Doing critical analysis -- Step One

There is no formula, and that is a good thing, because you need to show a personal critical grasp. As with most academic tasks, the best way is to see how other professionals do it – the more you read the better you get. There are also variations according to what the article is about – a literature or policy review? A piece of actual empirical research?  I am discussing perhaps the most common format below – a journal article which reviews the literature, does some research and discusses the results.

Remember that you are summarising AND commenting, picking up strengths and weaknesses. There are a few points to help you here, though. Until you get the experience, and the confidence that follows, you might try thinking of doing the following:

‘Internal’ criticism

Stick with the author(s) themselves first. Try to see how the argument actually works in the author you are reading. You do this because you want to show you can understand and summarise an argument AND make some comments about it.  Technical criticism can ALWAYS be done, since no piece is ever going to be perfect, and this is admitted by the authors(s) themselves very often. This sort of internal criticism cannot be simply denied or dismissed on the grounds that you just personally disagree with the author.

Think of some of the following:

1.       How is the problem defined? Your author reads some literature or policy and gradually identifies a major problem with it. Or your author decides to do some limited research on a particular issue arising from the literature. What arguments are used to justify this focus? Perhaps there is weak or limited argument?

2.       How is the argument actually developed or pursued? How was the literature, policy  or group to research chosen (most recent? most typical? representative? particularly interesting?) You will have to see if there are problems arising in the discussion from this choice (have things moved on? are there claims to being representative even though the sample isn’t?)

3.        Are the problems discussed well? Are any problems skipped over?

4.       What conclusions are drawn? Are they based on the actual study or was the author convinced (s)he/they was/were right all along? Do they bend over backwards to defend their work or cheerfully admit the problems?

NOTE that this sort of criticism is nice and technical, and nothing whatever to do with supposed biases on the part of the author(s). Suggesting personal bias is usually a waste of time if you only have the article itself to go on and do not know more about the author. Suggesting bias often looks like a defence mechanisms on YOUR part, a way of showing your own biases, and reacting against an argument you find annoying or threatening, especially if you are implying that all female writers MUST be biased against men (or the other way around), for example (this is actually a common example in the work I read). No-one is denying your right to have your God-given say. You are entitled to have your suspicions – but rants just do not (usually) score in academic pieces of work and you are wasting your time including them. Save them for seminars?

‘External’ criticism

In this type, you are comparing what one author says with what another one (or several) might say. This is worth doing whether the assignment asks you specifically to compare or not. This is your chance to show that you can see the context, and that you have read some additional stuff even beyond what the assignment requires. Of course, you must not go off the point, so only a few brief comparisons are required (which is lucky if you haven’t read very much). Where can you  find stuff to make these comparisons if you don’t read much?

1.       From other assignments – say you’ve done one on methods for another module, or one on policy, or one on history, or an early one on definitions, or a write-up of a visit or placement, a field trip? Are you SURE you can’t write a sentence or two  beginning with...

The methods used in this study have some problems and there are alternatives...

Policy development has actually developed in a number of other ways as well...

The situation when the debate first began was rather different...

Although this study defines sport as organised commercial activity, there is another way to describe it...

In practice, there are often additional complications, though...

2.       From lectures, seminars and other presentations. If you are sitting there you might as well take a few notes? Show you have by mentioning a few external points ( I begin many of my lectures with versions of the first 3)...

The subject has moved on a little recently...

The underlying issues are these...

There is no easy answer to this question since there are now several options...

An alternative way into this topic is...

Another aspect of the problem is ...

These points are easy to remember. Why don’t more students include them? Maybe they do not realise what being ‘critical’ means in academic terms? Maybe they lack confidence? Maybe they take far too literal an approach to an assignment and do not realise that the point is to demonstrate academic skills like this?

Maybe you don’t need to bother? Are you happy with the grades you are getting? Do any of the comment on your work suggest you do more ‘critical analysis’?

back to folder on critical analysis