Introduction
to the Review
1.
Is the area of interest explained? Does
the author of the review explain their connection or experience with the area?
2.
Is the purpose of the review made evident
to the reader?
3.
If terminology or concepts are being
introduced as part of the review, are these defined or clarified?
4.
Is the organization of the review made
evident to the reader?
5.
Is the method for selection of reviewed
materials described?
1.
Are headings used to group the literature
according to themes?
2.
If there are sections within the review
are these logically ordered and explained to the reader?
3.
Does the author provide clearly
articulated transitions between sections?
(Is the storyline easy to follow?)
4.
Is each item in the literature review
cited appropriately?
5.
How are quotes used? (If included, they should only be used when
the author cannot paraphrase the message easily.)
1.
Does the presentation of the studies
within sections include a storyline, that is, is the connection between each
piece of literature made explicit for the reader?
2.
When an item of literature is introduced,
is it summarized for the reader in terms of what the authors did, when they did
it, how they reached their conclusions, etc.?
3.
Is the author critical about each piece
of literature?
4.
Read the lead sentence in 5 or 6
successive paragraphs. If this were all
that was written would the storyline in this literature review still be evident
(it should be!)?
1.
Does the author go beyond summarizing the
studies? Is there evidence of analysis and critique of individual studies?
2.
Is there evidence of analysis and
synthesis across the studies? Are the messages that emerge from the literature
made evident? (This may involve comparing results, identifying differences
among a number of studies).
3.
Are the gaps, problems, or issues
unresolved by the literature clearly identified?
4.
Does the author provide evidence to
support the arguments, analysis, and criticism being made? Is the evidence
sufficient and convincing?
5.
Is the author's voice separate and
distinct from that of the authors they are summarizing, critiquing, and
reviewing?
1.
Does the author provide some summary and
conclusion that pulls together their entire review?
2.
Does the author identify the contribution
made by their review efforts?
3.
Does the author make suggestions for
research that needs to be conducted in the future?