Synthesis of research evidence literature review

Synthesis of research evidence literature review Final Project Component #2

Literature Review

Overview:

Write a literature review that demonstrates your ability to clearly present a synthesis of research evidence.  Be sure to describe the research gap that exists and why studying your topic is important.  Length will depend on topic chosen but 12-15 pages (APA style) is required (not including title page and reference pages).

 

Synthesis of research evidence literature review Guidelines:

The literature review summarizes and synthesizes the arguments, findings, procedures, gaps in topic, and ideas of scholars in a field of study. Also, it provides important background information that a researcher uses to situate his/her project in an academic area. I require a minimum of 15 citations (peer reviewed research articles only!) for this project.

 

There are three required sections for this literature review:

 

  1. Introduction
  2. Provide a clear, concise description of topic.
  3. Discuss the importance/relevance of topic to a particular audience.
  4. Methods- explain your selection criteria and how you found your articles
  5. Present an overview of the subsections (i.e., themes/patterns/issues) that you will take up in the review.

 

  1. Body
  2. Provide a clear, concise description of subsection.
  3. Discuss where this shows up in the literature—in more than one source.
  4. Discuss the findings or the key ideas.
  5. Present areas of disagreement or unanswered questions.

 

Repeat a. – d. for each subsection.

 

  • Conclusions
    1. Discuss what you have drawn form the literature review.
    2. Reiterate the key findings (briefly) and areas of agreement and/or disagreement.
    3. Indicate what questions remain to be answered—what further research could be undertaken.
    4. Restate the purpose of the project and research question(s).

All APA rules apply (i.e., cover page, running heads, etc.). See me if you have any questions.

 

Recommended Length:12-15 pages

 

 

Desired Outcome                                        Evaluation Criteria                                                              Grading                                    

 

Detailed discussion                                     Quality and clarity of,                                                         100 points

of relevant                                                                 introduction and conclusions,

literature                                                                                logic and clarity of findings,

over all organization, clarity, and mechanics.

Literature Review Assignment – Value and Risk: Enterprise Risk Management at Statoil

Literature Review

Synthesis of research evidence literature review Assessment Rubric

 

 

Evaluation Criteria Exemplary Satisfactory Problematic Unsatisfactory
 

Quality & Clarity of Introduction

 

Clear discussions with identifiable focus. Good discussions with minor ambiguities. Focus is stated but needs greater clarity. Unclear discussions with major ambiguities. Focus is unclear. Discussions and focus are not understandable.
 

Logic and Clarity of Findings

 

Strong logic and clear discussions of findings. Good logic with minor ambiguities. Discussions of findings need greater clarity. Unclear logic with major ambiguities. Discussions of findings are unclear. Logic and discussions of findings are not understandable.
 

Quality & Clarity of Conclusions

 

Clear conclusions with identifiable focus. Good conclusions with minor ambiguities. Focus stated but need greater clarity. Unclear conclusions with major ambiguities. Focus is unclear. Conclusions and focus are not understandable.
 

Overall Organization,

Clarity and

Mechanics

 

Little or no problems with grammar, spelling, and/or organization. Excellent use of APA formats where appropriate. Minor problems noted with grammar, spelling, and/or organization.  Consistent use of APA formats where appropriate. Major problems noted with grammar, spelling, and/or organization. Inconsistent use of APA formats. Poor editing of written work. Poor and inconsistent use of APA formats.

 

Last Updated on July 16, 2020 by Essay Pro