15/03/2012
What is a Critique? A critique or critical review is a form of essay that summarises and evaluates a book, a chapter of a book or an article. It is a written exercise in critical thinking. Requires the reader to: • Question the information and opinions presented Question the information and opinions presented
in the text
Writing a Critique/Critical Review Presenter: Vanessa van der Ham Centre for Teaching and Learning
[email protected]
What does a critique do? • Identifies what the author is saying
• Provide an informed and supported opinion on: ‐ the strengths and weaknesses of the text ‐ the contribution of the text to the field
What kind of text are you critiquing? Example:
• Identifies how points are being made
• Academic essay
• Identifies the assumptions being made
• Research report
• Evaluates the ideas developed, based on: the ideas developed based on: ‐ current theory and research ‐ knowledge of the conventions of the particular kind of text being reviewed
• Review of research • Academic book • Policy document
Understand conventions and expectations to know what you should h ld b be llooking ki for f
Always check specifications in your course guide
• Newspaper article
This presentation Part 1: General points on writing a critique
Part 1: Writing a Critique Parts of a critique:
• What are the main parts of a critique?
Introduction
• What are you looking for?
y Summary of the article
Part 2: Focus on research report • What are the components? • What are you looking for?
Your analysis and evaluation Conclusion Please note: The following are general guidelines only and may differ from what is required for your specific assignments Make sure you check specific content and structural guidelines in your course guides.
1
15/03/2012
Introduction to your Critique
Background information on…
The Topic Should include: • Brief background information about ‐ The topic Will vary depending The author ‐ The author on document ‐ The article • Your thesis statement/ main idea ‐ What is your main argument? ‐ What are going to show in the critique?
You might need to include information on…
• What is the general topic of the article/essay? See: ‐ Title of article ‐ Introduction ‐ Abstract • How does it fit into its field of study? • What gave rise to the need for this article?
Brief background information on …
The Author
The Article
• Where does the author work?
• What is the purpose of the article?
• What is the author’s research area?
• When was it written?
• How does this article fit into the author’s research area?
• What theoretical framework is used?
• What is the author’s research history?
• Who is the intended audience?
• Does the author have any political agenda?
‐ may be revealed by publication in which article appears • What sources does the author use?
Where do I find this information? 1. Somewhere in the publication itself
‐ Look at Reference List or check footnotes or endnotes ‐ Eg. Primary research; case studies
2. Use a Google search to find the author
Introducing your critique
Your Thesis Statement • A brief statement summarising your evaluation of the text • Evaluation is often a mixed response – both positive and negative and negative
Example: Although Madison’s article demonstrates the potential advantages of banning the use of cell phones in schools, his argument provides little compelling evidence that this will address the specific problem of cyber bullying.
Example 1: A Critical Review of Goodwin et al., 2000, Decision making in Singapore and Australia: The influence of culture on accountants’ ethical decisions, Accounting Research Journal, 13(2), 22-36. Using Hofstede’s (1980, 1983 and 1991) and Hofstede and Bond’s (1988) five cultural dimensions, Goodwin et al. (2000) conducted a study on the influence of culture on Five cultural dimensions: ethical decision making between two groups of accountants from Australia and Singapore. This research aimed to provide further evidence on the effect of cultural Individualism versus collectivism differences since results from previous research have been equivocal. The study reveals that accountants from the two countries responded differently to ethical Power distance dilemmas in particular when the responses were measured using two of the five cultural dimensions. The result agreed with the prediction since considerable differences existed between these two dimensions in Australians and Singaporeans Femininity versus masculinity (Hofstede 1980, 1991). However the results of the other dimensions provided less clear relationships as the two cultural groups differed only slightly on the dimensions. To the Uncertainty avoidance extent that this research is exploratory, results of this study provide insights into the importance of recognising cultural differences for firms and companies that operate in international settings. However several limitations must be considered in interpreting Long term versus short‐term orientation the study findings. (Adapted from Mort, Hallion, & Downey, 2005)
2
15/03/2012
Using Hofstede’s (1980, 1983 and 1991) and Hofstede and Bond’s (1988) five cultural dimensions, Goodwin et al. (2000) conducted a study on the influence of culture on ethical decision making between two groups of accountants from Australia and Singapore. This research aimed to provide further evidence on the effect of cultural differences since results from previous research have been equivocal. The study reveals that accountants from the two countries responded differently to ethical dilemmas in particular when the responses were measured using two of the five cultural dimensions. The result agreed with the prediction since considerable differences existed between these two dimensions in Australians and Singaporeans (Hofstede 1980, 1991). However the results of the other dimensions provided less clear relationships as the two cultural groups differed only slightly on the dimensions. To the extent that this research is exploratory, results of this study provide insights into the importance of recognising cultural differences for firms and companies that operate in international settings. However several limitations must be considered in interpreting the study findings. What is the general topic of the article? What did the researchers do?
How does it fit into its field of study? How did they do it?
What gave rise to the need for the article? What did they conclude from their findings?
What did they find?
Example 2: A critique of a review of previous research Critique of Cotton, J. L., Vollrath, D.A., Forgatt, K.L. Lengnick-Hall, M.L., & Jennings, K.R. (1988). Employee participation: Diverse forms and different outcomes. Academy of Management Review, 13(1), 8-22. In this seminal study, Cotton et al. reviewed previous research on the effect of participative decision making (PDM) on the performance and job satisfaction of individual employees. Arguing that previous attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of PDM in organisations had been clouded by assumptions of PDM as a unitary construct, their review set out to answer the question: Are different forms of PDM associated with different outcomes? In order to attempt to answer this question, Cotton et al. classified previous studies by form of PDM and analysed the outcomes for each form separately. They found that “different forms of PDM are associated with markedly different outcomes” and concluded that discrepancies in results among previous studies on PDM could be attributed to the form of PDM used in the studies. The article marked the beginning of a period of debate…This essay argues that this article contributed …However, a number of problems with…
What is your thesis (main idea) regarding the article?
In this seminal study, Cotton et al. reviewed previous empirical studies on the effect of participative decision making (PDM) on the performance and job satisfaction of individual employees. Arguing that previous attempts to evaluate the effectiveness of PDM in organisations had been clouded by assumptions of PDM as a unitary construct, their review sets out to answer the question: Are different forms of PDM associated with different outcomes? They found that “different forms of PDM are associated with markedly different outcomes” and concluded that discrepancies in results among previous studies on PDM could be attributed to the form of PDM used in the studies. The article marked the beginning of a period of debate…This essay argues that while there were the research provided a useful…, there were a number of problems with… What is the general topic of the article? What did the researchers do?
How does it fit into its field of study? What did they find?
What gave rise to the need for the article?
What did they conclude from their findings?
Summary of the Article Keep it brief unless your instructions specify more detail: • How does the author support the main point/thesis statement? ‐ Eg. Reasons developed; presentation of arguments and counter‐arguments; • What kind of evidence does the author supply? ‐ Studies cited; Appeals to authority; Cases St di it d A l t th it C • In a review of the literature: What research has been reviewed? ‐ Specific bodies of research, databases, time periods covered, locations, methodologies, results
• What limitations does the author acknowledge? ‐ eg. deals with only one aspect of the topic • What assumptions does the author make?
Your thesis statement
Your Evaluation and Analysis
Your evaluation and analysis A few possible areas of focus:
Background & Summary: • Breaks down the information provided in the article/book
• Thesis
The Evaluation:
• Evidence
• Looks at the presentation of the information
• Limitations
• Supporting ideas
• Looks at the validity of the information • Looks at the application of the information
Can you believe and trust what the author says?
• Presentation • Suitability for intended audience • Implications in the field Check assignment instructions for any specific criteria in evaluating texts
3
15/03/2012
Your evaluation and analysis
Thesis • Is there a clear argument or claim to the paper? • Is this argument or claim developed logically through the text? • Is the purpose of the article clearly defined in the Introduction? While rest homes in Auckland have been criticised for the quality of food provided to their elderly residents, research reveals that this food addresses the nutritional needs of the elderly and is sufficiently appetising to encourage healthy eating patterns.
Your evaluation and analysis
Limitations • Are the limitations clearly identified? • What limitations has the author identified? e.g. time limit, sample size, depth of research, lack of ideas from other disciplines, if relevant • Are there any unidentified limitations?
Your evaluation and analysis
Presentation • Has the material been organised in a logical fashion? ‐ Eg. chronological/time order where appropriate ‐ Does the order reflect the organisation of the thesis statement? • Is the article coherent, so that ideas are clearly connected? ‐ connecting material between sentences & paragraphs ‐ can you follow the author’s train of thought easily? OR ‐ does the author jump from point to point without clear signals to the reader? See my notes on Writing Paragraphs & Sentences
Your evaluation and analysis
Supporting ideas • Are the supporting ideas convincing? • Do they develop the main idea logically through the article/essay?
• Has the author developed all Has the author developed all the supporting points the supporting points mentioned in the introduction to the article? ‐ is there anything that is left out/left unfinished? ‐ are some points developed more fully than others? • Is the author’s point of view objective and impartial? ‐ also check the language used: Is it emotional?
Your evaluation and analysis
Evidence • Is the evidence reliable? Check the sources used. • Is it detailed? Does it convince the reader? • Is it sufficient to back up all the points being argued? I it ffi i t t b k ll th i t b i d? • What conclusions are drawn from the evidence? Are these conclusions justified? • Are both sides of the argument presented and supported with reference to theory or research?
Your evaluation and analysis
Suitability for intended audience • Level of difficulty ‐ conceptual density ‐ technical level • D Does the writer define technical terms for the reader th it d fi t h i l t f th d where appropriate? • Are there any culturally specific references? Is it aimed at a particular cultural group? Example: What would we ask about this article? Hatch, M.J. (1999). Exploring the empty spaces of organizing: How improvisational jazz helps redescribe organizational structure. Organization Studies, 20(1), 75-100.
4
15/03/2012
Your evaluation and analysis
Your evaluation and analysis
Implications in the field
Remember: You are providing a response to the article
• Which gaps in the knowledge on a topic does the article fill? • Does the article increase the bank of knowledge for academics in a particular discipline? For practitioners in a particular field? in a particular discipline? For practitioners in a particular field? ‐ theory, data and/or practical application • Does the article point to areas in which more research is needed? • Can people improve their lives by using the information in the article? How?
Concluding Your Critique • Restate your thesis/main idea • Summarise the main points you have made in your critique • Point out the implications and significance of the critique
• Do not simply summarise the article. Respond to it. • Explain why you are responding in a certain way ‐ support your response with your readings on the topic ‐ support your response with your knowledge of the conventions of the type of writing you are critiquing ‐ support your response with reference to research methodology issues where appropriate. Ask your lecturer to recommend a suitable text See examples used in Part 2 of this presentation
Part 2: Critiquing Research Reports • What are the components of a research report? • What are you looking for in summarising and critiquing each component and the d ii i h d h report as a whole? • Extracts from a critique to illustrate points Please note: The following are general guidelines only and may go beyond what is required for your specific assignments Make sure you check specific content and structural guidelines in your course guides
Research report Articles generally include:
Introduction section Components
Abstract: Brief summary highlighting reasons for study, methods and findings Literature Review Introduction: Brief review of theoretical background & earlier research on topic; reasons for current research
Often features: • Background information – context of research - why is the research area important? - statistics often used as evidence of importance
Discussion: Analysis, interpretations, implications of results
• Brief review of the literature - what has been studied previously on the topic? - how it has been studied? - what has been found? - how do the findings of different studies compare? - what are the limitations of these studies? - what are the gaps in existing knowledge on the topic?
Conclusion: Summary of key findings, implications for the field and suggestions of future directions for further research
• Focus of current research - which gap in existing knowledge will the study fill?
Method: How research was conducted & materials used Results: Details on findings and statistical tests, with summaries of data in the form of charts/graphs/tables
(Adapted from Lim, 2003)
5
15/03/2012
Introduction section
Introduction section
Review of the literature
Background information – context of research • Is there a clear research question/hypothesis? ‐ Is there a clear purpose to the research? • Is it clear why the general research area is important? Eg Which problem is the research addressing and ‐ Eg. Which problem is the research addressing and what is the extent of the problem? • Is it clear why the researcher has chosen to focus on the particular aspect of the problem examined in the study? • Is it clear how the research will contribute to the field of study and to practitioners ?
• Is the literature reviewed taken from appropriate sources? ‐ peer reviewed journals ‐ academic books • Does the writer refer to relevant research on the topic – both current and classic? • Are main concepts clearly defined and discussed? (See Pyrzcack & Bruce, 2005, pp. 69‐77). • Is the review balanced? Does it present literature showing different perspectives on the topic? • Is the review written critically? Does the writer show strengths and weaknesses, contributions and limitations of previous research? • Does the review lead logically to the research topic?
The literature review should lead logically to the research topic
Method section
Examples of things to consider:
Previous research on the topic • Theories • Studies • Reviews Comparison of findings Areas of agreement Areas of disagreement Contribution of the studies Limitations of the studies Gap(s) in the research
Is the method chosen appropriate to the research question(s)? • Is it the best way to find out what the researcher wants to know? ‐ If it is, explain why ‐ If not, explain why and suggest an alternative method
Synthesis and critique of previous research on the topic
• Refer to a research methodology text to support your argument (ask your lecturer to recommend a suitable text)
How current study addresses gap(s)
Method section
Method section
Research instruments
Participants
• Are they described in enough detail? ‐ If researchers have built their own instruments, these should be described in detail for the reader
• Ethical considerations and how they were addressed ‐ description of informed consent procedures where appropriate (including parental consent for minors)
• If the researcher has used a published instrument, the article should briefly describe at least: h ld b i fl d ib t l t ‐ the traits it was designed to measure ‐ its format ‐ the possible range of score values • Information on reliability and validity, when available, should be provided for both published and unpublished instruments
‐ description of steps taken to maintain confidentiality • Are the participants described in enough detail? ‐ Eg: Gender, ethnicity, age, socio‐economic status ‐ Details should be relevant to the issues being studied •
If a sample of a population was studied, is the method of sampling described?
(Pyrczak & Bruce, 2005)
6
15/03/2012
Example from a critique by McMorrow, 2006 Description and evaluation of data collection Vagueness and omissions can also be found in the methods and findings sections. Data was collected through “semi-structured” interviews with 63 Asian students at three Australian language schools – one affiliated to a university. No explanation is provided for this sampling, despite the fact that 10 of the students are permanent residents of Australia – hardly representative of the researcher’s purported context of ‘international education’… The data was collected through ‘semi-structured’ interviews, both individual and ‘focus group’. There is no discussion of the rationale for or conduct of these interviews. Nor of the possibility – or as many argue, the certainty (G. Barkhuizen, personal communication, 31st October 2006) – of ‘co-construction’ of any narrative obtained in such circumstances…
Results section A few things to consider:
• Is the process used to analyse the data clearly described for the reader? • Is it appropriate? • Could Could the data be interpreted in another way? the data be interpreted in another way? ‐ do you agree with the researcher’s interpretation? • Is there a possible alternative explanation for the results? ‐ something the researcher has not taken into account eg. health of participants in a study of sleep patterns
Reference to theory
Results section
• Is the process used to analyse the data clear for the reader? We are asked to believe there has been “a careful examination” of the students’ accounts, but told nothing about what this examination was or how it was conducted. The findings section is divided into six sections covering “recurring themes” of the survey. These are said to have “emerged” from the survey and the repeated assertion is that the findings “show” or “reveal” the interpretation given by the researcher. This suggests an implicit positivistic perspective, as if the data reflects an unambiguous, objective reality neutrally conveyed by an impartial scientific voice. Evidence of an “arduous struggle to understand” (Edge & Richards, 1998, p. 339) - characteristic of qualitative research - is absent.
Results section
• Do you agree with the writer’s interpretation of the data? Possible contamination of data can also be inferred by frequent merging of data with its interpretation, as in, “According to Student C, the Australian teachers’ abuse of the interactive teaching approach hindered the process of learning and dampened student enthusiasm for the tasks at hand” (p. 5). How are we supposed to accept this as an expression of a student’s “narrative” when the anonymous ‘voice’ is drowned out by the researcher’s own terminology?
‐ Quote from the text you’re critiquing where appropriate ‐ Explain any criticism clearly. Why is it a problem?
Discussion and conclusions • How do the researchers interpret the results of the study? • Do the conclusions drawn by the researchers seem reasonable? Why? Why not? If not, what are the problems? Provide possible alternative explanations for results. • Are the limitations of the research described? • Does the researcher point out whether the results of the study are consistent with the results and theories described in the literature review? • Does the writer discuss possible implications of the results? (Eg. Actions that could be taken based on the results of the study) • If the writer makes recommendations for further research on the topic, are these specific? • Is it clear exactly what value the research adds to the field?
Language Focus: Expressing Critique Making positive comments The author provides a number of insightful comments on… The model developed by the author provides a valuable new perspective on the relationship between X and Y… Not only has the author presented some valuable new insights into the problem, but she has presented these in a practical context which facilitates understanding across… The author’s argument is very well supported with references to a number of cases which provide strong evidence of… Google: Manchester University + Academic Phrasebank for useful phrases for expressing critique
7
15/03/2012
Language Focus: Expressing Critique Saying what the author should have done but did not do Some information on the historical background of the case would have been helpful
References American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author. Hawkins, J. (2003). A cross‐cultural content analysis of the portrayal of food and nutrition, in television advertising and programmes in New Zealand and Japan in 2002/2003. Unpublished master’s thesis, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand.
This article would have been more convincing g if the author had related his findings to previous work on the topic.
Manchester University. (2006). Academic phrasebank. Retrieved from y ( ) p
It would have been better if the authors had given their main findings in the form of the table
Mort, P., Hallion, L. , & Downey, T.L. (2005). Writing a critical review.
http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/index.htm Retrieved from University of New South Wales, The Learning Centre Web site: http://www.lc.unsw.edu.au/onlib/pdf/critical_review.pdf
The author should have provided a …
Pyrczack, F., & Bruce, R. (2005). Writing empirical research reports (5th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Pyrczack Publishing. (Swales & Feak, 1994, p. 34)
Examples of reviews in an education journal: Rossi, T. (2009). Book review: Research methods in education (6th ed.). The Australian Educational Researcher, 36(2), 147-148. Andrews, D. (2009). Book review: Educational leadership – Key challenges and ethical tensions. The Australian Educational Researcher, 36(2), 149-151. Burns, R.E. (2009). Book review: Organising and managing your research: A practical guide for postgraduates. The Australian Educational Researcher, 36(2), 152-153. Henderson, R. (2009). Book review: Helping students write: pedagogies for supervision The Australian Educational Researcher, 36(2), 154-156.
8