Aging Seniors Essay<\/p>\n
Description \u2013 Section II
\n& Doing the Literature Review
\nThe next step to researching the project topic is to engage in a thorough review of the published
\nliterature pertaining to the learners chosen area of investigation.
\nThe review of the literature serves to provide a conceptual framework by which the learner can
\nthoroughly understand the chosen topic of study. The theoretical base serves to provide definition,
\norientation, and direction to the project being undertaken.
\nRationale for the Literature Review
\nThere are four primary reasons why a thorough literature review is part of a well-done research
\nproject. First, it is essential to review past studies so that the current investigation can be set in its
\nappropriate context. Reviewing the literature helps the learner understand the true breadth of the
\ntopic area intended to study. Although the learner\u2019s study may eventually focus on a narrow slice of
\nthe larger issue, the learner needs to investigate how that narrow slice fits into its broader context.
\nMany related studies can provide insight into the learner\u2019s study; those studies need to be identified
\nand critiqued. Consider the following questions:
\n1. What studies on this topic have been done previously?
\n2. What were the findings of those studies?
\n3. In what ways were the previous works similar to each other?
\n4. How did the previous studies differ from each other?
\n5. In what ways are those studies similar to or different from the one you are undertaking?
\n6. How can each of the previous studies help in understanding the topic?
\nAll research builds on the shoulders of past studies. To adequately understand, therefore, the issues
\nunderlying the learner\u2019s proposed project, one must comprehend the historical development of past
\nresearch on the topic. Reviewing past findings is essential in order to identify the major issues (or
\nresearch threads) surrounding the topic and to determine the current status of information. If the
\nlearner wishes to be conversant with others investigating the topic, one must understand both the
\nhistorical perspective and the current status.
\nThe literature review assists in knowing and understanding the terminology, techniques, and
\nprocedures that have been used to investigate the topic. Often, the learner can find helpful hints and
\navoid many pitfalls in their own research by knowing the experience of other researchers.
\nMost persons do not make a career of doing research. Rather, they are primarily consumers of
\nresearch information and findings. The final reason, then, for reviewing the literature is to teach one
\nto be a good research consumer. The process of becoming skilled at \u201casking the right questions\u201d
\ndepends upon an ability and skill to adequately locate, critique, and evaluate published results.
\nProcess of Critiquing Research
\nMany pieces of information are conveyed in a published article. There are, therefore, many aspects
\nto be critiqued. When performing a review of the literature, it is necessary to determine if the articles
\nreviewed are relevant and useful for your project. The outline given below assists the learner with
\ndetermining the soundness of the material being reviewed and should help the learner to focus on
\nthe relevance it has (or doesn\u2019t have) for the study. Not all of the questions listed will be relevant for
\nevery article. However, this listing gives an idea of the types of questions that need to be asked when
\ncritically examining an article for its relevance and content.
\nI. PURPOSES (yours and the author\u2019s)
\nA. Find the author\u2019s hypothesis.
\n\u2022 Is it relevant to the purpose of his study?
\n\u2022 Is it relevant to the purpose of your project?
\nB. Was more than one hypothesis tested?
\nC. Did the author actually test the stated hypothesis?
\nD. What ideas presented represented assumptions, and which were to be tested?
\nE. Did the author give practical significance of the research? Is the research basic or
\napplied?
\nF. Did the author give a careful explanation of known facts and existing knowledge, which
\nhas a bearing on the problem at hand?
\nG. How sound is the logic that underlies the presentation of relevant facts and concepts
\nunderlying the problem? What evidence has been minimized and\/or ignored by the
\nauthor?
\nH. What is the scope of the author\u2019s research? Is it sufficiently narrow without being
\nirrelevant?
\nI. Is the review of the literature relevant?
\nJ. Does the author give a rationale or theoretical framework for the study based on the
\nresearch studies cited?
\nK. Does the author give a clear statement of the assumptions underlying the approach to
\nthe problem being investigated?
\nII. VARIABLES
\nA. Does the author identify the independent and dependent variable(s)? If more than one,
\nare all clearly specified?
\nB. What are the operational definitions of each variable? How adequate and appropriate are
\nthe definitions for the author\u2019s purpose?
\nC. How many and what levels of the independent variables are used?
\nD. Did the author hold to the definitions as given, i.e. is the usage consistent throughout the
\nresearch?
\nE. When stating generalizations & conclusions, are the limits of the sampling procedures
\nand measurement techniques kept in mind?
\nF. Are any predictions made logically consistent with the hypotheses stated? Is the logic
\nsound?
\nG. Is paradigm, schematic model, flow chart, etc. used appropriately? Does hypothesis
\nfollow from the model presented?
\nH. Does the author acknowledge threats to the internal and external validity of the
\nexperimental design employed?
\nI. Does the author provide adequate information for you to make a judgment concerning
\nthe appropriateness of the test or measurement scale used? That is, is information given
\nconcerning the reliability, validity, & standardization of the instrument?
\nJ. Does the author give a sufficient description of the procedures used in data collection,
\ni.e. when, where, and how data was obtained?
\nK. Does the author make a clear statement concerning the relationship between the
\nresearch hypothesis and the statistical hypothesis?
\nL. Did the author conduct a pilot study? If so, what was the outcome? Were any
\nmodifications in procedure made as a result of the pilot?
\nM. Is the description of data collection clear enough so that the study could be replicated?
\nN. Does the author give a statement of the assumptions underlying the methodology
\nemployed (e.g. adequacy of reliability & validity of measures, representativeness of the
\nsample, assumptions of statistical test, etc.?
\nIII. SAMPLING PROCEDURES
\nA. Is the sample representative of the population of interest?
\nB. Is the population of interest clearly defined?
\nC. Does the author state the methods by which the subjects were selected?
\nD. Do the sampling techniques logically follow from the population that has been defined?
\nE. What characteristics of the sample does the author report? Are some aspects of interest
\nto you omitted from the sample?
\nF. Does the author give information concerning selective dropouts?
\nIV. DATA ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION
\nA. Descriptive information
\n1. Note the central tendency & deviation of the groups measured.
\n2. Are the distributions skewed?
\n3. How different are the dispersions?
\n4. How much overlap among the groups?
\n5. How many observations were there in each group?
\nB. Inferential information
\n1. Is the statistical test appropriate for the available data?
\n2. Do the data gathered, and the statistical test used, allow one to answer the question
\nof interest?
\n3. What conditioning variables may be present? What steps were taken to eliminate
\nthe effect of those variables?
\n4. Does the author maintain objectivity and refrain from speculation?
\n5. Is the analysis consistent with and supported by known facts?
\n6. Does the author engage in overgeneralizations and\/or make sweeping statements
\nthat go beyond the data at hand?
\n7. How do the findings of this research relate to the findings of the studies previously
\ncited by the author?
\n8. Does the author report both confirming AND disconfirming evidence objectively
\nand with minimal bias?
\n9. Does the author honestly acknowledge and openly discuss weaknesses in the data?
\n10. Is there a clear distinction made between facts and inferences? Between analysis
\nand interpretation?
\n11. Does the author make appropriate use of tables, figures, charts, graphs, etc.? Are
\nthese aids clearly understandable?
\n12. Does the author address contradictions, inconsistencies, and misleading elements?
\nV. CONCLUSIONS
\nA. Are the conclusions drawn consistent with the statistical analysis and the sampling
\ntechnique used?
\nB. Were any conclusions drawn that are not warranted by the data presented?
\nC. Could you draw other conclusions using the same data?
\nD. Are the conclusions justified and supported by the facts of the research?
\nE. Do the conclusions drawn lead to new questions that can be set forth for research?
\nF. Does the author set forth any recommendations for implementing research findings?
\nThe purpose of the literature review is for the learner to set the research plan in the context of
\nprevious research. The learner\u2019s work should be a logical extension of what has already been done,
\nand should build upon this foundation. This research, no matter what it is, is based on some other
\nresearch that was done earlier.
\nTo begin Section II, the learner will conduct \u201clibrary research\u201d to gather background information.
\nThis background research is not sufficient for the entire project, but is only the first step. What the
\nlearner will end up with is NOT a \u201cterm paper\u201d based entirely on library research, but a research
\nproject that includes library research as part of the steps to a successful Naturalistic observation
\nField Experience. Accessing the online example is recommended to assist with this.
\nFinding References
\nBegin by conducting a computer-based search of databases and the Internet to find scholarly
\nresearched articles about the research topic. These scholarly articles should:
\n\u2022 Be published within the past five (5) years;
\n\u2022 Be published in a respected (preferably \u201cpeer-reviewed\u201d) research journal;
\n\u2022 Describe research, not a position.
\nThe learner may supplement the search with books, especially edited books in which each chapter is
\ncontributed by a different expert in the field. Avoid non-scholarly, single-author books intended for
\nthe popular market. In fact, avoid anything that would be purchased at a commercial retailer. If it is
\non their shelves, it\u2019s not likely to be very scholarly. By definition, anything with commercial value
\n(such as books and magazines sold to the general market) has been written to increase its
\ncommercial value, not to present an unbiased and research-based view of data.
\nBy the same token, the learner must be wary of Internet web pages intended for casual viewers.
\nThere is much excellent, scholarly material on-line, but to get to it the learner must wade past
\nmaterial presented for the general market. Also, do not use textbooks or the encyclopedia except for
\nthe most specific factual information.
\nPrimary source research is acceptable and, in fact, encouraged. If you can question a known expert
\nin your topic and receive a reply, you may use that reply in your Review of Literature.
\nAccumulate a minimum of twelve (12) scholarly sourced articles upon which to base the review of
\nliterature (but know that as many as 20 to 30 articles may need to be pulled in order to finally
\nsettle on 12 scholarly and useable sources). If there is controversy surrounding the research
\ntopic, make sure that the selection of articles represents both sides. Be sure to record complete
\nbibliographic information about each article, including authors\u2019 names, the name of the article, the
\njournal or book in which it is published, volume number, page numbers, etc. If the intention is to
\nuse a direct quote from an article, the learner must supply the precise page upon which it appears.
\nReferencing APA 5th edition throughout the paper is required (see provided: Pocket Guide
\nto APA Style text for specific examples and assistance).
\nUsing the Library On-Line
\nOne of the best advances in the past several years is the ability to conduct scholarly research from
\none\u2019s home computer, using the University\u2019s library database system. To do this, go to
\nwww.snu.edu and follow the links to the library and to the various databases. All of this
\ninformation was made available to you during the library night provided in Module 1.
\nThe learner must be prepared to spend some time in both familiarizing and increasing capabilities
\nwhen using the on-line library and performing the actual research process. The learner must plan
\nto devote a significant amount of time to doing the background research for this part of the
\nproject.
\nThe learner may be able to download full-text articles that are scholarly and research-based, but may
\nalso have to request that articles be located by the librarians. This takes a little time, so the learner is
\nencouraged not to delay in beginning the research process. One may also find excellent articles using
\na good search engine, such as Google Scholar or Kartoo. Just be sure to find scholarly articles, not sites
\nintended for the general public.
\nCan\u2019t Find Anything on the Project Topic?
\nThis is a common problem but it is a problem of thinking, not a problem with sources. If the learner
\nfeels that \u201cthere must be something out there,\u201d then the problem may be the search term being used
\nto describe the topic. Play around with this by using a much broader term than what has been used
\nto see what comes up. While the learner may not find exactly they are looking for, hints may be
\ndisplayed on sources about \u201cwhat people call this\u201d or search engine terms displayed.
\nIt may be that the learner\u2019s topic is so new or unique that no one has written anything on it yet. In
\nthat case, identify two elements or factors that come together in the research project and conduct
\nbackground research on those elements. Know that there IS information on the selected topic, it
\njust may take some creative thinking to locate it. This is also an area where SNU librarians can be of
\nhelp!
\nStaying Organized
\nFollow these steps:
\n1. Once the purpose statement is approved by the instructor, copy onto a piece of paper and
\npost it where you can see it. During the research process, the reader can have a tendency to
\nlose site of the focus, posting the purpose statement helps to keep the researcher grounded.
\n2. Read through the articles. Take note of what the authors\u2019 main points are \u2013 what are they
\ntrying to say?
\n3. Keep track of bibliographic information \u2013 this is important! If the learner finds good quotes or
\ninformation to paraphrase, be sure to note the page number of the article on which it appears.
\nAlso, look at the bibliographic information used for an article that you have pulled. This
\nsometimes provides additional \u201cresearch pearls\u201d for the learner to investigate further.
\n4. Develop a system to organize the research obtained whether by use of a color coding system,
\nfiling system, binder with tabs, etc. This is key to maximizing time when doing research.
\n5. Save, save, save your project document in many different capacities. This includes during
\nthe time you are actually composing the document. Electrical outages, power surges, and
\ncomputer crashes create havoc and destroy time spent on the project.
\n6. Create a \u201cdump file\u201d within your computer folders. Sometimes the researcher writes a
\nparagraph or two and then determines that it does not quite fit. Don\u2019t cut and delete the
\ninformation, cut and paste it into the \u201cdump file\u201d to search later for a better fit within the
\nproject document.
\n7. Avoid researching \u201ca little here and a little there.\u201d Hours of uninterrupted time are crucial to
\nsupporting the depth of thought necessary to build a project such as this.
\nWriting Section II-Literature Review
\nUse of 1 inch margins around the paper, 12 font either Arial or Times New Roman, and a total of
\n10\u201412 typed written pages are expected for Section II. Begin this section by centering and titling
\nSECTION II. Begin the section by including 2-4 paragraphs for a global opening to the literature
\nreview and include a transition paragraph which provides to the reader an overview of the 4 to 5
\nsub-topics (research threads) covered in the chapter in the order in which they were written within
\nthe paper. Remember to use transition sentences when leading in to each sub topic- area. Provide a
\nConclusion section that includes a nice wrap-up paragraph of the literature reviewed with a restatement
\nof the purpose statement (2-3 paragraphs in length). The continued use of headers and
\npage numbers must be used as noted in the APA Handbook. This section is also written in third
\nperson and past tense.
\nWriting the Review of the Literature
\nThe Review of Literature is a topical essay, NOT a series of article critiques. It is NOT an
\nannotated bibliography. It is helpful to construct a working outline before writing the Review, so the
\ntopics addressed fall in logical order. Information about each topic in the learner\u2019s outline may come
\nfrom more than one article, and each article may contribute to writing about several outline topics. It
\nis the learner\u2019s task to decide what the reader needs to know in order to understand the research
\narea. The learner must keep in mind what each of the articles has to contribute to this understanding
\nand how to arrange bits and pieces from these various articles in a logical order so that, at the end,
\nthe reader will have the important background information. There is no magical short cut to writing
\nthe Review of Literature and it is not a simple task!
\nFour points are important:
\n1. In the Review of Literature, the learner describes what others have found. The learner does
\nnot editorialize or contribute opinions. This is the time for just the facts.
\n2. Every idea presented in the Review must be attributed to someone, by a citation that appears
\nin parentheses and includes the author\u2019s name and the publication date of the article, as in
\n(Brown, Smith & Thomas, 1997). List all authors (and the date) when citing a work for the
\nfirst time. Thereafter, a work with three or more authors may be listed as (Brown, et al, 1997).
\nAgain, all ideas in the Review of Literature must be attributed to someone other than the
\nlearner.
\n3. There is no such thing as \u201ccommon knowledge.\u201d Do not presume that since \u201ceveryone knows
\ntelevision violence is bad\u201d that this does not need to be supported. Citations are very
\nimportant.
\n4. Every citation made in the text of the Literature Review must appear in full in a reference list
\nat the end of the paper. No references may appear in the list if they are not cited in the paper.
\nThe Review of Literature will take several pages to write which is a large investment of the learner\u2019s
\ntime. Depending on the topic, this section of the project is at least 10 \u2013 12 pages in length with 4 to
\n5 subheadings that reflect the research threads determined.
\nConstructing a Working Outline
\nThe learner may want to consider constructing a working outline of the Review of Literature. To do
\nthis, think about the research topic, and consider what a reasonable person would need to know to
\nunderstand the topic. (Refer to: Chapter 2 Research Threads\/Outline Hints and Tips)
\nWhen assembling these ideas from the reading, slot these ideas into the items on the working
\noutline. Notice that a particular article might have things to say about more than one outline item. In
\nthis way, the learner will construct a topical essay, in which the topics (outline items) drive the
\nnarrative, not an annotated bibliography, in which articles are addressed one after the other, with no
\nrelationship to the outline.
\nIt is usually a good idea to ask someone else to read the Review of Literature after the learner has
\nput together a first draft and before submitting to the instructor. Someone unfamiliar with the topic
\nwill be able to point out confusions, missing but necessary explanations, and odd organization of
\ninformation that the learner, who has been so close to this task, may not be able to see.
\nUsing APA Style
\nAPA format is required when writing the Naturalistic Observation Field Experience research
\ncomponent. Using the provided text, Pocket Guide to APA Style by Robert Perrin is required. Another
\nonline source to access to assist the learner with APA is
\nhttp:\/\/owl.english.purdue.edu\/owl\/resource\/560\/01\/<\/p>\n
Section II-Grading Rubric (FSG)
\nLiterature Review
\nCriteria Comments Points
\nPossible
\nPoints
\nAwarded
\nRunning head, page number sequence, correct margins 2
\nWriter followed the correct format of the title for Section II, global
\nopening, subtopic (research thread) titles, and conclusionary
\nparagraphs
\n2
\nWriter included 2-4 paragraphs for a global opening to the literature
\nreview. This global opening included a transition paragraph which
\nprovided an overview to the reader of the sub-topics (research
\nthreads) covered in the chapter in the order in which they were
\nwritten within the paper
\n6
\nThe first sub-topic area provided content relevant to the overall
\nresearch focus. Content was weaved together using the writer\u2019s
\nwords and not just a reproduction of the research. Length was
\nabout 2 to 2 1\/2 pages in length
\n12
\nTransition sentence used led logically in to sub-topic two 1
\nThe second sub-topic area provided content relevant to the overall
\nresearch focus. Content was weaved together using the writer\u2019s
\nwords and not just a reproduction of the research. Length was
\nabout 2 to 2 1\/2 pages in length
\n12
\nTransition sentence used led logically in to sub-topic three 1
\nThe third sub-topic area provided content relevant to the overall
\nresearch focus. Content was weaved together using the writer\u2019s
\nwords and not just a reproduction of the research. Length was
\nabout 2 to 2 1\/2 pages in length
\n12
\nTransition sentence used led logically in to sub-topic four 1
\nThe fourth sub-topic area provided content relevant to the overall
\nresearch focus. Content was weaved together using the writer\u2019s
\nwords and not just a reproduction of the research. Length was
\nabout 2 to 2 1\/2 pages in length
\n12
\nThe conclusion paragraph included a nice wrap-up paragraph of the
\nliterature reviewed with a re-statement of the purpose statement (2-
\n3 paragraphs in length)
\n5
\nAPA in-text citations were correct format for all quoted or
\nparaphrased sources as indicated in the APA Handbook
\n4
\nAll in-text citations corresponded to the reference list 2
\nThe majority of references cited were scholarly sources and was
\nresearch from the past 5 years. A minimum of 12 references were
\ncited on the reference page
\n8
\nAPA citation of references was done correctly and followed the
\nformat indicated in the APA Handbook
\n3
\nWriter used 12 font either Times New Roman or Arial 2
\nWriter used THIRD PERSON and PAST TENSE throughout the
\nentire chapter
\n3
\nWriter used correct spelling, grammar, sentence structures,
\npunctuation, and word usage (remember-no jargon)
\n8
\nChapter 2 was about 10-12 pages in length 4<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Aging Seniors Essay Description \u2013 Section II & Doing the Literature Review The next step to researching the project topic is to engage in a thorough review of the published literature pertaining to the learners chosen area of investigation. The Read More …<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-425761","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/425761","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=425761"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/425761\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=425761"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=425761"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.benedictsol.com\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=425761"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}