While much longer than would be expected in an MA thesis, this is an excellent example of a thorough and well organized review of relevant literature. Note that its organization follows exactly the outline presented in the sketch (item 1, above).
Jesse's thesis is very strong in many ways, but the lit review is not one of them. Note the lists of references tacked onto the end of discussions of big topics: you know nothing afterwards of what any particular reference added to the knowledge base, or how any reference fits into the context of Jesse's work, except in the vaguest way.
Shannon Scott's MA thesis, Ch. 3, sections 1 and 2: a "semiformal" lit review, broken out as a section.
Shannon's MA work had several parts, essentially independent. Each got a chapter, so section 2 of Ch. 3 could be regarded as the lit review for one of these projects.
This is a fairly typical organization, which would be appropriate in many MA theses. Note that she postpones an extensive discussion of the technical content of prior work to a later chapter. Do you think that she does a good enough job of explaining where her work fits in the grand scheme of things?
