At the start of this guide Godfrey (2018) was quoted:
Being critical involves 'looking at ideas, theories and evidence with a questioning attitude rather than taking them at face value. It means analysing things in detail (breaking down and examining concepts and ideas) and evaluating (finding strengths, weaknesses, connections and patterns). Then from this analysis and evaluation, deciding what you think about an issue, how important or relevant it is, and why'
As a result of your research and your critical thinking around it, it is now time to show this in your writing. Critical writing doesn't just repeat the information that you have read. It goes beyond description and shows, as a result of your reading, what you now think about an issue 'how important or relevant it is and why.' This forms part of your 'argument' or the stance that you are taking in order to address the assignment brief. Your argument is backed up with evidence from your reading. Your writing should follow a clear line of reasoning that is structured well, your main points should stand out to your reader and your writing should be clear and easy to follow.
An easy way to think about this is that:
Descriptive writing answers: What? Who? When? Where?
Critical writing answers: How? Why? So what? What next?
John Hilsdon created a model to generate critical thinking using these questions. You can find out more information here: Critical Thinking
Sometimes when giving feedback on student's writing, tutors may say something like "You are being too descriptive. Try and be more critical." This table shows some of the differences between descriptive writing and critical writing.
| Descriptive | Critical-analytical writing |
|---|---|
| States what happened | Identifies the significance |
| States what something is like | Evaluates and judges the value, strengths and weaknesses |
| Gives the story so far | Weighs one piece of information against another |
| States the order in which things happened | Makes reasoned judgments |
| Says how to do something | Argues a case according to the evidence |
| Explains what a theory says | Shows why something is relevant or suitable |
| Explains how something works | Indicates why something will work (best) |
| Notes the method used | Indicates whether something is appropriate or suitable |
| Says when something occurred | Identifies why the timing is important |
| States the different components | Weighs up the importance of component parts |
| States options | Gives reasons for selecting each option |
| Lists details | Evaluates the relative significance of details |
| Lists in any order | Structures information in order of importance [etc.] |
| States links between items | Shows the relevance of links between pieces of information |
| Gives information | Draws conclusions |
Cottrell (1999:23)
COTTRELL.Stella. 1999. Critical Thinking. Developing Effective Analysis and Argument. Basigstoke: Palgrave MacMillan
Godfrey, J.2018 Writing for University. Hampshire. Macmillian International.
