An introduction to educational research methods. Введение в образовательные исследовательские методы Білім беру-зерттеу әдістеріне кіріспе
жүктеу/скачать 32,4 Mb. Pdf көрінісі
|
- Бұл бет үшін навигация:
- Purpose of the work
- Structure of the work
- Challenging the claims made by the author
- Check for biases
- Check for relevance
- Writing a literature review
- FURTHER READING
- Reflective questions
- Какова цель обзора литературы
Figure 2.3 Literature summary template Source: Atkinson, M., Springate, I., Johnson, F. and Halsey, K. (2007) Inter-school Collaboration: A Literature Review. Slough: NFER.
When you read papers and books use active reading techniques. Use the note taking guidelines in Table 3.3 and add your references to your Zotero. This will be a big help when you come to write up your work or if you have to come back to the literature after a break from the research project. While you read each paper, ask the following questions.
Organizing note-taking SCHOOL-BASED RESEARCH 52 more familiar with specialist vocabulary, academic language and reading about theo- ries and ideas. Nonetheless, even if you have followed the advice given in the previous section, it is likely that you will still have a large number of articles to read, so it would be a good idea to have a systematic strategy for reading these. 1 Sorting papers into categories – sort the articles into piles that are all related to each strand of your research or sub-question. Alternatively, you might want to rank them in order of importance, or even rank each pile. 2 Note-taking – create a table before you start to read the papers, so that you can write down notes as you read. Figure 3.3 gives an example of such a template and is the structure used by Atkinson in the literature review referred to earlier in this chapter. It is worthwhile spending time before you start creating a relevant straight- forward table for you to use as you read so that you can go back to these notes at a later time. Make a note of pertinent quotations or extracts as you read, in case you want to use these later. Your literature review ought to be an expression of your own thinking, not a patchwork of borrowed ideas. Therefore it is good idea to plan therefore to invest your research time in understanding your sources and integrat- ing them into your own thinking. Your note cards or note sheets will record only ideas that are relevant to your focus on the topic; and they will mostly summarize rather than quote. Find your own words for notes on sticky labels. Don’t ever write in the book itself. Title: Date:
Author(s): REVIEW OF SOURCE Purpose/focus of literature Type of collaboration, e.g. no. of schools, etc. Description of collaboration and its operation/processes Aims/purpose/intended outcomes (why collaborate) Conditions/factors which drive collaboration Conditions/factors which facilitate collaboration (during) Recommendations/key factors for best practice Conditions/factors which inhibit collaboration Challenges/concerns Role of LA/government/other organizations in supporting collaboration Evidence of gains/benefits arising from collaboration DESCRIPTION OF SOURCE Sector Country/area Participants Method(s) 04-Wilson-Ch-03.indd 52 8/31/2012 5:40:36 PM REVIEWING THE LITERATURE AND WRITING A LITERATURE REVIEW 53 Critical reading When you read papers and books use active reading techniques. Use the note taking guidelines in Table 3.3 and add your references to your Zotero. This will be a big help when you come to write up your work or if you have to come back to the literature after a break from the research project. While you read each paper, ask the following questions. Table 3.3 Organizing note-taking Citation RQ
Key findings Design and methods
Sample Extracts or quotes Comments Rank 1–5 E.g. Author, date, title, journal, volume, issue, pages Related to your
research question
Related to your
research question
What kind of research? How was it done? Who was
involved? How many? Page numbers Anything else of note 1 = very important 5 = interesting but not important Purpose of the work
• What is the author’s purpose in writing the paper? • Does this fit in with the area you are interested in? If not, then omit this from your review.
• Is the significance of the work clearly established?
• Could the problem have been approached more effectively from another perspective? When data collected and duration Source/document type Key references REVIEWER’S COMMENTS Is the reported analysis adequate and correct? Are the author’s interpretations supported by the evidence? Are there any biases/caveats raised or to be aware of? Is there a corroboration or triangulation of sources? Relevance to review (high, medium or low) Date of review Figure 3.3 Literature summary template
Slough: NFER. 04-Wilson-Ch-03.indd 53 8/31/2012 5:40:36 PM REVIEWING THE LITERATURE AND WRITING A LITERATURE REVIEW 53 Critical reading When you read papers and books use active reading techniques. Use the note taking guidelines in Table 3.3 and add your references to your Zotero. This will be a big help when you come to write up your work or if you have to come back to the literature after a break from the research project. While you read each paper, ask the following questions. Table 3.3 Organizing note-taking Citation RQ
Key findings Design and methods
Sample Extracts or quotes Comments Rank 1–5 E.g. Author, date, title, journal, volume, issue, pages Related to your
research question
Related to your
research question
What kind of research? How was it done? Who was
involved? How many? Page numbers Anything else of note 1 = very important 5 = interesting but not important Purpose of the work
• What is the author’s purpose in writing the paper? • Does this fit in with the area you are interested in? If not, then omit this from your review.
• Is the significance of the work clearly established?
• Could the problem have been approached more effectively from another perspective? When data collected and duration Source/document type Key references REVIEWER’S COMMENTS Is the reported analysis adequate and correct? Are the author’s interpretations supported by the evidence? Are there any biases/caveats raised or to be aware of? Is there a corroboration or triangulation of sources? Relevance to review (high, medium or low) Date of review Figure 3.3 Literature summary template
Slough: NFER. 04-Wilson-Ch-03.indd 53 8/31/2012 5:40:36 PM Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 75
What is the author’s purpose in writing the paper? Does this fit in with the area you are interested in? If not, then omit this from your review. What is the problem or issue and is this clearly defined? Is the significance of the work clearly established? Could the problem have been approached more effectively from another perspective?
Examine the structure of the paper. How does the author structure the argument? • Identify the main claims the author makes in putting forward their argument. • Deconstruct the flow of the argument to see whether or where it breaks down logically; • see
Box 2.3 which uses Fisher’s analysis of an argument. Box 2.3 Extracts from the discussion section from: Pedder, D. (2006) ‘Are small classes better? Understanding relationships between class size, classroom processes and pupils’ learning’, Oxford Review of Education, 32 (2): 213–234. The text has been annotated with conclusions underlined, (reasons in brackets) and inference indicators in italics. The secondary school study (Pedder, 2001) developed no evidence of simple one-way relationships between class size and optimum conditions for all kinds of teaching and learning. This is a key finding. (Different teachers recognised increased opportunities for promoting and supporting learning in large as well as in small classes; they also recognised constraints in small as well as in large classes). Politicians therefore need to be receptive to the possibility that benefits to pupils’ learning arise in large as well as in small classes and thus need to promote frameworks within which schools can adopt more flexible approaches to allocating pupils to learning groups of different size for different teaching and learning purposes. Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 76
Adopt a sceptical stance towards the authors’ claims, checking whether they support convincingly what they assert. • Does the author have sufficient backing for the generalizations they make in a • research study? • How robust are the basic components of the study design (e.g. sample size, intervention • and outcome)? • How accurate and valid are the measurements? • Is the analysis of the data accurate and relevant to the research question? • Are the conclusions validly based upon the data and analysis? Check for biases Consider whether and how any values guiding the authors’ work may affect what they claim. Distinguish between respecting the authors as people and being sceptical about what they write. Keep an open mind, retaining a conditional willingness to be convinced. • Has the author evaluated the literature relevant to the problem or issue? • Does the author include literature taking positions she or he does not agree with? Check for relevance Check that everything the authors have written is relevant to their purpose in writing the account and the argument they develop. • In material written for a popular readership, does the author use appeals to emotion, one-sided examples, or rhetorically charged language and tone? • Is there an objective basis to the reasoning, or is the author merely ‘proving’ what he or she already believes?
Having completed your search and synthesized your ideas the final outcome of the process will take the form of a written literature review. The purpose of the review is to inform your audience of what is happening in the area. It will also establish you as a credible, well-informed and capable researcher. Additionally, if well constructed, it will help provide a context for your own approach, argue for the relevance and significance of your research question, and justify the appropriateness of your approach.
A good literature review is not just a summary of everything you have read but rather is a well reasoned purposeful argument which supports your research focus. Therefore, you need to be analytical of the key ideas and then synthesize these into a coherent section of your essay or thesis. In other words you not only need to know what research has been done in the area but you will also need to demonstrate that you Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 77 understand how all the ideas relate to another. For example: political journalists don’t simply write down everything that is said in Parliament, they analyse how one statement relates to another; they remember what was said last month and note whether it is consistent with this; they look for the vested interest that might be held by those making the judgements.
When you synthesize, you bring things together, relating one to the other to form something new. So writing a good review requires that you: • read a few good reviews • write critical annotations • develop a structure • write purposefully • use the literature to back up your arguments • review and write throughout the research process • get feedback • are prepared to redraft. There are nine errors in synthesizing ideas in a literature review which were identified by Dunkin (1996) that ought to be avoided.
The first two are what Dunkin describes as primary errors of finding and using literature yourself. First, not including all the important work in the area of study will diminish the relevance of your study. This might occur because you have not done sufficient reading or perhaps that you have not set appropriate search boundaries. The second error takes place if you assume that all sources are of equal quality or importance. For example, this might happen if you try to use a reference from an unofficial report to argue against the empirical evidence presented in an international peer- reviewed paper.
Dunkin classifies errors three to seven as secondary errors which are caused when you use literature in an uncritical way. Error three occurs if you present inaccurate information about sampling, methods, design procedures and contexts of the studies written about in the sources you use. Error four happens if you double count references by the original author; for example, if you list different reports from the same project as providing additional confirmation of the same finding. Error five occurs if the author of the original report has not represented their findings fully in their statements of conclusions. The error is compounded if you accept the statements uncritically and actually continue the original authors’ misrepresentation of data. Error six consists of claiming that studies yield findings or reach conclusions that they do not. Error seven is a question of ethics and is about suppressing contrary findings. Original reports sometimes contain findings that are actually contradictory to the generalizations which you claim to support.
The final two errors occur when primary and secondary errors are included in generalizations made in your final review. These are, error eight, consequential errors where generalizations are made based on flawed errors made earlier in the review, and finally, error nine, when you don’t marshal all the evidence relevant to a generalization. These last errors occur in the process of formulating the final conclusion and are a result of a lack of criticality earlier in the review process. This is why it is vital that you read sources very carefully and work closely with your supervisor from an early stage of the research project.
Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 78
Common errors in writing a literature review In summary the purpose of the review is to critically analyse a segment of a published body of knowledge through summary, classification, and comparison of prior research studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles. See Chapter 13 for more guidance on what to include in your literature review. REVIEWING THE LITERATURE AND WRITING A LITERATURE REVIEW 57 Table 3.4 Common errors in writing a literature review Primary errors These are errors made by an author when writing a review 1 Not including seminal work or failing to define the scope of the review appropriately 2 Lack of discrimination; not all the research cited is of equal validity or quality Secondary errors These are errors made when the author uses literature in an uncritical way 3 Presenting inaccurate information about sampling, methods, design procedures and contexts of study 4 Double counting of references by original author 5 Non-recognition of faulty conclusions by original author 6 Unwarranted attributions, the original author making claims not justified by the data 7 Suppression of contrary findings Tertiary errors These areas are when primary and secondary errors are included in generalizations made in the final review written by the author 8 Consequential errors. Flawed generalizations as a consequence of earlier lack of criticality 9 Failure to marshal all evidence relevant to a generalization In summary the purpose of the review is to critically analyse a segment of a published body of knowledge through summary, classification, and comparison of prior research studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles. See Chapter 13 for more guidance on what to include in your literature review. Key ideas Setting your own research in the context of other literature on the same or similar subject adds credibility to your work. It broadens your awareness of other research in the area and provides background information and data that corroborate what you’ve found. It also ensures that you are not duplicating research that has already been done by someone else. Searching the literature may also challenge your assumptions – you may find that the literature contradicts commonly held points of view or says exactly the opposite to what you were hoping to find. Sometimes, researchers decide to revise their original line of enquiry to take account of new information that has been found during the literature search. 04-Wilson-Ch-03.indd 57 8/31/2012 5:40:36 PM Key ideas Setting your own research in the context of other literature on the same or similar subject adds credibility to your work. It broadens your awareness of other research in the area and provides background information and data that corroborate what you’ve found. It also ensures that you are not duplicating research that has already been done by someone else. Searching the literature may also challenge your assumptions – you may find that the literature contradicts commonly held points of view or says exactly the opposite to what you were hoping to find. Sometimes, researchers decide to revise their original line of enquiry to take account of new information that has been found during the literature search.
Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 79
Harlen, W. and Schlapp, U. (1998) Literature reviews, Scottish Council for Research in Education. dspace.gla.ac.uk/bitstream/1905/214/1/107.pdf (retrieved January 2012). Hart, C. (1998) Doing a Literature Review. London: Sage. Jesson, J., Matheson, L. and Lacey, F. (2012) Doing your Literature Review: Traditional and Systematic Techniques. London: Sage. Ridley, D. (2012) The Literature. Review. A Step-by-Step Guide for Students (2nd edn) London: Sage.
• Has your literature search brought up the same names and are you finding the same sources in more than one database? Then you have either done sufficient • reading or you might have used very narrow search terms? Ask you tutor for advice.
• Are you adopting a ‘Jeremy Paxman’ critical approach to the papers you are reading?
• Are you being disciplined in storing references in a literature management • system? • Have you avoided the errors pointed out by Dunkin in constructing your review?
Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 80
Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 81 ЛИТЕРАТУРНОГО ОБЗОРА ГЛАВА 2
Обзор главы Обзор литературы должен соответствовать трем критериям: во-первых, представлять результаты схожих исследований; во-вторых, соотносить ваше исследование с ведущимся в литературе диалогом; и, в-третьих, устанавливать рамки для сравнения результатов исследования с другими исследованиями. Для этого необходимо: определить подходящие критерии поиска; найти подходящую литературу; прочесть и проверить релевантность литературы; систематизировать выбранную вами литературу; и, наконец, написать литературный обзор. Начнем с рассмотрения цели анализа литературы и написания литературного обзора. Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 82
Работа с литературой является неотъемлемым этапом процесса исследования. В течение всего процесса исследования литература используется по разным причинам, а именно: • сужение области интереса • определение задач • приведение обоснования • теоретическая информация для вашего исследования • разработка подходящего проекта или составление официального обзора литературы На каждом этапе процесса исследования важно критически относиться к опубликованным исследованиям. Если сделать это тщательно, то этот процесс поможет вам выработать новые идеи и направить задачи исследования, оставаясь также неотъемлемой частью планирования вашего научного проекта. Другими словами, фактический процесс составления обзора является важным начальным этапом для проведения хорошего исследования, и результат данного процесса в форме составленного литературного обзора продемонстрирует ваш тщательный выбор области исследования.
Поэтому обзор литературы необходимо проводить по трем причинам. Во-первых, этот процесс позволит вам узнать, что уже известно в вашей области изысканий, чтобы определить основные идеи в этой области и ключевых исследователей в этой области. Так что это означает ознакомление с основными исследованиями в данной предметной области наряду с выработкой понимания значимости их работ. Узнавая, кто и где занимается данной проблемой, вы сможете оценить значимость литературы, найденной в ходе поиска. По мере ознакомления с определенными областями знаний и терминами, станет ясно, откуда возникли идеи и как они развивались.
Во-вторых, в процессе поиска существующей литературы вы также осознаете установите взаимосвязи между рассматриваемой областью и другими предметными областями. Узнавая больше по конкретной теме, вы сможете обозначить, определить другие новые области, объекты для исследования, что увеличит ваше знание по этой теме.
В-третьих, по мере ознакомления с работой и методами других исследователей в той же области вы также начнете понимать, как каждый исследователь изучал свою тему. Соответственно, идеи и работа других также может помочь вам определить рамки собственной работы, включая возможные методики, методы сбора информации, ключевые концепции и структурирование исследования в виде традиционной академической диссертации.
Анализ литературы по предмету может позволить вам получить новый академический опыт, но только при условии, что все сделано правильно. Reviewing The Literature And Writing A Literature Review 83
жүктеу/скачать 32,4 Mb. Достарыңызбен бөлісу:
|