Planning and drafting your paper are the most demanding tasks in the writing process. They require you to analyze carefully the assignment criteria, shift into a critical thinking mode, and demonstrate your ability to engage in higher order learning. Some students skip the critical thinking phase of their writing entirely by simply gathering ideas from other sources, rearranging them into some logical order, and assuming they have, thus, created the basis for a graduate paper.

However, the beauty of graduate school is that you are no longer considered to be simply a consumer of other people’s ideas. Instead, you are expected to engage critically with others’ ideas, to bring forward your own lens and experience, and to be an active participant in advancing the understanding of issues, theories, and practices in the health disciplines. The cornerstone of professional writing is the insertion of your own voice, your own critical analysis, and your own position on, or assertion about, the topic. Do not wait until you complete your program; you can begin to develop your professional voice, and to join that voice with credible, scholarly voices from others in your field of study, in your very first graduate paper.

5.1 Understanding Reconstruction

I have copied Figure 4.3.1 (below) as a reminder of the recursive and iterative process of writing a literature review or other forms of professional writing. In this section, we pick up at the point of reconstruction.

To move from your critical deconstruction of existing literature (Chapter 4) to writing your own literature review, start by stepping back and asking yourself the following questions:

• What themes do I see emerging in my summary of the existing literature?
• What issues or concepts have not been talked about?
• What relationships between ideas are not fully explored?
• What more can be said on the topic by looking at it using a different lens, a different theoretical perspective, an alternative research paradigm, or a different context?

These questions encourage you to develop your own voice, point of view, position, or perspective on the literature you have been reading. You are now moving from the process of deconstruction to one of reconstruction (i.e., putting the literature back together in an original and creative way). Deconstructing and reconstructing the professional literature is a process you will each continue to engage throughout your graduate program and throughout your careers as scholar-practitioner-advocate-leaders.

5.2 Structuring Your Literature Review

Literature reviews can be structured to accomplish different purposes even though they draw on (and reconstruct) the same overview or summary of existing literature. Regardless of the route you choose to complete your graduate program, writing a literature review effectively is a skill you are expected to develop. There are two basic purposes for a literature review: (a) as a rationale or justification for research (e.g., in a thesis proposal, or in the introduction to a research article) or (b) to support a conceptual or theoretical argument (e.g., in a course assignment, or in other non-research-based articles for publication).

In either case, the basic structure of a literature review is similar; it leads the reader from a broad thesis or problem statement, through a series of key arguments, to a particular conclusion (see Figure 5.2.1). In the case of a literature review that is used to justify research (i.e., a thesis or research study proposal), the conclusion reached is the research question(s). Where the literature review supports a conceptual or theoretical article, the conclusion is usually related to implications for practice, advancement or critique of theory, application of a particular construct or principles, and so on.

Figure 5.2.1

Basic Structure of a Literature Review for Research Versus Conceptual or Theoretical Papers

Literature Review as a Foundation for Research	Literature Review as a Theoretical or Conceptual Paper
Audio version:	Audio version:

As you can see from the diagrams above, problem or thesis statements provide a broad starting place for your writing. As you build your arguments, you progressively narrow the focus to lead logically to either (a) your research question(s) or (b) the implications and conclusions you want to present to readers. In Table 5.2.1 (below), the same assertion is used as a problem statement and a thesis statement to provide a foundation for (a) a literature review to justify potential research and (b) a conceptual literature review. Notice how much of the content in black applies to both writing projects. The content in blue shows areas where your writing might diverge based on the different objectives of these two literature reviews.

The bottom line is that, as scholar-practitioner-advocate-leaders, you are responsible to respect and mirror the body of literature in the health disciplines, and you are also called to contribute to that body of literature. You might do this through engagement in research, or you might do this by contributing a theoretical or conceptual article to a journal, writing for a professional magazine, or presenting your work at a conference or a professional meeting. In each case, you may find this basic structure of a literature review helpful as a guide for your writing.

5.3 Developing a Thesis or Problem Statement

Now that you have a sense of the big picture of what is involved in a writing a literature review, and you have gathered enough information from the professional literature to get a clear sense of what you would like to say about the topic, I recommend that you take a break from your research to craft a thesis/problem statement for your paper. A thesis/problem statement is a sentence (or two) that tells the reader what you intend to argue about a particular topic. It is the main assertion or central position that forms the backdrop against which the relevance of everything else in your paper is assessed.

Let’s pick up on the objectives from Table 4.1.2 (Section 4.1) to differentiate between the objectives of a paper and its thesis or problem statements. Notice in Table 5.3.1 below, the thesis statements are also aligned with the level of learning targeted.

You will notice that a number of different thesis statements have been drawn from the topic, Approaches to Client/Patient Care. The thesis statement depends on (a) the objective of the paper, (b) what you discover in your preliminary research (deconstruction of the professional literature), and (c) your interests and opinions about the topic.

Each thesis/problem statement can be evaluated against the following criteria:

• A thesis or problem statement is usually a single sentence.
• It focuses on one central idea.
• It identifies a gap between what is known and unknown; between current practices and potential practices; between current thinking and new ways of conceptualizing problems, issues, or practices.
• It focuses on an area of emergent concern or debate.
• It makes an arguable claim or assertion about the topic.
• In most cases, the assertion is debatable.
• A thesis/problem statement is specific enough to provide direction for the paper.
• It identifies the unifying thread for the arguments that follow.
• It narrows the focus or scope of the argument (i.e., breadth and depth) of the paper.
• It alerts readers as to why your research, concept, or theory-based argument is important.

What should be clear from the list above is that the final writing of your literature review cannot be completed until after you have gathered, summarized, and critically analyzed the existing literature to such a degree that you can come up with your own thesis or problem statement. However, this is likely to be a recursive process that requires you to go back and forth a number of times between what you have learned from the literature and what you want to assert in your literature review. The result will be the unique position that you want to argue. Your position statement derives from the body of literature, but it offers something new and original.

A strong thesis or problem statement indicates to readers the single most important idea that you want to communicate, and it often provides them with a preview of how your arguments will be laid out in the paper. You may revise your thesis statement as you continue to develop your paper. Normally, you position your thesis statement prominently in your introduction, often as the last line.

5.4 Creating a Conceptual Framework

As you explore the professional literature or engage in applied practice contexts, you may discover that there are particular concepts and theories that shed light on the topic about which you are curious. These concepts and theories may influence how you or others think about your topic. Most graduate papers do not require you to develop a conceptual framework. However, you may be expected to do so for a research proposal in your methods of inquiry course or as part of your thesis work (if you choose that exit route). The conceptual and methodological congruence of your research plan and implementation will be dependent on your level of clarity about the lenses (i.e., concepts and theories) you adopt. You may also benefit from including a conceptual framework in other course assignments or culminating program activities. The decision to include a conceptual framework depends, to a large degree, on the topic and the objective of your writing or, if you are planning to engage in research, on how you position your research.

A framework is basically a broad structure that provides meaning and direction for your research or writing. This framework is most often built upon a number of interrelated concepts. I am using the term, concept, to refer to an abstract representation, in language, that characterizes a particular experience or phenomena. In some cases, specific concepts are already clustered together in a purposeful way within a particular theory or model. In this case, the relationships among those concepts has already been explored and articulated. Normally, the relationships between concepts in a theory are more definitive, developed, or “tested”; whereas, conceptual relationships in a model tend to be more tentative and exploratory (McConnelly, 2014). In other cases, the concepts of interest to you may be loosely interconnected, or they may not yet have been connected to the phenomenon you are interested in studying.

It is your job, as a writer and researcher, to make these connections. In most cases, you develop the connections through your literature review, and then enter into your writing or research with a conceptual framework in mind. Although the terms, conceptual framework and theoretical framework, are often ill-defined or used interchangeably in the literature (Green, 2013; McConnelly, 2014; Ravitch & Riggan, 2017), I am using the term, conceptual framework, as the broader, umbrella term (Ravitch & Riggan, 2017). This choice is based, in part, on the argument by Green (2013), who proposes that theories are rarely used whole to support research; rather, particular interrelated concepts are highlighted to support a specific purpose within any study. I define a conceptual framework as a visual representation of the relationship between theories, models, and concepts (as well as variables in the case of quantitative research) that makes transparent the way in which you, as the researcher, are thinking about the various elements that influence your research questions and research design. Ravitch and Riggan (2017) reinforce this definition by arguing that to create a conceptual framework “you must critically read and make connections between, or integrate and synthesize, existing work related to your emerging research topic and its multiple theoretical and practical contexts” (p 11).

Your paradigmatic position (i.e., the assumptions you make about the nature of reality, what is knowable, and how knowledge is created) also needs to be stated in your research; however, it is not typically represented directly in the conceptual framework. Having said this, the paradigm that you gravitate towards (e.g., positivist/postpositivist, constructivist/interpretive, critical/emancipatory/transformative, Indigenous, pragmatic) may have considerable influence on the theories and concepts you highlight in your conceptual framework and how you position the relationships among them (Green, 2013; Mertens, 2015). For example, addictions research among the poor may be positioned quite differently if an emancipatory/critical lens, rather than a positivist/postpositivist lens, is applied to the research. The former is much more likely to draw on concepts such as social determinants of health, equity, social injustice and to position the locus of research at the level of systems rather than at the level of the individual. Your paradigm might also influence the nature of the relationships you envision among the concepts (e.g., causal, correlational, explanatory).

Many writers and researchers articulate a conceptual framework during the literature review and problem exploration stage of the research. Many more could, and should, have done so at that point to make their thinking about the context of the research more transparent to consumers. However, there are some methods of inquiry in which one might argue that the conceptual framework is intended to arise from the research, because the goal is to generate theory (e.g., grounded theory) (Green, 2013; McConnelly, 2014). It is important to be aware that, even when then the conceptual framework is provided up front, it may be modified, clarified, or expanded upon based on the research outcomes.

Take, for example, the broad topic of graduate studies in the health disciplines. A literature review might reveal a number of important concepts (e.g., critical thinking, reflective practice, cognitive complexity), which all influence the development of professional competency. In addition, you might encounter some important principles from adult learning theories (e.g., experiential learning, practice-based learning, authentic assessment). All of these elements influence your conceptual framework. In this case, they are also all consistent with a constructivist paradigmatic lens. Figure 5.4.1 provides an example that illustrates how a visual representation of the conceptual framework makes the interconnections among these concepts clearer.

5.5 Building Your Argument

Now that you have a clear thesis or problem statement for your paper, your task is to create a convincing argument in support of that overriding assertion or position. A graduate professional paper is organized according to a set of key points or arguments; it should not simply follow a topic outline based on your gathering of ideas from the professional literature as discussed in Chapter 4. The arguments you make to support the thesis of your paper should be clear, succinct, and well-organized. This requires you to take a step back and consider how best to support the thesis or problem statement you have generated, as expressed in the following Faculty of Health Disciplines (FHD) Program Outcome.

Building Effective Arguments

The example in Figure 5.5.1 is drawn from my own research and might form the foundation for a paper I write on the topic of multicultural counselling and social justice. Apply the principles we have examined above to the objective and thesis statement. Then consider the key arguments (in bold) and subpoints I have chosen to support those arguments. Both reflect my critical analysis of the literature and my own professional experience and perspectives (i.e., my voice).

Although I am drawing on the research I have conducted in this area, each of the key points and subpoints are in my own words. They are my analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of the literature. This does not mean I do not need to give credit to the sources I have reviewed. I inserted them to ensure I do not lose track of whom I need to credit to support my ideas. Think of each of the key points or arguments in Figure 5.5.1 as the foundation for a paragraph or set of paragraphs in your paper. As I created my argument above, I systematically and purposefully organized each of the key points to build my overall argument. I had to reorganize my argument a number of times to make sure there was a logical flow. In this case, I have opted to move from broad assertions down to more narrowly focused points. I corrected a few flaws in the progression of my ideas as I read them through sequentially.

A solid argument is composed of an organized and logical set of the following elements.

• Assertions about, or points of view on, a subject. You will break down your overall argument into several key points or arguments, but each should be clearly connected to the position (thesis/problem statement) of your paper.
• Evidence to support those assertions or points of view. You have built the foundation of your arguments by gathering information from the body of professional literature, and now you will use that research to support the key points in your draft paper. Your challenge is to take a critical look at that evidence to ensure that it supports your thesis and is presented in a systematic and logical fashion.
• A response to counterarguments. In some cases, there may be arguments against your thesis/problem statement that you need to address in order to provide your reader with a complete picture. By systematically identifying and responding to these counterarguments you demonstrate critical thinking and strengthen your overall argument.

Differentiating an Argument from a Topic Outline

It is important to distinguish between building an argument, which is essential in graduate and professional writing, and creating a topic outline (which may have been acceptable in some undergraduate contexts). Contrast the argument outlined in Figure 5.5.1 with the topic outline in Figure 5.5.2. The latter is organized by topic rather than argument and does not clearly lead the reader to a logical conclusion or position (thesis).

It would be very difficult to write a solid argument based on the topic outline in Figure 5.5.2. You would be much more likely to end up with a descriptive paper (i.e., one that demonstrates only knowledge and comprehension), rather than a paper that takes a particular position and systematically supports that position.

Table 5.5.1 provides an example of an argument on the topic of our food supply and compares it to a topic outline. I have stated each key point clearly in one sentence. The logical flow between the key points is clear. I have nested (indented) the subpoints to make the flow of the argument clear. I based this sample argument on a book I was reading.

Critically analyzing, and extrapolating upon, the argument presented by another writer, as I have demonstrated in Table 5.5.1, is a good way to summarize the ideas that you may want to incorporate into your own paper. It forces you to think critically and to synthesize the information into succinct statements (using your own words). However, do not use this as the argument for your paper as if it reflects your own ideas. Remember, copying another author’s argument is a form of plagiarism.

Refining Your Arguments

Coming up with a clear thesis or problem statement and logical flow of arguments in support of that assertion requires time and energy. However, making this investment will improve your writing exponentially. Consider these additional tips for refining your arguments. In this case, I have worded these in relation to a literature review for the purpose of a research proposal (recall the structure of literature reviews for various purposes in Section 5.2), although the same basic principles apply to all professional writing.

• Arguments should demonstrate logical flow from the problem statement to the research purpose.
• They should be distinct, succinct, and clearly stated.
• Arguments should not have significant leaps between them; if there are any such gaps, they may need to be filled in with an additional key point.
• They should be grounded in the body of literature within the health disciplines.
• They should be complete. Ask yourself if you might need to add anything else to enhance the flow or comprehensiveness of your argument?
• Arguments, like thesis statements, are “arguable” assertions; a statement of fact is not an argument, although it can support, or provide background for, an argument.
• They are strongest when phrased proactively or positively (i.e., these practices promote fairness versus these practices are not unfair).
• Arguments are best phrased in the first person, active voice, because you are expressing an informed opinion and your original thinking about the topic.
• Each key point in your argument should build on the previous one and be conceptually congruent with the problem statement.
• Arguments can typically be expressed in one sentence (preferable) or two short, succinct, and clear sentences; if you write a paragraph, the main point will be difficult to discern.
• Each element of your argument should reflect only one key point; avoid making two arguments together.

In Figure 5.5.4 (below), I provide a brief synthesis of an assignment that requires students to write a literature review for the Methods of Inquiry course in the FHD Master of Counselling program. I then provide a video, designed to support that assignment, in which I reinforce what it means to draw on the professional literature to create a problem statement and a set of arguments to support future research. This video reiterates the content provided in this section.

5.6 Synthesizing and Integrating the Professional Literature

Synthesizing and Integrating Effectively

At this point in your writing process, you have a clear argument drafted with key points and subpoints to support your thesis or problem statement. Make sure that each paragraph (or group of paragraphs) relates to one of the key points in your argument. You may want to copy each of your key points to the first line of the paragraph that elaborates on that point. The key point becomes the topic sentence for that paragraph and ensures that the reader can easily follow the flow of your argument. Your next task is to integrate the ideas of others effectively to support your arguments to meet the following FHD program outcome.

There are several reasons why it is important to cite, accurately, the work of others throughout your paper.

• You are making a contribution to the body of literature in your discipline when you write a scholarly paper. It is important that this contribution be documented clearly so that others can link your ideas to that broader literature base.
• You are presenting ideas that readers may want to explore further. Properly citing your sources allows them to find the complete reference in your reference list and locate the original source for themselves.
• You compromise your scholarly integrity and put yourself at risk of plagiarism, as noted in Chapter 2, when you fail to systematically and accurately identify your sources.
• You strengthen the arguments you are making by integrating and synthesizing the professional literature, effectively and ethically.

If you have effectively tracked the sources of your ideas, you may have supported some of the key points and subpoints in your argument already; in other cases, you may need to revise the paragraph(s) to provide sufficient evidence to support the key point. You can go back to the ideas you generated and organized through your preliminary research on the topic (Chapter 4), or you can search out additional sources to inform and support your points.

Students sometimes have difficulty understanding how the objective of a paper, which addresses the nature of the assignment and levels of learning targeted, influences how they integrate material from other sources and how they word the points and subpoints in their paper. Table 5.6.1 provides some examples of the kinds of statements you might make if you were attempting to demonstrate various levels of learning (Bloom, 1956). Read the descriptors associated with each level, and then analyze the statements on the right to see how well they reflect these criteria. Notice how the nature of the statements changes as the level of learning targeted advances. Please note that it is difficult to accomplish all the goals associated with a particular learning outcome in one or two statements; these are intended simply as examples. I have not included the skills domain, because this would rarely be assessed through a written assignment. I have added fictional citations to reinforce the importance of synthesizing the professional literature to support your points. Even when you are speaking about your own attitudes, beliefs, and values (i.e., affect), it is important to tie your assertions to the professional literature.

Complete Exercise 5.6.1 to practice writing in a way that reflects the levels of learning targeted. Writing in a way that reflects analysis, synthesis, and evaluation may make the difference between a poor grade and a great grade on graduate papers.

You should now have an almost complete draft of your paper. Carefully read through it to ensure that the criteria for demonstrating critical thinking (Section 4.5) are met throughout your writing. You may want to write in the margins the levels of learning you are demonstrating with each key point: evaluation, synthesis, awareness, and so on. If you cannot clearly identify which criteria apply, rethink and rewrite that section.

Drafting Your Introduction

Now that you have pulled together the literature to support your argument, take a step back to ensure that your objective and thesis/problem statement are still a good fit with your draft of the paper. You may need to massage them a bit based on new research you have discovered or the evolution of your argument. Then you are ready to craft your introduction. Drawing on Fowler et al. (2005), at minimum, your introduction should

• introduce the topic of the paper,
• describe your objective in writing the paper, and
• state your thesis.

You may also want to

• describe why the topic is important;
• indicate your attitude toward the topic;
• provide an example, a scenario, or a dilemma to capture the reader’s attention;
• set the context or provide relevant background information;
• define key terms or concepts; and
• describe how the paper is organized (if not indicated in your thesis statement).

I typically begin by introducing the topic and stating the objective of my paper, add any additional information, and then conclude with the thesis (or problem) statement. I have crafted a sample introduction in Figure 5.6.1 based on the topic, purpose, and thesis in Table 5.6.2 below.

Drafting your conclusion

The conclusion to your paper is just as important as the introduction. Your conclusion typically begins with a brief summary of the arguments presented. It links to your thesis or problem statement to demonstrate how the main point of the paper has been supported through the body of your writing. Rather than simply copying your thesis statement, restate it in a new and interesting way. Depending on the nature of the paper, you can then choose to include some or all of the following:

• implications or significance of the ideas presented,
• directions for further research or development,
• personal reflections or applications, or
• a call for action.

Review the sample conclusion in Figure 5.6.2 (below). It is based on the topic, objective, and thesis from Table 5.6.2, which was used to craft the introduction in Figure 5.6.1 (above).