Critical Reading: Background
Critical Reading: Background
Critical reading is the process of reading that goes beyond just understanding a text.
Critical reading involves:
In brief, you are actively responding to the reading. Critical reading is useful at all stages of
academic study, but is particularly important when writing an article critique or a literature
review.
Critical reading often involves asking questions about the reading. In particular, you are
examining the strengths and weaknesses of the reading's argument.
Each of these affects how 'strong' the argument is, that is, how convincing it is.
Note: The questions here can also be used to improve your own writing, especially when you
are required to construct an argument.
Background
Before you consider the argument of a reading, you should build up a background picture of
the reading.
While you cannot evaluate an argument based solely on the qualifications of the author, their
background can give you an indication of credibility or potential bias.
As with the author, the type of reading can give you an idea of potential bias and the quality /
applicability of the information. Is this an academic source? Is it trying to convince you of
something or sell something?
The reading may be organised and written differently or have different goals depending on
the intended audience.
Is it aimed at
Up-to-date information is more useful. Something that was believed to be true in 1982 may
have been disproved or improved since then.
Purpose
Getting the 'big picture' of the reading is essential so that you can see how all the pieces fit
together.
The main claim (or argument) of the reading is the point that it is trying to prove. The claim
of a reading is often a single statement: the thesis statement. This is often found in the
abstract, the introduction, and/or the conclusion of the article.
The structure of the reading will give you an idea of which points are most important, and
which points support the conclusion. Look at
headings
subheadings
tables
the introduction
Evidence
It is essential to consider the quality of the evidence in the reading, as this directly relates to
the usefulness of the reading.
Methodology
If the reading is based on any kind of research (e.g. a survey, an experiment, a case study) it
is important to consider how the research was conducted, as this can affect the validity of the
findings reported.
Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages, but the type of research will always
affect the findings. Is this type of research appropriate for this topic?
The wider the range or sample size of research, the more the findings can be generalised.
Could other research prove this research wrong? This is not asking whether the research is
false, but whether it is possible to test its validity. If it is impossible to prove a claim wrong, it
is also impossible to prove a claim right; the claim is instead a matter of faith.
If someone else conducted similar research using these methods, would they be likely to have
a similar result? If it is impossible to repeat research, it is also impossible to test it.
Were there other methods that may be more effective, more scientific, more reliable, more
culturally-sensitive, or more practical? Why weren't they used?
Logic
When reading critically it is important to examine the chain of reasoning used by the author,
as any gaps or problems can undermine the validity of the conclusion.
Definitions are an important part of academic study: terminology often varies between topics
and between authors.
Does every point follow on from the last point? If there is a gap between two ideas, this could
be a 'leap of faith' that undermines the overall conclusion.
Is the reasoning logically sound? Some arguments are weak because they rely on faulty logic:
these are often referred to as logical fallacies.
Balance
In order to read critically you have to consider whether the argument is appropriately
balanced, looking at the issue or problem from relevant perspectives.
Do you have questions that are not answered in the reading? [hide]
Readings are often written from one perspective; what other ways can you look at this topic?
Try, for example, a PESTLE analysis, which examines the political, economic, sociological,
technological, legal, and environmental perspectives and implications.
A reading that offers several perspectives is more balanced, and a strong argument must
consider and argue against counter-arguments.
Are you aware of any counter-arguments that exist but were not discussed? This is a
sign of a weaker argument.
Limitations
What does the argument assume? [hide]
Some readings will identify their assumptions: this is so that if an assumption is later proven
false, it is clear whether the argument is still correct or not.
Does the reading make assumptions that it does not identify? Hidden assumptions
may weaken the argument.
Some theories or principles only apply in certain situations. If a theory is applied outside of
those situations, it may weaken the argument.
Other sources
No reading exists in isolation. You must consider how the reading fits into the 'bigger picture'
of the larger academic context.
If the reading disagrees with something from other readings, your textbook, or the lecturer, it
may be incorrect. It may also be a controversial or debatable argument, or this reading may
be discussing the argument from a different perspective.
Are there competing theories with better explanations for the evidence? [hide]
When there is more than one way to explain evidence, you must carefully evaluate the
plausibility of each explanation.
Is there more up-to-date research that could disagree with the findings, or improve upon
them? [hide]