Critical Analysis and Thinking Skills Evaluation Synthesis Analysis Application Comprehension Knowledge At the bottom of the pyramid are the skills of knowledge and comprehension. Particularly in scientific disciplines, it is important to be able to describe processes with clarity and precision. Being able to convey complex ideas clearly, accurately and concisely is also an important skill. However, whilst these skills are essential, on their own they will not get you a degree. ‘Application’ refers to the process of applying theories to practice. For example, a teacher who has studied debates about inclusivity in the classroom might apply the theories to their own working situation.

What is critical thinking? Critical thinking is concerned with how we: Understand information and ideas Consider an issue from different perspectives Analyse and evaluate information, ideas and perspectives e.g. To be a critical thinker in a purchasing context, we might seek information on how a product works, what it is made from/of, and what price it is. At this stage we might encounter ideas on the product from marketers, promotional materials, friends who have the product already. We would then (most likely) seek alternatives by comparing the product to other similar products on the market, as well as by thinking about our own needs and how these are met by the product(s). We might also read customer reviews or perspectives on the products(s) and compare that information. Using all of this information, we would then made an evaluation (which is best, which suits my needs most, which can I afford, which has the best reviews) before purchasing the product.

Critically evaluate Cadbury’s claim that chocolate is beneficial to health. Health Benefits of Eating Chocolate There are plenty of people who believe that eating Cadbury Dairy Milk or any other sweet is actually not good for their physical condition. If you are one of those who live with this idea, it is time for you to think otherwise. Actually, chocolate can be very beneficial to human health. Since it uses a lot of cocoa, this means that it contains plenty of Flavonoids or Vitamin P and citrin, which help maintain the body’s blood pressure. It also aids in balancing blood sugar levels, especially if the variant eaten is the dark one. With that said, the risk of getting diabetes is minimised because the food enhances the body’s metabolism of blood sugar. Furthermore, taking in a few bites of the sweet helps lessen a person’s chances of getting heart attacks since it keeps the LDL cholesterol low and the HDL cholesterol high. In addition, chocolates actually help improve a person’s mood. This is because of the presence of serotonin, which acts as an anti-depressant. Whenever an individual feels sad, he can always munch on a bar or two in order to bring him back to a happy state. Also, sleepiness, tiredness, and the like can easily be combated since different elements in the food facilitate the blood flow to the main areas of the brain. Indeed, those who are looking for an instant energy and disposition boost can benefit from eating chocolates. Copyright © 2010 www.cadbury-dairy-milk.com All rights reserved

Critical Analysis – Thinking critically for university Critical analysis involves breaking a question or topic down in order to consider all of its elements. Critical analysis takes into account the Context (including author, source-type, time and place of publication). Critical analysis requires wide reading or ‘synthesis’ on all elements of a question or topic. To ‘Critically Evaluate’ a subject is to make considered judgements about the quality of context, claim and content. e.g. Critically analyse the role of the police force in the British riots of 2010. This question would require investigation into both the role of the police in riot situations and the riots of 2010. Examination of the inherent suggestion that the ‘role of the police force’ in these riots should be questioned also demands further thought – perhaps along the lines of: was their role justified? How does it compare with their role in other riots? Was it a good or bad role – i.e. did it calm the riot, or incite it further? Before beginning research, you should analyse what the question is about, what elements are within in, how these should be applied to each other. You should also look for apparent suggestions/standpoints within the phrasing of the question.

Critical evaluation involves bombarding a topic with a variety of questions. What is the argument? And in What form of source is it made (journal, website, popular press – think about how the source type affects the quality/reliability of the source)? When was it made? Who made it?

Critical evaluation involves bombarding a topic with a variety of questions. Why was this information/idea/argument created? Is it a response to another point-of-view? Is there a ‘vested interest’? How can this information be used (by you or others?) How does it contribute to understanding? How does it respond to existing theories or ideas?

Critical evaluation involves bombarding a topic with a variety of questions. What if the information is compared to other sources? Are there differences/similarities? So what does this information add to your discussion? How relevant is the information to your argument/discussion? What does it add? What next? What is the logical conclusion/implication of this idea? If further research was undertaken (either by you or the researcher themselves) would other possible outcomes conclusions be provided?

An argument usually responds to an existing viewpoint or theory A key element of critical thinking in university study is the ability to engage with other people’s arguments and make arguments of your own. It is, therefore, useful to consider what an argument is: An argument takes a particular stand on an issue and provides evidence to back it up. An argument usually responds to an existing viewpoint or theory Academic writing of any sort (e. g. your own assignments, books, journal articles) has a main argument running through it. Academic argument must be based on: - Factual information (i.e. evidence) - Previous theoretical claims

To critically engage with an argument you need to: Identify the point of the argument. What is the author saying/concluding? Deconstruct the argument. What is it made of? (evidence, reasoning, persuasion) Appraise the strengths and weaknesses of the argument (is the reasoning relevant and adequate?)

EXAMPLE Evidence: the survey conducted this year at the University of Chester (with a total of 105 L4 UG students) showed that 78% of students prefer essays to exams. Reasoning: This suggests that the majority of students would benefit from a move to a 100% coursework-based degree. Conclusion: The failure to move to a 100% coursework-based degree model is likely to result in poor student recruitment and attainment. Is the reasoning Relevant? Is the evidence Adequate? Are you convinced (persuaded) by the conclusion (i.e. argument)? Relevant? The evidence from the study does not actually demonstrate that students would benefit from doing only coursework. There are of course benefits to exam assessment which students may not be aware of. Even though 78% of students prefer essays, they do not imply that they would choose a different university based on assessment procedures. Nor is there any evidence here to suggest that those students who do not prefer exams will do any worse in their exam results than those students who prefer exams! Adequate? Only 105 first-year students were asked. This group is arguably more worried about exams that higher level students who have had more practice. Further study, at all levels and with a larger group, is required.

Deconstructing an argument: Some questions for you to consider a. What is the context (author, source-type, time and place of publication) and why is it important? b. What is the main argument/conclusion or recommendation? c. What are the minor conclusions? d. What are the measurable or observable facts (evidence)? e. What is implicitly or explicitly assumed to be true without any support? f. How does this information compare with that from other sources?

Consider this source… Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability…(2014) What is the context – author, year, source type What are the key findings/arguments? What evidence is used to support the findings? Are there any assumptions or bias?

Now compare to this source… Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change, Climate Change Reconsidered II (2014) What is the context – author, year, source type What are the key findings/arguments? What evidence is used to support the findings? Are there any assumptions or bias? HOW DOES THIS SOURCE COMPARE TO THE FIRST?

To summarise, critically engaging with academic sources involves routinely asking questions of the material which may include: What exactly is the author arguing? Is the argument logical? Are there alternative arguments of explanations that need considering? Are you convinced by the argument? Why? Does the evidence support the argument fully or partially? How strong is the evidence? How big is the sample? Is the source reputable & unbiased? Consider also: the perceptions of those producing the information (e.g. over positive or over negative views); how those producing the information made their judgements (e.g. irrelevant criteria, stereotyping, oversimplifying) the reactions of those producing the information to the topic (e.g. attacking individuals, explaining away)?

Critical Analysis in your writing Critical analytical writing is all about making informed and evidence-supported claims, arguments and theories. A claim, argument or theory is a statement of something you believe or something you have discovered. It needs to be supported by evidence and discussion of existing theories (arguments) and their context and evidence. If your claim isn't supported by these factors it becomes just an opinion… You will have been told perhaps that ‘your opinion doesn’t matter/count’ in relation to academic writing. In one respect, this is true. Your subjective feelings about an issue should certainly not be included in an academic discussion, as they are often not based on evidence, but rather, hearsay, popular (media) views, or one-off experiences. Your interpretation of events/ideas/information is also often informed by your own context (education, religion, gender, age, political leaning) and is therefore biased and does not belong in an academic discussion. Your interpretation of evidence however, is exactly what should be included in your academic work. This can also be described as your critical evaluation. This is your judgement of the academic sources (including their arguments and evidence) that you have read in relation to the topic being discussed in your essay/exam/presentation/dissertation.

1. Johnson (2006) states that the Harry Potter books are fantasies of “conservative myths” (p. 222), but Henning (2007) refers to these books as harmless fun. 2. Johnson, in an article for the The Sunday Telegraph’s political section (12th November 2006) (context), states that the Harry Potter books are fantasies of “conservative myths” (p. 222). But, Henning, in an interview for Children’s Hour (2007) (context), predictably avoids such controversy and refers to these books as harmless fun. By inclusion of context and background to this argument, we are not only presenting information but showing an attempt to consider or evaluate this information (‘Sign-Posting’), and as can be seen, the emphasis has changed suggesting some kind of academic argument developing. We are still lacking a focus on evidence in the second example however.

Climate Change Arguments What information could we add to show critical analysis in the following statement? The IPCC see climate change as a ‘crisis’ directly affected by human behaviour, but the NIPCC claim that there humans have little impact on climate change, and that there is in fact no ‘crisis’.

To summarise, critical analysis in your writing involves…. Providing the sources of your information/evidence Identifying the arguments put forward by authors Discussing the context and evidence used to support this argument Synthesising arguments, perspectives & evidence Building your own argument in response to the question Using key points to support your argument Providing evidence which supports your key point & arguments Putting your argument in the context of existing theories & perspectives