1. Self-Critical Writing:
Critical Reading for
Self-Critical Writing:
introduction to a structured approach for reviewing literature
Mike Wallace and Alison Wray

2. Aims
to introduce a structured approach for reviewing literature based on analysing texts at two levels of depth
to highlight the parallel between constructively critical reading of others’ writing in the literature and self-critical writing as creators of academic literature for other critical readers
to support participants in developing their ability to engage critically with the literature

3. Programme
linking constructively critical reading with self-critical academic writing
engaging critically with ‘front-line’ texts – a critical synopsis
using a mental map and structuring an in-depth critical analysis of a text
trying out the critical analysis of a text reporting research
building up a comparative critical review and developing an argument

4. Three-Part Book Structure (p viii-x)
Getting started on critical reading and self-critical writing, summary analysis of texts (Ch 1-5)
Developing a mental map for navigating the literature, analysing texts in depth, writing critical reviews of them (Ch 6-10)
Structuring critical reviews of the literature, incorporating them into a dissertation, taking forward critical reading and self-critical writing skills in an academic career (Ch 11-14)

5. 1. Linking constructively critical reading with self-critical academic writing

6. The Logic of Enquiry (p vii-viii)
Two-way critical academic discourse:
as a reader, one evaluates others’ attempts to communicate and convince through developing their argument
as a researcher and writer, one develops one’s own argument that will communicate with and convince the projected audience
(Everyone is both a reader and a writer)

7. Components of an Argument
the conclusion rests on claims to knowledge, assertions that something is, or should be, true
warranting provides backing for these claims by drawing on evidence,
evidence varies, e.g. from literature / own work: - research findings - professional experience - a definition of a theoretical idea

8. Being Constructively Critical
adopting an attitude of scepticism towards knowledge and its production
scrutinising arguments to see how far claims are warranted, and so convincing
being open-minded, willing to be convinced if scrutiny removes doubts
being constructive by attempting to achieve a worthwhile goal in developing one’s own argument

9. Complete the exercise on page B of the handout (Ch 1 p12-13)

10. 2. Engaging critically with ‘front-line’ texts – a critical synopsis

11. Support and ‘Front-Line’ Literature (Ch 2 p17-21)
Support texts, eg textbooks, readers, handbooks, encyclopaedias
- good for an overview, but light on evidence supporting claims
‘Front-line’ texts, eg accounts of theory, research reports, accounts of practice, policy statements
- direct reporting of theory, research, practice, and statements of policy
- most appropriate for advanced students, and for the approach to be introduced

12. Critical Reading (Ch 3): Five Critical Synopsis Questions (p31-4)
A Why am I reading this?
B What are the authors trying to do in writing this?
C What are the authors saying that’s relevant to what I want to find out?
D How convincing is what the authors are saying?
E In conclusion, what use can I make of this?

13. Complete the Critical Synopsis form on page C of the handout for the research report article or chapter you brought (Ch 3 p35)

14. Self-Critical Writing (Ch 4): Structure for a Critical Summary (p44)
Title
Introducing the text, informed by the answer to Critical Synopsis Question:
A Why am I reading this?
Reporting the content, informed by the answers to Critical Synopsis Questions:
B What are the authors trying to do in writing this? and
C What are the authors saying that’s relevant to what I want to find out?
Evaluating the content, informed by the answer to Critical Synopsis Question:
D How convincing is what the authors are saying?
Drawing your conclusion, informed by the answer to Critical Synopsis Question:
E In conclusion, what use can I make of this?
warranting

15. Comparative Critical Summary (Ch 5): Structure (p49)
Title
Introducing the text, informed by answers to Critical Synopsis Question A for all texts
Reporting the content, informed by answers to Critical Synopsis Questions B and C for all texts
Evaluating the content, informed by answers to Critical Synopsis Question D for all texts
Drawing your conclusion, informed by answers to Critical Synopsis Question E for all texts
warranting

16. 3. Using a mental map and structuring an in-depth critical analysis of a text

17. Mental Map for Navigating the Literature (Ch 6-7)
One set of tools for thinking
Two dimensions of variation amongst knowledge claims
Three kinds of knowledge
Four types of literature
Five intellectual projects

18. One set of Tools for Thinking: the Key to the Mental Map
Concepts (p64)
Perspectives (p65)
Metaphors (p66)
Theories
Models (p68)
Assumptions (p69)
Ideologies

19. Two Dimensions of Variation of Claims (p74)
Degree of certainty
Low High
Low vulnerability -
weak claim,
minimal generalization
Moderate vulnerability -
strong claim,
Moderate vulnerability -
weak claim, extensive generalization
High vulnerability -
strong claim, extensive generalization
High Low
Degree of generalization

20. Three Kinds of Knowledge (+ Key)
Theoretical knowledge
developed through systematic reflection
Tools for thinking
concepts
perspectives
metaphors
theories
models
assumptions
ideologies
Research knowledge
developed through systematic investigation
Practice knowledge
developed through taking action

21. Four Types of Literature (p81-2)
research - systematic enquiries into policy and practice by professional researchers or practitioners, results are made public
practice - by informed professionals who evaluate others’ practice and by practitioners who evaluate their practice
policy - policy-makers’ desired changes in practice (negative evaluation of present)
theoretical - ideas and models for interpreting and explaining practice

22. Five Intellectual Projects (p86-7)
Rationale
Value stance
Typical question
Under-standIng
Understand through theory and research
Disinterested
What happens and why?
Critical evaluation
Evaluate through theory and research
Critical
What is wrong with what happens?
Action
Inform policy-makers and practitioners through research and evaluation
Positive towards policy and improving practice
How effective are actions to improve practice?
Instrum-
entalism
Improve practice through training and consultancy
How may this programme improve practice?
Reflexive action
Improve own practice through evaluation and action
Critical of practice, positive about improving
How effective is my practice? How may I improve?

23. Critical Synopsis and Critical Analysis Questions (Ch 8) (p92)
A Why am I reading this? 1. What review question am I asking of this literature? B What are the authors trying to do in writing this? 2. What type of literature is this? 3. What kind of intellectual project is being undertaken? C What are the authors saying that’s relevant to what I want to find out? 4. What is being claimed that is relevant to answering my review question?

24. D. How convincing is what the authors are. saying. 5
D How convincing is what the authors are saying? 5. How far is there backing for claims? 6. How adequate is any conceptual or theoretical orientation to back claims? 7. How far does any value stance adopted affect claims? 8. How far are claims supported or challenged by others' work? 9. How far are claims consistent with my experience? E In conclusion, what use can I make of this? 10. What is my overall evaluation of this literature in the light of my review question?

25. 4. Trying out the critical analysis of a text reporting research

26. Decide on your review question(s) and complete the Critical Analysis form for the research report article or chapter you brought (book Appendix 3)

27. Useful Sources of Assistance
Mental map Ch 6-7
Types of literature and potential limitations Table 7.1 (p81-2)
Guidance on using Critical Analysis form (p93-99)

28. Critical Text Review Structure (Ch 10 p117-8)
Title - keywords
Introduction – state purpose (review questions – critical analysis Q1)
Summary of research design – purposes (Q2, 3),
relevance to review questions (Q1), procedure
Main findings and claims – up to 5 claims relating to review question (Q4), range of contexts to which applied
Evaluation of claims – for context from which derived, applicability to other contexts (Q5-9)
Conclusion – overall evaluation, summary answer to review question (Q10)
References
warranting

29. 5. Building up a. comparative critical. review and developing
5. Building up a comparative critical review and developing an argument

30. Developing a Critical Literature Review (Ch11): Definition (p130)
a reviewer’s constructively critical account
developing an argument designed to convince a particular audience
about what published (and possibly also unpublished)
theory, research, practice or policy texts indicate is and is not known
about one or more questions that the reviewer has framed

31. Literature Review Structure Based on Critical Analyses and Critical Synopses (p134-5)
Introduction – purpose, justification, scope, limitations, signposting
Sections building up the warranting of your argument
Based on answers to Critical Analysis Questions for central texts
Based on answers to Critical Synopsis Questions for more peripheral texts
Introduction to texts being reviewed
Authors’ main claims relevant to review question
Evaluation of authors’ main claims
2, 3 4
5-9 B C D
Final section setting out conclusion of argument
Summary of evaluation answering review question 10 E
References

32. Extended Structure for Multiple Review Questions (p139-40)
Introduction – purpose, justification, scope, limitations, signposting
Section addressing the first review question
Subsections building up the warrant of your argument for this section
Based on answers to Critical Analysis Questions for central texts
Based on answers to Critical Synopsis Questions for more peripheral texts
Introduction to texts being reviewed
Authors’ main claims relevant to first review question
Evaluation of authors’ main claims
2, 3 4
5-9 B C D
Final subsection setting out conclusion of argument
Summary of evaluation answering first review question 10 E

33. Section addressing second
review question
Subsections leading to conclusion of argument answering second review question
Based on answers to Critical Analysis Questions for central texts
Based on answers to Critical Synopsis Questions for more peripheral texts
Section addressing third
Subsections leading to conclusion of argument answering third review question
Conclusion for whole literature review
References

34. Thematic Review Structure (not in book)
Introduction – purpose, justification, scope, limitations, signposting
Sections building up the warranting of your argument
Based on answers to Critical Analysis Questions for central texts
Based on answers to Critical Synopsis Questions for more peripheral texts
Introduction to texts being reviewed
2, 3 B
Authors’ main claims and evaluation, Theme 1
Authors’ main claims and evaluation, Theme 2
4, 5-9
C, D
Final section setting out conclusion of argument
Summary of thematic evaluation answering review question 10 E
References

35. Electronic Resources
Blank forms (which can be used as masters) can be downloaded from the website:
Critical Synopsis form
Critical Analysis form

36. Good luck!