Organizing an Analysis for a Review of Published Literature
Summary: This handout explains the features and functions of a talk that reviews published literature.
First, organize to interpret results in an accessible, understandable way. Usually students research issues in order to evaluate the adequacy of what is known and to determine what more needs to be known. Your paper and presentation in CEVE 203 will enable you to view the topic you’ve picked through the lens of concepts and theories you’ve learned in 203. Your presentation will extend the rest of the students’ understanding of the relevance of their studies in 203. This purpose means, first, that your talk must be
- more than a summary–it must have an analytical point
- organized to be accessible, which means that the talk
- signals the goal or “destination” and plan or “map” for the intellectual “trip”
- helps listeners remember the map and know “where they are”
- reinforces with repetition of key terms and a “forecast and support” pattern
Furthermore, in grade school students are taught to summarize and then comment on the summary. Unfortunately, that leaves the audience in suspense–not knowing where the writer is going with the exposition of information. To improve the audience’s ability to understand your argument, the claims and points need to come BEFORE the evidence. They need to be “mental hooks” on which listeners can hand information.
Second, your talk needs to be connected to students’ interests. Psychologists tell us that listeners connect new information to old information or concerns. Unless you motivate the audience to make a memorable connection, the listeners may not form a strong link between your new information and their existing knowledge. They couldn’t pass a quiz a week later on what you covered. As speakers, you’re responsible for showing them these connections and engaging them in the topic.
Unfortunately, classroom experience tends to make students indifferent to topics their classmates present. Student audiences tend to classify presentations as “other required presentations” instead of handy, concentrated perspectives into additional new areas they may want to explore later. For example, during an internship or job interview, it’s very useful to be able to speak intelligently about the trends or developments engineering areas. So the common bad practice of beginning a talk by saying, “Hello, this is the X team and I’m Y. Today we’re talking about the LEED system” is pretty much a waste of time for everyone. Instead, consider what your own reaction would have been to
“Hello, my team wondered whether buildings using “green” strategies are going to be worth more ten years from now than conventional buildings. Some of the concepts we’ve studied this year can be applied to make a conventional site plan more environmentally friendly, but will those applications pay off? Can you be a more desirable candidate to a prospective employer because you know how to create economic benefits through your engineering work? Our talk will show you what you can and can’t promise in your next interview.”
Both your organization and introduction will make your literature review a hit with your audience.
Comments, questions, feedback, criticisms?
Send feedback
- E-mail the author of the module, Organizing an Analysis for a Review of Published Literature
Footer
More about this content: Metadata | Version History
This work is licensed by The Cain Project in Engineering and Professional Communication under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 2.0).
Last edited by The Cain Project in Engineering and Professional Communication on Apr 23, 2008 2:44 pm GMT-5.