500

Hart (1998) states that a literature review should “demonstrate that you understand the history of your topic” which I felt MacArthur et al. (2001) accomplished. They reviewed diverse literature that spanned fifteen years.

The purpose of a literature review is to identify what has been done in order to inform future research. McArthur et al. (2001) show that they reviewed literature which “addressed the efficacy of technology for students with disabilities” (p. 273) and go on to say that their literature review will take a different twist by focusing on “research on literacy and technology for students with disabilities” (p. 273).

I see a clear sequence in the introduction of the review by McArthur et al. (2001) which is:

1. Show importance of research topic
2. Identify gaps in past literature
3. Define key terms
4. Narrow topic and/or research and explain why
5. Show how research was found
6. Introduce synthesis and analysis (p. 274, para. 3)

#6 might also include brief mention of a critique of the literature when McArthur et al. (2001) said, “Furthermore, the quality of the research methodology is uneven” (p. 274, para. 3). However, I wasn’t sure about that.

Hart, Chris (1998). Doing a literature review. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

MacArthur, C. A., Ferretti, R. P., Okolo, C. M., & Cavalier, A. R. (2001). Technology applications for students with literacy problems: A critical review. The Elementary School Journal, 101(3), 273-301.