Literature Review #2

[Dhipinder Walia]

Please post your writer’s memo here. Remember, I’m interested in hearing what you’ll do differently when completing this second literature review.

[Renee M]

Writer’s Memo

This second literature review poses new challenges. It is very different from the first one in multiple ways. This review is longer and needs more sources to support claims made through the review. The APA format will be a significant part of grading. The second review will also focus on the sources more as they must be evaluated with the idea of determining whether a claim or quote appeals to logos, pathos or ethos. Once determined, we must then incorporate these evaluations using an argumentative approach. This literature review also demands a new set of vocabulary to be able to incorporate quotes and evaluations.

[Dhipinder Walia]

This is great instruction for other students who might still be confused. The only thing I want to clarify is your point here:Once determined, we must then incorporate these evaluations using an argumentative approach.

You’re not going to ARGUE anything, rather you’ll be analyzing THEIR argumentative approach. The THEIR being the articles/research.

[Christopher Nunez]

In the next literature review I plan to focus more on how the author is trying to deliver the message that he or she is conveying. By doing this I will also be able to gauge whether the author is showing his ideas effectively or if it needs to be a bit clearer. Also for the next literature review I will try to see the authors use of logos, pathos, and ethos in their writing. By trying to find this element in their writing it can also be beneficial in looking at how the author displayed their ideas. Finally, I will try to use APA better. I will try to avoid simple mistakes and try to cite properly.

[Dhipinder Walia]

All great goals– especially the bit of understanding “HOW the author conveys their message.” I would push on that more and say “how the author makes his/her/their argument”

[John Cherry]

John’s writer’s memo.

My plans for the next assignment is to stay with my same style and pick a topic I’m interested in, a philosophical one. The main topic I am going to see if I can write about is if there is something that defines someone as truly good or evil. Hopefully by researching this ill be able to learn more about myself and come to a better conclusion on the topic. I am planning on seeing if there are articles about this before tomorrow.

2) This assignment is different from the first in the sense that in the first LA the goal was to just link two articles together with the same idea. With this LA the goal is to do the same thing but look more closely into the arguments being made and looking as to what methods are being done to get their arguments across.

3)The sample I am going to do is can a person be truly identified as good or evil.

[Dhipinder Walia]

Hi John– in fact, it might be REALLY worthwhile to choose a philosophical argument for this kind of review because you might come away with a firm position on which “perspective” or “argument” is more well-reasoned. Just a note– it’s okay if you’re looking at research right now and evaluating ALL OF IT for weaknesses and strengths. In other words, I’m not interested TOO MUCH in you pushing “your position.” I’m interested in seeing “your position” on the kinds of weaknesses and strengths within the articles themselves.

Good luck!

[Irine Argenas]

My plans for the second literature review is to be more advanced in terms of language. I will include logos, pathos and/or ethos where it is necessary to prove or disprove the overall argument made. The second literature review will focus more on analyzing different sources individually as well as providing connections between all of them. In order to do that, I will have to do extensive research on the sources and further analyze to make sure the information the sources are giving us are correct or not. As a result, the second literature review will be stronger in terms of providing correct information and including the strengths, weaknesses, and gaps of all the material provided by different authors and journalists.

 

[Dhipinder Walia]

Your point about researching the sources your research uses is such a GREAT one and will be helpful as your evaluate your research.

[Sofia Yanez]

For my second literature review I plan to stick with my topic of racism and white supremacy. However, this time I am going to evaluate the credibility of each evidence. I also plan to find the strengths and weaknesses in each evidence. Now that I learned about logos, pathos, and ethos, I can use these tools to help me go in depth with the evidence each author provides. In my next literature review, I won’t focus so much on summarizing the text, but acknowledge how the author uses the text to support their argument or claim.

[Dhipinder Walia]

Good– you might even consider positioning yourself as a surveyor of research that argues “we are a racist society” vs. “we are not” and see what kind of evidence and argumentative strategies are using on either side and evaluate it for strengths and weaknesses.

[Rushane Porter]

I still don’t know what I want write about. I wanted to write about abortion. However, I am contemplating my angle. I feel like I know how to go about doing the assignment, but my biggest obstacle is choosing a topic.

I believe that this assignment will be different from the previous one due to the content. We will have to expresss and explain how and why we are convinced or why we are against the writer, as oppose to the one before. We will have to be more clear in what we support as well as elaborate on the senses that the writer have evoked in us.

[Dhipinder Walia]

It’s not just about being clearer, it’s also about understanding EACH ARTICLE as an ARGUMENT and letting the reader know how each article argues its points, the evidence used, and whether the evidence has flaws or strengths.

[Ana da Silva]

In the second literature review, I will make the following changes: I will refer only to the author’s last name and the (year) of publication. I will identify what evidences the author used to support his/her argument. Then, I will evaluate if the evidence is enough, strong or weak. I will choose words like: claim, argues, etc to state the author’s opinion/idea.

[Larissa De La Rosa]

The second literature review will differ from the first in that there are more details and arguments being made. Not only are there sources used to support the thesis, there are also evaluations of those sources included. This can be done by using even more sources as a reference as to why the first one is or isn’t credible or reliable. There is more analyzing and evaluating authors as sources because of the claims they make. It’s a more in depth search for the truth or reliability, in essence. An example would be using Coulter as a source and then using two other sources to show that she is not a credible source because of x, y, and z. That could be either she lacks specialty in a certain area, she is exaggerating her claims, or she is just making up pseudo facts that can be disproven.

[Dhipinder Walia]

Excellent concrete example of how this literature review is different from the first– using sources to prove or disprove other sources is a GREAT technique.

[Ann-Kristin Vishinsky]

For my next literature review I am interested in the topic of global warming and specifically how the meat and dairy industry contribute to our upcoming climate crisis. My goal here will be how different scientists and organizations address this issue and what they recommend as solutions. I have personal interest in this topic and know that the government fails to address the greenhouse gas contributions of animal agriculture. Furthermore, the government disappoints in regards to informing the public about this aspect of global warming while only focusing on well-known global warming contributors such as transportation. Therefore, I want to find out how we can handle this threat in the future and find ways to combat global warming in a more efficient way.

[Dhipinder Walia]

You might position this as a “solution” literature review. Find articles that try to SOLVE the global warming/meat consumption crisis and EVALUATE the solutions. You might walk away then with a clearer sense of what solution WILL WORK and you can start from that point for the argumentative essay.

[Andrew Moeller]

For this next assignment I’m planning on reviewing my other literature review and using that almost as a template for this next review. Granted, it’s going to be a different topic but the structure of the article will be similar. Obviously one of the major differences between these two assignments is going to be the amount of information given to the reader. This review will likely have a lot more arguments, similar to the sample we read in class and I’m planning on incorporating a lot more examples to support what I’m arguing. My guess is that this review won’t be as political as something like the Media and Government sample but I’m hoping the argument is still as convincing.

[Dhipinder Walia]

It definitely doesn’t have to be political, but it should be more concerned with evaluation. How is the evidence used? is the evidence strong? enough? credible? weak? bias? flawed? etc.

[Kristina Vuceljic]

My plans for this assignment is to research and analyze my articles better.  From the first literature review I noticed I had trouble with incorporating both articles into one and comparing and contrasting them this could also be from the lack of knowledge I had on the topic This assignment will be different from the last because I will try harder to perfect this paper. The last paper I was confused on how to link the articles together and since there will be more than 3 articles this time I will try my best to evaluate all of them correctly by pointing out each articles strengths and weaknesses.

[Dhipinder Walia]

I appreciate your honesty and I do think you should go into this writing adventure KNOWING you’ll have TWO goals– identify CONNECTIONS AND evaluate EVIDENCE. It’s quite possible that your evaluation of evidence might be a possible connection between the three or four articles. For instance, if I found all the research used census data from 2013 to support an argument, I might spend a whole paragraph talking about that and explaining why it’s useful and if it’s credible.

[Abegale]

This Literature Review will be different from the first one in many ways. One way is that you have the option to use more sources than before which means the length of the paper will extend as well. In this literature review it will be more strict on the APA formatting so you have to put more time into making sure there are no formatting mistakes. Another difference between the first and second literature review is that the second one will require you to use logos, pathos and or ethos to explain how the author supports their claim/argument. It requires more through evaluation of your sources than before.

[Dhipinder Walia]

All excellent points– just remember, I don’t want you to use LOGOS PATHOS AND ETHOS, but instead EXAMPLES of these three strategies– testimony, observation, etc.

[Carla Landa]

This Literature Review requires more synthesis and evaluating. In this Literature Review I will choose a topic and evaluate it by using 3-5 outside sources. I will evaluate the evidence used in these sources, their strengths and weaknesses and how they support their arguments. I will also try to not have APA errors.To cite everything correctly and have this literature review properly structured. In this literature review I will summarize key points of my articles used and overlaps that they have. In my first literature review I had trouble organizing my paragraphs, however in this literature review I will organize them by overlaps, strengths and weaknesses of their evidence used.

[Dhipinder Walia]

I’m curious to know what you mean when you say you’ll organize paragraphs by “strengths and weaknesses” does that mean you’ll have paragraphs that focus on ONE strength of a piece of evidence? That seems difficult.

[yasony]

After today’s class, I saw many mistakes that I made in my first literature review. For my second literature review, I have to examination better APA style. I learned, in prior class, that for this literature review I will need to evaluate the sources that I will use identifying the new terms that I learned: logos, pathos and ethos.

For my second literature review, I have not chosen my topic, but I have some ideas. My first idea is to fix, cover and develop better my first topic about dropout rates in education. As second ideas I would like to develop topics such as legalization of marijuana, legalization of abortion, immigration, are wealth what makes people happy? and music as healthy advantage.

For me this literature review is a challenge because it is longer and has more requirements to follow than the first one. Also, because I don’t like to write a lot and, I am very specific to saying things. I say the things short and precise. But i am here to learn.

[Dhipinder Walia]

I like the idea of talking more about dropout rates in education. I also like the idea of looking at wealth and happiness. Immigration and marijuana legalization and abortion might be too broad?

[amina mohamed]

For the second literature review, I will be writing about guns and gun control and how it is affecting America’s society. I haven’t found sources yet, but I am planning on finding at least four sources about gun control. Two sources will be about how guns have positive effect on America and at least two that show the negative effects of guns. I also am thinking about writing how because we dont have gun control there are many mass shootings happening. Laws arent strict enough and many people have access to guns easily. Many criminals who have a bad past have been able to get ahold of weapons as well as mentally ill people. This shows how we need gun control. I will talk about how the sources support their claim. How they use ethos logos and pathos to explain their argument.

[Dhipinder Walia]

This sounds promising just remember– the research is the star in this– if you want to link gun control to mass shootings, you’ll have to find SOURCES that do it and then evaluate the evidence used to make the claim that gun control is related to an increase in mass shootings.

[Xheve Mulliqi]

In this Literature Review, I will choose a topic that will be about a problem and use 3 to 5 outside sources to find solutions. I will evaluate each source by identifying: logos, pathos, and ethos used. Provide examples, testimony, observation, details etc used in the text to support each authors argument or claim toward solving the problem.I will evaluate if the evidence used is enough, strong or weak and be clear in what I support and which solution will work.

[Dhipinder Walia]

Great plan!

[Jennifer Madrid]

In this literature review, I will research the growing impact that veganism has had in the last decade. I will analyze various sources that deal with facts, particularly statistics, that demonstrate why or how veganism has risen so greatly in the last years. Furthermore, I plan on finding testimonials of people who have tried veganism and/or know about it well enough to support ethos. To support pathos, I want to concentrate on pro-vegan advertisements, particularly PETA and the emotional impact it has been able to create among people.

What will also be different in this literature review from my previous one is that I will be looking for more sources. In previous paper, I mainly focused on journal articles and online articles but this time around, I want to find statistics and personal testimonies. And of course, I will be keeping logos, pathos, and ethos in mind throughout the entire paper, which I hadn’t done before.

[Dhipinder Walia]

I like the idea of exploring different types of texts and seeing how veganism is being argued as an appropriate choice. Remember, it’ll be your job to evaluate the method of argument. This can also include telling readers what you feel the “texts” are not considering, or evidence the “texts” fail to mention.

[Tanjum Nusrat]

In my second literature review, I have to use more sources then the first one which will make it easy to extent my paper. But it is also difficult because now I have to find the similarities between all these sources to support my thesis. I also found out many of my mistakes in APA format. I believe I will do better in my second literature review.

[Dhipinder Walia]

While I am excited to see you are thinking through HOW you’ll evaluate your research, just be cautious of not pushing YOUR position to the forefront. Remember, though I want to know what YOU THINK, I want to know what you think about the RESEARCH– so how each article proves their argument, what kind of sources are used, strengths, weaknesses.

[Author]

Posts