Literature Review
- Due Oct 8, 2021 by 17:00
- Points 25
- Submitting an external tool
- Available Oct 4, 2021 at 0:00 - Oct 22, 2021 at 11:59 18 days
Format: Literature Review
Length: 2,000 words
Weighting: 25%
You are required to define a topic for further research, and produce a critical review of the literature relevant to your proposed topic.
Your literature review will involve:
- Conducting a preliminary search of literature relating to the content of your research topic, and to the range of available research approaches.
- Critically analysing and evaluating the body of knowledge through reflective thinking.
- Synthesising information and knowledge from the literature with personal insights.
- Clearly defining gaps in the literature, which justifies your decision to conduct research in the area.
A descriptive review of the literature is not acceptable. It must be a critical and evaluative review. Students will be assessed on their capacity to organise the literature, develop arguments and generate critical insights into their chosen topic.
The literature review should be approximately 2,000 words. All pages must be numbered and the document has to be prepared with 12 font size and single space format.
ULOs assessed: A, B, D
|
Assessment Type |
Literature Review Rubric |
||||
|
Criteria /Grade |
High Distinction (80-100%) |
Distinction (70-79%) |
Credit (60-69%) |
Pass (50-59%) |
Fail (0-49%) |
|
Search & Selection |
Evidence of a broad search and selection of material; consistent use of databases, experts, handbooks and web resources; selection of high quality material, like peer-reviewed articles |
Evidence of sound ability in search and selection of material; frequent use of databases, experts, handbooks and web resources; selection of quality material |
Evidence of a basic search of some databases and resources; some use of databases, experts, handbooks, and web resources; some use of high-quality materials |
Evidence of a limited search; limited use of databases, experts, handbooks and web resources; a few well-selected materials, but mostly non-scholarly resources |
No evidence of systematic or sufficient research; no use of databases, experts, handbooks, and web resources; poor selection of materials |
|
Synthesis |
The research is situated in broader scholarly literature or in a historical context; effective examination leads to statement of new direction for research; ambiguities are acknowledged but perhaps only partially resolved |
Demonstrates ability in evaluating research context; offers new directions in the literature; critical analysis and review of key terms and ambiguities |
Shows promise in engagement with research context; emerging new direction in the literature; analysis and review of key terms and ambiguities |
Evidences engagement with research context; some analysis and review of key terms and ambiguities |
No research context given; poor analysis of topic; key ambiguities and definitions missing |
|
Breadth & Scope |
Explains why specific topics and materials are used; gives clearly structures criteria for inclusion and exclusion of sources |
Demonstrates sound ability in justifying reasons for included and excluded literature |
Evidences discussion of the reasons for included and excluded literature |
Shows promise in discussing some of the reasons for included and excluded literature |
Does not discuss the criteria for inclusion or exclusion |
|
Justification for Research |
Clearly identifies specific gaps in the literature; articulate and persuasive justification to conduct research in the area |
Clearly identifies gaps in the literature; sound justification to conduct research in the area |
Identifies gaps in the literature; provides general justification to conduct research in the area |
Identifies vague gaps in the literature; attempts justification to conduct research in the area |
Does not identify gaps in the literature; no justification to conduct research in the area |
|
Style & Format |
Models language, style, and format of scholarly literature; publishable |
Style and format standards consistently applied; accurately documented |
Few errors of style and format; most sources documented correctly |
Inconsistent style and format; lacks precision in use of quotations and citation of sources |
Style/format standards not applied; sources plagiarised; clarity compromised by errors |
|
Language Conventions |
Free of mechanical errors; smooth flow and effective transitions |
Few mechanical errors; good flow and strong transitions increase comprehensibility |
Generally follows mechanical conventions, but with some minor errors; appropriate transitions |
Frequent mechanical errors; ineffective transitions and flow from point to point |
Numerous mechanical errors, making comprehension almost impossible |
|
Uses APA conventions |
Uses correct APA headings and referencing (in-text & final page) 80% or more of the time |
Uses correct APA headings and referencing (in-text & final page) 70-79% of the time |
Uses correct APA headings and referencing (in-text & final page) 60-69% of the time |
Uses correct APA headings and referencing (in-text & final page) 50-59% of the time |
Uses correct APA headings and referencing (in-text & final page) less than 50% of the time |
Find Rubric
