Slide 1.1

Session 3: Critically reviewing the literaturePo

wer

Values Assu

mpti

ons

Controversies

Slide 1.2

Slide 1.3

Literature sources available

Saunders et al. (2009)Figure 3.2 Literature sources available

Slide 1.4

Reasons for reviewing the literature

To conduct a ‘preliminary’ search of existing material

To organise valuable ideas and findings

To identify other research that may be in progress

To generate research ideas

To develop a critical perspective

Slide 1.5

How should we present this theory?

It is NOT ! It ISJust a list of references

Data

List of variables

Diagrams

Hypothesis

“Theory is about the connections between the phenomena, a story why events, structure and thoughts occur. Theory emphasises the nature of causal relationships, identifying what comes first as well as the timing of events. Strong theory, in our view, delves into underlying processes so as to understand the systematic reasons for a particular occurrence or non-occurrence”

[Sutton & Staw 1995 p. 375 citied in Saunders et al 2009 p.36]

Slide 1.6

Where can I find ‘theory’?

Academics gain personal (& institution) prestige by researching and publishing in key journals

BFSU Online databases [http://202.204.132.205/database_list.asp?id=69]

especially this one · EBSCOhost全文数据库 (新增社会学、教育学、文学等五个子库 )

Slide 1.7

The literature search strategy (1)

Write down

parameters of your searchkey words and search terms to be useddatabases and search engines to be usedcriteria for selection of relevant and useful studies

And

Discuss these with a colleague & tutor (if possible)

Slide 1.8

How to use the databasesKey Terms: Text Book / Key Article / Key AuthorsSearch tips:

Peer Reviewed (this ‘ensures’ it is high quality)Full Text (ensures you can get access to it)

Search in title, abstract etc.

Combine terms using ‘AND’ ‘OR’ ‘NOT’

Expand terms by using ‘*’ e.g. comput* to find the words computer or computing.

Wild cards by using ‘#’ e.g colo#r will bring back ‘colour’ and ‘color’

Slide 1.9

The literature review process

Figure 3.1 The literature review process

Slide 1.10

Content of the review

You will need to

Include key academic theories

Demonstrate current knowledge of the area

Use clear referencing for the reader to find the original cited publications

Acknowledge the research of others

Slide 1.11

The Critical ReviewKey purposes

To further refine research questions & objectives

To discover recommendations for further research

To avoid repeating work already undertaken

To provide insights into strategies and techniques appropriate to your research objectives

Based on Gall et al. (2006)

Slide 1.12

Adopting a critical perspective

The most important skills are

The capacity to evaluate what you read

The capacity to relate what you read to other information

Wallace and Wray (2006)

Slide 1.13

Adopting a critical perspective

Skills for effective reading

Quick look: Title, Abstract, Introduction then Conclusion

Annotating: Cornell system

Summarising: Cornell system

Comparing and contrasting

Harvard College Library (2006)

Slide 1.14

Adopting a critical perspective

Questions to ask yourself : the essentials

Why am I reading this?

What is the author trying to do in writing this?

How convincing is this?

What use can I make of this reading?

Adapted from Wallace and Wray (2006)

Slide 1.15

Is your literature review critical?Content of literature review

Does it relate to the research questions?

Have you covered most relevant theories?

Have you included most relevant & significant literature

Is your literature up to date?Is it reference (to Harvard

standard)?

Is it Critical?

Have you shown how your research question links to previous research?

Have you assessed +ve / -ve of previous research?

Have you been objective?Have you included literature

counter to your opinion?Clearly distinguished facts &

opinions?Justified why new research is

required (inc. reference to previous research)?

Slide 1.16

The key to a critical literature review

Demonstrate that you have read, understood and evaluated your material

Link the different ideas to form a cohesive and coherent argument

Make clear connections to your research objectives and the subsequent empirical material

Saunders et al. (2009)

Slide 1.17

Recording the literature

Make notes for each item you read

Record –

Biographic details

Brief summary of content

Supplementary information

Sharp et al. (2002)

Slide 1.18

Recording the literature

Bibliographic details (author, year publication, title, journal volume, journal part / issue number, page number)

Brief summary

Supplementary information (key quotes, where you found it, your comments, when you consulted it, where you have saved the PDF !)

Saunders et al. (2009)

Slide 1.19

Example of a Plagiarism Report

Slide 1.20

Plagiarism

Four common forms

Stealing material from another source

Submitting material written by another

Copying material without quotation marks

Paraphrasing material without documentation

Adapted from Park (2003), cited in Easterby-Smith et al. (2008)

Slide 1.21

ExamplesTHE ORIGINAL PASSAGE

This book has been written against a background of both reckless optimism and reckless despair. It holds that Progress and Doom are two sides of the same medal; that both are articles of superstition, not of faith. It was written out of the conviction that it should be possible to discover the hidden mechanics by which all traditional elements of our political and spiritual world were dissolved into a conglomeration where everything seems to have lost specific value, and has become unrecognizable for human comprehension, unusable for human purpose. Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1973 ed.), p.vii, Preface to the First Edition.

A) Copying sections word for word ....

Source: www.gervaseprograms.georgetown.edu/honor/system/53501.html (downloaded on the 16th Sept. 2010)

Slide 1.22

Examples This book has been written against a background of both reckless optimism and reckless despair. It

holds that Progress and Doom are two sides of the same medal; that both are articles of superstition, not of faith. It was written out of the conviction that it should be possible to discover the hidden mechanics by which all traditional elements of our political and spiritual world were dissolved into a conglomeration where everything seems to have lost specific value, and has become unrecognizable for human comprehension, unusable for human purpose. Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1973 ed.), p.vii, Preface to the First Edition.

B) Hannah Arendt’s book, The Origins of Totalitarianism, was written in the light of both excessive hope and excessive pessimism. Her thesis is that both Advancement and Ruin are merely different sides of the same coin. Her book was produced out of a belief that one can understand the method in which the more conventional aspects of politics and philosophy were mixed together so that they lose their distinctiveness and become worthless for human uses.

Even if the author’s exact language is not used, a footnote is required for material that is

paraphrased.

Slide 1.23

Examples C) the mosaic

“The first edition of The Origins of Totalitarianism was written in 1950. Soon after the Second World War, this was a time of both reckless optimism and reckless despair. During this time, Dr. Arendt argues, the traditional elements of the political and spiritual world were dissolved into a conglomeration where everything seems to have lost specific value. In particular, the separation between the State and Society seems to have been destroyed. In this book, she seeks to disclose the hidden mechanics by which this transformation occurred”.

Even though this example includes some original material, selected phrases of the original are woven throughout the passage - a. reckless optimism and reckless despair, b. traditional elements of the {our in original} political and spiritual world were dissolved into a conglomeration where everything seems to have lost specific value, and c. hidden mechanics.

Slide 1.24

…it is not all about percentages! the ‘apt phrase’

“Following the Second World War, scholars from a variety of disciplines began to explore the nature of “totalitarianism.” One of the most pressing issues for these writers was understanding the “essence” of totalitarianism. How, for example, is a totalitarian regime different from an authoritarian regime? Although authors disagree on the precise answer to this question, a common thread running throughout most of the classic works on totalitarianism deals with the relationship between State and Society. In a totalitarian state, the traditional boundaries between State and society are dissolved into a conglomeration so that the two become indistinguishable”.

This passage is almost entirely original, but the phrase “dissolved into a conglomeration” is taken directly from Arendt. Even though this is a short phrase, it must be footnoted. Only phrases that have truly become part of general usage can be used without citation.

Slide 1.25

The easiest way is to get use, now, to referencing If you are paraphrasing / summarising an article “Johnston (2003) claims

that there are many factors that are known to affect the success of students at university”.

If you are taking a direct idea (often a quotation) “McLaine (2002, p. 16) stated that productivity was found to be affected by work related stress in 69% of workers. “

See this booklet for examples of how to reference different sources:http://www.unisa.edu.au/ltu/students/study/referencing/harvard.pdf

Slide 1.26

My Mid-Autumn Break Gift to You!http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/

E.g. Being Critical Introducing questions, problems and limitations (theory) Introducing questions, problems and limitations (method/practice) Identifying a study's weakness:Offering constructive suggestions:Highlighting inadequacies of previous studies: Introducing other people's criticisms:

However, Jones (2003) points out that .....Many analysts now argue that the strategy of X has not been successful. Jones (2003), for example, argues that .....Non-government agencies are also very critical of the new policies.The X theory has been / vigorously / strongly challenged in recent years by a number of writers.Smith's analysis has been criticised by a number of writers. Jones (1993), for example, points out that ……

Slide 1.27

Pow

er Values As

sum

ption

sControversies

Session 3 Homework: Critically reviewing the literature

Slide 1.28

Questions to ‘ask’ the author

Why did you write this?

Who did you write this for?

What was your purpose?

What questions were you asking?

What answers did you find?

What is your evidence?

What is your conclusion?

Questions to ask myself

Why am I reading this?Was it written for me?What am I looking for?What questions am I asking?Do I find those answers

credible?Do I accept that evidence?Do I agree with those

conclusions?But above all …What have I learned AndHow can I use it?

Clough and Nutbrown 2007 p. 102

Slide 1.29

Tsang, EWK (1998) Can Guanxi Be a Source of Sustained Competitive Advantage for Doing Business in China? The Academy of Management Executive Vol. 12, No. 2 (May, 1998), pp. 64-73

http://www.jstor.org/stable/4165458

Woetzel, J. (2004) ‘A guide to doing business in China’ The McKinsey Quarterly 2004 p.37-45

http://www.cccb.org.uk/Chinese_Chamber_Commerce_in_Britain_Resources/files/A%20guide%20to%20doing%20business%20in%20China.pdf

Slide 1.30

Davies H. et al ‘The Benefits of Guanxi; the value of relationships in developing the Chinese market Industrial Marketing Management 24, 207-214 http://www3.gdufs.edu.cn/smgdufs/marketing/frontier/kh/the%20value%20of%20relationships%20in.pdf

Kohen, D. ‘Confucian Trustworthiness and The Practice of Business in China’ Business Business Ethics Quarterly Vol. 11, No. 3 (Jul., 2001), pp. 415-429http://www.jstor.org/stable/3857847

Slide 1.31

Blah Blah

Read article – at least 24hrs before and make notes using CriticalReading questions

HOME : Discuss the article with each other in same colour groups of 4 or 5 ... 5 x 5 mins = 25mins

AWAY: Discuss the article with each other in different colour groups of 4 ... 4 x 6 mins = 24mins & 15 mins group discussion to prepare some notes for everyone Blah Blah

Slide 1.32

Summary:

The critical literature review

Sets the research in context

Leads the reader into later sections of the report

Begins at a general level and narrows to specific topics

Slide 1.33

Summary:

A literature search requires

Clearly defined research questions and objectives

Three main categories of sources

Defined parameters

Slide 1.34

Critical Literature Review What is the author trying to say?

What is the real point here? What is the central argument? To whom is the author speaking?

Is this account written for academics? Policy makers? Practitioners? Is the author really speaking to me?

Why has this account of this research been written? Does s/he have a political point to make? How does this relate to current policy?

What does the author ultimately want to achieve? Does s/he want to bring about some change? Does s/he want to make a difference? To

what? What authority does s/he appeal to?

Disciplinary? Policy evidence? Political mission? What evidence does the author offer to substantiate the claims?

Participants’ statements? Observations / documentary analysis? Is there any ‘missing’ evidence?

Do I accept this evidence? Is it sufficient to support the claims made in the report? What else could I ask to see?

Slide 1.35

Critical Literature Review 2 Does this account accord with what I know of the world?

Is there a match between my experience and my reading and what I am reading? Does it matter if the report is disconnected from my own world? Can I learn something from that disconnection?

What is my view? Based on what principles / ideology / pedagogy / life experiences .. And

supported by which authors…? What evidence do I have for this view?

How can I substantiate my own view? Do I draw on what I am reading here? What other sources and experiences have formed my view?

Do I find this account credible with the compass of my experience and knowledge? Taking my responses to the above questions, does my reading of this research

report lead me to decide that it should ‘count’ in my own study? Should it be included as part of the bank of information and evidence which shapes my own study?

Clough and Nutbrown 2007 p. 101-102