ATTEMPTING LLM DISSERTATION: SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW Ultimately, LR is not only limited to Chapter 2 or the ‘standard research’. It is an integral ‘academic processes’ applied to all chapters. For instances: Chap 01 – IntroductionThis is in fact, the ‘Title Proposal’. One just can’t obtain a title without knowing the ‘subject matter’ one wish to research. So, intrinsically, one would have a preferred area of law to research upon. Thereon, it is surface reading of the LR from all journals one can lay its hand upon. Group them according to ‘Topic’, which ultimately, forms one’s research objectives. ‘Seaming’ these objectives, forms the ‘Research Aims’, which is your ‘Research Title’ itself. This can be a daunting task of combing the internet/library, downloading, printing and classifying them into ‘boxes’. Very time consuming. Chap 02 – Literature ReviewA special chapter dedicated to LR. While one continue to build up the collection of ‘library’, now, one has to also read the entire collection in detail, among other, in a systematic way, i.e.: For each literature keep a ‘Summary Log’ comprising among other, the ‘topic’; title; author(s); abstract; OSCOLA referencing; summary and reference. This is a ‘second reading’. Keep a ‘register of all the literature’ you had referred to in a matrix comprising of the author; title; and the topic it ought to address your objectives. Revisit all the literature again, and add up another item, the ‘research gap’ as in the ‘Summary Log’, highlighting what these literatures failed to address or its limitations. This is a ‘third reading’. One has to read critically to draw out these ‘knowledge gaps’. Finally, connecting the dots, by building up a narration of how an issue is addressed in one literature, to be ‘defeated’ or ‘supported’ by another literature. This is what is known as ‘Structuring the Chapters’. It should sufficiently provide a mind map as to how one would write the chapter. This is even more daunting as the saying goes, ‘it is a lonely journey, and LR takes 3-times of reading, not just one.’ Some spent years, just building on this part of the journey. Chap 03 – Methodology This chapter is dedicated to the entire deliberation of the Research Methodology, in quantitative research. However, for qualitative legal research, this chapter, one can go straight into addressing the second objective, as the first objective would have been addressed in chapter 2. In attempting to write the ‘body of the thesis’, the following may be applicable, pour over the LR for the respective topic and narrate the matrixes in accordance to:
Chapter 04 – Findings / Chapter 05 – Analysis This chapter 5 is dedicated to the findings of the ‘fieldworks’ for quantitative research. While this chapter 6 is dedicated to analysing the findings of the ‘fieldworks’ against other ‘available models’ for quantitative research. For qualitative, both chapters are dedicated to addressing the other objectives or topics. In addressing such the same, Bloom’s taxonomy approach is applicable. Thus, the LR for the respective topic is heavily relied upon to build up the narration. Chapter 06 – Conclusion Chapter 06 – Conclusion This chapter is dedicated to:
In conclusion, one’s research is all about LR, where before you can create, you ought to research what others had done in a systematic way, through the hierarchy of Bloom’s taxonomy, not the other way around. So, my ‘zen-master’ Sv is correct when he says:
[O]ne of the reasons why you are required to use academic or legal sources is that those works have been peer reviewed before publishing and include a section describing the method of research and its limitations. This is science and must be supported by tried and tested work. This does not mean that the published work is correct. Quite the opposite, it if often incorrect and therefore it is often discredited and dismissed. [Y]ou must aim at presenting ‘critical analysis’ and ‘evaluation’ in every paragraph you write. You cannot present originality (or create) unless you complete this process of analysis and evaluation.
0 Comments
ATTEMPTING LLM DISSERTATION: HOW TO PROCEED? Congratulation if you had passed the first hurdle. The Sv may lay the following ground-rules:
Remember, your Sv may sometimes acted like a ‘zen master’, very little word and it is priceless when he instruct you and you have to come out with the rest of the ‘instruction’, as though you are an ‘enlightened researcher’. It is too often to hear: [I] think my powers are very limited in terms of teaching LLM students how to write. This is a challenge across the board […]. EFFECTIVE READING AND WRITING Contemplate this opening statement: [I]t is not immaterial what you think, there are ways in academia we ask you to present it. Therefore, take note of the followings:
--------------------------------------- [1] Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives (Handbook One 1956) pp.201-207: Outlined Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis and Creative. LITERATURE REVIEW Strangely but truly, LR is your ‘passport’ to be ‘accepted’ in the academia. I am struggling with this issue initially, for what is the point, am I writing but to repeat what others had said and I am just ‘going round circles’? Acknowledging this to be academia, my Sv has this to say: [O]ne of the reasons why you are required to use academic or legal sources is that those works have been peer reviewed before publishing and include a section describing the method of research and its limitations. This is science and must be supported by tried and tested work. This does not mean that the published work is correct. Quite the opposite, it if often incorrect and therefore it is often discredited and dismissed. To have a good grasp on the literature that is available, nothing short of getting:
REFERENCING From the onset the RGU has provided ample resources on OSCOLA referencing.[1] Yet, one may overlooked and assumed that most of the LR provided the same style of referencing, when discussing construction law. It is not. My Sv is quick to identify this:
[T]hat said you don't appear to follow some of the guides provided […] i.e., why are you referencing is a bespoke half Harvard half OSCOLA style? I took notice of this shortcoming and found my inclination of ‘Harvard style’ vs. OSCOLA, more of practicality, as the followings:
Generally, the RGU required strict adherence to OSCOLA. I find the following to be useful:
-------------------------------------- [1] OSCOLA (4th edition Oxford 2012) |
Objective of this Page:I am contributing to the public information regarding my experience reading law in UK University, in general. These information is for educational purpose only and shall not be taken as an advice be it legal or otherwise. You should seek proper advice to your case with the relevant professionals. The author cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information so provided here. Archives
April 2022
Categories
All
|