Adapting Systematic Literature Reviews for Undergraduate Thesis Projects: A Conceptual Framework
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article aims a explore conceptual analysis of authoritative SLR guidelines to develop the Undergraduate SLR Model - a simplified yet rigorous seven-stage framework specifically designed for undergraduate thesis projects. Systematic literature review (SLR) has gained increasing adoption in undergraduate educational research, yet most established SLR guidelines were developed for advanced research contexts and impose procedural demands that exceed undergraduate students' capacity in terms of time, database access, methodological training, and team composition. This study employed a conceptual research design through the systematic analysis and synthesis of authoritative SLR guidelines to identify essential methodological principles and adapt them to undergraduate research contexts. The results is unlike existing SLR guides that target graduate or professional researchers, this framework explicitly addresses the constraints of single-researcher settings by introducing supervisor validation as a quality assurance substitute for dual-reviewer screening, limiting database requirements to one primary source with a mandatory supplementary search strategy, and recommending thematic narrative synthesis as a feasible alternative to meta-analysis. The model also provides a decision guide for choosing between SLR and scoping review approaches, practical tools including a simplified PRISMA Flow Diagram and self-assessment checklist, and guidance for collaborative multi-researcher scenarios. This framework offers a methodological reference that enables undergraduate students and their supervisors to conduct literature reviews that are both rigorous in principle and realistic in practice.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Al-Jarf, R. (2026). An integrative systematic review of studies across diverse educational evaluation domains. British Journal of Teacher Education and Pedagogy, 5(3), 40-60. https://doi.org/10.32996/bjtep.2026.5.3.5
Atenas, J., Havemann, L., & Timmermann, C. (2023). Reframing data ethics in research methods education: A pathway to critical data literacy. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 20(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951714559253
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
De Cassai, A., Dost, B., Tulgar, S., & Boscolo, A. (2025). Methodological standards for conducting high-quality systematic reviews. Biology, 14(8), 973. https://doi.org/10.3390/biology14080973
Fielding, J. (2025). Taking an argumentation approach to statistical investigations: Developing student data-ing practices. ZDM–Mathematics Education, 57(1), 31-44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-024-01639-y
Ghamrawi, N., Shal, T., Ghamrawi, N. A. R., Abu-Tineh, A., Alshaboul, Y., & Alazaizeh, M. A. (2025). A Step-by-step approach to systematic reviews in educational research. European Journal of Educational Research, 14(2), 549–566. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.14.2.549
Ghamrawi, N., Shal, T., Ghamrawi, N. A., Abu-Tineh, A., Alshaboul, Y., & Alazaizeh, M. A. (2025). A step-by-step approach to systematic reviews in educational research. European Journal of Educational Research, 14(2), 549-566. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.14.2.549
Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378
Hammersley, M. (2020). Reflections on the methodological approach of systematic reviews. In Systematic reviews in educational research (pp. 23–39). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7_2
Iqbal, M. (2026). Memahami pendekatan kuantitatif dalam penelitian skripsi: Sebuah kajian literatur naratif. Jurnal Diferensiasi: Jurnal Hasil Penelitian, Pengembangan dan Kajian Kepustakaan di Bidang Pendidikan, 1(4), 227–236. https://balejurnal.com/index.php/JDPK/article/view/73
Jayadi, A., Kholisussa’di, & Iqbal, M. (2026). Memahami pendekatan kualitatif dalam penelitian skripsi: Sebuah kajian literatur naratif. Jurnal Diferensiasi: Jurnal Hasil Penelitian, Pengembangan dan Kajian Kepustakaan di Bidang Pendidikan, 1(4), 237–249. https://balejurnal.com/index.php/JDPK/article/view/74
Mannarath, A. K. (2026). Systematic literature review for an effective research: A structured framework for social science researches. Quality & Quantity, 60(2), 4773-4799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-025-02458-3
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Moreau, M. A., & Woodhouse, E. (2025). Improving transparency in conservation social science research to enhance quality, equity, and collaboration. Conservation Biology, 39(2), e70003. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.70003
Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
Newman, M., & Gough, D. (2020). Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives and application. In Systematic Reviews in Educational Research (pp. 3–22). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7_1
Ocheja, P. I., Onoja, P., Agada, J. O., & Ochuema, A. (2025). Supervisor-supervisee relationships in postgraduate research: A wholistic perspective. International Journal of Global Affairs, Research and Development, 3(1), 221-230. https://ijgard.com/index.php/ijgard/article/view/87
Oladimeji, O., Londani, M., Moyo, S., Seekoe, E., Saidi, A., Mothiba, T. M., Feza, N. N., Davhana-Maselesele, M., Maart, R., Babalola, J. O., Okoh, A. I., Okonofua, F., Ntusi, N. A. B., & Sibiya, M. N. (2026). Mentorship-infused initiatives for postgraduate research supervision in African higher institutions of learning: A systematic review and meta-synthesis protocol. BMJ Open, 16(1), e107670. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2025-107670
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., Stewart, L. A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A. C., Welch, V. A., Whiting, P., Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
Pantic, K., & Hamilton, M. (2024). Conducting a systematic literature review in education: A basic approach for graduate students. Brock Education Journal, 33(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.26522/brocked.v33i1.1121
Pawar, A. S. (2026). A framework-guided conceptual analysis of foundational philosophical questions. Philpapers, https://philpapers.org/go.pl?id=PAWAFC&proxyId=none&u=https%3A%2F%2Fdoi.org%2F10.5281%2Fzenodo.18247528
Peters, M. D. J., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18(10), 2119–2126. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167
Schreiber, F., & Cramer, C. (2024). Towards a conceptual systematic review: Proposing a methodological framework. Educational Review, 76(6), 1458-1479. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2022.2116561
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039
Taber, K. S. (2025). Mediated learning leading development—The social development theory of Lev Vygotsky. In Science Education in Theory and Practice: An Introductory Guide to Learning Theory, 275-292. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-81351-1_16
Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’Brien, K. K., Colquhoun, H., Levac, D., Moher, D., Peters, M. D. J., Horsley, T., Weeks, L., Hempel, S., Akl, E. A., Chang, C., McGowan, J., Stewart, L., Hartling, L., Aldcroft, A., Wilson, M. G., Garritty, C., … Straus, S. E. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine, 169(7), 467–473. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850
Veroniki, A. A., Hutton, B., Stevens, A., McKenzie, J. E., Page, M. J., Moher, D., McGowan, J., Straus S. E., Li, T., Munn, Z., Pollock, D., Colquhoun, H., Godfrey, C., Smith, M., Tufte, J., Logan, S., Catalá-López, F., Tovey, D., Franco, J. V. A., Chang, S., Garritty, C., Hartling, L., Horsley, T., Langlois, E. V., McInnes, M., Offringa, M., Welch, V., Pritchard, C., Khalil, H., Mittmann, N., Peters, M., Konstantinidis, M., Elsman, E. B. M., Kelly, S. E., Aldcroft, A., Thirugnanasampanthar, S. S., Dourka, J., Neupane, D., Well, G., Akl, E., Wilson, M., Soares-Weiser, K., & Tricco, A. C. (2025). Update to the PRISMA guidelines for network meta-analyses and scoping reviews and development of guidelines for rapid reviews: A scoping review protocol. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 23(3), 517. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-24-00308
Xiao, Y., & Watson, M. (2019). Guidance on conducting a systematic literature review. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 39(1), 93–112. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X17723971
Zawacki-Richter, O., Kerres, M., Bedenlier, S., Bond, M., & Buntins, K. (2020). Systematic reviews in educational research (O. Zawacki-Richter, M. Kerres, S. Bedenlier, M. Bond, & K. Buntins, Eds.). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27602-7
Zhao, M. Y. (2026). Harmony: Towards a unified conceptual framework. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 21(2), 241-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2025.2500564