TETD 819: Analytic Review of Empirical Literature

Week3

Reading deeply: Value positions

Value positions

• Always signaled by language choices, theoretical framing and “positioning” of the literature drawn on

• Often signaled by what is studied or the examples drawn upon

• Often signaled by what the author criticizes• Typically linked in different ways to normative

claims

So let’s examine Ladson-Billings’ value positions

Reading deeply: Mapping arguments

Argument analysis

• “An argument involves putting forward reasons to influence someone’s belief that what you are proposing is the case” (Hart 1998: 79)

• An argument comprises “giving reasons for some conclusion: the reasons [claims] are put forward in order to establish, support, justify, prove or demonstrate the conclusion” (Fisher 1993:140).

• An argument typically comprises at least two parts: reason(s)/evidence + conclusion

Hart (1998)

• Types of argument: Inference, assertion & supposition

Toulmin’s approach (from Hart 1998)

• Claim an arguable statement• Evidence data used to support the claim• Warrant an expectation that provides the

link between the evidence and claim

• Backing context and assumptions used to support the validity of the warrant and evidence

Fisher’s approach (Hart, p. 93)

Ladson-Billings, p. 472

Let’s begin with mapping L-B’s argument (and nested arguments) on pp. 466-468.

then

What is Ladson-Billing’s main argument in this paper, and

how do you know?

Remember

• Your argument in your analytic review must necessarily “grow out of” your data set

• In an analytic review, you cannot use your data set in the service of a pre-determined argument

More on writing analytic reviews

Winnowing your initial data pool

• Initial pass: Toss out anything that’s not a fullblown report of a study

• Prior to second pass: Develop and refine your selection criteria. These need to be documented, tied super closely to your research question, and justified. You will report your criteria in your methodology section.

• Second pass: Apply your selection criteria consistently to your data pool. This generates your final data corpus with which you will work.

• Watch for doubling up (multiple reports of the same study)• Attention to replicability

Finalizing & organizing your corpus

• Looking at Spencer, Knobel & Lankshear, for example.

Sample selection criteria

• qualitative study• article appeared in a peer-reviewed journal • conducted from a sociocultural theoretical

orientation• the study focused on "non-school" literacy• the study focused on children aged between 4

and 8 years• the study focused on literacy practices outside

school

Organizing your corpus• Decide what dimensions of the studies as a

whole are likely to be useful and draw up a table to summarize key elements for easy comparisons

For example

Reminders

• Liaise with your advisor re your research question and search boundaries.

When is enough enough?or

When is too much too much?