Developing critical reading skills

1
Developing critical reading skills

• Dr Hazel Hall, Reader, School of Computing

2
Purpose of the session

• Lets start with a question
• Why are you here today?

3
Reasons to be here

• To learn how to evaluate and analyse literature.
• To learn how to read strategically.
• To learn what to do with the output of PhD
  reading activity.
• To learn how to save time.
• To network with other PhD students?
• To have a break from the everyday routine of a
  PhD student?
• To be entertained by Hazel?
• To have a wee snooze?

4
The use of the term critical

• Critical in this context means
• to analyse and evaluate for the particular
  purposes of your PhD work
• It does not mean
• to make unkind remarks

5
Agenda

• Main themes to be covered
• Evaluation of material prior to studying it in
  detail
• Critical reading
• Reading output and the literature reviewing
  process

6

• EVALUATING MATERIAL PRIOR
• TO STUDYING IT IN DETAIL

7
Exercise rating publications

• List the criteria that you currently use to rate
• Journal and conference publications
• Individual journal and conference papers
• Books
• Commercial online database for literature
  searching
• You may list the criteria that apply to all
  formats, and any that are format-specific.
• If you have anything else to say about other
  formats of literature, e.g. web pages and
  blogs, please also note this for discussion.

8
Evaluating journal/conference publications

• Academic
• Publisher who publishes this title - a society
  a body (university, museum) a mainstream
  publisher?
• Who is on the editorial board?
• Evaluate membership as you would authors (see
  later)
• Review policy is it a peer-reviewed journal?
• Longevity how long has the title been in
  existence?
• Scope are there indications of the
  publications scope in its title what do the
  terms international and review mean?
• Indexing which databases index this title?
• Implication you need to evaluate commercial
  databases
• Professional/trade journals and conferences?
• Are any professional/trade journals of importance
  to your work?

9
Evaluating individual papers

• Type of paper
• Is this a report of empirical research/literature
  review/domain classic?
• Which version is this?
• Who funded the study?
• Relevance of the material
• What are the main points of the paper, and is it
  relevant to your work?
• In which domain is the work situated?
• Is this material still current? What about the
  references?
• Presentation of the work
• Is it accessible, does it inspire confidence?

10
Evaluating books

• Scope
• For PhD work, the scope of a book is very
  important. This is because research literature is
  not normally published in book format
• Publisher
• Who publishes this title - a society a body
  (university, museum) a mainstream publisher?
• Longevity
• Has this work been republished, i.e. in an
  edition other than the first?

11
Evaluating commercial online databases

• Provenance
• Who is the supplier?
• Scope
• What is the databases coverage, e.g. in terms of
  geography, language?
• What is the level of access basic bibliographic
  details or full-text
• Access
• Is there free access from Napier?

12
Evaluating authors

• Stature of authors
• Many different types of author journalists,
  teaching academics, research-active academics,
  fellow PhD students, full-time researchers
• Have you heard of them?
• Does your supervisor know them?
• Where do they work?
• Impact of authors work
• What is their publication track record?
• Is their work of a consistently high standard?
• How often is their work cited?

13
Academic researchers may publish across a range
of publications for different reasons
14
Not everything published makes it into databases
such as Web of Science
15
We can assume that these are two of Hazels
top-rated articles
16
You can also use citation indexes to assess the
impact of an authors work following publication
17
Some pieces of work are more highly cited than
others!
18
Individual journal titles also provide ranking
information
19
Exercise evaluation of material

• Evaluate the articles in the handout from the
  perspective of the following PhD topics
• PR effectiveness of new media
• Political party discourses at the time of
  elections
• Role of blogs in project management with
  particular reference to construction projects
• Information systems for new knowledge creation
• Evaluate the articles from the perspective of a
  PhD student debating the value of keeping a blog
  for reflecting on his PhD work

20

• CRITICAL READING

21
Exercise critical reading

• Consider the order in which you read the main
  elements of the following material
• An Ian Rankin Inspector Rebus novel
• A bus timetable
• The Argos catalogue
• An academic paper
• A recipe
• A court report
• Your old school friends Christmas newsletter

22
Critical reading - order

• The order in which you do something has an impact
  on its effectiveness and efficiency

23
Which order?

• Abstract
• Acknowledgements
• Conclusions
• Discussion
• Introduction
• Methods
• References/bibliography
• Results
• Section headings
• Title

24
Which order?

• Abstract short cut to relevance
• Acknowledgements may tell you more about the
  author
• Conclusions short cut to relevance
• Discussion
• Introduction short cut to relevance
• Methods
• References/bibliography short cut to
  identifying domain
• Results
• Section headings
• Title

25
Critical reading - attention

• Some aspects of the material require more
  attention than others

You may need a range of pictures from long
shots, medium shots to close-ups. This
depends on the purpose of your reading the paper,
e.g. if you are interested in outcomes of an
empirical study, youll focus on methods for a
literature review article, you will need to
evaluate the scope of the material covered.
26
Critical reading what you read

• Decisions on what to read
• Output from literature searches
• Recommendations from others
• The librarian
• Your supervisor
• Recommendations from citation pearling, RSS
  feeds
• Decisions become easier over time as you become
  familiar with the literature of your domain.

27
Critical reading handling

• Time is short minimise double-handling of
  material
• Read and take notes
• Highlight material in the text, or notes in the
  margin
• Take a break, then extract what is genuinely
  useful
• Hand-written linear notes, word-processed notes,
  or mind maps but do not copy verbatim
• Only go back to the original if absolutely
  necessary
• Learn when enough is enough
• Keep a dictionary at hand to help clarify terms,
  enlarge your vocabulary, learn the discourse of
  your subject area

28
Critical reading the focus

• When reading academic work you are evaluating the
  level of argument presented
• Look out for
• Claims/conclusions
• Reasons/interpretations of data that lead to the
  above
• Evidence on which above is built
• Any qualifications for the claims/conclusions

29
Critical reading the focus

• Illustration
• Claims/conclusions
• You really should read this novel
• Reasons/interpretations of data that lead to the
  above
• The author is fantastic
• Evidence on which above is built
• She won all these awards
• Any qualifications for the claims/conclusions
• They are all for crime writing

30
Checking the level of argument

• Do the arguments that the authors put forward
  make sense?
• Are the views of the authors consistent with the
  evidence provided?
• Is it possible to distinguish fact and opinion?
• Are there any omissions in this work?
• Is there ambiguity?
• Is there bias?
• How current is the material?
• How well referenced is the work?

31

• READING OUTPUT AND THE
• LITERATURE REVIEWING PROCESS

32
Literature review
What have been the main research questions?
What are the main perspectives on this topic in
previous research?
In which subject areas has the topic been studied?
Do parallel literatures exist for this topic?
What are the main conclusions on previous
research in this area?
What are the key concepts in this area?
Coherent synthesis of past and present research
in the domain of study
How is this topic approached by others?
Who are these others?
Which existing work could be extended?
Where are the gaps in literature?
Where is existing knowledge thin?
Which aspects of this work are of most relevance
to my study?
Which discussions?
What are the key areas of debate in this area?
Which work is subject to challenge?
Which sub-themes?
Which writers?
33
Theories on managing consultation processes
Adapted from Newman, D. (2008, January).
E-consultation, from citizens to parliaments.
Internal research seminar presented at Napier
University.
34
Exercise output and literature reviewing

• Take an A3 copy of the literature map.
• Using post-its, impose on the structure your
  assessment of the literature of the domain
  associated with your study.

35
Your review and the focus of your study

• You need to be critical in order to identify
• Deficiencies in the treatment of your subject
  area, e.g. important issues possibly
  misunderstood
• Gaps in existing knowledge
• The context for your work
• Thus you are able to validate the sense of
  undertaking your own study in a critique, rather
  than straightforward report
• NB the literature review in the final version of
  your thesis will be a version of the one written
  at the start of your work be prepared for
  revisions!