Reviewing the Literature PDF

7 Constructing the Literature Section Tina Byrom Chapter Aims and Objectives This chapter aims to help you to: realise and provide the necessary thinking tools to assist you to write a literature section; develop a clear understanding on what a literature section is; begin stru...

7 Constructing the Literature Section Tina Byrom Chapter Aims and Objectives This chapter aims to help you to: realise and provide the necessary thinking tools to assist you to write a literature section; develop a clear understanding on what a literature section is; begin structuring your literature section; deal with all the information you select; pull together all the information you have gathered from the relevant research on your topic. Introduction The literature review [section] is one of the most important parts of any piece of academic writing. It is rather like the foundation upon which the rest of the work is built. Bricklayers never start building a house until a solid concrete foundation, with all the drainpipes, has been laid first. Once the foundation is laid, they can connect the rest of the house to it. In a similar way, all academic writing needs a base on which it can be fixed. (Oliver, 2012: 1) The above quote emphasises the importance of the literature review/section to a piece of academic work as it frames, guides and provides direction for your entire study. When writing a literature section of a piece of work such as a dissertation there are a number of key things you need to think about. In the first instance you need to work out where you are at in terms of approaching the literature section itself. Students are sometimes fearful of writing the literature section saying such things like ‘I feel out of my depth’, ‘I don’t know where to start’, ‘I have no idea what I’m doing’. Whilst these feelings are understandable, writing the literature section of your dissertation or research project is an ‘integral part of a research process’ (Hartas, 2010: 96); it is simply the backbone of your work. It frames the study by presenting your reader with an idea of what your work will be about, what ideas already exist in the field and also what the essence of your argument will be. If you apply a systematic approach in dealing with literature, crafting the literature section of your dissertation or research project should be exciting and enjoyable as you uncover interesting ideas about a topic you are keen to explore. It may be worth spending a few moments considering what a literature section is. The word ‘review’ is often used to describe a literature section, but this seems to be an inadequate term. Think about what you are doing with the ideas – you are doing more than reviewing them – you are using them to frame your own ideas and argument and preparing the foundations for your study (Hartas, 2010). The plethora of literature on literature reviews confirms that it is an active process. The language used in many texts (e.g. Hart, 1998; Machi and McEvoy, 2009) refer to ‘doing’, ‘conducting’, ‘crafting’, ‘reviewing’, ‘critiquing’, ‘synthesising’, ‘surveying’ and so on. In essence, when you are engaged with literature you are not passively working with it – you are actively picking it apart, working out its relevance to your own study and compiling your own argument from the synthesis work that you have completed. That is, through a systematic and active process, you are able to develop and present your academic voice through using the ideas of others whilst still assessing the value of those contributions. When you begin to think of the literature section in this way, it helps you to consider what it is not or what it should not be. It should not be: a list describing one piece of literature then another (descriptive); an opportunity for you to present everything you have read about your chosen topic (lack of direction and selection); based on dated sources that are not seminal texts (currency). Fink identifies a literature section as being: A systematic, explicit and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesising the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars, and practitioners. (Fink, 2010: 3) From this you can identify three clear stages involved when undertaking a literature section: identifying appropriate sources; evaluating and testing out their relevance to your work; synthesising information into a well-structured and coherent written argument. The literature section can be summarised, therefore, as a piece of critical analysis which demonstrates your knowledge and understanding of the field within which you are studying. In that sense it has the following functions: 1. It illustrates where your work is located in relation to existing work in the field; 2. It frames your own argument; 3. It consolidates previous research into a structured piece of writing; 4. It helps to frame the research question. It should be made clear at this point that a literature section should not be a place where you: answer your research question; get on a ‘soap-box’ and rant about your own views; write descriptively; produce a long list of what you have read about. This chapter will provide a number of pointers for approaching literature which should help you avoid some of the pitfalls that can occur when putting a literature section together. It also offers some strategies which can help you manage the sources you may explore. Where to Begin? The first step is to think about the area you wish to explore. There is very little that has not been explored and you should see your work as adding to an existing body of knowledge (O’Leary, 2004; Burton et al., 2008). This thought should help you as you begin your search but also provide you with some comfort that you don’t have to invent a new research area. You also need to identify where you will draw your information from. The following are possible sources, although not an exhaustive list, from which you can gather information: article in a peer review journal article in a professional journal authored book chapter in an edited book textbook conference proceedings thesis or dissertation magazine or newspaper websites (but not Wikipedia, as it is not edited) official statistics Thomas (2013) provides a useful summary of the relative benefits and pitfalls of various sources, particularly emphasising the issues involved with accessing non-peer reviewed sources. The use of electronic databases, whilst contributing to the ease of locating information (Burton et al., 2008) also presents some issues of which you need to be mindful. Ensure that you follow the appropriate referencing conventions for all sources, but in particular online sources, to ensure that you do not fall foul of academic misconduct/plagiarism (see Chapter 3 for more information). Oliver (2012) advises the use of key terms in helping you identify sources for your work. Key words can be placed into search engines to help you identify the most appropriate sources for your chosen area, but you can also look at the list of references at the end of a source to see whether that could provide some useful sources for you (O’Leary, 2004). Once you have identified a particular source to use, you need to ask questions about the quality of the source you are using: Is this piece of literature based on a piece of research? Can I trust this source? What kind of research has been used? Was the study large or small scale? What is the research claiming – what conclusions are being made? Who has authored the work? Would the researcher have a vested interest in the results? It may not be possible to answer all of the above questions, but they serve as a useful guide in helping you assess whether the literature you are exploring has any limitations that may impact on your own study. For example, in working out whether you can trust the source you may wish to find out whether the work has been peer-reviewed. Work that is peer-reviewed undergoes a rigorous process of being reviewed by other academics working in the field and may have been amended to reflect a detailed critique of it. Information from other sources may not have been through this process, however, so it is your job to weigh up the relative merits of the different types of sources you use. To begin with you should have an idea of what area you would like to explore. You may have a research question, but this may still be in development. At this early stage, it does not really matter whether you have fully defined your question – you should be able to develop it further once you have read around your area in more depth. Let’s look at Tricia’s story: As a result of this process, Tricia entered a phase of filtering her literature – working out what was important to her study, that which was important but peripheral information and that which was irrelevant to her study. Whilst she could then focus her efforts onto the specific area she was exploring, she continued to ensure she had a sufficient range of texts to enable her to consider different perspectives and views that were evident in the literature (Coles and McGrath, 2010). She noticed that as she read, she could identify different themes and this formed the basis of how she organised her search. Machi and McEvoy (2009) provide a useful tool for this as illustrated in Figure 7.1. Figure 7.1 Tool for organising literature into themes (Adapted from Machi and McEvoy, 2009: 52) In practice, this structure will enable you to clearly identify the specific focus of your research. For example, Ben wanted to look at the broad theme of Social Justice and Education, but did not have a clearly defined focus. He used the tool in Figure 7.1 to help him construct an overview of the literature to determine the specific area he would explore. As he continued to read he found four main themes emerging: academies; SEN and inclusion; educational outcomes; marketisation of schools. He was able to further extrapolate sub-themes on the area of educational outcomes (as illustrated in Figure 7.2) as he continued to read. This sub-theme then formed the main focus of his reading and engagement with the literature. Figure 7.2 Tool for organising literature sub-themes (Adapted from Machi and McEvoy, 2009: 52) At this stage Ben continued to be unsure of the exact research question he wanted to explore, but he had gone a long way in determining what the precise focus of his study would be. This often takes longer than most students expect, so be prepared for this part of the process to take time as you begin to unearth parts of the literature which will excite and motivate you. Case Study Tricia was interested in exploring the area of working-class students in schools. At the beginning of the process she was not entirely clear about the direction of her study but was intrigued by the idea that there seemed to be some differences in educational outcomes across middle and working-class young people. To help her refine the research question she looked at: Department of Education (DfE) data on attainment; Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) data on low participating groups in higher education (HE); Academic journal articles and books recommended by her supervisor. Whilst the statistical data interested Tricia, she was much more interested in the sources that presented narratives of young people’s experiences of education as they made decisions about whether to go to university or into work. This led her to develop a research question: ‘What are working-class experiences of education as they prepare to transition out of compulsory education?’ The key message here is that Tricia used the literature to reframe the direction of her study. It had moved from an interest in academic attainment differences across social class groups to their aspirations. The statistical information continued to be helpful in providing an overall picture of what happens but Tricia’s interest and on- going motivation was based on the ‘stories’ that had been presented in what she read. Developing the Research Question As you progress through the literature you should make notes of anything that interests you. This will help you to funnel down into something that is researchable. Your research question should literally ‘tumble’ out of the literature section. Because your literature section builds a case, and sustains an argument around the research you wish to explore, your question should naturally flow out of that case. In that sense, by the time your reader gets to the end of the literature section, your question should not come as a surprise. The following case study illustrates how this can be achieved. Polly has done a commendable job in ensuring the literature presented leads into her aims and research question. It is clear from the question that the aims of the project can be met: it all ties together and makes sense. It is also clear that Polly had been through a process of managing the information in her study: she was able to construct appropriate sub-themes within her literature section which helped her achieve coherence. This was not achieved by chance. Polly developed a systematic approach to managing the literature which we will explore in the next section. (For more information on developing your research question(s) read Chapter 4.) Case Study Polly used her literature section to explore the ways in which pupils permanently excluded from school end up experiencing other forms of disadvantage. She uses appropriately themed subtitles to help build her argument. The subtitles were as follows: 1. – Educational Exclusion 2. – Social Supports 3. – Institutional Habitus 4. – Working-Class Disadvantage In each section Polly made a case which had the common thread of disadvantage running through. It therefore came as no surprise to the reader when she stated the aims of the project as being: The literature discussed proposes many societal barriers and educational inequalities young people face, particularly for those of working-class origin. In accordance to this, recent times have revealed an increase of NEETs, proposing a lack of interest towards further education and getting into employment – due to the unreliability of the economy and job market. Therefore, this study proposes to explore the aspirations of young people, in particular pupils permanently excluded from education as they are probable to fall into the category of NEET (DfE, 2013b) obtain low or no qualifications (Castle and Parsons, 2006), and self- eliminate themselves from society because of earlier rejection (Bourdieu and Passeron, 1977). In particular the main foci are: to explore pupils’ plans after compulsory education and the wider future, and pay attention to their experiences of the process of ending education, the support received and concerns for the future. In order to explore these foci, the following research question is posed: ‘What can permanently excluded pupils tell us about their educational experiences and how these have informed their thinking about their future?’ Managing the Information As you find sources to read you will need to keep a good record. An organised approach will help you to manage the sources so that when you need to refer to the information, you can find it quickly. There is nothing more frustrating when putting a literature section together, when you know that you have read something that would contribute positively to your argument, but you just cannot locate it. You may wish to invest in Refworks or Endnote which are online bibliographic software management systems and commercially available. They link into Microsoft Word, for example, with a ‘cite while you write’ function which helps you to integrate the sources into your argument as you go along. However, if you do not have access to tools such as Endnote or Refworks there are alternative ways in which you can manage your sources. Figure 7.3 Grid to structure literature The grid I have devised (see Figure 7.3) not only helps you to synthesise and consolidate the reading that you do, it helps you to manage the literature. You could organise the grid into themes so that when you commence writing, you can easily access what you have read for each theme. The key concern is to ensure that your hard work in relation to the literature does not get misplaced. It is worth investing time into developing a method that you can manage and that works for you. Another example of how to work with the literature is provided in Table 7.1. This structure helps you to consider the way in which the sources contribute to your own understanding of the issue/s under exploration. For each of the subheadings, you can identify key aspects of a text that help you shape your thinking about your research area, which can subsequently feed into the argument you develop. The key difference between the first and second grids is the depth of critique. The first grid offers a descriptive level of information and does not require much analytical thought. The second provides much more detail and also illustrates how the text relates to other sources in this particular field. This approach will encourage you to think deeply and deconstruct the text in a way to highlight areas of tension (critiques of other definitions), limitations of the material (excluded from the definition), and understanding of the source (included in the definition). Thus it is a useful method for being able to cross-reference the content with other sources. This process of critique should enable you to form an argument of your own. The final column is a useful way of pulling out key quotes which can appear in your own literature section. You should use quotes sparingly, of course, and my advice would be to ask yourself whether you simply cannot put the information in a better way without losing some of its meaning/message. Where possible you should try to paraphrase rather than use direct quotes, but if you believe this will have a detrimental effect on the passage’s meaning, you should quote it directly, remembering the specific conventions that apply to quoting existing material: Quotes of more than two lines should be in a separate paragraph and indented from both the left and right; Quotes of less than two lines should be integrated into your text with quotation marks appropriately placed. Whatever strategy you adopt for managing your sources, you will need to ensure that it supports your endeavour to consolidate, evaluate, critique and synthesise the material you read (Punch, 2009; McMillan and Weyers, 2010). In addition, if you ensure that this part of the process is conducted methodically it will save you much time later in the writing process (Walliman, 2011). It is obvious when students have not systematically approached the literature that informs their study and can often lead to a fragmented section that does not achieve coherence. In addition this can lead to the argument not being supported with sufficient evidence. Look at Luke’s opening section in the case study below. It is very difficult to determine what this literature section is setting out to do. The first paragraph reads very much as a first draft, where ideas are being noted. There is no sense of direction or argument. The inclusion of Ball (2003) is not linked into the work in a coherent way as there is no sense of chronology and it is unclear whether Ball is in fact referring to the structure of education following the 1944 Education Act. There is little substance to this opening and also an apparent lack of understanding of the key themes that are being written about. There is also the issue that Luke has omitted to provide the page number for the quote he has included. Another example of a weak literature section, in this case study from Helena, is provided below. In this example, in addition to the poor writing style, Helena moves from one author to the next without having completed any critical evaluation and synthesis of the material. There is an attempt to relate the material as she goes through an explanation of the term ‘continuity’, but this is not done in a way where her own authoritative voice is evident. It is very important, as you move through your argument, that you sustain an authoritative voice and that your argument is evident from the start of your literature section. In this example from Helena there is also some confusion with the key terms being used. She does not adequately convey the different meanings between ‘continuity’, ‘growth’, ‘advancement’, ‘progression’ and ‘continuous development’. Because these appear to be central to what is being said, it is important that the meanings are appropriately delineated in order that the reader can clearly identify what message is being conveyed. She is also not being consistent with her referencing technique. It is equally important to ensure you start your literature section with a purpose – that is, start it convincingly with a strong argument achieved through the development of an authoritative voice. Case Study The English education system has been an on-going debate since 1944, especially that of secondary education. Not only has it been subjective to the public, it has also been dramatically influenced by Educational Acts through the years. The system has always favoured the upper class families, finances being an influential factor on a child’s education in more ways than one, this does not seem fair for the child as everybody should have an equal opportunity to succeed and lead a life that they choose. The system has progressed dramatically since the 1944 Education Act, there have been many different approaches that have been put across to help improve the system and allow us to gain a greater education. In 1944 it started out, in my opinion, as a system that favoured the middle class, regardless if you pass the 11 plus or not. The test would entail you looking at what one of three schools you would go to. ‘Different types of school for different types of mind, was clearly modelled on a class- divided vision of education’ (Ball, 2003). Case Study The term continuity, defined by Capel (2006) as ‘a consistent line of development without any sharp breaks’ (46). This statement is supported by Murdoch (2004) who states that Physical Education should ‘be one logical, focused, seamless, smooth state of growth or advancement’ (287). Publications by the DFES (1987: 4) divulge that the introduction of the English curriculum also welcomed an aim that all children would undergo ‘a broad and balanced curriculum whilst demonstrating continuity and progression’. More recent research into continuity within education by Capel (2013) suggests that ‘communication between teachers which ensures the planned provisions of teaching and learning to facilitate pupils’ continuous development’ (CCCUC, 1998: 10). Present the Argument from the Beginning Your literature section should read like a coherent story and not a list of ideas that you have come across. In order to achieve this you need to synthesise and analyse the material you are reading (Coles and McGrath, 2010; Oliver, 2012). One of the main tasks you have when constructing your literature section is to draw your reader in – capture their interest in your work from the beginning. Take Lisa’s beginning sentence in the case study below: The writing here is very descriptive and vague. There is an unsubstantiated claim in the very first sentence: ‘There are a number of theories surrounding how educational and career aspirations are formed and developed’. The writing does not make it clear what the theories could be and indeed whether they are in fact ‘theories’. As a result, this opening does not provide sufficient information to draw the reader in. There are also potential issues with the broadness of the project under exploration: educational and career aspirations have two large literature bases supporting them and for most writing projects it would be better to focus on one area. In addition, this opening alludes to the type of research that will be conducted despite being the opening of the literature section. Whilst this information is useful to the overall project, it is problematic to present it in the opening statement without having presented the argument that justifies using this age group and context. This information would more appropriately sit within the methodology section where the sample and research methods are discussed. Following a meeting with her supervisor, Lisa was advised to re-visit this and construct a more focused and argument-based opening. That is, she needed to think about the ‘issue’ under exploration. The final re-working was as follows: In this final iteration (and there were many drafts in-between), the sense of argument is much clearer. Lisa clearly identifies what the research is about and uses literature to build the case for the study. Machi and McEvoy (2009: 62) argue that ‘scholarly argument is not meant to overpower, but rather convince’. This can be achieved if attention is paid to the development of the argument, that is, the way in which your writing can be viewed as sustaining its message. The trick to this is to ensure that your themes flow from one to another and to avoid description. Achieving Flow Kamler and Thomson (2006) provide a useful framework for structuring your writing. Whilst their advice focuses on doctoral level writing, it can also be applied to all dissertations. They suggest that scholarly writing should be interesting and that it should move away from ‘stodgy prose’ characterised as ‘soporific slabs of writing, formulaic, over signposted, bristling with brackets, crabbed and turgid, [and] generally just a very dull read’ (Kamler and Thomson, 2006: 125). They also refer to the writing process as being formed by ‘argumentative moves’ (ibid.: 125). ‘Moves’ in this instance can be understood as being stages or steps in the argument that you are building. In establishing the ‘argumentative moves’ for your own work you need to clearly think through what it is you want to say and in what order you want to say it. In the same approach used by Kamler and Thomson (2006), Rich began to consider the order in which he wanted to explore the area of working-class young people’s educational experiences. The following email exchange illustrates the difficulties Rich faced as he tried to bring all the information he had read together into a coherent argument. This short email exchange helped Rich to re-focus his argument and he subsequently went on to produce an interesting submission that successfully presented a number of complex theoretical ideas. In reaching this successful outcome, Rich had to focus his intention on the argument. He went through the process of writing out sentences that could be used to frame each section of his work in the way that Kamler and Thomson (2006) suggest. His first attempt was problematic as it did not fully capture the sense of direction for the argument, lending itself to a very descriptive and chronological account of working-class disadvantage in education as illustrated in the following case study section: Rich then began to craft and re-craft his work and successfully presented an engaging and persuasive argument that fully integrated a range of sources and the theoretical ideas of Bourdieu. He avoided the potential for description by focusing his attention on what he wanted his argument to say and by employing the techniques he had discussed with his tutor during tutorials. Case Study Rich’s email: I’m really struggling with my assignment again. The plan that I’ve got I’m rapidly losing faith in and beginning to panic. My question is still ‘Is the education system failing young people from disadvantaged backgrounds?’ I really need help but don’t know what to do and really worried I’m messing everything up. Any advice would be welcomed with open arms! Tutor’s reply: We’ll talk about this on Thursday – my first word of advice is – don’t panic. My second is: go back to the crux of the argument – what would you like your assignment to say? Then construct the sentences that will help you develop and shape your paragraphs. E.g. Is the education system failing young people from disadvantaged backgrounds? Evidence suggests that young people from disadvantaged backgrounds do badly at school (use statistics in this section) This issue has been an on-going problem for many years despite Government initiatives (highlight Government initiatives that have sought to address the problem) This issue can be understood through Bourdieu’s conceptual tools (highlight field – structures within schools that contribute to the problem; habitus – the alienation from education experienced by disadvantaged groups) Summarise the key issues With this structure you should have sufficient scope to write an insightful assignment – for ‘field’ – there is so much to write about which could actually take up more words than you have, so make sure you synthesise this area of your work. Begin jotting notes on how you will support each section (e.g. section 1 – statistics – exam results; truancy; exclusion rates – highlight that these are different across the differing social group demographics). Then keep expanding until you can get some paragraphs out of it. Case Study Rich’s proposed structure: 1. Children are ‘born to fail’ – Wedge and Prosser, 1973; 2. The tri-partite system continued to privilege middle-class young people; 3. The 1988 Education Reform Act created an education market place; 4. Exam results show that working-class young people perform less well than their middle-class peers at all stages of education. As Rich discussed this structure with his tutor he soon began to understand the issues with this approach and began to re-craft the structure based on his tutor’s advice: Rich’s revised structure: 1. Examination results illustrate that working-class young people do not achieve as well as their middle-class peers; 2. This ‘problem’ contributes to low participation rates of young people from disadvantaged backgrounds in higher education (HE); 3. Whilst Government policy has attempted to address the issue, it appears not to have been successful; 4. Bourdieu provides a theoretical perspective that enables us to understand the structural constraints within education that contribute to the issue. Avoiding Description Avoiding description is a key element of your writing. You will find that higher marks are awarded to work that is able to present an argument rather than that which merely describes existing ideas. The skill of turning descriptive writing into an argument requires practice and you will need to be committed to drafting and re-drafting your work many times (Basit, 2010). You may find this difficult and it can at times be difficult understanding what the difference is. The following example illustrates descriptive writing: In 1988, the Education Reform Act introduced league tables which consequently led to the marketisation of schools. Once this statement is presented in a different way it can clearly establish a position where your voice comes through. The re-drafted statement offered below is much more persuasive than the descriptive writing in the previous example. You should identify what the ‘issue’ is that needs to be presented and work your sentence around that. In this example, the ‘issue’ was the impact of the 1988 Education Reform Act in developing an education quasi-market place. There is no sense of argument in the descriptive writing, whereas in the second, the ‘issue’ can clearly be identified: ‘increased competition between schools’. The publication of league tables, following the 1988 Education Reform Act, has increased competition between schools, effectively turning education into a quasi- market. The following case study further emphasises the way in which descriptive writing leads to a weak argument being presented. If we unpick this section we will see issues not only with description but many other aspects of academic writing: The first sentence, for example, makes the claim that ‘all parents are different and therefore have differing opinions of where their child should go to school’. This claim is not substantiated and therefore has not been supported within the field within which the ideas are located. The second sentence begins descriptively by stating that Gerwirtz et al. (1995) ‘looked at the overall market, choice and equity of education’. There is no argument being presented here. As a reader, I need to know what the issue is. For example, a more interesting statement might be ‘Gerwirtz et al. (1995) identified a lack of choice and equity in educational choice since the marketisation of schools’. This then becomes more interesting and less ambiguous in meaning. The third sentence is out of place. There is no need to identify the research methods as part of the narrative/argument unless it is vital to the argument. That is, if you can  identify a potential issue in relation to the findings that has been influenced by the way in which the research was conducted. In this example, the information appears unnecessary and does not develop the argument in any way. There is an attempt to critique the literature through the statement ‘Despite these results it is important to note that this is not always the case as two children from the same social class may have either very involved parents; who know about the education system or parents who care less about their children’s education’. There are punctuation errors in this section of writing but importantly, there is limited coherence. The statement is not supported through literature and comes across as very anecdotal. In academic writing this should be avoided. Writing a literature section should be an enjoyable process – it enables you to understand the field within which you are working but also provides you with an opportunity to develop your own position on a particular issue. Whilst some of the process can be frustrating at times, approaching your literature systematically should help avoid some of the feelings identified at the beginning of the chapter. Let’s look at some key points that will help you as you engage further with your area of interest. Case Study All parents are different and therefore have differing opinions of where their child should go to school. Gewirtz et al. (1995) looked at the overall market, choice and equity of education. The research looked at both demands and supply in terms of what parents wanted and how schools chose pupils in ‘three overlapping local education markets in an English city – London’ (Gewirtz et al., 1995: 21). Interviews were conducted with parents, teachers and members of the LEA involving ideas of choice, enrolment and school performance. In terms of demand there is a strong correlation between that of social class and educational background. Parents from a more privileged background were more in control of the process of their child’s school choice and understood the public resources given to them to make an informed choice (Brighouse, 2000; Gewirtz et al., 1995). Despite these results it is important to note that this is not always the case as two children from the same social class may have either very involved parents; who know about the education system or parents who care less about their children’s education. Due to this, it is clear how ‘educational inequality may be facilitated by school choice’ (Brighouse, 2000: 113) as not only are the parents bothered by their children’s education; pushing for their children to attend certain schools but these children are more attractive to schools because of their parents enthusiasm and involvement for them to succeed. Key Points to Remember ‘There is no such thing as the perfect review’ (Hart, 1998: 25). This should not only offer you a sense of relief, but it further emphasises the idea that there is no work that can be free from bias/judgement. As you begin to form your own argument, you are presenting your views and as such, your own writing will contain your values/judgements. As you search through the literature be mindful of the range of sources you collect, question whether you are sticking to work that appears to fit with your own standpoint. If you do this you may not be able to construct a balanced argument that details contradictory views. Part of your job will be to weigh up the credibility of the sources you have identified: not all sources will carry the same level of credibility in the academic world (Thomas, 2013). Journal articles and book chapters go through a rigorous peer- review process and as such carry more weight than newspaper articles and some online sources. Our advice would be to assess the credibility of each source as you read it and consider whether the viewpoint needs to be focused on as you develop your argument. The process of identifying and deciding upon literature to be used in your literature section is not a simple one, because it requires interpretation of text – the critical uncovering of ideas and evaluation of fit: whether the work will feature in your argument or not. You need to take time with this. As identified above, you should be prepared to draft and re-draft your literature section – it will not come together overnight and it should not be rushed. You will not be able to do justice to your research area if you try to construct your literature section in a very limited time period. Your ‘story’ should have a beginning, middle and an end. You should outline the issues at the beginning (setting the scene for your dissertation; identifying the issue or problem to be explored) then move into the middle (explanation of the issue based on previous work) and the end (summarise the main issues, paradoxes, dilemmas and questions that have emerged as a result of the literature section). Further Reading Fink, A. (2010) Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper (3/E). London: SAGE. Hartas, D. (2010) ‘Doing a Literature Review’, in D. Hartas (ed.), Educational Research and Inquiry: Qualitative and Quantitative approaches. London: Continuum. Ridley, D. (2012) The Literature Review. A Step-by-Step Guide for Students (2/E). London: SAGE.