Analysis and evaluation: Developing critical thought

Ross Woods, 2021

At higher academic levels, students need to develop a mindset of critical enquiry. “Critical enquiry” means evaluating views to:

• interpret them correctly (i.e. grasp the intended meaning)
• accept good points
• reject unacceptable points
• justify their conclusions (i.e. not just “like” or “don’t like”)
• ask good questions that help them to explore
• see how they apply in real situations.

Some things will not simply be “good/bad” or “right/wrong” differentiations, and students must be able to differentiate between light gray and dark gray.

The task

Given one or more readings, lead a group discussion in which group members analyse and evaluate the readings.

The questions below are only examples. The task is not to follow a rigid set of questions, but to choose or create the best questions for the situation. The order of questions is not important, except that some of the first questions must be answered first, and the last must be done last. Most of these steps are relevant to the study of any document.

A. Preparation

1. Send out the document(s) to all students, and ask students to read it before the meeting.
2. Prepare your set of key questions.

B. Start

Start the session with a reason why the group is doing this. In most cases, this means, explaining why we chose this particular article to discuss.

C. What does it say?

1. Read the whole document.
2. What is the structure and outline of the whole document?
3. When and where was it written?
4. What is the historical and cultural context? Do any particular historical or cultural factors affect the way it should be interpreted?
5. What caused it to be written?
6. What was the writer's purpose in writing?
7. What was the writer's main message or conclusion?

D. What does it mean?

1. Are there any notable vocabulary or language features (e.g. terminology with specific meanings)?
2. Do any particular cultural factors affect interpretation?
3. What influences are apparent in the author's view?
4. What is specific to the writer's situation and what principles apply more widely?
5. What conclusions can you draw about the meaning of the text?
6. Is it possible to have two interpretations? i.e. is the article ambiguous?

E. Is it true?

1. Is it true? If so, which aspects?
2. Identify difficulties in the text and explore solutions. (E.g. things that don’t seem to make sense, things that appear to be contradictory, inconsistent, improbable, or unrealistic.)
3. Is the logic sound? Are there mistakes in logic?
4. What assumptions is it making?

F. How would you apply it?

1. What would be helpful in your situation?
2. What would not be helpful, or perhaps even harmful?
3. How would you apply it in your situation?
4. How would you apply it in other situations?
5. What would be the risks in applying it?
6. What would be the benefits?

G. Close

1. What did we learn that was new?