1. TETD 819: Analytic Review of
Empirical Literature
Week3

2. Reading deeply: Value positions

3. Value positions
• Always signaled by language choices, theoretical
framing and “positioning” of the literature
drawn on
• Often signaled by what is studied or the
examples drawn upon
• Often signaled by what the author criticizes
• Typically linked in different ways to normative
claims

4. So let’s examine Ladson-Billings’
value positions

5. Reading deeply: Mapping arguments

6. Argument analysis
• “An argument involves putting forward reasons
to influence someone’s belief that what you are
proposing is the case” (Hart 1998: 79)
• An argument comprises “giving reasons for
some conclusion: the reasons [claims] are put
forward in order to establish, support, justify,
prove or demonstrate the conclusion” (Fisher
1993:140).
• An argument typically comprises at least two
parts: reason(s)/evidence + conclusion

7. Hart (1998)
• Types of argument: Inference, assertion &
supposition

8. Toulmin’s approach (from Hart 1998)
• Claim
an arguable statement
• Evidence data used to support the claim
• Warrant an expectation that provides the
link between the evidence and
claim
• Backing context and assumptions used to
support the validity of the warrant
and evidence

9. Fisher’s approach (Hart, p. 93)
Let’s begin with mapping L-B’s argument (and
nested arguments) on pp. 466-468.
then
Ladson-Billings, p. 472

10. What is Ladson-Billing’s main
argument in this paper, and
how do you know?

11. Remember
• Your argument in your analytic review must
necessarily “grow out of” your data set
• In an analytic review, you cannot use your
data set in the service of a pre-determined
argument

12. More on writing analytic reviews

13. Winnowing your initial data pool
• Initial pass: Toss out anything that’s not a fullblown report
of a study
• Prior to second pass: Develop and refine your selection
criteria. These need to be documented, tied super closely
to your research question, and justified. You will report
your criteria in your methodology section.
• Second pass: Apply your selection criteria consistently to
your data pool. This generates your final data corpus with
which you will work.
• Watch for doubling up (multiple reports of the same
study)
• Attention to replicability

14. Finalizing & organizing your corpus
• Looking at Spencer, Knobel & Lankshear, for
example.

15. Sample selection criteria
• qualitative study
• article appeared in a peer-reviewed journal
• conducted from a sociocultural theoretical
orientation
• the study focused on "non-school" literacy
• the study focused on children aged between 4
and 8 years
• the study focused on literacy practices outside
school

16. Organizing your corpus
• Decide what dimensions of the studies as a
whole are likely to be useful and draw up a
table to summarize key elements for easy
comparisons

17. For example

18. Reminders
• Liaise with your advisor re your research
question and search boundaries.

19. When is enough enough?
or
When is too much too much?