7/28/2019 Literature Review Workshop

1/1

Wolcott Literature Review in-Process Workshop ENC 1102

Please consider the following items as you discuss your in-process drafts, and use these to generate

helpful discussions about what you can do to improve your current drafts. As usual, you dont need to

answer each of these questionsfocus on the ones most important to the draft you have.

Is there an introduction? Does it define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern, thus

providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature?

Find three points ofsynthesis in your peers paper. Explain how they are synthesizing information

instead of recounting single arguments.

Does the author yet address areas of controversy or discrepancy, if those are relevant to your

study? If so, point to where they do this. If not, have a brief conversation about if there are any areas

of controversy that your peer noticed while writing their annotated bibliography.

Are there sub-headings in the current draft of the literature review? How were they chosen? Do they

make sense to you as a reader? Explain to the writer why or why not.

What do you think is missing from the articles being analyzedhas the author identified research

gaps, yet, in this draft? Have they articulated what those gaps are? Have they yet decided which of

those gaps they would like to contribute to?

Wolcott Literature Review in-Process Workshop ENC 1102

Please consider the following items as you discuss your in-process drafts, and use these to generate

helpful discussions about what you can do to improve your current drafts. As usual, you dont need to

answer each of these questionsfocus on the ones most important to the draft you have.

Is there an introduction? Does it define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern, thus

providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature?

Find three points ofsynthesis in your peers paper. Explain how they are synthesizing information

instead of recounting single arguments.

Does the author yet address areas of controversy or discrepancy, if those are relevant to your

study? If so, point to where they do this. If not, have a brief conversation about if there are any areas

of controversy that your peer noticed while writing their annotated bibliography.

Are there sub-headings in the current draft of the literature review? How were they chosen? Do they

make sense to you as a reader? Explain to the writer why or why not.

What do you think is missing from the articles being analyzedhas the author identified research

gaps, yet, in this draft? Have they articulated what those gaps are? Have they yet decided which of

those gaps they would like to contribute to?