literature review on writing skills

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Structuring your literature review

In this section, you will learn about structuring your literature review. You will find information on where to include the literature review in the overall structure of your thesis as well as how to structure your ideas and arguments within the literature review itself.

Where to place your literature review in your thesis?

While you are likely to refer to the literature throughout the thesis (e.g. when providing a rationale for the study, justifying your methodology, or linking your discussion back to the literature), remember that the literature review performs a specific function, which we saw in the section on the purposes of the literature review, and therefore usually appears as a unified and substantial section or chapter.

Accordingly, where you locate your literature review within your thesis depends on the structure of your thesis. Your thesis might follow one of the following three typical structures:

• Traditional
• Traditional complex
• Thematic based

Traditional thesis structure

Usually, in a traditional thesis, the literature review is a standalone chapter:

• Introduction
• Literature review
• Results and analysis
• Discussion and conclusions

Traditional complex thesis structure

• Main literature review 
• General methods
• Study one literature review 
• Study two literature review 
• General discussion and conclusion

Thematic based thesis structure

• Theme 1 – includes a literature review related to the theme 
• Theme 2 – includes a literature review related to the theme  
• Theme 3 – includes a literature review related to the theme 
• Discussion and conclusion

To summarise, depending on the overall structure you choose for your thesis, the section you call your literature review may form:

• a discrete chapter (e.g. traditional thesis)
• different sections distributed among other thematically-based chapters (e.g. topic-based thesis)
• a combination of the above (e.g. traditional complex thesis)

What overall structure do you think your thesis will take?

Where will your literature review appear as a result of this overall structure?

The internal structure of the literature review

An effective literature review usually observes the following structure:

• Introduce the problem and the context
• Summarise key trends, themes, areas of controversy and the gap(s) in the literature
• Outline the organisation of the body and indicate the scope of the literature review.
• Highlight the development of major concepts/themese and influential studies.
• Focus on areas of agreement, modification of design, tensions and inadequacies as you gradually narrow the focus to studies closest to your own
• Identify the GAP where your research fits. (Note that identifying a gap is critical in a literature review as it justifies or provides an argument for the need for your research).
• Sum up the major themes that you have reviewed and link to your research
• Summarise major contributions
• Point out gaps or issues to be investigated
• Relate the literature review to your research question or problem

Research and Writing Skills for Academic and Graduate Researchers Copyright © 2022 by RMIT University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER FEATURE
• 04 December 2020
• Correction 09 December 2020

How to write a superb literature review

Andy Tay is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Literature reviews are important resources for scientists. They provide historical context for a field while offering opinions on its future trajectory. Creating them can provide inspiration for one’s own research, as well as some practice in writing. But few scientists are trained in how to write a review — or in what constitutes an excellent one. Even picking the appropriate software to use can be an involved decision (see ‘Tools and techniques’). So Nature asked editors and working scientists with well-cited reviews for their tips.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03422-x

Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 09 December 2020 : An earlier version of the tables in this article included some incorrect details about the programs Zotero, Endnote and Manubot. These have now been corrected.

Hsing, I.-M., Xu, Y. & Zhao, W. Electroanalysis 19 , 755–768 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Ledesma, H. A. et al. Nature Nanotechnol. 14 , 645–657 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brahlek, M., Koirala, N., Bansal, N. & Oh, S. Solid State Commun. 215–216 , 54–62 (2015).

Choi, Y. & Lee, S. Y. Nature Rev. Chem . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-00221-w (2020).

Download references

Related Articles

• Research management

I had my white colleagues walk in a Black student’s shoes for a day

Career Q&A 28 MAY 24

Changemakers — Nature’s new series celebrates champions of inclusion in science

Editorial 28 MAY 24

Researcher parents are paying a high price for conference travel — here’s how to fix it

Career Column 27 MAY 24

How researchers in remote regions handle the isolation

Career Feature 24 MAY 24

Guidelines for academics aim to lessen ethical pitfalls in generative-AI use

Nature Index 22 MAY 24

Who will make AlphaFold3 open source? Scientists race to crack AI model

News 23 MAY 24

Egypt is building a $1-billion mega-museum. Will it bring Egyptology home?

News Feature 22 MAY 24

Pay researchers to spot errors in published papers

World View 21 MAY 24

Postdoctoral Associate- Neuroscience

Houston, Texas (US)

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM)

Call for applications- junior and senior scientists

The BORDEAUX INSTITUTE OF ONCOLOGY (BRIC U1312, https://www.bricbordeaux.com/) is seeking to recruit new junior and senior researchers

Bordeaux (Ville), Gironde (FR)

INSERM - U1312 BRIC

Postdoctoral Scholar - Organic Synthesis

Memphis, Tennessee

The University of Tennessee Health Science Center (UTHSC)

Postdoctoral Scholar - Chemical Biology

Postdoctoral scholar - clinical pharmacy & translational science.

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

How To Write An A-Grade Literature Review

3 straightforward steps (with examples) + free template.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | October 2019

Quality research is about building onto the existing work of others , “standing on the shoulders of giants”, as Newton put it. The literature review chapter of your dissertation, thesis or research project is where you synthesise this prior work and lay the theoretical foundation for your own research.

Long story short, this chapter is a pretty big deal, which is why you want to make sure you get it right . In this post, I’ll show you exactly how to write a literature review in three straightforward steps, so you can conquer this vital chapter (the smart way).

Overview: The Literature Review Process

• Understanding the “ why “
• Finding the relevant literature
• Cataloguing and synthesising the information
• Outlining & writing up your literature review
• Example of a literature review

But first, the “why”…

Before we unpack how to write the literature review chapter, we’ve got to look at the why . To put it bluntly, if you don’t understand the function and purpose of the literature review process, there’s no way you can pull it off well. So, what exactly is the purpose of the literature review?

Well, there are (at least) four core functions:

• For you to gain an understanding (and demonstrate this understanding) of where the research is at currently, what the key arguments and disagreements are.
• For you to identify the gap(s) in the literature and then use this as justification for your own research topic.
• To help you build a conceptual framework for empirical testing (if applicable to your research topic).
• To inform your methodological choices and help you source tried and tested questionnaires (for interviews ) and measurement instruments (for surveys ).

Most students understand the first point but don’t give any thought to the rest. To get the most from the literature review process, you must keep all four points front of mind as you review the literature (more on this shortly), or you’ll land up with a wonky foundation.

Okay – with the why out the way, let’s move on to the how . As mentioned above, writing your literature review is a process, which I’ll break down into three steps:

• Finding the most suitable literature
• Understanding , distilling and organising the literature
• Planning and writing up your literature review chapter

Importantly, you must complete steps one and two before you start writing up your chapter. I know it’s very tempting, but don’t try to kill two birds with one stone and write as you read. You’ll invariably end up wasting huge amounts of time re-writing and re-shaping, or you’ll just land up with a disjointed, hard-to-digest mess . Instead, you need to read first and distil the information, then plan and execute the writing.

Step 1: Find the relevant literature

Naturally, the first step in the literature review journey is to hunt down the existing research that’s relevant to your topic. While you probably already have a decent base of this from your research proposal , you need to expand on this substantially in the dissertation or thesis itself.

Essentially, you need to be looking for any existing literature that potentially helps you answer your research question (or develop it, if that’s not yet pinned down). There are numerous ways to find relevant literature, but I’ll cover my top four tactics here. I’d suggest combining all four methods to ensure that nothing slips past you:

Method 1 – Google Scholar Scrubbing

Google’s academic search engine, Google Scholar , is a great starting point as it provides a good high-level view of the relevant journal articles for whatever keyword you throw at it. Most valuably, it tells you how many times each article has been cited, which gives you an idea of how credible (or at least, popular) it is. Some articles will be free to access, while others will require an account, which brings us to the next method.

Method 2 – University Database Scrounging

Generally, universities provide students with access to an online library, which provides access to many (but not all) of the major journals.

So, if you find an article using Google Scholar that requires paid access (which is quite likely), search for that article in your university’s database – if it’s listed there, you’ll have access. Note that, generally, the search engine capabilities of these databases are poor, so make sure you search for the exact article name, or you might not find it.

Method 3 – Journal Article Snowballing

At the end of every academic journal article, you’ll find a list of references. As with any academic writing, these references are the building blocks of the article, so if the article is relevant to your topic, there’s a good chance a portion of the referenced works will be too. Do a quick scan of the titles and see what seems relevant, then search for the relevant ones in your university’s database.

Method 4 – Dissertation Scavenging

Similar to Method 3 above, you can leverage other students’ dissertations. All you have to do is skim through literature review chapters of existing dissertations related to your topic and you’ll find a gold mine of potential literature. Usually, your university will provide you with access to previous students’ dissertations, but you can also find a much larger selection in the following databases:

• Open Access Theses & Dissertations
• Stanford SearchWorks

Keep in mind that dissertations and theses are not as academically sound as published, peer-reviewed journal articles (because they’re written by students, not professionals), so be sure to check the credibility of any sources you find using this method. You can do this by assessing the citation count of any given article in Google Scholar. If you need help with assessing the credibility of any article, or with finding relevant research in general, you can chat with one of our Research Specialists .

Alright – with a good base of literature firmly under your belt, it’s time to move onto the next step.

Need a helping hand?

Step 2: Log, catalogue and synthesise

Once you’ve built a little treasure trove of articles, it’s time to get reading and start digesting the information – what does it all mean?

While I present steps one and two (hunting and digesting) as sequential, in reality, it’s more of a back-and-forth tango – you’ll read a little , then have an idea, spot a new citation, or a new potential variable, and then go back to searching for articles. This is perfectly natural – through the reading process, your thoughts will develop , new avenues might crop up, and directional adjustments might arise. This is, after all, one of the main purposes of the literature review process (i.e. to familiarise yourself with the current state of research in your field).

As you’re working through your treasure chest, it’s essential that you simultaneously start organising the information. There are three aspects to this:

• Logging reference information
• Building an organised catalogue
• Distilling and synthesising the information

I’ll discuss each of these below:

2.1 – Log the reference information

As you read each article, you should add it to your reference management software. I usually recommend Mendeley for this purpose (see the Mendeley 101 video below), but you can use whichever software you’re comfortable with. Most importantly, make sure you load EVERY article you read into your reference manager, even if it doesn’t seem very relevant at the time.

2.2 – Build an organised catalogue

In the beginning, you might feel confident that you can remember who said what, where, and what their main arguments were. Trust me, you won’t. If you do a thorough review of the relevant literature (as you must!), you’re going to read many, many articles, and it’s simply impossible to remember who said what, when, and in what context . Also, without the bird’s eye view that a catalogue provides, you’ll miss connections between various articles, and have no view of how the research developed over time. Simply put, it’s essential to build your own catalogue of the literature.

I would suggest using Excel to build your catalogue, as it allows you to run filters, colour code and sort – all very useful when your list grows large (which it will). How you lay your spreadsheet out is up to you, but I’d suggest you have the following columns (at minimum):

• Author, date, title – Start with three columns containing this core information. This will make it easy for you to search for titles with certain words, order research by date, or group by author.
• Categories or keywords – You can either create multiple columns, one for each category/theme and then tick the relevant categories, or you can have one column with keywords.
• Key arguments/points – Use this column to succinctly convey the essence of the article, the key arguments and implications thereof for your research.
• Context – Note the socioeconomic context in which the research was undertaken. For example, US-based, respondents aged 25-35, lower- income, etc. This will be useful for making an argument about gaps in the research.
• Methodology – Note which methodology was used and why. Also, note any issues you feel arise due to the methodology. Again, you can use this to make an argument about gaps in the research.
• Quotations – Note down any quoteworthy lines you feel might be useful later.
• Notes – Make notes about anything not already covered. For example, linkages to or disagreements with other theories, questions raised but unanswered, shortcomings or limitations, and so forth.

If you’d like, you can try out our free catalog template here (see screenshot below).

2.3 – Digest and synthesise

Most importantly, as you work through the literature and build your catalogue, you need to synthesise all the information in your own mind – how does it all fit together? Look for links between the various articles and try to develop a bigger picture view of the state of the research. Some important questions to ask yourself are:

• What answers does the existing research provide to my own research questions ?
• Which points do the researchers agree (and disagree) on?
• How has the research developed over time?
• Where do the gaps in the current research lie?

To help you develop a big-picture view and synthesise all the information, you might find mind mapping software such as Freemind useful. Alternatively, if you’re a fan of physical note-taking, investing in a large whiteboard might work for you.

Step 3: Outline and write it up!

Once you’re satisfied that you have digested and distilled all the relevant literature in your mind, it’s time to put pen to paper (or rather, fingers to keyboard). There are two steps here – outlining and writing:

3.1 – Draw up your outline

Having spent so much time reading, it might be tempting to just start writing up without a clear structure in mind. However, it’s critically important to decide on your structure and develop a detailed outline before you write anything. Your literature review chapter needs to present a clear, logical and an easy to follow narrative – and that requires some planning. Don’t try to wing it!

Naturally, you won’t always follow the plan to the letter, but without a detailed outline, you’re more than likely going to end up with a disjointed pile of waffle , and then you’re going to spend a far greater amount of time re-writing, hacking and patching. The adage, “measure twice, cut once” is very suitable here.

In terms of structure, the first decision you’ll have to make is whether you’ll lay out your review thematically (into themes) or chronologically (by date/period). The right choice depends on your topic, research objectives and research questions, which we discuss in this article .

Once that’s decided, you need to draw up an outline of your entire chapter in bullet point format. Try to get as detailed as possible, so that you know exactly what you’ll cover where, how each section will connect to the next, and how your entire argument will develop throughout the chapter. Also, at this stage, it’s a good idea to allocate rough word count limits for each section, so that you can identify word count problems before you’ve spent weeks or months writing!

PS – check out our free literature review chapter template…

3.2 – Get writing

With a detailed outline at your side, it’s time to start writing up (finally!). At this stage, it’s common to feel a bit of writer’s block and find yourself procrastinating under the pressure of finally having to put something on paper. To help with this, remember that the objective of the first draft is not perfection – it’s simply to get your thoughts out of your head and onto paper, after which you can refine them. The structure might change a little, the word count allocations might shift and shuffle, and you might add or remove a section – that’s all okay. Don’t worry about all this on your first draft – just get your thoughts down on paper.

Once you’ve got a full first draft (however rough it may be), step away from it for a day or two (longer if you can) and then come back at it with fresh eyes. Pay particular attention to the flow and narrative – does it fall fit together and flow from one section to another smoothly? Now’s the time to try to improve the linkage from each section to the next, tighten up the writing to be more concise, trim down word count and sand it down into a more digestible read.

Once you’ve done that, give your writing to a friend or colleague who is not a subject matter expert and ask them if they understand the overall discussion. The best way to assess this is to ask them to explain the chapter back to you. This technique will give you a strong indication of which points were clearly communicated and which weren’t. If you’re working with Grad Coach, this is a good time to have your Research Specialist review your chapter.

Finally, tighten it up and send it off to your supervisor for comment. Some might argue that you should be sending your work to your supervisor sooner than this (indeed your university might formally require this), but in my experience, supervisors are extremely short on time (and often patience), so, the more refined your chapter is, the less time they’ll waste on addressing basic issues (which you know about already) and the more time they’ll spend on valuable feedback that will increase your mark-earning potential.

Literature Review Example

In the video below, we unpack an actual literature review so that you can see how all the core components come together in reality.

Let’s Recap

In this post, we’ve covered how to research and write up a high-quality literature review chapter. Let’s do a quick recap of the key takeaways:

• It is essential to understand the WHY of the literature review before you read or write anything. Make sure you understand the 4 core functions of the process.
• The first step is to hunt down the relevant literature . You can do this using Google Scholar, your university database, the snowballing technique and by reviewing other dissertations and theses.
• Next, you need to log all the articles in your reference manager , build your own catalogue of literature and synthesise all the research.
• Following that, you need to develop a detailed outline of your entire chapter – the more detail the better. Don’t start writing without a clear outline (on paper, not in your head!)
• Write up your first draft in rough form – don’t aim for perfection. Remember, done beats perfect.
• Refine your second draft and get a layman’s perspective on it . Then tighten it up and submit it to your supervisor.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

38 Comments

Thank you very much. This page is an eye opener and easy to comprehend.

This is awesome!

I wish I come across GradCoach earlier enough.

But all the same I’ll make use of this opportunity to the fullest.

Thank you for this good job.

Keep it up!

You’re welcome, Yinka. Thank you for the kind words. All the best writing your literature review.

Thank you for a very useful literature review session. Although I am doing most of the steps…it being my first masters an Mphil is a self study and one not sure you are on the right track. I have an amazing supervisor but one also knows they are super busy. So not wanting to bother on the minutae. Thank you.

You’re most welcome, Renee. Good luck with your literature review 🙂

This has been really helpful. Will make full use of it. 🙂

Thank you Gradcoach.

Really agreed. Admirable effort

thank you for this beautiful well explained recap.

Thank you so much for your guide of video and other instructions for the dissertation writing.

It is instrumental. It encouraged me to write a dissertation now.

Thank you the video was great – from someone that knows nothing thankyou

an amazing and very constructive way of presetting a topic, very useful, thanks for the effort,

It is timely

It is very good video of guidance for writing a research proposal and a dissertation. Since I have been watching and reading instructions, I have started my research proposal to write. I appreciate to Mr Jansen hugely.

I learn a lot from your videos. Very comprehensive and detailed.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge. As a research student, you learn better with your learning tips in research

I was really stuck in reading and gathering information but after watching these things are cleared thanks, it is so helpful.

Really helpful, Thank you for the effort in showing such information

This is super helpful thank you very much.

Thank you for this whole literature writing review.You have simplified the process.

I’m so glad I found GradCoach. Excellent information, Clear explanation, and Easy to follow, Many thanks Derek!

You’re welcome, Maithe. Good luck writing your literature review 🙂

Thank you Coach, you have greatly enriched and improved my knowledge

Great piece, so enriching and it is going to help me a great lot in my project and thesis, thanks so much

This is THE BEST site for ANYONE doing a masters or doctorate! Thank you for the sound advice and templates. You rock!

Thanks, Stephanie 🙂

This is mind blowing, the detailed explanation and simplicity is perfect.

I am doing two papers on my final year thesis, and I must stay I feel very confident to face both headlong after reading this article.

thank you so much.

if anyone is to get a paper done on time and in the best way possible, GRADCOACH is certainly the go to area!

This is very good video which is well explained with detailed explanation

Thank you excellent piece of work and great mentoring

Thanks, it was useful

Thank you very much. the video and the information were very helpful.

Good morning scholar. I’m delighted coming to know you even before the commencement of my dissertation which hopefully is expected in not more than six months from now. I would love to engage my study under your guidance from the beginning to the end. I love to know how to do good job

Thank you so much Derek for such useful information on writing up a good literature review. I am at a stage where I need to start writing my one. My proposal was accepted late last year but I honestly did not know where to start

Like the name of your YouTube implies you are GRAD (great,resource person, about dissertation). In short you are smart enough in coaching research work.

This is a very well thought out webpage. Very informative and a great read.

Very timely.

I appreciate.

Very comprehensive and eye opener for me as beginner in postgraduate study. Well explained and easy to understand. Appreciate and good reference in guiding me in my research journey. Thank you

Thank you. I requested to download the free literature review template, however, your website wouldn’t allow me to complete the request or complete a download. May I request that you email me the free template? Thank you.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 The Definition of Writing Skill

ABOUT WRITING SKILL

Related Papers

Journal of NELTA Gandaki

Pitamber Gautam

QuaderniCIRD

Monica Randaccio

The aim of this paper is threefold. First, a diachronic development of ESL (English as a Second Language) composition theory from the 1950s to the 1990s will be outlined. Second, the organising principles relevant to ESL composition theory will be analysed. Third, a survey of the material used in my English classes and a presentation of the introductory unit on writing skills will be given. Finally, some tentative conclusions derived from my students’ compositions will be drawn.

Damianos A . Damianopoulos

Noorlaila Hayani

Review of Research in Education

Nancy L Stein

Juan José Prat Ferrer

mary maguire

Villamor Dumlao

Writing is one of the four macro skills in English. It is where one produce concepts, ideas and thoughts through written words in a structured and well-organized manner. It is very essential to academic and professional level as it enables one to think logically and creatively. In addition, it is considered as the hardest skill to acquire. The purpose of this study is to identify the hindrances in the enhancement of English writing skills. The study utilized descriptive method of research to identify the existing barriers in enhancement of the writing skills in English medium. Significantly, descriptive research used mixed method to gather information from the participants. The descriptive study also utilized probability simple random sampling approach. Self-composed standardized questionnaires with four-point Likert scale were used where it underwent a reliability analysis and obtained a Cronbach alpha of .908 which showed that it is a reliable tool. Moreover, data are interpreted by getting the mean of every items answered by the participants from the survey questionnaire to get the descriptive value for the quantitative part. On the other hand, thematic analysis for the qualitative part to extract emerging concepts. The participants of this study were the Grade 9 students of St. Rose Catholic School, Inc. There are two hundred thirty-three (233) students from Grade 9 and a total of one hundred forty-five students (145) were randomly selected as participants as calculated in Slovein’s formula. The results showed the different hindrances in composition skills such as grammatical errors and technical errors kept learners from further improvement of their skills and these difficulties were not addressed on their lower years where they are supposed to learn the basics of writing. Hence, resulting into incompetent composition skills. Keywords: Macro Skills, English, Concepts and Ideas, Academic and Professional Level, Writing, Writing Skills, Produce Concepts

Nopi Surianto

The problem of the research is factors that influencing the students' writing skill. This research was conducted at English Education Department FKIP Lancang Kuning University, Pekanbaru. Using Descriptive Research focusing on the second year students of class A consisting of twenty five students. This research tries to explain the factors influencing the improvement of the students' writing skill. The instruments of this research were observation, field notes, and interview. After analyzing the data, it was found that factors influence the improvement of the students' writing skill were material, media, classroom activities, classroom management, teacher's strategy, and teacher's approach. In conclusion, materials, media, classroom activities, classroom management, teacher's strategy, and teacher's approach are factors that influence the students' writing skill.

Studies in Writing

Per Henning Uppstad

RELATED PAPERS

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

amer hudhaifah hamzah

Estefan Monteiro Da Fonseca

Akun Facebook

Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP

mastura md yusof

Journal of Quaternary Science

Erwin Appel

Proceedings of the International Symposium “Mesoscale and Submesoscale Processes in the Hydrosphere and Atmosphere” (MSP-2018), 30 October – 02 November 2018, Moscow / [Ed. by: Zatsepin A.G., Ginzburg A.I., Kostianoy A.G., Sviridov S.A.]

Oleg Kochetov

Frances Mair

Gastroenterology

Alen Bišćanin

Viviane Teixeira Silveira

The journal of world investment & trade

Kalman Kalotay

Nathalie Dion

David W. Kraft

Darko Landek

Serhii Vasylenko

Beth Singler

Notes custom dengan logo perusahaan, Notes custom dengan foto, Notes custom dengan pesan personal, Notes custom besar, Notes custom kecil, Notes custom spiral, Notes custom hardcover, Notes custom softcover, Notes custom kertas recycable, Notes custom tahan air, Notes custom warna-warni

seminarkit jogja01

Nurul Detisna

Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials

Gwendolyn Quinn

Comprehensive Psychiatry

jennifer martinez

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

1 Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France

2 Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

• LEARNING SKILLS
• Writing a Dissertation or Thesis

Researching and Writing a Literature Review

Search SkillsYouNeed:

Learning Skills:

• A - Z List of Learning Skills
• What is Learning?
• Learning Approaches
• Learning Styles
• 8 Types of Learning Styles
• Understanding Your Preferences to Aid Learning
• Lifelong Learning
• Decisions to Make Before Applying to University
• Top Tips for Surviving Student Life
• Living Online: Education and Learning
• 8 Ways to Embrace Technology-Based Learning Approaches
• Critical Thinking Skills
• Critical Thinking and Fake News
• Understanding and Addressing Conspiracy Theories
• Critical Analysis
• Study Skills
• Exam Skills
• How to Write a Research Proposal
• Ethical Issues in Research
• Dissertation: The Introduction
• Writing your Methodology
• Dissertation: Results and Discussion
• Dissertation: Conclusions and Extras

Writing Your Dissertation or Thesis eBook

Part of the Skills You Need Guide for Students .

• Research Methods
• Teaching, Coaching, Mentoring and Counselling
• Employability Skills for Graduates

Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.

You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.

We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.

A literature review demonstrates that you have read around your topic and have a broad understanding of previous research, including its limitations.

In the literature review, you summarise the main viewpoints and important facts that you encountered in your reading as they relate to your chosen topic . You will also use the literature review to justify the value of doing research on your topic by showing what is already known, what is not yet known, and how it is relevant.

Your literature review should not simply be descriptive but should also provide a critical analysis of the body of work, and demonstrate that you understand how it fits together as a whole and how your own research fits with previous studies.

A key aspect of a literature review is what sources you select to include, and which you exclude.

Finding Sources

Thanks to the internet, literature searches are now relatively easy, and can be done from the comfort of your own laptop without needing to go anywhere near a library.

However, a word of warning is in order here. The ease with which anybody can access and publish to the internet means that many items published online have not been scrutinised by anybody other than the author.

In other words, content has not necessarily been checked, you have no way of knowing whether the author’s facts and claims are at all accurate and you could easily land yourself in trouble by blindly following or citing from online sources. 

Furthermore, because items on the internet are frequently changed, you may find that something you read yesterday is no longer available in the same form today. However, internet sources can be very useful for up-to-date information, especially current affairs or ongoing or very recent research.

Blogs and sites like the encyclopaedia Wikipedia are particularly prone to these problems.  For these reasons, a general rule of thumb is that you should only rely on internet resources from the websites of organisations whose information you already know to be reputable, like SkillsYouNeed.

See our page: Assessing Internet Information for more.

Do not underestimate how much physical libraries and librarians may be able to help you.

Librarians are usually hugely experienced in using all the search tools and databases, and can often show you much quicker ways of doing things, as well as tips and tricks to help you refine your search.

Furthermore, libraries may have copies of books and academic journals that are not available online. So a trip to your library may prove to be very helpful.

If you haven’t already done so, get yourself an ATHENS account through your university and/or school library. Spend time working out which of the available databases are going to be most useful for your topic, including asking the librarians for advice.

A simple way to get started with finding appropriate materials is simply to ask people who are likely to know.

You might for example ask your tutor or supervisor, or an expert or practitioner working on your chosen topic. Often, they will be able to give you some very helpful ideas about where to begin your reading.

However, be aware that some professionals may find constant requests for information intrudes on their time. Always be courteous and sensitive to the level of demand you may be making on someone’s time.

See our page: Sources of Information for more about the types of resources that you might use and how to access them.

Choosing and Refining your Search Terms

Your search terms are one of the most important elements of finding the right sources for your research project and developing them is an ongoing process.

It’s a good idea to start with a phrase that you think others will have used about the topic, perhaps that you have identified from your lectures and/or earlier study. You will probably find that your first few searches don’t turn up much that’s useful.

Use the one or two articles that you find that are on the right lines to identify alternative search terms, and continue to search until you turn up useful articles.

You can also use a tool such as Google Adword Keyword Research Tool to identify phrases and keywords that are similar to your chosen term(s). This tool is usually used by internet marketing professionals to help them find keywords similar to their own but can be useful for academic research too.

If you’re really struggling to find articles on the right topic, but you’re certain that they must be out there, drop your supervisor a note asking about possible search terms. Tell them what you’ve already used, and ask them for a few alternatives to get you started. However, this should be a last resort, as you don’t want to demonstrate your ignorance too obviously!

Finally, keep searching. You need to read a lot of sources to find the most relevant and will probably end up discarding more than half of what you read. Use abstracts to decide which articles are worth reading, and don’t read those that aren’t relevant: keep checking back to your research questions and decide whether each article is useful. If not, move on.

Critical Reading

Your literature review should not only show that you have been reading a range of materials related to your topic, but also that you have been reading them critically and have thought about the wider contexts and how they apply to your own area of research.

Critical reading is a skill that, like any other skill, is acquired with practice.

In essence, reading critically means that you do not take the claims at face value: you question the basis for claims, why the author may have done and said things in the particular way he or she did, what the wider context is, and whose interests are being served by the claims you encounter.

See our page, Critical Reading for more information.

How Many Sources?

Your university or college supervisor will be able to give you an idea of how many sources you should include in your literature review.

You will probably need to read at least double that number to find enough that are suitable for inclusion. You should also try to find several different sorts of sources: books, journal articles, dissertations, conference papers, working papers, and so on.

You need to make sure that you identify the key texts for the subject. Check a few references, and see which texts are cited most often, or ask the librarians how to use the databases to check how often each article is cited. A good way to identify when you have read enough is if your reading keeps turning up the same points and you’re not learning anything new.

A Note on Dates

There are some theories or articles which are so important in a particular field that they need to be cited, however long ago they were originally published. But those apart, you should generally prefer more recent sources published in the last five or ten years. As a rough guide, the balance of publication dates should be about two thirds from the last 10 years, and no more than one third older than that.

Writing your Literature Review

In general, your literature review should start with one or two broad paragraphs, demonstrating your understanding of the breadth of your area of study.

You should then discuss the literature that deals with your area of research and, finally, consider and critique the studies that are most directly relevant.

You should spend most time on the latter.

Writing your literature review should be an iterative process.

The best way to do it is probably to summarise each source as you go along, referencing it carefully, and grouping your sources by themes.

You will almost certainly find that the themes develop as you go along, and so do your search terms. Use headings to store your summaries and then write a more polished section under that heading when you have enough sources to be able to ‘compare and contrast’ opposing views, and particularly to draw out areas where there is disagreement and/or conflicting evidence as these are the most fruitful for further research.

Where there are gaps, you can then go back and search for more sources on that area. The best literature reviews are not only descriptive, but draw together similar thinking and provide a critical analysis of the previous research, including highlighting really good studies, or identifying flaws and gaps.

To make sure that you carrying out a critical analysis, make sure that you ask yourself the question ‘ Do I agree with this viewpoint? Why? ’, and also consider whether the methods used are strong or weak and why. This will also help you to decide on your own methodology.

Another way of checking whether you are evaluating or merely describing is to look at whether you have discussed work chronologically (likely to be descriptive) or in terms of whether there is general agreement on a topic (much more likely to be evaluative).

Checklist of Questions for Critical Reading

Ask yourself the following questions to decide whether or not a particular piece of work is worth including in your literature review.

• Who is the author? What can I find out about him/her? Has he/she written other books, articles etc.?
• What is the author’s position in the research process, e.g., gender, class, politics, life experience, relationship to research participants?
• Where and when was the document produced? What type of document is it?
• Is it reporting original research that the author has done, or is it presenting second-hand information about a topic?
• Is it formal or informal?
• Is it 'authoritative' (e.g., academic, scientific) or 'popular' (newspaper or magazine article)?
• How has it been produced? Is it glossy, with lots of pictures, diagrams, etc.?
• If it is contained on a website, is the website from a reputable organisation, or is the document drawn from some other reputable source?

The Message

• What is being said?
• What is not being said?
• How is the argument presented? Why?
• What use has been made of diagrams, pictures etc.?
• Who was or is the intended audience?
• Whose interests are being served by this message? Are there political implications, for instance?
• What evidence is presented to support the claims that are made?
• Does the evidence actually support the claims? Is the evidence presented in enough detail for you to make up your own mind whether you agree with the claims?
• Are there errors or inconsistencies?
• What is the significance to my topic and the research that I wish to carry out?

Your literature review should also demonstrate how your study does or will relate to previous work, and how it either fills gaps, or responds to calls for further work.

Your literature review will help you to refine your research question. It should also help you to explain how your methodology fits with previous work, and help you to identify and evaluate possible research methods.

A Note on Tense

When you are describing someone’s findings or opinions, it is probably best to use the past tense.

For example:

“Jones (2001) argued that…”.

Many authors of academic papers prefer the present tense when describing opinions or views (“Jones (2001) argues that…”). However, it is always possible that Jones has subsequently changed his/her view, and therefore the past tense is preferable.

The past tense is always going to be correct for something that was expressed in the past; the present tense may no longer be true.

Citations and References

Your university will almost certainly have a preferred style for citations and references that you will need to use. Make sure you understand how this works before you start writing your literature review and use it consistently throughout.

Keep your references up to date as you go, and make sure that you always cite the reference as you write: it’s much easier than trying to build a reference list at the end.

See our page on Academic Referencing for more information

For scientific subjects, Vancouver (numerical) referencing is often preferred.

However, it is much harder to check that your references are correct using this system. It is therefore better to use a (name, date) system of citations until you are certain that you have finished revising the document.

Alternatively, use a system of end-notes which will automatically update the numbering if you move a citation as you will otherwise end up hopelessly confused.

Draft, Draft and Redraft

Finally, once you have written each section by theme, go back and read the whole thing to check that the sections flow logically one from another, and that the whole literature review reads sensibly and coherently.

As with any essay or extended piece of writing, editing and redrafting will improve the quality of your writing, as will asking someone else to read it over and check for errors or inconsistencies.

You should also do a search to check for consistent use of British or American spellings (-ise and -ize, for example), double spaces after words, and double/single inverted commas around quotations. You might think such details are less important than the content, but the marker may not share your view.

Continue to: Writing a Research Proposal Writing a Dissertation: The Introduction

See also: Writing a Methodology Dissertation Results and Discussion Dissertation Conclusions and Extra Sections

Reference management. Clean and simple.

Literature review

How to write a literature review in 6 steps

How do you write a good literature review? This step-by-step guide on how to write an excellent literature review covers all aspects of planning and writing literature reviews for academic papers and theses.

How to write a systematic literature review [9 steps]

How do you write a systematic literature review? What types of systematic literature reviews exist and where do you use them? Learn everything you need to know about a systematic literature review in this guide

What is a literature review? [with examples]

Not sure what a literature review is? This guide covers the definition, purpose, and format of a literature review.

The impact of teacher academic support and L2 writing self on feedback-seeking behavior

• Published: 25 May 2024

Cite this article

• Ya Zhang   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9087-9121 1  

22 Accesses

Explore all metrics

The literature has revealed the impact of personal factors on feedback-seeking behavior (FSB) in second language (L2) writing. However, little is known about how teacher academic support influences FSB in L2 writing and whether this relationship is mediated by L2 writing self (ideal and ought-to L2 writing selves). To address the lacunae, this study used a quantitative research design and a sample of 221 Chinese non-English major undergraduates to explore the relationships among teacher academic support, L2 writing self, and FSB. Structural equation modeling (SEM) analysis revealed that teacher academic support could directly predict the two dimensions of FSB (feedback monitoring and feedback inquiry) and L2 writing selves. Moreover, mediation analysis indicated that teacher academic support indirectly predicted both dimensions of FSB via ideal L2 writing self, and it also indirectly predicted feedback monitoring via ought-to L2 writing self. This study suggested that teacher academic support, as an environmental factor, could enhance learners’ writing motivation and self-regulated writing behaviors. Pedagogical implications for L2 writing instruction were discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Modeling chinese high school EFL writers’ language mindsets, goal orientations, and feedback-seeking behavior: the interaction effect between language mindsets and writing competence

Who perceives more value of teacher feedback? Exploring the roles of college students’ possible second language selves and language learning strategies

The Effects of Peer Feedback on L2 Students’ Writing Motivation: An Experimental Study in China

According to the Ministry of Education of the People’s Republic of China, as of September 2018, there were a total of 1243 undergraduate institutions of higher learning in China, of which 137 were “Double-First-Class” universities and 1106 were non-“Double-First-Class” universities (89.0%) ( http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xxgk/xxgk_jyta/jyta_gaojiaosi/201901/t20190129_368438.html ).

Alsaleem, S. (2017). Supervisory support and feedback environment as contextual determinants of the frequency of feedback-seeking [Doctoral dissertation, The George Washington University]. https://www.proquest.com/pqdtglobal1/dissertations-theses/supervisory-support-feedback-environment-as/docview/1927182124/sem-2?accountid=26779 .

Anseel, F., Beatty, A. S., Shen, W., Lievens, F., & Sackett, P. R. (2015). How are we doing after 30 years? A meta-analytic review of the antecedents and outcomes of feedback-seeking behavior. Journal of Management , 41 (1), 318–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206313484521 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory . Prentice Hall.

Bastola, M. N., & Hu, G. (2021). Chasing my supervisor all day long like a hungry child seeking her mother! Students’ perceptions of supervisory feedback. Studies in Educational Evaluation , 70 , 101055. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101055 .

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design . Harvard University Press.

Chen, L. H., Chen, M. Y., Kee, Y. H., & Tsai, Y. M. (2009). Validation of the gratitude questionnaire (GQ) in Taiwanese undergraduate students. Journal of Happiness Studies , 10 (6), 655–664. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-008-9112-7 .

De Stobbeleir, K. E. M., Ashford, S. J., & Buyens, D. (2011). Self-regulation of creativity at work: The role of feedback-seeking behavior in creative performance. Academy of Management Journal , 54 (4), 811–831. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.64870144 .

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition . Lawrence Erlbaum.

Feng, L., & Papi, M. (2020). Persistence in language learning: The role of grit and future self-guides. Learning and Individual Differences , 81 , 101904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101904 .

Guo, N., & Li, R. (2022). Measuring Chinese english-as-a-foreign-language learners’ resilience: Development and validation of the foreign language learning resilience scale. Frontiers in Psychology , 13 , 1046340. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1046340/full

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage.

Han, Y. (2019). Written corrective feedback from an ecological perspective: The interaction between the context and individual learners. System , 80 , 288–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.12.009 .

Han, Z. (2021). Corrective feedback from behaviorist and innatist perspectives. In H. Nassaji, & E. Kartchava (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of corrective feedback in second language learning and teaching (pp. 23–43). Cambridge University Press.

Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research , 77 (1), 81–112. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487 .

Higgins, E. T. (1987). Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review , 94 (3), 319–340. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319 .

Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist , 52 (12), 1280–1300. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280 .

Homans, G. C. (1958). Social behavior as exchange. American Journal of Sociology , 63 , 597–606. https://doi.org/10.1086/222355 .

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling , 6 (1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118 .

Joughin, G., Boud, D., Dawson, P., & Tai, J. (2021). What can higher education learn from feedback seeking behaviour in organisations? Implications for feedback literacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education , 46 (1), 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1733491 .

Kessler, M. (2023). Written corrective feedback in an online community: A typology of English language learners’ requests and interlocutors’ responses. Computers and Composition , 67 , 102752. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2023.102752 .

Kline, R. B. (2004). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.

Krosnick, J. A., & Presser, S. (2010). Question and questionnaire design. In P. V. Marsden, & J. D. Wright (Eds.), Handbook of survey research (pp. 263–314). Emerald Group Publishing.

Leenknecht, M., Hompus, P., & van der Schaaf, M. (2019). Feedback seeking behaviour in higher education: The association with students’ goal orientation and deep learning approach. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education , 44 (7), 1069–1078. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2019.1571161 .

Li, X., Duan, S., & Liu, H. (2023). Unveiling the predictive effect of students’ perceived EFL teacher support on academic achievement: The mediating role of academic buoyancy. Sustainability , 15 (3), 10205. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310205 .

Liu, H., & Li, X. (2023). Unravelling students’ perceived EFL teacher support. System , 115 , 103048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103048 .

Liu, Q., Du, X., & Lu, H. (2023). Teacher support and learning engagement of EFL learners: The mediating role of self–efficacy and achievement goal orientation. Current Psychology , 42 , 2619–2635. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-04043-5 .

Luan, L., Hong, J. C., Cao, M., Dong, Y., & Hou, X. (2023). Exploring the role of online EFL learners’ perceived social support in their learning engagement: A structural equation model. Interactive Learning Environments , 31 (3), 1703–1714. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1855211 .

Ma, L., Luo, H., & Xiao, L. (2021). Perceived teacher support, self-concept, enjoyment and achievement in reading: A multilevel mediation model based on PISA 2018. Learning and Individual Differences , 85 , 101947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2020.101947 .

Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist , 41 (9), 954–969. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41.9.954 .

Naseer, S., & Rafique, S. (2021). Moderating role of teachers’ academic support between students’ satisfaction with online learning and academic motivation in undergraduate students during COVID-19. Education Research International , 7345579. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/7345579 .

Oxford, R. L., & Burry-Stock, J. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the strategy inventory for language learning (SILL). System , 23 (1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(94)00047-A .

Pan, X. (2022). Examining the influencing factors and the functioning mechanism of online learning supporting learners’ empowerment. Frontiers in Psychology , 13 , 1028264. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1028264/full .

Pande, M., & Bharathi, S. V. (2020). Theoretical foundations of design thinking: A constructivism learning approach to design thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity , 36 , 100637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100637 .

Papi, M. (2010). The L2 motivational self system, L2 anxiety, and motivated behavior: A structural equation modeling approach. System , 38 , 467–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.06.011 .

Papi, M., & Khajavy, G. H. (2021). Motivational mechanisms underlying second language achievement: A regulatory focus perspective. Language Learning , 71 (2), 537–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12443 .

Papi, M., & Teimouri, Y. (2012). Dynamics of selves and motivation: A cross-sectional study in the EFL context of Iran. International Journal of Applied Linguistics , 22 (3), 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2012.00312.x .

Papi, M., & Teimouri, Y. (2014). Language learner motivational types: A cluster analysis study. Language Learning , 64 , 493–525. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12065 .

Papi, M., Rios, A., Pelt, H., & Ozdemir, E. (2019a). Feedback-seeking behavior in language learning: Basic components and motivational antecedents. The Modern Language Journal , 103 (1), 205–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12538 .

Papi, M., Bondarenko, A. V., Mansouri, S., Feng, L., & Jiang, C. (2019b). Rethinking L2 motivation research: The 2×2 model of L2 self-guides. Studies in Second Language Acquisition , 41 , 337–361. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263118000153 .

Papi, M., Bondarenko, A. V., Wawire, B., Jiang, C., & Zhou, S. (2020). Feedback-seeking behavior in second language writing: Motivational mechanisms. Reading and Writing , 33 , 485–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-019-09971-6 .

Papi, M., Tabari, M. A., & Sato, M. (2024). The importance of seeking feedback for benefiting from feedback: A case of second language writing . The Modern Language Journal, 108 (2), 489–512. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12923

Rannikmäe, M., Holbrook, J., & Soobard, R. (2020). Social Constructivism—Jerome Bruner. In B. Akpan, & T. J. Kennedy (Eds.), Science education in theory and practice: An introductory guide to learning theory (pp. 259–276). Springer.

Reusser, K., & Pauli, C. (2015). Co-constructivism in educational theory and practice. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (2nd ed., pp. 913–917). Elsevier.

Reyes, B., Martínez-Gregorio, S., Galiana, L., Tomás, J. M., & De los Santos, S. (2022). Validation of perceived academic support questionnaire (PASQ): A study using a sample of Dominican Republic high-school students. Journal of Child and Family Studies , 31 , 3425–3434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-022-02473-0 .

Roever, C., & Phakiti, A. (2017). Quantitative methods for second language research: A problem-solving approach . Routledge.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist , 55 (1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68 .

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness . Guilford Press.

Schiavo, M. L., Prinari, B., Saito, I., Shoji, K., & Benight, C. C. (2019). A dynamical systems approach to triadic reciprocal determinism of social cognitive theory. Mathematics and Computers in Simulation , 159 , 18–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2018.10.006 .

Sun, Y., & Huang, Y. (2023). The relationships among Chinese university EFL learners’ feedback-seeking behavior, achievement goals, and mindsets. Behavioral Sciences , 13 (2), 190. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13020190 .

Sung, C. C. M. (2023). Agency and feedback-seeking: Academic English socialization of L2 students in Hong Kong. Language and Education , 37 (3), 364–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2022.2085048 .

Tahmouresi, S., & Papi, M. (2021). Future selves, enjoyment and anxiety as predictors of L2 writing achievement. Journal of Second Language Writing , 53 , 100837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100837 .

Tao, V. Y. K., Kam, C. C. S., Li, Y., & Wu, A. M. S. (2023). Differential prospective relationships of social-oriented and individual-oriented achievement motivations with achievement goals and affective wellbeing: A 1-year follow-up study. Learning and Instruction , 85 , 101734. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101734 .

VandeWalle, D. (2003). A goal orientation model of feedback-seeking behavior. Human Resource Management Review , 13 (4), 581–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2003.11.004 .

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Harvard University Press.

Waller, L., & Papi, M. (2017). Motivation and feedback: How implicit theories of intelligence predict L2 writers’ motivation and feedback orientation. Journal of Second Language Writing , 35 , 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.01.004 .

Wei, S. (2022). The influence of servant leadership on employees’ career success: The mediating role of leader-member exchange and the moderating role of perceived organizational support. Academic Exploration , 5 , 106–115.

Google Scholar  

Wiliam, D. (2023). Putting learners at the heart of the feedback process: Reflections on the special issue. Learning and Instruction , 87 , 101785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2023.101785 .

Winstone, N., & Carless, D. (2020). Designing effective feedback processes in higher education: A learning-focused approach . Routledge.

Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , 3087. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087 .

Wong, J. Y. L., & Oh, P. H. (2023). Teaching physical education abroad: Perspectives from host cooperating teachers, local students and Australian pre-service teachers using the social exchange theory. Teaching and Teacher Education , 136 , 104364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2023.104364 .

Wood, J. (2023). Enabling feedback seeking, agency and uptake through dialogic screencast feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education , 48 (4), 464–484. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2022.2089973 .

Xu, J., & Wang, Y. (2022). The differential mediating roles of ideal and ought-to L2 writing selves between growth mindsets and self-regulated writing strategies. System , 110 , 102900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102900 .

Xu, J., & Wang, Y. (2023). Individual differences in L2 writing feedback-seeking behaviors: The predictive roles of various motivational constructs. Assessing Writing , 56 , 100698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100698 .

Xu, J., & Wang, Y. (2024). Do I need feedback or avoid it in L2 writing? Impacts of self-efficacy and shyness on feedback-seeking behavior. Assessing Writing , 59 , 100805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100805 .

Yan, A., & Lin, L. (2019). Silent monitoring or direct inquiry? A study on the influence of high-commitment work systems on feedback seeking behavior. Human Resources Development of China , 36 (6), 6–20. https://doi.org/10.16471/j.cnki.11-2822/c.2019.06.001 .

Yang, Y., & Du, C. (2023). The predictive effect of perceived teacher support on college EFL learners’ online learning engagement: Autonomous and controlled motivation as mediators. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development . https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2023.2259879 .

Yao, Y., & Zhu, X. (2024). Modeling Chinese high school EFL writers’ language mindsets, goal orientations, and feedback-seeking behavior: The interaction effect between language mindsets and writing competence. Reading and Writing , 37 , 539–561. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-022-10339-6 .

Zarrinabadi, N., & Rahimi, S. (2022). The effects of praise for effort versus praise for intelligence on psychological aspects of L2 writing among English-majoring university students. Reading & Writing Quarterly , 38 (2), 156–167. https://doi.org/10.1080/10573569.2021.1934928 .

Zhan, J., Yao, Y., & Zhu, X. (2023). The mediating effect of feedback-seeking behavior on the relationship between ideal L2 writing self and story continuation writing performance: A multigroup structural equation modeling approach. System , 113 , 102976. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102976 .

Zhang, Q., & Wang, J. (2023). The effects of teacher support on students’ engagement in foreign language classrooms: Multiple mediating role of academic emotions. Foreign Languages in China , 20 (5), 69–77. https://doi.org/10.13564/j.cnki.issn.1672-9382.2023.05.011 .

Zhao, P., Zhu, X., Yao, Y., & Liao, X. (2023). Ideal L2 self, enjoyment, and strategy use in L2 integrated writing: A self-regulatory learning perspective. System , 115 , 103033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103033 .

Zhou, Y., & Papi, M. (2023). The role of future L2 selves in L2 speech development: A longitudinal study in an instructional setting. System , 119 , 103156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2023.103156 .

Zhou, L., Gao, Y., Hu, J., Tu, X., & Zhang, X. (2022). Effects of perceived teacher support on motivation and engagement amongst Chinese college students: Need satisfaction as the mediator. Frontiers in Psychology , 13 , 949495. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.949495 .

Zhou, J., Deneen, C., Tai, J., & Dawson, P. (2023). Feedback seeking by first-year Chinese international students: Understanding practices and challenges. Assessing Writing , 57 , 100757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2023.100757 .

Zimmerman, B. J., & Risemberg, R. (1997). Becoming a self-regulated writer: A social cognitive perspective. Contemporary Educational Psychology , 22 , 73–101. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1997.0919 .

Download references

The research has been supported by the Postgraduate Research & Practice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province (KYCX23-0216) to Ya Zhang.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Foreign Languages, Southeast University , No.2, Southeast University Road, Jiangning District, Nanjing, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ya Zhang .

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Zhang , Y. The impact of teacher academic support and L2 writing self on feedback-seeking behavior. Read Writ (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10557-0

Download citation

Accepted : 10 May 2024

Published : 25 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-024-10557-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Feedback-seeking behavior
• Teacher academic support
• L2 writing self
• Social constructivism
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

How Does Writing Fit Into the ‘Science of Reading’?

• Share article

In one sense, the national conversation about what it will take to make sure all children become strong readers has been wildly successful: States are passing legislation supporting evidence-based teaching approaches , and school districts are rushing to supply training. Publishers are under pressure to drop older materials . And for the first time in years, an instructional issue—reading—is headlining education media coverage.

In the middle of all that, though, the focus on the “science of reading” has elided its twin component in literacy instruction: writing.

Writing is intrinsically important for all students to learn—after all, it is the primary way beyond speech that humans communicate. But more than that, research suggests that teaching students to write in an integrated fashion with reading is not only efficient, it’s effective.

Yet writing is often underplayed in the elementary grades. Too often, it is separated from schools’ reading block. Writing is not assessed as frequently as reading, and principals, worried about reading-exam scores, direct teachers to focus on one often at the expense of the other. Finally, beyond the English/language arts block, kids often aren’t asked to do much writing in early grades.

“Sometimes, in an early-literacy classroom, you’ll hear a teacher say, ‘It’s time to pick up your pencils,’” said Wiley Blevins, an author and literacy consultant who provides training in schools. “But your pencils should be in your hand almost the entire morning.”

Strikingly, many of the critiques that reading researchers have made against the “balanced literacy” approach that has held sway in schools for decades could equally apply to writing instruction: Foundational writing skills—like phonics and language structure—have not generally been taught systematically or explicitly.

And like the “find the main idea” strategies commonly taught in reading comprehension, writing instruction has tended to focus on content-neutral tasks, rather than deepening students’ connections to the content they learn.

Education Week wants to bring more attention to these connections in the stories that make up this special collection . But first, we want to delve deeper into the case for including writing in every step of the elementary curriculum.

Why has writing been missing from the reading conversation?

Much like the body of knowledge on how children learn to read words, it is also settled science that reading and writing draw on shared knowledge, even though they have traditionally been segmented in instruction.

“The body of research is substantial in both number of studies and quality of studies. There’s no question that reading and writing share a lot of real estate, they depend on a lot of the same knowledge and skills,” said Timothy Shanahan, an emeritus professor of education at the University of Illinois Chicago. “Pick your spot: text structure, vocabulary, sound-symbol relationships, ‘world knowledge.’”

The reasons for the bifurcation in reading and writing are legion. One is that the two fields have typically been studied separately. (Researchers studying writing usually didn’t examine whether a writing intervention, for instance, also aided students’ reading abilities—and vice versa.)

Some scholars also finger the dominance of the federally commissioned National Reading Panel report, which in 2000 outlined key instructional components of learning to read. The review didn’t examine the connection of writing to reading.

Looking even further back yields insights, too. Penmanship and spelling were historically the only parts of writing that were taught, and when writing reappeared in the latter half of the 20th century, it tended to focus on “process writing,” emphasizing personal experience and story generation over other genres. Only when the Common Core State Standards appeared in 2010 did the emphasis shift to writing about nonfiction texts and across subjects—the idea that students should be writing about what they’ve learned.

And finally, teaching writing is hard. Few studies document what preparation teachers receive to teach writing, but in surveys, many teachers say they received little training in their college education courses. That’s probably why only a little over half of teachers, in one 2016 survey, said that they enjoyed teaching writing.

Writing should begin in the early grades

These factors all work against what is probably the most important conclusion from the research over the last few decades: Students in the early-elementary grades need lots of varied opportunities to write.

“Students need support in their writing,” said Dana Robertson, an associate professor of reading and literacy education at the school of education at Virginia Tech who also studies how instructional change takes root in schools. “They need to be taught explicitly the skills and strategies of writing and they need to see the connections of reading, writing, and knowledge development.”

While research supports some fundamental tenets of writing instruction—that it should be structured, for instance, and involve drafting and revising—it hasn’t yet pointed to a specific teaching recipe that works best.

One of the challenges, the researchers note, is that while reading curricula have improved over the years, they still don’t typically provide many supports for students—or teachers, for that matter—for writing. Teachers often have to supplement with additions that don’t always mesh well with their core, grade-level content instruction.

“We have a lot of activities in writing we know are good,” Shanahan said. “We don’t really have a yearlong elementary-school-level curriculum in writing. That just doesn’t exist the way it does in reading.”

Nevertheless, practitioners like Blevins work writing into every reading lesson, even in the earliest grades. And all the components that make up a solid reading program can be enhanced through writing activities.

4 Key Things to Know About How Reading and Writing Interlock

Want a quick summary of what research tells us about the instructional connections between reading and writing?

1. Reading and writing are intimately connected.

Research on the connections began in the early 1980s and has grown more robust with time.

Among the newest and most important additions are three research syntheses conducted by Steve Graham, a professor at the University of Arizona, and his research partners. One of them examined whether writing instruction also led to improvements in students’ reading ability; a second examined the inverse question. Both found significant positive effects for reading and writing.

A third meta-analysis gets one step closer to classroom instruction. Graham and partners examined 47 studies of instructional programs that balanced both reading and writing—no program could feature more than 60 percent of one or the other. The results showed generally positive effects on both reading and writing measures.

2. Writing matters even at the earliest grades, when students are learning to read.

Studies show that the prewriting students do in early education carries meaningful signals about their decoding, spelling, and reading comprehension later on. Reading experts say that students should be supported in writing almost as soon as they begin reading, and evidence suggests that both spelling and handwriting are connected to the ability to connect speech to print and to oral language development.

3. Like reading, writing must be taught explicitly.

Writing is a complex task that demands much of students’ cognitive resources. Researchers generally agree that writing must be explicitly taught—rather than left up to students to “figure out” the rules on their own.

There isn’t as much research about how precisely to do this. One 2019 review, in fact, found significant overlap among the dozen writing programs studied, and concluded that all showed signs of boosting learning. Debates abound about the amount of structure students need and in what sequence, such as whether they need to master sentence construction before moving onto paragraphs and lengthier texts.

But in general, students should be guided on how to construct sentences and paragraphs, and they should have access to models and exemplars, the research suggests. They also need to understand the iterative nature of writing, including how to draft and revise.

A number of different writing frameworks incorporating various degrees of structure and modeling are available, though most of them have not been studied empirically.

4. Writing can help students learn content—and make sense of it.

Much of reading comprehension depends on helping students absorb “world knowledge”—think arts, ancient cultures, literature, and science—so that they can make sense of increasingly sophisticated texts and ideas as their reading improves. Writing can enhance students’ content learning, too, and should be emphasized rather than taking a back seat to the more commonly taught stories and personal reflections.

Graham and colleagues conducted another meta-analysis of nearly 60 studies looking at this idea of “writing to learn” in mathematics, science, and social studies. The studies included a mix of higher-order assignments, like analyses and argumentative writing, and lower-level ones, like summarizing and explaining. The study found that across all three disciplines, writing about the content improved student learning.

If students are doing work on phonemic awareness—the ability to recognize sounds—they shouldn’t merely manipulate sounds orally; they can put them on the page using letters. If students are learning how to decode, they can also encode—record written letters and words while they say the sounds out loud.

And students can write as they begin learning about language structure. When Blevins’ students are mainly working with decodable texts with controlled vocabularies, writing can support their knowledge about how texts and narratives work: how sentences are put together and how they can be pulled apart and reconstructed. Teachers can prompt them in these tasks, asking them to rephrase a sentence as a question, split up two sentences, or combine them.

“Young kids are writing these mile-long sentences that become second nature. We set a higher bar, and they are fully capable of doing it. We can demystify a bit some of that complex text if we develop early on how to talk about sentences—how they’re created, how they’re joined,” Blevins said. “There are all these things you can do that are helpful to develop an understanding of how sentences work and to get lots of practice.”

As students progress through the elementary grades, this structured work grows more sophisticated. They need to be taught both sentence and paragraph structure , and they need to learn how different writing purposes and genres—narrative, persuasive, analytical—demand different approaches. Most of all, the research indicates, students need opportunities to write at length often.

Using writing to support students’ exploration of content

Reading is far more than foundational skills, of course. It means introducing students to rich content and the specialized vocabulary in each discipline and then ensuring that they read, discuss, analyze, and write about those ideas. The work to systematically build students’ knowledge begins in the early grades and progresses throughout their K-12 experience.

Here again, available evidence suggests that writing can be a useful tool to help students explore, deepen, and draw connections in this content. With the proper supports, writing can be a method for students to retell and analyze what they’ve learned in discussions of content and literature throughout the school day —in addition to their creative writing.

This “writing to learn” approach need not wait for students to master foundational skills. In the K-2 grades especially, much content is learned through teacher read-alouds and conversation that include more complex vocabulary and ideas than the texts students are capable of reading. But that should not preclude students from writing about this content, experts say.

“We do a read-aloud or a media piece and we write about what we learned. It’s just a part of how you’re responding, or sharing, what you’ve learned across texts; it’s not a separate thing from reading,” Blevins said. “If I am doing read-alouds on a concept—on animal habitats, for example—my decodable texts will be on animals. And students are able to include some of these more sophisticated ideas and language in their writing, because we’ve elevated the conversations around these texts.”

In this set of stories , Education Week examines the connections between elementary-level reading and writing in three areas— encoding , language and text structure , and content-area learning . But there are so many more examples.

Please write us to share yours when you’ve finished.

Want to read more about the research that informed this story? Here’s a bibliography to start you off.

Berninger V. W., Abbott, R. D., Abbott, S. P., Graham S., & Richards T. (2002). Writing and reading: Connections between language by hand and language by eye. J ournal of Learning Disabilities. Special Issue: The Language of Written Language, 35(1), 39–56 Berninger, Virginia, Robert D. Abbott, Janine Jones, Beverly J. Wolf, Laura Gould, Marci Anderson-Younstrom, Shirley Shimada, Kenn Apel. (2006) “Early development of language by hand: composing, reading, listening, and speaking connections; three letter-writing modes; and fast mapping in spelling.” Developmental Neuropsychology, 29(1), pp. 61-92 Cabell, Sonia Q, Laura S. Tortorelli, and Hope K. Gerde (2013). “How Do I Write…? Scaffolding Preschoolers’ Early Writing Skills.” The Reading Teacher, 66(8), pp. 650-659. Gerde, H.K., Bingham, G.E. & Wasik, B.A. (2012). “Writing in Early Childhood Classrooms: Guidance for Best Practices.” Early Childhood Education Journal 40, 351–359 (2012) Gilbert, Jennifer, and Steve Graham. (2010). “Teaching Writing to Elementary Students in Grades 4–6: A National Survey.” The Elementary School Journal 110(44) Graham, Steve, et al. (2017). “Effectiveness of Literacy Programs Balancing Reading and Writing Instruction: A Meta-Analysis.” Reading Research Quarterly, 53(3) pp. 279–304 Graham, Steve, and Michael Hebert. (2011). “Writing to Read: A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Writing and Writing Instruction on Reading.” Harvard Educational Review (2011) 81(4): 710–744. Graham, Steve. (2020). “The Sciences of Reading and Writing Must Become More Fully Integrated.” Reading Research Quarterly, 55(S1) pp. S35–S44 Graham, Steve, Sharlene A. Kiuhara, and Meade MacKay. (2020).”The Effects of Writing on Learning in Science, Social Studies, and Mathematics: A Meta-Analysis.” Review of Educational Research April 2020, Vol 90, No. 2, pp. 179–226 Shanahan, Timothy. “History of Writing and Reading Connections.” in Shanahan, Timothy. (2016). “Relationships between reading and writing development.” In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (2nd ed., pp. 194–207). New York, NY: Guilford. Slavin, Robert, Lake, C., Inns, A., Baye, A., Dachet, D., & Haslam, J. (2019). “A quantitative synthesis of research on writing approaches in grades 2 to 12.” London: Education Endowment Foundation. Troia, Gary. (2014). Evidence-based practices for writing instruction (Document No. IC-5). Retrieved from University of Florida, Collaboration for Effective Educator, Development, Accountability, and Reform Center website: http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/innovation-configuration/ Troia, Gary, and Steve Graham. (2016).“Common Core Writing and Language Standards and Aligned State Assessments: A National Survey of Teacher Beliefs and Attitudes.” Reading and Writing 29(9).

A version of this article appeared in the January 25, 2023 edition of Education Week as How Does Writing Fit Into the ‘Science of Reading’?

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In