SKILL 6065 WEEK 2 DISCUSSION POST
SKILL 6065 WEEK 2 DISCUSSION POST
cRITICAL READING FOR EVALUATION
Posted on February 24, 2020 by waldenacademicskills in Reading
This post is a continuation of Hillary’s previous post: Critical Reading for Analysis and Comparison.
Struggling to meet your deadline ?
Get assistance on
SKILL 6065 WEEK 2 DISCUSSION POST
done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!
Whereas analysis involves noticing, evaluation requires the reader to make a judgment about the text’s strengths and weaknesses. Many students are not confident in their ability to assess what they are reading. It is important to remember, though, that even though a piece of writing is published, it is not necessarily accurate, scholarly, or free of bias. Readers must look at published writing with a critical eye to gauge its trustworthiness.
Reading for Evaluation
Critical reading for evaluation can be considered a three-step process of prereading, reading, and forming the evaluation.
ORDER A CUSTOMIZED, PLAGIARISM-FREE SKILL 6065 WEEK 2 DISCUSSION POST HERE
Good News For Our New customers . We can write this assignment for you and pay after Delivery. Our Top -rated medical writers will comprehensively review instructions , synthesis external evidence sources(Scholarly) and customize a quality assignment for you. We will also attach a copy of plagiarism report alongside and AI report. Feel free to chat Us
Prereading
Scan the title, abstract, publication information, headings, and reference list to gather your first impressions on the credibility of the text. Ask yourself questions like these:
- Who is the author?
Once you have been reading and studying in your field for a while, you may begin to recognize certain authors or scholars. The more you read, the better the sense you will have about which scholars are well-known and have immediate credibility in your field. If you are unfamiliar with an author, you can do a simple Internet search to learn more about their background. Then use your critical thinking skills to help determine the author’s credibility. For example, an article on nuclear energy written by a nuclear scientist will likely be worth more to a researcher than one written by a neurosurgeon. Also consider potential biases between the author and the subject. A piece on gun control written by a former president of the National Rifle Association is likely to come with biases.
- Who is the publisher?
Determine the journal or publisher by locating the publication information, usually found in the library database and/or title page of the article. Peer-reviewed sources are preferred (check Ulrich’s for details about specific publications). In general, choose scholarly journal articles over other types of sources. If a source has no specific author or publication date (or is published by a corporation with an obvious bias), regard it skeptically.
- When was the work published?
Fields develop and change, some more rapidly than others. For fields in which change is rapid, a researcher must rely on the most current sources. Generally, works written within the last 5 years are preferred.
- Does the author include a reference list or bibliography?
Examining the references should tell you whether the subject was well researched. If there is no reference list or the references are outdated or nonscholarly, you should question the usefulness and trustworthiness of the material.
Advertisements
REPORT THIS AD
During the pre-reading step, you might determine that the text is not worth reading because it is clearly biased or authored by someone who is not credible in your field. If you decide to read it, continue with the next step below.
Reading
Once you have decided to commit to a text, your next step is to read it with a critical eye. During this step, pay close attention to the argument and the evidence used to support that argument. Ask yourself questions like these:
Audience, Purpose, and Language:
- Has the author communicated clearly and organized the text well? (e.g., logical connections between topics, clear sentences, use of headings)
- Is the author effectively writing to their audience? (e.g., appropriateness of language and tone)
Argument and Evidence
- Does the evidence support the conclusions that are drawn? In other words, has the author interpreted the evidence correctly? Are there other interpretations that could be made?
- Does the author present and address a counterargument?
- Has the author made unreasonable assumptions?
- Has the author allowed bias to influence their work?
Methods (for Research Studies):
- Was the research method appropriate, or would another method have been more effective?
- Was the sample size sufficient? How generalizable are the findings? (In some instances the evidence is strong but applies only to an isolated case, as might occur when research deals with a small sample size or a unique demographic. In such cases, a critical reader must be able to recognize that the case is isolated and the results cannot be generalized to a larger population.)
- What were the limitations in this study (both the ones disclosed by the author and ones that you see as a critical reader)?
- Could the evidence be flawed due to how the study was conducted?
David H. Schwartz’s video Not All Scientific Studies are Created Equal provides an excellent example of reviewing sources, considering variables, and discovering potentially flawed causal relationships.
Advertisements
REPORT THIS AD
Forming the Evaluation
The final step is to form your evaluation based on the judgments you made as you were reading. This exercise is a short one that may not always end up in a paper or dissertation chapter, but it is essential. What is your overall evaluation? Can you articulate it in a few sentences? Consider how you would respond if someone asked, “How was the article?” or “How was that book?” Here is an example:
Although Ramirez’s (2017) study provided compelling evidence for mandatory drug testing of athletes, the researcher was also the principal at the school where she conducted the study. Ramirez did not adequately control for researcher bias. Therefore, more research is needed to determine whether similar results would be achieved without such a relationship.
If you are using a tool like a literature review matrix, now is the time to fill in your evaluation of the source and other notes. If you are writing a course paper, include your evaluation along with a brief source summary in your notes. Be sure to evaluate the source immediately after reading it so that it remains clear in your head.
Hillary Wentworth joined Walden in 2010 as a writing instructor in the Writing Center. She now serves as a contributing faculty member in the Academic Skills Center and as a learning architect developing Walden’s academic programs. She holds a BA in English from the University of New Hampshire and an MFA in creative writing from the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. Hillary lives in Maine with her husband and young son.
Sponsored Content
1 Teaspoon Before Bed Can Burn Belly Fat Like Never Beforegetfittoday.online | Sponsored
Forget Retinol, Use This Household Item To Fill In WrinklesHealthy Guru | Sponsored
Epic Night out!Medieval Times | Sponsored
[Photos] 15+ Vintage Ads That Probably Wouldn’t Exist TodayShow Snob | Sponsored
Most Affordable Camper VansCamper Vans | Search Ads | Sponsored
Seniors in Georgia Eligible For Hearing Aids In SeptemberConnect Hearing | Sponsored
CD Rates That Can’t Be IgnoredCD Rates | Sponsored Listings | Sponsored
RATE THIS:
11 Votes
SHARE THIS:
Loading…
RELATED
Critical Reading for Analysis and Comparison
February 20, 2020
In “Reading”
Demystifying the Purpose and Functions of NVivo
February 15, 2019
In “Doctoral”
5 Success Tips for the Course on Quantitative Reasoning and Analysis
March 17, 2017
In “Statistics”
Tagged Reading, Success Strategies
PUBLISHED BY WALDENACADEMICSKILLS
View all posts by waldenacademicskills
POST NAVIGATION
PREVIOUS POSTCritical Reading for Analysis and Comparison
NEXT POSTCompleting my Doctoral Capstone
12 THOUGHTS ON “CRITICAL READING FOR EVALUATION”
- Sean says:
This is helpful information as I write my essays.
Like
- Sarah Bourne says:
This article was very informative and I was able to get a better perspective of what it means to critically read. I like the idea of reading the beginning and then the end before reading the body to get an idea of where the reader is leading to.
Like
- Rinderia N/A says:
This information was clear, concise, and informative.
Like
- colleen mckenzie says:
September 22, 2021 at 10:47 pm
The information presented here was excellent. Thank you very much!
Like
- SURYA says:
GREAT WORK DONE. THANK YOU.
Like
- Leacie Anderson says:
Awesome, great resources. Thank you.
Like
- Cheryl Ancog says:
This article is well thought out. Explained simply. Thank you.
Like
- Beverly Williams says:
Some of the best information yet.
Like
- Tekolla Goshu says:
Very interesting and packed with important ideas.
Like
- Lenora R Fuller-McCall says:
I found the questions raised in determining whether or not the references and resources used were of critical importance. I value these comments!
Like
- Allieu Tommy says:
The information is so helpful to me for academic writing.
Like
A Sample Of This Assignment Written By One Of Our Top-rated Writers
SKILL 6065 WEEK 2 DISCUSSION POST
After reading the article, Postsecondary Online Students’ Preferences for Text-Based Instructor Feedback by Joseph Gredler (2018), I argue that there is a need to incorporate proximal, detailed, supportive feedback when dealing with students to improve their writing skills.
This argument is based on the study’s qualitative findings that revealed that the participants preferred proximal, detailed, supportive feedback such as rubrics, track changes, and examples to enable them to improve their writing skills. The feedback was appreciated even by students with good grades as it justified deductions. Similarly, quantitative findings revealed that the study participants preferred proximal comments, rubric feedback, and track changes for corrections.
Reference
Gredler, J. (2018). Postsecondary online students’ preferences for text-based instructor feedback. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 30(2), 195-206
Struggling to meet your deadline ?
Get assistance on
SKILL 6065 WEEK 2 DISCUSSION POST
done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW!