review Paper next week, and this assignment will help you develop a draft of a major portion of that assignment. Be sure to incorporate the feedback you receive from your instructor on this assignment into your final paper for next week. You may also want to review the following documents:

.

A sample literature review

.

A document illustrating how to set up your word processor for APA style

.

A “Guide for Writing a Literature Review”

If you have any questions about your paper, contact your instructor by the Questions for the Professor area of the course.

10

10

10

10

Grading Criteria	Maximum Points
Refined and elaborated the paper topic.					10
Organized the findings into a draft.
Identified supporting or contrasting themes.
Generated an original hypothesis.
Wrote in a clear, concise, and organized manner; demonstrated ethical scholarship in accurate representation and attribution of sources; displayed accurate spelling, grammar, and punctuation.
Total:	50

Guidelines for Writing a Literature Review

· Your final literature review requires the selection of at least 10 credible articles from peer-reviewed journals. You may need to select and review a greater number of articles to arrive at 10 articles to address in your paper.

· The articles you have chosen should be those that offer the soundest empirical evidence, from which you will be drawing conclusions about your topic. The quality of your own paper rests on the quality of the published scholarship.

· The literature review should be between 5-6 pages in length, depending on how many sources you identified and how expansive the literature is on this topic. This does not include the title page, abstract, or references pages.

· The required format is double-spaced with 1-inch margins. Follow APA style guidelines in writing and citing references.

· Begin the review by introducing readers to your focal question. What is this question intended to address? You may state your “question” in the form of a problem if you like. This focal question will become part of your introduction.

· It is useful to tell the reader how the review is organized in your introduction section, somewhere between research question and the transition into the body of the review.

· If there is one major theme you want to highlight, state the theme. If there are three major themes or streams of thought on the topic, briefly name them—and then organize the balance of your literature review around those three streams. Think of themes, theories, concepts, lines of thought, and ideas as organizing strategies for your literature review.

· Once you state your focal question, write a transition sentence moving readers into the body of your literature review.

Example: Assume you are writing about the use of therapy dogs with children who have autism. Your focal question (problem statement) might be something along the lines of “Pilot studies suggest that children who have autism may benefit socially from having a therapy dog. However, one of the challenges in introducing a therapy dog to a child with autism is the child may not feel empathy toward the animal and therefore experience difficulty establishing a bond with the animal, let alone improving social functioning with other humans. Little has been explored about the use of therapy animals with children who have autism. This paper explores the use of therapy dogs with children who have autism to determine if the intervention helps these children develop social skills.” Next, you could transition into the body of the review with a sentence such as, “Scholars disagree about the effectiveness of therapy animals in treating children who have autism. One school of thought argues that . . . .”

· When you are done introducing the first line of thought, create a new paragraph to discuss studies which present another line of thought or opposing view.

· Don’t write a literature review where each paragraph discusses a single article, one by one, like a grocery list. Remember, the point is to synthesize information from the reading you have done, and you do that by organizing your literature review paper by themes/theories/concepts, rather than article by article.

· Within each paragraph, if you are truly engaging in the ideas you found in the literature, you will likely cite 3 to 5 articles that highlight that theme.

· Your literature review should hit the high points of each article. Zero in on the main theme or finding and then move on to the next theme.

· Don’t recreate each article. It’s fine to describe the study, including the purpose of the study, and the key findings or larger meanings of the research. But remember, this is a synthesis, an integration of all the things you have learned. You are creating a discussion on paper, which in turn gives the reader a context for understanding where the scholarship has been, where it is currently, and where it likely will be heading next. Provide enough details to help the reader understand the significance of the studies you cite without “rebuilding Rome.”

· Be sure to evaluate the studies and offer critical comments on any shortcomings you’ve observed or that have been reported by the authors.

· Remember to use your own words to describe and evaluate the articles. Avoid the temptation to paraphrase which easily slides into plagiarism if you are not careful. Avoid quoting the material and remember to cite works when you are discussing someone else’s ideas.

· Your creativity in this assignment is not the content or findings but the clarity with which you organize the review and create a context for understanding the focal question.

· Complete your review by drawing conclusions about your body of research and identifying gaps in the research which still remain to be explored, maybe even by you!

Page 2 of 2
© 2009 Argosy University