Reading and Writing Strategies
Three types of analysis strategies are described below to assist you in developing techniques for critically reading and writing a variety of documents. The most fundamental of these strategies is the "Reading or Critical Analysis" approach which appears first. All other approaches include basic components of the reading analysis strategy. Your ability to effectively summarize thematerial you are reading is essential. Remember that a summary identifies the main points in the material and the logical relationships between these points in such a way that the summary exposes the structure of the argument presented. Both clear identification of main points and
exposure of the structure of the logic or argument are absolutely essential characteristics of a summary. If you are interested in more information about the structure of papers, see the American Psychological Association Style Manual, writing in the Child Development Department and your individual professors.
A. Reading or Critical Analysis:
The written tradition, unlike the oral, provides narrative and information in the absence of its author (rather like cave paintings, but we prefer to see it as a much clearer more "intelligent" form). While appearing to therefore be more "objective", written work has an ironic double subjectivity. Writing combines the subjective influence of the author (which is frozen in the text and speaks from an often unidentified context) and the subjective reconstruction of the reader (which is fluid and personally contextual). The purpose of the reading analysis approach is to identify the underlying assumptions and context of origin, the basic structure or "logic" of the argument and the way in which the author utilizes references and "authority" to support his thesis, that is to understand the author as present in the writing. It is essential to unfreeze this subjective influence in order to enter into a dialogue, and thereby have the opportunity to examine the subjectivity of our own reconstruction of the writing and seek the voice of the author
in the current context.
A basic outline for this type of analysis follows. Always give a rational and references
(where appropriate) for your responses to items 2-9, and provide specific passages from the text to support your analysis. Use APA style for text and references.
- Summarize the primary focus and main points of the article as identified by the author.
- What are the author's underlying assumptions or a priori judgments? Try to identify the
general philosophical orientation. - What is the socio-historical, intellectual and professional context in which the author is
writing? - Is the author's argument internally consistent?
- What "tactics of argumentation" are used?
- What is the basis of authority or validation?
- How does this article relate to other ideas, programs, authors, theories, etc.?
- What are the logical consequences and implications of the material?
- How professionally useful/meaningful is this reading? Why?
- What is your personal reaction to this article?
B. Advocacy Analysis:
Presentations are never truly neutral. In the same way that the subjective influence and
context of the author is "frozen" in the written text, the conditions which led to the speaking are captured but often very subtly. There is an intent to make aware, challenge, influence or expose in each written work. The purpose of the advocacy analysis approach is to understand the persuasive nature of language, presentation and structure. This analysis presumes and extends a thorough reading done using the reading analysis approach. A basic outline for this type of analysis follows. Support your analysis as you did with the reading analysis.
- Summarize the authors main points as the author presents them.
- Who is the author's intended audience?
- What is the authors purpose? Indicated whether or not the purpose is specifically stated and
whether or not there appears to be a secondary or covert purpose as well. - What does the author want the reader to believe or do?
- What style of presentation is being used? (expository, persuasive, entertaining,
conversational, etc.) - What sources does the author use to convince you of the "correctness" of this position?
- What language, organization or imagery is used to influence?
- What use is made of stereotypes, cultural or communal metaphors, "buzz" words and/or
pedagogy? In what ways is the presentation particularly tailored (or not) to the audience? - What assumptions (expression of philosophical orientation)are being made?
- Does the internal logic of the argument hold up?Apply the test of negative assertion.
- What are the logical consequences of this position?
- What is your personal reaction to the article?
C. Ethical Analysis:
Each author has an ethical perspective which influences what that person will perceive as
essential. The purpose of this approach is to highlight the underlying value system and moral
structure which is being expressed through the judgments and tone of the author. Again, the
analysis presumes and extends the thorough reading done using the reading analysis approach.
A basic outline for this type of analysis follows. Support your analysis as you did with the
reading analysis.
- Summarize the article, exposing the main points and the structure of the argument.
- What moral model underlies this presentation (Consequentialist, Non-consequentialist,
Wholistic)? Identify specific subcategories where possible, eg altruistic utilitarian. Give
examples to support your argument. - To what extent does the article meet the criteria for ethical decision-making?
- What philosophical system might be most closely related to the author's value system?
- In what ways does the author's value system differ from your own?
- To what extent would this article be useful to you as a professional?