Literature Review Analysis Template

Complete two tables below (one for Article 1, another for article 2).

Article 1.
Article Citation in APA format
Farmer, S., Grissom, J., McQueen, K., & Ronfeldt, M. (2015). Teacher collaboration in
instructional teams and student achievement. American Educational Research
Journal, 52(3), 475-514.

Topic of Literature Review

What is the broader topic that is reviewed in the literature review section? What are the
sub-topics that are reviewed/discussed in the literature review?

The literature review of the article, Teacher Collaboration in Instructional Teams and
Student Achievement, centered on instructional collaboration. More specifically, the
authors (Farmer, Grissom, McQueen, & Ronfeldt, 2015) focused on “descriptive
information about collaboration and professional communities in schools, studies that
link collaboration to student achievement, and studies that examine features of
collaboration related to student achievement gains (p. 477).” The authors went into
further detail on each of these more specific areas in relation to instructional
collaboration.

Structure/organization of Literature Review

How did the author(s) structure or organize the literature review section?

The literature review includes an introduction followed by four parts. The first section of
the article included information relating to how collaboration varies from teacher-to-
teacher and school-to-school. The second and third sections linked collaboration to
student achievement both quantitatively and qualitatively. Finally, the last section of the
literature summarizes the focus of the research and sets the purpose.

By organizing/structuring in that way, what are the key points the author(s) present to you
regarding what is already known about the research topic? Write down key
points/statements from the literature review regarding the research topic.

The authors make several key points in regards to instructional collaboration. Some of
these include:
 A study of a nationally representative sample of K–12 public school teachers also
suggested that teacher collaboration varies widely (MetLife Foundation, 2009).
 In a study of Chicago elementary schools, Bryk et al. (1999) identified several
factors that facilitated professional community, including small school size, strong
principal leadership, and social trust among faculty.
 Although multiple studies have shown school climate to predict student
achievement (Kraft & Papay, 2014; Lee & Smith, 1996; Louis & Marks, 1998),
 these studies do not disentangle the effects of teacher collaboration from other
dimensions of climate.
 In case studies of discourse patterns among teacher teams, Little (2003) and Horn
and Little (2009) argued that the nature of teachers’ conversations with
colleagues serve to either open up or close down opportunities for teacher
learning, depending in part on the conversational norms that guide these
interactions.
 Adams (2008) concluded that the most effective PLCs were those characterized
by ‘‘collaboration with a clear and persistent focus on data about student
learning’’ (p. 89).

How did the literature review inform the author(s)’s research question(s) or research design
of the article?

The existing literature on instructional collaboration confirmed the association between

teacher collaboration and student performance and achievement. However, the
information did not clarify “(1) the types of collaboration that are common across schools
and whether these vary by teacher and school characteristics, (2) the collaboration
features that are most strongly associated with student achievement gains, or (3) how
within-school differences in collaboration may be related to student achievement (p.
481).” Because of this fact, the researchers based their question and design around the
effects of instructional collaboration on a large urban school district. They sought to
identify what collaboration practices were already in place, if teachers viewed these
practices as effective, and the variation from teacher-to-teacher and school-to-school.

Strength and Weakness

What do you like or dislike (or both) about the writing style of the literature review of this
article? And why?

As I was reading this literature review, I felt like the authors were able to make the
information they were presenting relevant by emphasizing the importance of
collaboration and the inconsistences in each school and district. It also aligned this to
school culture, which I thought was interesting. Authors provided statistics that gave
validity to the data they were presenting. For example, (Farmer, Grissom, McQueen, &
Ronfeldt, 2015) stated, “While virtually all respondents reported participating in
collaborations, they collaborated from less than 30 minutes per week (12%) to more than
3 hours per week (24%). Survey results also suggested that some kinds of collaboration
are more common than others. For example, many teachers reported meeting frequently
with colleagues to discuss ways to increase achievement and to examine student work
(75% and 68%, respectively), but far fewer (22%) reported observing colleagues to
provide instructional feedback. (p. 478) While reading this article, this statistic stood out
to me because it verified the where time was spent during collaboration and where it was
not. As I was looking at the statistics, I began reflecting on how these statistics apply to
me based on my own schools collaboration. I think it is important to make the
information provided in your action research relevant to other teachers as well.
Article 2.
Article Citation in APA format
Berka, M., Block, M., Brown, J., Brugar, K., Duke, N. K., Halvorsen, A. L., . . . Strachan, S.
(2012). Narrowing the achievement gap in second-grade social studies and
content area literacy: the promise of a project-based approach. Michigan State
University, Education Policy Center. Working Paper 26. (1-46).
Topic of Literature Review
What is the broader topic that is reviewed in the literature review section? What are the
sub-topics that are reviewed/discussed in the literature review?

The broader topic reviewed in the literature review section was the integration of social
studies into content area literacy through project-based learning. The sub-topics of this
literature review focused on the history, nature, and research that supports this teaching
and learning.

Structure/organization of Literature Review

How did the author(s) structure or organize the literature review section?

Similar to the first article, this literature review also includes an introduction followed by
four parts. The first section gives a brief history of project-based teaching. The second
section discusses their definition of project-based learning in relation to their topic. The
third section reviews the research collected on project-based learning. In the last section
of the literature review, authors discuss potential drawbacks of this type of teaching and
learning.

By organizing/structuring in that way, what are the key points the author(s) present to you
regarding what is already known about the research topic? Write down key
points/statements from the literature review regarding the research topic.

The authors make several key points and considerations in regards to instructional
collaboration. Some of these include:
 While there are many ways to integrate content area and content literacy
instruction, we join other scholars in viewing project-based approaches as
particularly powerful (e.g., Blumenfeld et al., 1991; Katz & Chard, 2000;
Railsback, 2002).
 The scholars suggested instructing children based on their interests and
natural curiosity and by learning by doing, rather than relying on the dry, rote,
learning of traditional approaches, as long as the approach was purposeful
(Beineke, 1998; Dewey, 1902; Kilpatrick, 1918; Kliebard, 1986).
 Thomas (2000) determined five key qualities consistent throughout much of
the literature. Specifically, he concluded that project-based approaches (a) are
central to the curriculum; (b) focus on questions or problems that drive
 learning; (c) involve the construction and transformation of students’
knowledge; (d) are at least somewhat student-driven; and (e) take the form of
authentic or real-world projects.
 Research on the impact of project-based approaches on both achievement and
affective dimensions such as attitude, engagement, and motivation is quite
positive overall (Thomas, 2000).
 Making social studies relevant to students’ everyday lives and grounded in
their prior knowledge and experiences appears to lead to deeper social
studies learning and engagement (e.g., Alleman & Brophy, 1998; Bennett,
2007).
 Research makes clear the need for considerable scaffolding and support of
teachers and students in project-based teaching (Thomas, 2000).

How did the literature review inform the author(s)’s research question(s) or research design
of the article?
The existing literature on project-based approaches supported the methods as a use for
the methodology to increase performance of students from a low SES on standardized
testing. “Following review of literature and use of focus groups, we developed detailed
unit and lesson plans for two projects (between 50 and 75 single-spaced pages each),
grounded in characteristics of project-based pedagogy (Berka et al., 2012).”
Strength and Weakness
What do you like or dislike (or both) about the writing style of the literature review of this
article? And why?

After reflecting over this article and the methods used for research, I could not help but
begin thinking about my own action research on word studies. I kept considering how I
could apply what I have learned from this article to my own literature review. I thought
the structure of this review was beneficial because it provided the background for why
this information was important, and provided research-based data as evidence for the
implementation of project-based methods. I think this is beneficial because it gives
validity and evidence for these research-based measures. One of the areas I liked most in
this literature reviews was the potential drawbacks for the implementation. This is
important information to include and recognize because this was an immediate thought
that came to my mind just when reading the title. The authors covered these drawbacks
early and then addressed rest of their information in the article. “These are challenges
we have attempted to address in the present study: providing considerable support
for teachers to implement a project-based approach, aligning project-based units to
specific learning standards, and curricular-izing project-based learning such that, if
successful, projects could be implemented by many teachers across many settings
(Berka et al., 2012).”