The literature review assignment has four (4) parts
1. Primary Review: First, conduct a primary literature review and analysis of Annette Lareau’s Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family, theoretical framework (see Appendix B pp. 361-364), research methodology (see Appendix A pp. 345-360) and findings (for additional information see Chapter 15 pp. 333-343 & see Supportive Tables pp.363-384).
2. Related Literature Review: Second, review, synthesize, and summarize related literature critical and supportive of Lareau’s research, theoretical framework, methodology, and findings.
3. Comparison Analysis: Third, take the findings from Lareau’s literature reviews above and conduct a keyhole analytical comparison of social and cultural reproduction of family life of households in your country ( Saudi Arabia ) . The procedure is to use your literature review findings as a lens through which to review and describe your country’s social and cultural reproduction of family life.
4. Write a Paper: Fourth, include 1-3 above in a stand-alone written final paper.
Your literature review assignment has four (4) parts:
- Primary Review:First, conduct a primary review and analysis of Annette Lareau’s Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family, theoreticalframework (see Appendix B pp. 361-364), research methodology (see Appendix A pp. 345-360) and findings (for additional information see Chapter 15 pp. 333-343 &see Supportive Tables pp.363-384).
- Related Literature Review: Second, review, synthesize, and summarize related literature critical and supportive of Lareau’s research, theoretical framework, methodology, and findings.
- Comparison Analysis: Third, take the findings from Lareau’sliterature reviews above and conduct a keyhole analytical comparison of social and cultural reproduction of family life of households in your country(SaudiArabia). The procedure is to use your literature review findings as a lens through which to review and describe your country’s social and cultural reproduction of family life.
- Write a Paper: Fourth, include 1-3 above in a stand-alone written final paper.
Comparative Analysis in the Paper
Thesis. In a compare-and-contrast paper, the thesis depends on how the things from Lareau’s information you’ve chosen to compare actually relate to one another. Do they extend, corroborate, complicate, contradict, correct, or debate one another? In the most common compare-and-contrast paper—one focusing on differences—you can indicate the precise relationship between A and B by using the word “whereas” in your thesis:
Whereas Lareau perceives social reproductionof inequality as secondary to the need to address cultural capital, my countrydoes not consider social reproduction of inequality but counts cultural capita. Whether your paper focuses primarily on difference or similarity, you need to make the relationship between A and B clear in your thesis. This relationship is at the heart of any compare-and-contrast paper.
Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal childhoods: Class, race, and family life (2nd Edition). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In John G. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the sociology of education. Westport, CN: Greenwood Press.
Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. C.(1977). Reproduction in Education, Society and Culture. London: Sage.
Calarco, J. M. (2014). Coached for the classroom: Parents’ cultural transmission and children’s reproduction of educational inequalities. American Sociological Review, 79(5), 1015- 1037.
Carlson, M. J., & Magnuson, K. A. (2011). Low-income fathers’ influence on children. ANNALS, AAPSS, 635, 95-116.
Cheadle, J. E., & Amato, P. R. (2011). A quantitative assessment of Lareau’s qualitative conclusions about class, race, and parenting. Journal of Family Issues, 35(5), 679-706.
Collins, J. (2009). Social reproduction in classrooms and schools. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 38,33-48.
Cucchiara, M. B., & Horvat, E. M. (2009). Perils and promises: Middle-class parental involvement in urban schools. American Educational Research Journal, 46(4), 974-1004.
De Graff, N. D., De Graff, P. M., & Kraaykamp, G. (2000). Parental cultural capital and educational attainment in the Netherlands: A refinement of the cultural capital perspective. Sociology of Education, 73(2), 92-111.
Jæger, M. M., & Breen, R. (2016). A dynamic model of cultural reproduction. AJS, 121(4), 1079-1115.
Lareau, A., & Weininger, E. B. (2003). Cultural capital in educational research: A critical assessment. Theory and Society, 32, 567-606.
Lee, J., & Bowen, N. K. (2006). Parent involvement, cultural capital, and achievement gap among elementary school children. Educational Research Journal, 43(2), 193-218.
Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2010). Learning in the home and at school: how working-class children’s ‘succeed against the odds’. British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 463-482.
Small, L. M., Harding, D. J., & Lamont, M. (2010). Reconsidering culture and poverty. ANNALS, AAPSS, 629, 6-27.
Stanton-Salazar, R. D. (1997). A social capital framework for understanding the socialization of racial minority children and youth. Harvard Educational Review, 67(1), 1-40.
Galvan, J. L. & Galvan, M. C. (2017). Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences. (7th Edition) New York, NY: Routledge.
1. Do parenting strategies affect the long-term outcomes for children? An interview with Annette Lareau
Norton Sociology Published on Mar 26, 2013Annette Lareau (University of Pennsylvania) talks the updated edition of Unequal Childhoods. In particular, she discusses how different parenting strategies based on socioeconomic backgrounds may or may not affect the long-term outcomes of children.
2. Unequal Childhoods: Annette Lareau
Published on Apr 23, 2016
Enroll now in our free online course on poverty and inequality in the United States: thepovertycourse.lagunita.stanford.edu
Here are seven simple rules that cover the most common literature review mistakes, in no particular order. Refer to these rules before submitting any written work:
- Do not write in the first person (no I or we).
- Use APA format,Times Roman, 12 point, & double pace
- Pay attention to capitalization on the References page. Only capitalize the first letters of titles and after punctuation. Capitalize and italicize all first letters in journal titles.
- Limit direct quotations to two, total, in the review and always include author, year, and page numbers for direct quotations. For example, (Galvan, 2006, p. 76). Paraphrase!
- Everything is double-spaced – no single, not triple, double. Everything is double-spaced.
- Use subheadings for the different points in your review.
- Only use peer-reviewed sources. Newspapers and magazines do not count as peer-review references.
What is a review of literature?
The format of a review of literature may vary from discipline to discipline and from assignment to assignment.
A review may be a self-contained unit — an end in itself — or a preface to and rationale for engaging in primary research. A review is a required part of grant and research proposals and often a chapter in theses and dissertations.
Generally, the purpose of a review is to analyze critically a segment of a published body of knowledge through summary, classification, and comparison of prior research studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles.
Writing the introduction
In the introduction, you should:
- Define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern, thus providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature.
- Point out overall trends in what has been published about the topic; or conflicts in theory, methodology, evidence, and conclusions; or gaps in research and scholarship; or a single problem or new perspective of immediate interest.
- Establish the writer’s reason (point of view) for reviewing the literature; explain the criteria to be used in analyzing and comparing literature and the organization of the review (sequence); and, when necessary, state why certain literature is or is not included (scope).
Writing the body, literature
In the body, you should:
- Group research studies and other types of literature (reviews, theoretical articles, case studies, etc.) according to common denominators such as qualitative versus quantitative approaches, conclusions of authors, specific purpose or objective, chronology, etc.
- Summarize individual studies or articles with as much or as little detail as each merits according to its comparative importance in the literature, remembering that space (length) denotes significance.
- Provide the reader with strong “umbrella” sentences at beginnings of paragraphs, “signposts” throughout, and brief “so what” summary sentences at intermediate points in the review to aid in understanding comparisons and analyses.
Writing the conclusion
In the conclusion, you should:
- Summarize major contributions of significant studies and articles to the body of knowledge under review, maintaining the focus established in the introduction.
- Evaluate the current “state of the art” for the body of knowledge reviewed, pointing out major methodological flaws or gaps in research, inconsistencies in theory and findings, and areas or issues pertinent to future study.
- Conclude by providing some insight into the relationship between the central topic of the literature review and a larger area of study such as a discipline, a scientific endeavor, or a profession.