Summaries and Synthesis: what you should go to review its own literature

Bad literature reviews are often the same size – are usually (usually short) list of documents that the student has read, summarized. This is not really what is expected of them and not get a high score. Another common mistake is to look at the literature, which is used to indicate some of the practical activities of the project, and look at the work that has been responsible for the same or related research questions. You can do better, the writing is not only a synthesis of technology in their region, but also to synthesize the literature. In fact, the synthesis is one of the key skills that we expect from students last year.

So what is the synthesis? The main idea is that you should have understood the literature you have read and, more importantly, you must show that you understand the relationship between the elements of literature. This means that what comes first in your area, how it influenced later work, how each stage of research, improve what precedes it, and so on. Ideally, you present your own point of view of the work you describe. This, among other things means that you must be critical of the literature you read, and say where the gaps in the work is and how the work can be improved (in particular how your work will improve the well-known technique ). In addition, you can have your own opinion about where your research is likely to go in the future.

Criticizing the work of others is something that is often new to students last year. One of the most common mistakes I see students criticize the style of the newspapers they read, rather than research that these documents are described. Avoid writing things like “this document is not well written” or “this document is difficult to understand.” A review of the literature should be a review of research that has gone before, not a literary critic of the style of other writers who adopt.

http://www.profile.cegonsoft.com