HAND-OUTS FOR ‘CRITICAL READING’ (BAE-207)

Compiled by

Arum Budiastuti, MCS

English DepartmentFaculty of HumanitiesUniversitas Airlangga2013

0

CRITICAL THINKING AND CRITICAL READING

(Taken and adapted from Learning Centre, The University of Sydney and UNSW, Australia)

Outline of Lecture what is critical thinking? demonstrating critical thinking strategies for critical reading and writing

1. Defining critical thinking

Critical thinking has been defined in many different ways. Very broad definitions include ’thinking which has a purpose’ or ‘reflective judgement’. However, these definitions are often too general to be useful to students.

Let’s begin by reflecting on some approaches that critical thinkers may or may not take to problems and issues.

Exercise 1Read through the following statements and tick those that you think may come from critical thinkers.

“I hate talk shows where people just state their opinions but never give any reasons at all”“No matter how complex a problem, you can bet there will be a simple solution”“Just because information is in a textbook, doesn’t necessarily mean it can be trusted”“My views are probably shaped by the social and economic groups I belong to”“I hate it when teachers discuss problems instead of just giving the information”“Selling an idea is like selling cars, you say whatever works”“I like to think about whether someone’s views reflects the experience of all groups of people”“I question the authority of evidence before I accept it”

A useful definition of the type of critical thinking you need to develop at university level is

In order to display critical thinking, students need to develop skills in♦ interpreting: understanding the significance of data and to clarify its meaning♦ analysing: breaking information down and recombining it in different ways♦ reasoning: creating an argument through logical steps♦ evaluating: judging the worth, credibility or strength of accounts.

1

The kind of thinking which seeks to explore questions about existing knowledge for issues which are not clearly defined and for which there are no clear-cut answers.

Why is critical thinking important at university?In general, students who develop critical thinking skills are more able to♦ achieve better marks♦ become less dependent on teachers and textbooks♦ create knowledge♦ evaluate, challenge and change the structures in society

2. Displaying critical thinking in reading and writing

READINGThree important purposes of reading critically are♦ to provide evidence to back up or challenge a point of view♦ to evaluate the validity and importance of a text/ position♦ to develop reflective thought and a tolerance for ambiguity

2

WRITINGWritten assignments may call for Critical thinking either explicitly or implicitly.

Implicit types of critical writingAt undergraduate level, critical writing typically refers to the genre of the persuasive essay in which a logical argument [ to a stated position/ issue ] is developed and presented. The cognitive process of critical thinking brings to light and questions ‘accepted’ views and assumptions and can offer alternative perspectives

What is meant by critical?At university, to be critical does not mean to criticise in a negative manner. Rather it requires you to question the information and opinions in a text and present your evaluation or judgement of the text. To do this well, you should attempt to understand the topic from different perspectives (i.e. read related texts) and in relation to the theories, approaches and frameworks in your course.

What is meant by evaluation or judgement?Here you decide the strengths and weaknesses of a text. This is usually based on specific criteria. Evaluating requires an understanding of not just the content of the text, but also an understanding of a text’s purpose, the intended audience and why it is structured the way it is.

What is meant by analysis?Analysing requires separating the content and concepts of a text into their main components and then understanding how these interrelate, connect and possibly influence each other.

Critical thinking is a process that challenges an individual to usereflective, reasonable, rational thinking to gather, interpret and evaluate

information in order to derive a judgment.

General Strategies for critical writing♦ Read critically (e.g. check validity of references used in source text)♦ Be fair. Take into account accepted standards of judgement used in the particular

discipline or field. Comment (if possible from both a positive and negative perspective) on the section

♦ Draw on other sources to back up your comments. Use evidence taken from sources which are considered authoritative in the field

♦ Consider viewpoints from a range of perspectives (e.g. male and female, different socioeconomic and ethnic groups)

♦ Come to a conclusion on the overall worth/ validity etc of the original text♦ Use inclusive language (e.g. non-gender specific, non-absolute terms such as ‘often’

and ‘could’ rather than ‘always’ and ‘is’)

3

GUIDANCE FOR WRITING ARTICLE REVIEWS

First of all, an article review is a writing giving your opinion on certain thing. It could be a product, a service, a movie, a book or even an article. Writing an article could be a little bit challenging for some people, but does not have to be hard.

Purpose of a Critical ReviewThe critical review is a writing task that asks you to summarise and evaluate a text. The critical review can be of a book, a chapter, or a journal article. Writing the critical review usually requires you to read the selected text in detail and to also read other related texts so that you can present a fair and reasonable evaluation of the selected text.

4

Structure of a Critical ReviewCritical reviews, both short (one page) and long (four pages), usually have a similar structure. Headings are usually optional for longer reviews and can be helpful for the reader.

IntroductionThe length of an introduction is usually one paragraph for a journal article review and two or three paragraphs for a longer book review. Include a few opening sentences that announce the author(s) and the title, and briefly explain the topic of the text. Present the aim of the text and summarise the main finding or key argument. Conclude the introduction with a brief statement of your evaluation of the text. This can be a positive or negative evaluation or, as is usually the case, a mixed response.

SummaryPresent a summary of the key points along with a limited number of examples. You can also briefly explain the author’s purpose/intentions throughout the text and you may briefly describe how the text is organised. The summary should only make up about a third of the critical review.

CritiqueThe critique should be a balanced discussion and evaluation of the strengths, weakness and notable features of the text. Remember to base your discussion on specific criteria. Good reviews also include other sources to support your evaluation (remember to reference).You can choose how to sequence your critique. Here are some examples to get you started:• Most important to least important conclusions you make about the text.• If your critique is more positive than negative, then present the negative points first

and the positive last.• If your critique is more negative than positive, then present the positive points first

and the negative last.• If there are both strengths and weakness for each criterion you use, you need to

decide overall what your judgement is. For example, you may want to comment on a key idea in the text and have both positive and negative comments. You could begin by stating what is good about the idea and then concede and explain how it is limited in some way. While this example shows a mixed evaluation, overall you are probably being more negative than positive.

• In long reviews, you can address each criteria you choose in a paragraph, including both negative and positive points. For very short critical reviews (one page or less) where your comments will be briefer, include a paragraph of positive aspects and another of negative.

• You can also include recommendations for how the text can be improved in terms of ideas, research approach; theories or frameworks used can also be included in the critique section.

5

ConclusionThis is usually a very short paragraph.• Restate your overall opinion of the text.• Briefly present recommendations.• If necessary some further qualification or explanation of your judgement can be

included. This can help your critique sound fair and reasonable.

ReferencesIf you have used other sources in you review you should also include a list of references at the end of the review.

Summarising and paraphrasing for the critical reviewSummarising and paraphrasing are essential skills for academic writing and in particular, the critical review. To summarise means to reduce a text to its main points and its most important ideas. The length of your summary for a critical review should only be about one quarter to one third of the whole critical review. The best way to summarise is to:1. Scan the text. Look for information that can be deduced from the introduction,

conclusion and the title and headings. What do these tell you about the main points of the article?

2. Locate the topic sentences and highlight the main points as you read.3. Reread the text and make separate notes of the main points. Examples and

evidence do not need to be included at this stage. Usually they are used selectively in your critique.

Paraphrasing means putting it into your own words. Paraphrasing offers an alternative to using direct quotations in your summary (and the critique) and can be an efficient way to integrate your summary notes. The best way to paraphrase is to:1. Review your summary notes2. Rewrite them in your own words and in complete sentences3. Use reporting verbs and phrases (eg; The author describes…, Smith argues that …).4. If you include unique or specialist phrases from the text, use quotation marks.

Some General Criteria for Evaluating TextsThe following list of criteria and focus questions may be useful for reading the text and for preparing the critical review. The template for making an article review is given in the last part of this handout.

Criteria Possible focus questions

Significance and contribution tothe field

• What is the author’s aim?• To what extent has this aim been achieved?• What does this text add to the body of

knowledge? (This could be in terms of theory, data and/or practical application)

• What relationship does it bear to other works in the field?

• What is missing/not stated?• Is this a problem?

6

Methodology or approach • What approach was used for the research? (eg; quantitative or qualitative, analysis/review

of theory or current practice, comparative, case study, personal reflection etc…)• How objective/biased is the approach?• Are the results valid and reliable?• What analytical framework is used to discuss

the results?Argument and use of evidence • Is there a clear problem, statement or

hypothesis?• What claims are made?• Is the argument consistent?• What kinds of evidence does the text rely on?

What is the nature of each piece of supporting evidence? For example, is it based on empirical research, ethical consideration, common knowledge, anecdote?

• How valid and reliable is the evidence?• How effective is the evidence in supporting the

argument?• What conclusions are drawn?• Are these conclusions justified?

Writing style and text structure • Was it difficult to read and understand? If so, why? If not, why not?

Does the writing style suit the intended audience? (eg; expert/non-expert, academic/non- academic)

Did the structure of sentences and paragraphs and the overall organization guide you and help you follow the author's intent?

What is the organising principle of the text? Could it be better organised?

In the following pages, you will find two sample article reviews with annotated comments.

They are authentic examples of student writing. Therefore you should not view this as amodel – while it contains many attributes of a successful article review, it is not a perfect piece of writing. The comments on the right hand side draw your attention to both ‐strengths and weaknesses in the review, but are not comprehensive and as such you should not assume that sections of the article review which do not have comments are without problems. Please not that the language in this article review is not withoutgrammatical errors.

7

#Sample 1

8

Template for Journal Article Review

Article Title :Author(s) :Author’s Brief background : expertise and affiliationJournal name:Date:Pages :Volume :Issue :URL (if any) :Keywords: These should be keywords that define the major topics of the article. I.e., if someone were searching a database of these articles, then they would search these keywords much as you searched library databases. Examples: gender equity, cooperative learning, spatial sense, etc. Keywords are usually found in the article abstract.

Reviewers: The names of the people in your group writing this article review!

REVIEWIntroduction:Abstract and Overview: Short summary of the article. True abstracts are no more than 100/150 words and are one paragraph. This abstract and overview can be a little longer.

Analysis and Synthesis: Here is where you actually "review" the article. What are the most important conclusions of the article or the most important aspects from your perspective? How, specifically, does this inform your group and your project? What did you learn from the article? Are there points in the article with which you agree or disagree? Why? Pull it all together--what conclusions or implications do you feel are the most important? Again, don't feel that you need to write a long document. A few well-crafted paragraphs that are succinct and directly to the point with sound arguments supporting your position are all that are needed. Conclusion : What new insights/discoveries have I made in relation to my belief and values? How will I make use of this new knowledge in future?

9

Rubrics for Assessing Journal Article Review

GradingDescription of Quality of Work

Excellent (A)

75 and above

Very clear focus and clarity of thoughts and expression. Key points are well developed and described in detail. Excellent analysis of article content that is discerning, in-depth and supported by both academic and personal knowledge. There is a high quality of reflection as can be seen in the ability to relate to one’s values, beliefs and experiences to the content of the article. The reviewer is able to suggest how the information and knowledge could be adopted or adapted innovatively to enhance or improve learning in the field. Personal insights and views that are expressed show that the reviewer has thought critically and reflectively about the article.

Very Good (AB)

70 - 74

The review is clear, well organized with logical sequencing and elaboration of key points. All key points are adequately detailed and there is in-depth analysis of some of the points. Insights and discoveries made show a good understanding of the article content and that that the reviewer has made good effort to reflect on his/her values, beliefs and experiences.

Good (B)

65 - 69

There is adequate analysis of the article content but with some points detailed more than others. The reviewer was able to suggest how the information and knowledge could be applied to improve or enhance current practices. Overall, the review is satisfactory in that it shows an overall understanding of the content and the ability to reflect on the content. There is minimal error in grammar and paraphrasing.

Satisfactory (C - BC)

55-64

The review is lacking in focus and clarity of expression. Key points not elaborated upon and details are minimal. Little analysis of content. Minimal reflection and insights given. There are also notable errors in grmmarand paraphrasing.

Unsatisfactory (D - E)

Below 55

unacceptable levels of paraphrasing; irrelevance of content; polemical assertion without evidence or analysis; presentation, grammar or structure so poor it cannot be understood; proven as plagiarism.

10