Developing critical reading skills

1. Developing critical reading skills Dr Hazel Hall, Reader, School of Computing

2. Purpose of the session Let�s 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 publication�s� 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 database�s 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?

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 friend�s 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

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

33. Theories on managing consultation processes

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!