Start Drafting
It’s time to start drafting your paper. Follow the structure from your outline and start filling in the missing parts. Get out your notes and remind yourself of the sources you plan to talk about. You don’t have to write your paper from beginning to end in order–you can go to the parts that feel the easiest and start there. Here are some places you can start:
Bullet-Point Draft
With a Bullet-Point draft you take the ideas you’ve been outlining and fill them in with more details but only in bullet-point form. The beauty of bullet points is that they keep you from getting caught up in the language and style and allow you to focus simply on your main points. You can smooth out the sentences and transitions later, but for now, just get your ideas on the page.
Write the Introduction
Another way to get started is to write the Introduction. You already have a thesis statement, so now you can start introducing your topic and its importance, setting up your literature review.
Write a Body Paragraph
Or a third place to start is to jump into writing a body paragraph that synthesizes your sources. Use your notes and outline, and choose one set to talk about in paragraph form.
Don’t think too hard about getting things perfect when you’re drafting–that’s what revision is for. Just focus on getting started. If you get stuck, do some brainstorming activities to get your creative juices flowing. Once you have something written, I suggest seeking feedback to make sure you’re going in the right direction. In fact, I recommend getting as much feedback as possible along the way.
Synthesize
As you create a draft, try to incorporate several sources into each paragraph to be sure that you’re synthesizing and not just summarizing or listing without making connections. Your color-coded notes can help you be sure that you’re synthesizing.
Add Metacommentary
Metacommentary is the key to synthesis. Metacommentary (aka metadiscourse) is a type of commentary that guides your reader and helps them interpret the sources and evidence you’re presenting. Think of it as really powerful transitions.
Transition words act like signposts–they guide your reader through your points. They can also glue your ideas together so they feel more cohesive. Beware that transitions can definitely be overdone, but most students in general could use more transitions in their papers rather than fewer.
You might think you can just stop at transition words, but metacommentary is much more than just sprinkling some “therefores” and “howevers” throughout your paper–metacommentary actually takes your synthesis to the next level. What do you comment on? You can either interpret why a source is important, highlight its significance, or connect it with other sources. This is your chance to point out the answers to the four questions you looked for in your note-taking:
-
What do researchers agree and disagree about?
-
How are researchers narrowing or changing their focus to create new information?
-
What are each study’s limitations and strengths?
-
What’s the next step in research—what should be studied in the future? (The research gap)
You can think of metacommentary as a sandwich with your name on it. If my student’s name were Alisa, here’s what and Alisa sandwich would look like:
ALISA-SOURCE-ALISA
-
First, Alisa starts with a claim about what’s happening in the field or about a particular subsection or focus of the field. This could serve as a topic sentence for a paragraph, for example.
-
Second, she sets up the source with guiding language like transitions and references to her past points or sources.
-
Third, she writes about the source itself and summarizes pertinent information.
-
Lastly, Alisa comments on the source and/or connects it to her main point or to next source.
This type of sandwich can occur several times in a paragraph as you synthesize your sources. Here’s a sample paragraph from Chris, a Public Health student, who wrote a paper called “The Causes of a Behavioral Pandemic: Screen-time Addiction and Consequent Depression Among Adolescents.” I’ve bolded the metacommentary Chris included to guide his readers and to connect his points.
Even though there have been far fewer studies on adolescents than adults, adolescent studies have consistently shown that those who are more physically active experience less depressive and associated symptoms, as well as a greater overall state of well-being (Kremer, 2014). These studies have also shown that low levels of vigorous exercise in youth can independently cause depressive symptoms. One longitudinal study revealed that over 30% of children who participate in high levels of screen-time use experience moderate to high levels of depressive symptoms (Kremer, 2014). Additionally, another study of children in the United States demonstrated that those who participated on a sports team were less likely to exceed recommended screen-time limits established by the US Department of Health. This study also demonstrated that as the number of total physical activity sessions increased among youth, both during free time and at organized events, children were less likely to exceed recommended screen-time limits (Carlson, 2010). In this study, children who were more physically active consistently showed lower rates of depression and other emotional disorders. Therefore, evidence across multiple studies suggests that participating in screen-time activity may not be the direct cause of depressive symptoms, but rather the sedentary lifestyle and lack physical activity it causes among youth. With this recent evidence, experts are beginning to search for ways to replace screen-time participation of adolescents with physical activities.
Note how the last few sentences of this paragraph consist entirely of metacommentary–points that connect to the bigger picture of Chris’s literature review. Also notice how Chris uses transition words and phrases to glue his points together so it doesn’t come out of the blue when he brings up a new study. Also, Chris discusses more than one study in this paragraph, demonstrating his ability to synthesize and not just summarize. Without the metacommentary, it would be much harder to see the connections between the studies and how they fit into the bigger picture. Finally, Chris indicates the implications of these studies and points to what researchers are doing next. This has a duel purpose of reminding readers why this topic is important as well as indicating where he will go in his next paragraph (about physical activities). Metacommentary is powerful!
Metacommentary takes practice, but you can do it! And it will not only make your points stronger, it will make it easier for your audience to read and understand–which should always be your goal.
If You Get Stuck
Literature reviews can be hard. If you get stuck, I have a little trick I tell my students. For your first draft, try starting every sentence with “Researchers . . .” I know this seems formulaic, but if you can keep your focus on what particular researchers did or what they agree or disagree on, you’ll avoid the most common pitfalls of literature reviews: sounding like a typical argumentative research paper. If your focus is always on what researchers are doing or what they’ve found, then at the very least you’ll stay in the realm of the literature review genre. Later you can go back through and change up your sentence structure, but I’ve found that this is an easy way for students to get through a first draft.
A Word on Verb Tense
|
Tense |
Reference |
Example |
|---|---|---|
|
Past Tense |
A Single Study or Event |
McFly (1989) investigated the usefulness of hoverboards in a chase. |
|
Present Tense |
Generally Accepted Knowledge of the Field |
One of the most promising areas of hoverboard technology is the use of electromagnets (Allain, 2015). |
|
Present Perfect Tense |
An Area of Inquiry |
The usefulness of skateboards in a chase has been widely researched (McFly, 1985; McFly, 1989; McFly, 1990). |
The Real Last Step: Revise (and Revise and Revise)
Fantastic BYU Family Science professor Julie Haupt offers the following suggestions for doing four purposeful revisions–two global and two local.
GLOBAL REVISION–The Forest
Level 1: Structural Review (Global)
Purpose: The structural review examines the document as a whole to see if all requirements are met and the document’s organization is sound.
Meet Assignment Requirements. Ask yourself if your paper meets all the requirements of the assignment? Look at your structure and make sure you have all necessary sections such as the following:
- Introduction (with Thesis Statement and/or Organizing Statement)
-
Body with Headings
-
Conclusion/Discussion
-
References
Include a Thesis and an Organizing Statement. Does the current version of the thesis statement match the tone, scope, and organization of the body text? Does an organizing statement after the thesis introduce the major topics and the order they will appear in the body (e.g., “This review will first discuss . . . then . . . and finally . . .)
Use Headings. Is the body text subdivided in a logical way with evidence-based information located in appropriate sections? Are the major sections roughly symmetrical (in terms of length)? Are the headings brief, yet descriptive? If subheadings are used, does the major section contain at least two? Are all levels of headings separated by text?
Level 2 (Global): Paragraph/Logic Review
Purpose: The Paragraph/Logic Review is designed to review each paragraph for cohesion and compliance to the CEC (Claim/Evidence/Commentary) format.
Sequence Paragraphs Effectively. When reading only the first sentence of each paragraph, does the logical pattern of the paper emerge? Do the claims made in these topic sentences coordinate well with the thesis of the paper?
Check Topic Sentences and Cohesion. Does the topic sentence or claim provide an effective overview of the information that is located in the paragraph? Is the claim supported by several points of synthesized evidence, rather than a single study? Does each paragraph seem well directed and cohesive? Do the sentences build one upon another within the paragraph in a logical way?
Evaluate Paragraph Length. Are any paragraphs too long (longer than approximately ½ page)? Are any paragraphs too short (approximately three sentences or less)? Do paragraphs transition well from one to the next and use transitional words to connect ideas?
LOCAL REVISION–The Tree
Level 3 (Local): APA Formatting Review
Purpose: The APA Formatting Review is designed to make sure all APA conventions are explicitly followed to help the paper reflect a high level of professionalism.
Check Document Formatting. Do the body text and reference page appear in the correct page formatting as required? (Use the APA Manual if you have questions.)
Examine the Reference List Closely. Are all references in the reference list ordered alphabetically? Is the reference list double spaced entirely (with no extra gaps between paragraphs)? Are all references (e.g., journal articles, internet resources, or books) listed in the correct format? Is every reference on the reference list cited at least once in the body and does each in-text citation have a corresponding reference in the reference list?
Make a Final Check of the In-Text Citations. Is all information properly cited with an in-text citation when needed? Do all in-text citations include the year next to the author(s)? When more than one citation is listed within parentheses are they separated by semi-colons and ordered alphabetically by first author’s last name? If included in parentheses, do studies with multiple authors use ampersands (“&” rather than the word “and”) before listing the last author?
Level 4 (Local): Finishing Review
Purpose: The Finishing Review is an opportunity to look closely at sentence construction, language, hedging, and grammar/punctuation.
Review Phrasing with a Read-Aloud Session. Since having to read a sentence twice to get its meaning or “tripping over” phrasing can be an indication of awkward construction, are all sentences easily read aloud? Are any sentences so long that they have become difficult to comprehend, but could be split without changing the meaning?
Use Non-Biased, Non-Absolute Language. Do all references to people comply with the “people first” designation and avoid inappropriate uses of terms for various groups? Are the findings and summary statements in the review properly “Hedged”?
Check Punctuation and Grammar. Are all commas, semicolons, colons, hyphens, and other punctuation used correctly throughout the document (including the reference page)? Are common grammar mistakes, such as parallelism, subject-verb agreement, incorrect misuse of pronouns, and other grammatical issues corrected?
*Bonus Video
If you’re still confused or would like more guidance on writing a literature review, here is an optional 25-minute video that thoroughly goes through the entire process of writing a literature review. As an extra bonus, it’s made by Michael Paye from the University of Dublin who has an awesome Irish accent. Enjoy!
