Drawing on the experience of carrying out a literature review commissioned to support the Review of Teacher Education in Scotland, this paper discusses the role of literature reviews within the movement for "evidence-based policy" making. The first part of the paper discusses the purposes of such reviews and some of the misconceptions that may be associated with them. Several critical questions that shape the work of reviewing are identified. By examining the particular case in which the authors were involved, it is demonstrated how the establishment of terms of reference and definitions of scope are critical factors in determining the outcome of such a project. But so too are the relationships established between those undertaking the project and the commissioners of the work. The conclusion is that reviewing literature is much more of a deliberative process than is commonly understood. (Contains 6 notes.)