I was pondering about the literature review which I have to do for my online activity for the course. More I dig into the functionality and understanding of review, more ignorant I feel. So many things I was not aware of and now, with a bit of reading, I suppose, I am getting a better understanding.
Let me juggle through some e.g Topic is broad, but review question should be narrow! Otherwise, a reviewer will submerge into the 'Sargasso Sea' of knowledge and conundrum! Source of the literature is vastly important. If we are not careful about our selections, we might end up dipping into a sales person's tricky ad with lots of 'confounding' and 'causation' dilemma. Article could be a research, professional or just 'glossy' popular information designed for a huge audience. But mind it, all items have their own place and merit, otherwise we will end up choosing a ballistic missile to shoot a fly. While getting ready for literature review, came across some interesting readings e.g
" In education, one of the enduring controversies is whether children who do poorly should be held back". Most people assume that repeating a grade will help them catch up. Most of the popular literature also assumes that retaining children is a good idea. "However, in the research studies, where retained children are followed for the long term, there is zero evidence that it helps. In fact, the research shows that retaining children causes a lot of problems for everyone". (Jim Ollhoff, 2013).
Got to stop, now. Next time!
Following cartoon is 'just a bit of nothing' - the link reference: