This repeats until the lawyer has presented all the essential and necessary evidence to understand the situation at hand.
As the lawyer presenting your case, you need to organize and structure the evidence for your argument so that the jury knows how you think of your evidence.
The way a lawyer organizes evidence is crucial to how well the jury understands the argument and moves from one piece of evidence to the next.
Obviously a lawyer chooses which piece of evidence to present first, and chooses the next piece of evidence based on the previous evidence and what the jury needs to understand to evaluate the next piece.
Your transitions need to tell the reader how each new point or piece of evidence fits with the one before it and what you think about it.
Your reader should never have to figure out why you chose to include the quotation or evidence you did, or what it means.
A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information in a way that informs how you are planning to investigate a research problem.
The analytical features of a literature review might: It is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers.
In a literature review organized chronologically, you group and discuss your sources in order of their publication date, highlighting the changes in research in the field and your specific topic over time.
This structure is useful for reviews focusing on research methodology, historiographical papers, and other writing in which you want to emphasize how ideas have developed over time.