|
|
|
- Is
the/your topic important, either from a theoretical or a practical
perspective?
|
|
|
|
- Is
the/your topic’s significance or importance demonstrated and justified?
|
|
|
|
- Does
the title of the/your manuscript adequately describe the subject of the/your
review?
|
|
|
|
- Does
the/your review include an introduction and a discussion and conclusions
section?
|
|
|
|
- Has
a reference list been included?
|
|
|
|
- Does
the/your introduction describe the scope of the literature being reviewed;
and why the topic is important?
|
|
|
|
- Does
the introduction describe the paper’s general structure?
|
|
|
|
- Does
the/your introduction identify the line of argumentation followed in the
manuscript?
|
|
|
|
- Does
the introduction specify the/your thesis statement or point of view, if
this is relevant?
|
|
|
|
- Has
an explanation been provided for findings described as being strong?
|
|
|
|
- Has an
explanation been provided for findings described as being weak?
|
|
|
|
- Did
you identify the major patterns or trends in the literature?
|
|
|
|
- Have
gaps in the literature been noted and explained?
|
|
|
|
- Have
any pertinent controversies in the field been described?
|
|
|
|
- Have
relationships among studies beem noted and
explained, such as which ones came first? Which ones share similarities?
Which ones have differences?
|
|
|
|
- Have
the source/s of key terms or concepts been indicated?
|
|
|
|
- Is
the path of the/your argument clear throughout the manuscript?
|
|
|
|
- Does
each part of the/your review flow logically from the preceding part?
|
|
|
|
- If used,
do subheadings, help to advance the argument?
|
|
|
|
- If
not used, would adding subheadings help advance the argument?
|
|
|
|
- Does
the/your conclusion provide closure for the reader?
|
|
|
|
- Does
the/your conclusion make reference to the line of argumentation you
specified in the introduction?
|