奇书网

Section 2 Purpose of Literature Review（第1页）

Se2:PurposeofLiteratureReview

Althoughliteraturereviewsmayvaryagtodise，theiroalissimilar。Aliteraturerevieilatiosignifitsourasubjedrelatesthefindihesesourarationalmaiurereviewauthor’sownthesis。Aliteraturereviewestablisheswhichsourcesaremostrelevanttoitsauthor’spointandwhichsourcesaremostcredibletothediseathand。Iurereview，theresultsofpreviousresearcharesummarized，anizedaed。

Theaimofaliteraturereviewistoshowyourreader（yourtutor）thatyouhaveread，andhaveagoodgraspof，themainpublishedwaparticulartopicorquestionihisworkmaybeinanyformat，inlimaybeaseparateassig，ororoductorysesofareport，dissertatiohelatterparticular，thereviewwillbeguidedbyyourresearchobjectiveorbytheissueorthesisyandwillprovidetheframeworkforyourfurtherwork。

Itisveryimportayourreviewshouldnotbesimplyadesofwhatothershavepublishedintheformofasetofsummaries，butshouldtaketheformofacriticaldis，showinginsightandanawarenessuments，theoriesandapproaches。Itshouldbeasynthesisandanalysisoftherelevantpublishedwork，lialltimestoyourowionale。

Activity2-1:Developingcritiking

Didthestudentinthefolloleshowcritikihefollraphawoquestions。

&（2001）suggestedthatteachersfiftedlearnersshoulduseadifferentiatedcurriculumthatprovidesgreaterdepth，variedtopiacceleratedpace。Theyalsoclaimthatteustbeusedtramgoalsaheindividualhegifted。Thisclaimisathatinformationandunisteologybeusedeffectivelytoassistthegiftedlearners。。。However，thepositiveresultsfiftedareheiionofteology。Thesestudentswillhavelikelylearnedwell，evenwithouttheiionofteologyintothecurriculum。Teologyisohodinformation。

1。Ueshowcritialysisoftheauthor’swork。

2。Howwouldyouuheauthor’suseested”and“thisparagraph?（Seelaoknowmore）

Activity2-2:Analyziures

Belowarefourversionsofaheliterature。Asyoureadthem，youmayheyvaryinanumberofways。Disgroupsaablewhichfollowsthetext。（Alsopayattentioationpatterheseversions。）

VersionA:

ThereadingsprovidegevideowhetherESLstudentsfruagebadsvaryinperformandbehavior。Kobayashi（1984）reportsdiffereioricalpatterns。Huang（1985）cludesthatgoodlanguagelearnersinPeople’sRepubliafiesadoptedbygoodlanguagelearnerselsewhere。Olleretal。（1970），ascitedbyTesdell，foundthatspellingerrorsvariedagtotheL1writiesdell（1984）foundnosuchvariation。

VersionB:

Fromastificperspective，retstudiesaimedatiiherlauralbadihelearningofEisfactory。Theavailablework（1-3）issmall-sdreportedonlyinsummaryform。Weaknessesialdesignandiisticaltestsmeanthatnosbedrareseherresearecessary。

VersionC:

&leastfourpapersrelevaionofbadvariatioheearliestfoundthattheL1writingsystemhadaonspellingerrors（Olleretal。1970），butlaterworktradictsthisfinding（Tesdell1984）。JapanesemaybeiheirbadiheyainginEnglish（Kobayashi1984）。Oherhand，goodlanguagelearnersmaybesimilaralloverthew1985）。

VersionD:

Tesdell（1984）foundthatspellingdidnotvaryagtolanguagegroup，althoughheearlierstudy（Olleretal。1970）showingvariatitoRomannon-Rsystems。SpecificrhetoricalpatternsinwritiifiedforJapanesespeakersbyKobayashi（1984）。Irast，Huang（1985）seemedtoshowthatatleastgoodlanguagelearnersinPeople’sRepubliaadoptedsimilarstrategiestothoseidentifiedelsewhere（e。g。，Rubin1975）。Itisdifficulttodrawthesefiperhapstospeculatethatbaayaffealearningstyle。

Analysischart