what is argumentative writing and critical thinking

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Working with sources
• What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Published on May 30, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan . Revised on May 31, 2023.

Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment .

To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources .

Critical thinking skills help you to:

• Identify credible sources
• Evaluate and respond to arguments
• Assess alternative viewpoints
• Test hypotheses against relevant criteria

Table of contents

Why is critical thinking important, critical thinking examples, how to think critically, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about critical thinking.

Critical thinking is important for making judgments about sources of information and forming your own arguments. It emphasizes a rational, objective, and self-aware approach that can help you to identify credible sources and strengthen your conclusions.

Critical thinking is important in all disciplines and throughout all stages of the research process . The types of evidence used in the sciences and in the humanities may differ, but critical thinking skills are relevant to both.

In academic writing , critical thinking can help you to determine whether a source:

• Is free from research bias
• Provides evidence to support its research findings
• Considers alternative viewpoints

Outside of academia, critical thinking goes hand in hand with information literacy to help you form opinions rationally and engage independently and critically with popular media.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

Critical thinking can help you to identify reliable sources of information that you can cite in your research paper . It can also guide your own research methods and inform your own arguments.

Outside of academia, critical thinking can help you to be aware of both your own and others’ biases and assumptions.

Academic examples

However, when you compare the findings of the study with other current research, you determine that the results seem improbable. You analyze the paper again, consulting the sources it cites.

You notice that the research was funded by the pharmaceutical company that created the treatment. Because of this, you view its results skeptically and determine that more independent research is necessary to confirm or refute them. Example: Poor critical thinking in an academic context You’re researching a paper on the impact wireless technology has had on developing countries that previously did not have large-scale communications infrastructure. You read an article that seems to confirm your hypothesis: the impact is mainly positive. Rather than evaluating the research methodology, you accept the findings uncritically.

Nonacademic examples

However, you decide to compare this review article with consumer reviews on a different site. You find that these reviews are not as positive. Some customers have had problems installing the alarm, and some have noted that it activates for no apparent reason.

You revisit the original review article. You notice that the words “sponsored content” appear in small print under the article title. Based on this, you conclude that the review is advertising and is therefore not an unbiased source. Example: Poor critical thinking in a nonacademic context You support a candidate in an upcoming election. You visit an online news site affiliated with their political party and read an article that criticizes their opponent. The article claims that the opponent is inexperienced in politics. You accept this without evidence, because it fits your preconceptions about the opponent.

There is no single way to think critically. How you engage with information will depend on the type of source you’re using and the information you need.

However, you can engage with sources in a systematic and critical way by asking certain questions when you encounter information. Like the CRAAP test , these questions focus on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

When encountering information, ask:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert in their field?
• What do they say? Is their argument clear? Can you summarize it?
• When did they say this? Is the source current?
• Where is the information published? Is it an academic article? Is it peer-reviewed ?
• Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence? Does it rely on opinion, speculation, or appeals to emotion ? Do they address alternative arguments?

Critical thinking also involves being aware of your own biases, not only those of others. When you make an argument or draw your own conclusions, you can ask similar questions about your own writing:

• Am I only considering evidence that supports my preconceptions?
• Is my argument expressed clearly and backed up with credible sources?
• Would I be convinced by this argument coming from someone else?

If you want to know more about ChatGPT, AI tools , citation , and plagiarism , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• ChatGPT vs human editor
• ChatGPT citations
• Is ChatGPT trustworthy?
• Using ChatGPT for your studies
• What is ChatGPT?
• Chicago style
• Paraphrasing

 Plagiarism

• Types of plagiarism
• Self-plagiarism
• Avoiding plagiarism
• Academic integrity
• Consequences of plagiarism
• Common knowledge

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

You can assess information and arguments critically by asking certain questions about the source. You can use the CRAAP test , focusing on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

Ask questions such as:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

A credible source should pass the CRAAP test  and follow these guidelines:

• The information should be up to date and current.
• The author and publication should be a trusted authority on the subject you are researching.
• The sources the author cited should be easy to find, clear, and unbiased.
• For a web source, the URL and layout should signify that it is trustworthy.

Information literacy refers to a broad range of skills, including the ability to find, evaluate, and use sources of information effectively.

Being information literate means that you:

• Know how to find credible sources
• Use relevant sources to inform your research
• Understand what constitutes plagiarism
• Know how to cite your sources correctly

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search, interpret, and recall information in a way that aligns with our pre-existing values, opinions, or beliefs. It refers to the ability to recollect information best when it amplifies what we already believe. Relatedly, we tend to forget information that contradicts our opinions.

Although selective recall is a component of confirmation bias, it should not be confused with recall bias.

On the other hand, recall bias refers to the differences in the ability between study participants to recall past events when self-reporting is used. This difference in accuracy or completeness of recollection is not related to beliefs or opinions. Rather, recall bias relates to other factors, such as the length of the recall period, age, and the characteristics of the disease under investigation.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 4, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, student guide: information literacy | meaning & examples, what are credible sources & how to spot them | examples, applying the craap test & evaluating sources, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

8 Arguments and Critical Thinking

J. anthony blair, introduction [1].

This chapter discusses two different conceptions of argument, and then discusses the role of arguments in critical thinking. It is followed by a chapter in which David Hitchcock carefully analyses one common concept of an argument.

1. Two meanings of ‘argument’

The word ‘argument’ is used in a great many ways. Any thorough understanding of arguments requires understanding ‘argument’ in each of its senses or uses. These may be divided into two large groupings: arguments had or engaged in , and arguments made or used . I begin with the former.

1.1 A n ‘a rgument’ as something two parties have with each othe r, something they get into, the kind of ‘argument’ one has in mind in de scribing two people as “arguing all the time ”

For many people outside academia or the practice of law, an argument is a quarrel . It is usually a verbal quarrel, but it doesn’t have to use words. If dishes are flying or people are glaring at each other in angry silence, it can still be an argument. What makes a quarrel an argument is that it involves a communication between two or more parties (however dysfunctional the communication may be) in which the parties disagree and in which that disagreement and reasons, actual or alleged, motivating it are expressed—usually in words or other communicative gestures.

Quarrels are emotional. The participants experience and express emotions, although that feature is not exclusive to arguments that are quarrels. People can and do argue emotionally, and (or) when inspired by strong emotions, when they are not quarrelling. Heated arguments are not necessarily quarrels; but quarrels tend to be heated.

What makes quarrels emotional in some cases is that at least one party experiences the disagreement as representing some sort of personal attack, and so experiences his or her ego or sense of self-worth as being threatened. Fear is a reaction to a perceived threat, and anger is a way of coping with fear and also with embarrassment and shame. In other cases, the argument about the ostensible disagreement is a reminder of or a pretext for airing another, deeper grievance. Jealousy and resentment fuel quarrels. Traces of ego-involvement often surface even in what are supposed to be more civilized argumentative exchanges, such as scholarly disputes. Quarrels tend not to be efficient ways of resolving the disagreements that gives rise to them because the subject of a disagreement changes as the emotional attacks escalate or because the quarrel was often not really about that ostensible disagreement in the first place.

In teaching that ‘argument’ has different senses, it is misleading to leave the impression (as many textbooks do) that quarrels are the only species of argument of this genus. In fact they are just one instance of a large class of arguments in this sense of extended, expressed, disagreements between or among two or more parties.

A dispute is an argument in this sense that need not be a quarrel. It is a disagreement between usually two parties about the legality, or morality, or the propriety on some other basis, of a particular act or policy. It can be engaged in a civil way by the disputants or their proxies (e.g., their spokespersons or their lawyers). Sometimes only the disputing parties settle their difference; sometimes a third party such as a mediator, arbitrator or judge is called in to impose a settlement.

A debate is another argument of this general kind. Debates are more or less formalized or regimented verbal exchanges between parties who might disagree, but in any case who take up opposing sides on an issue. Procedural rules that govern turn-taking, time available for each turn, and topics that may be addressed are agreed to when political opponents debate one another. Strict and precise rules of order govern who may speak, who must be addressed, sometimes time limits for interventions, in parliamentary or congressional debates in political decision-making bodies, or in formal intercollegiate competitive debates. Usually the “opponent” directly addressed in the debate is not the party that each speaker is trying to influence, so although the expressed goal is to “win” the debate, winning does not entail getting the opponent to concede. Instead, it calls for convincing an on-looking party or audience—the judge of the debate or the jury in a courtroom or the television audience or the press or the electorate as a whole—of the superior merits of one’s case for the opinion being argued for in the debate.

To be distinguished from a debate and a dispute by such factors as scale is a controversy . Think of such issues as the abortion controversy, the climate change controversy, the same-sex marriage controversy, the LGBT rights controversy, the animal rights controversy. The participants are many—often millions. The issues are complex and there are many disputes about details involved, including sometimes even formal debates between representatives of different sides. Typically there is a range of positions, and there might be several different sides each with positions that vary one from another. A controversy typically occurs over an extended period of time, often years and sometime decades long. But an entire controversy can be called an argument, as in, “the argument over climate change.” Controversies tend to be unregulated, unlike debates but like quarrels, although they need not be particularly angry even when they are emotional. Like quarrels, and unlike debates, the conditions under which controversies occur, including any constraints on them, are shaped by the participants.

Somewhere among quarrels, debates and controversies lie the theoretical arguments that theorists in academic disciplines engage in, in academic journals and scholarly monographs. In such arguments theorists take positions, sometimes siding with others and sometimes standing alone, and they argue back and forth about which theoretical position is the correct one. In a related type of argument, just two people argue back and forth about what is the correct position on some issue (including meta-level arguments about what is the correct way to frame the issue in the first place).

The stakes don’t have to be theories and the participants don’t have to be academics. Friends argue about which team will win the championship, where the best fishing spot is located, or what titles to select for the book club. Family members argue about how to spend their income, what school to send the children to, or whether a child is old enough to go on a date without a chaperone. Co-workers argue about the best way to do a job, whether to change service providers, whether to introduce a new product line, and so on. These arguments are usually amicable, whether or not they settle the question in dispute.

All of these kinds of “argument” in this sense of the term—quarrels, friendly disputes, arguments at work, professional arguments about theoretical positions, formal or informal debates, and various kinds of controversy—share several features.

• They involve communications between or among two or more people. Something initiates the communication, and either something ends it or there are ways for participants to join and to exit the conversation. They entail turn-taking (less or more regimented), each side addressing the other side and in turn construing and assessing what the other has to say in reply and formulating and communicating a response to the replies of the other side. And, obviously, they involve the expression, usually verbal, of theses and of reasons for them or against alternatives and criticisms.
• They have a telos or aim, although there seems to be no single end in mind for all of them or even for each of them. In a quarrel the goal might be to have one’s point of view prevail, to get one’s way, but it might instead (or in addition) be to humiliate the other person or to save one’s own self-respect. Some quarrels—think of the ongoing bickering between some long-married spouses—seem to be a way for two people to communicate, merely to acknowledge one another. In a debate, each side seeks to “win,” which can mean different things in different contexts ( cf. a collegiate debate vs. a debate between candidates in an election vs. a parliamentary debate). Some arguments seemed designed to convince the other to give up his position or accept the interlocutor’s position, or to get the other to act in some way or to adopt some policy. Some have the more modest goal of getting a new issue recognized for future deliberation and debate. Still others are clearly aimed not at changing anyone’s mind but at reinforcing or entrenching a point of view already held (as is usually the case with religious sermons or with political speeches to the party faithful). Some are intended to establish or to demonstrate the truth or reasonableness of some position or recommendation and (perhaps) also to get others to “see” that the truth has been established. Some seem designed to maintain disagreement, as when representatives of competing political parties argue with one another.
• All these various kinds of argument are more or less extended, both in the sense that they occur over time, sometimes long stretches of time, and also in the sense that they typically involved many steps: extensive and complex support for a point of view and critique of its alternatives.
• In nearly every case, the participants give reasons for the claims they make and they expect the other participants in the argument to give reasons for their claims. This is even a feature of quarrels, at least at the outset, although such arguments can deteriorate into name-calling and worse. (Notice that even the “yes you did; no I didn’t;…; did; didn’t” sequence of the Monty Python “Having an argument” skit breaks down and a reason is sought.)

The kinds of argument listed so far are all versions of having an argument (see Daniel J. O’Keefe, 1977, 1982). Some might think that this is not the sense of ‘argument’ that is pertinent to critical thinking instruction, but such arguments are the habitat of the kinds of argument that critical thinkers need to be able to identify, analyze and evaluate.

1.2 An argument a s something a person makes (or constructs, invents, borrows) consisting of purported reasons alleged to suggest, or support or prove a point and that is used for some purpose such as to persuade someone of some claim, to justify someone in maintaining the position claimed, or to test a claim .

When people have arguments—when they engage in one or another of the activities of arguing described above—one of the things they routinely do is present or allege or offer reasons in support of the claims that they advance, defend, challenge, dispute, question, or consider. That is, in having “arguments,” we typically make and use “arguments.” The latter obviously have to be arguments in different sense from the former. They are often called “reason-claim” complexes. If arguments that someone has had constitute a type of communication or communicative activity, arguments that someone has made or used are actual or potential contributions to such activities. Reason-claim complexes are typically made and used when engaged in an argument in the first sense, trying to convince someone of your point of view during a disagreement or dispute with them. Here is a list of some of the many definitions found in textbooks of ‘argument’ in this second sense.

“… here [the word ‘argument’] … is used in the … logical sense of giving reasons for or against some claim.” Understanding Arguments, Robert Fogelin and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, 6th ed., p. 1. “Thus an argument is a discourse that contains at least two statements, one of which is asserted to be a reason for the other.” Monroe Beardsley, Practical Logic, p. 9. “An argument is a set of claims a person puts forward in an attempt to show that some further claim is rationally acceptable.” Trudy Govier. A Practical Study of Arguments, 5th ed., p. 3. An argument is “a set of clams some of which are presented as reasons for accepting some further claim.” Alec Fisher, Critical Thinking, An Introduction, p. 235. Argument: “A conclusion about an issue that is supported by reasons.” Sherry Diestler, Becoming a Critical Thinker, 4th ed., p. 403. “ Argument: An attempt to support a conclusion by giving reasons for it.” Robert Ennis, Critical Thinking, p. 396. “Argument – A form of thinking in which certain statements (reasons) are offered in support of another statement (conclusion).” John Chaffee, Thinking Critically, p. 415 “When we use the word argument in this book we mean a message which attempts to establish a statement as true or worthy of belief on the basis of other statements.” James B. Freeman, Thinking Logically, p. 20 “Argument. A sequence of propositions intended to establish the truth of one of the propositions.” Richard Feldman, Reason and Argument, p. 447. “Arguments consist of conclusions and reasons for them, called ‘premises’.” Wayne Grennan, Argument Evaluation, p. 5. Argument: “A set of claims, one of which, the conclusion is supported by [i.e., is supposed to provide a reason for] one or more of the other claims. Reason in the Balance, Sharon Bailin & Mark Battersby, p. 41.

These are not all compatible, and most of them define ‘argument’ using other terms—‘reasons’, ‘claims’, ‘propositions’, ‘statements’, ‘premises’ and ‘conclusions’—that are in no less need of definition than it is. In the next chapter, David Hitchcock offers a careful analysis of this concept of an argument.

Some define argument in this second sense as a kind of communication; others conceive it as a kind of set of propositions that can serve communicative functions, but others as well (such as inquiry). Either way, the communicative character, or function, of arguments has been the subject of much of the research in the past several decades. Most recently what some have called “multi-modal” argument has attracted attention, focusing on the various ways arguments can be communicated, especially visually or in a mix of verbal and visual modes of communication. Some have contended that smells and sounds can play roles in argument communication as well. This area of research interest would seem to have relevance for the analysis of arguments on the web.

1.3 Argumentation

‘Argumentation’ is another slippery term. It is used in several different senses.

Sometimes it is used to mean the communicative activity in which arguments are exchanged: “During their argumentation they took turns advancing their own arguments and criticizing one another’s arguments.” Sometimes ‘argumentation’ denotes the body of arguments used in an argumentative exchange: “The evening’s argumentation was of high quality.” And occasionally you will find it used to refer to the reasons or premises supporting a conclusion, as in: “The argumentation provided weak support for the thesis.” ‘Argumentation theory’ is the term often used to denote theory about the nature of arguments and their uses, including their uses in communications involving exchanges of arguments.

2 The relation between critical thinking and argument

2 .1 arguments are both tools of critical thinking and objects of critical thinking.

In … [one] sense, thought denotes belief resting upon some basis, that is, real or supposed knowledge going beyond what is directly present. … Some beliefs are accepted when their grounds have not themselves been considered …. … such thoughts may mean a supposition accepted without reference to its real grounds. These may be adequate, they may not; but their value with reference to the support they afford the belief has not been considered. Such thoughts grow up unconsciously and without reference to the attainment of correct belief. They are picked up—we know not how. From obscure sources and by unnoticed channels they insinuate themselves into acceptance and become unconsciously a part of our mental furniture. Tradition, instruction, imitation—all of which depend upon authority in some form, or appeal to our advantage, or fall in with strong passions—are responsible for them. Such thoughts are prejudices, that is, prejudgments, not judgments proper that rest upon a survey of evidence. (John Dewey, How We Think , pp. 4-5, emphasis added.)

People—all of us—routinely adopt beliefs and attitudes that are prejudices in Dewey’s sense of being prejudgments, “not judgments proper that rest upon a survey of evidence.” One goal of critical thinking education is to provide our students with the means to be able, when it really matters, to “properly survey” the grounds for beliefs and attitudes.

Arguments supply one such means. The grounds for beliefs and attitudes are often expressed, or expressible, as arguments for them. And the “proper survey” of these arguments is to test them by subjecting them to the critical scrutiny of counter-arguments.

Arguments also come into play when the issue is not what to believe about a contentious issue, but in order just to understand the competing positions. Not only are we not entitled to reject a claim to our belief if we cannot counter the arguments that support it; we are not in possession of an understanding of that claim if we cannot formulate the arguments that support it to the satisfaction of its proponents.

Furthermore, arguments can be used to investigate a candidate for belief by those trying “to make up their own minds” about it. The investigator tries to find and express the most compelling arguments for and against the candidate. Which arguments count as “most compelling” are the ones that survive vigorous attempts, using arguments, to refute or undermine them. These survivors are then compared against one another, the pros weighed against the cons. More arguments come into play in assessing the attributed weights.

In these ways, a facility with arguments serves a critical thinker well. Such a facility includes skill in recognizing, interpreting and evaluating arguments, as well as in formulating them. That includes skill in laying out complex arguments, in recognizing argument strengths and weaknesses, and in making a case for one’s critique. It includes the ability to distinguish the more relevant evidence from the less, and to discriminate between minor, fixable flaws and major, serious problems, in arguments. Thus the critical thinker is at once adept at using arguments in various ways and at the same time sensitive in judging arguments’ merits, applying the appropriate criteria.

Moreover, arguments in the sense of “reasons-claim” complexes surround us in our daily lives. Our “familiars”, as Gilbert (2014) has dubbed them—our family members, the friends we see regularly, shopkeepers and others whose services we patronize daily, our co-workers—engage us constantly in argumentative discussions in which they invoke arguments to try to get us to do things, to agree, to judge, to believe. The public sphere—the worlds of politics, commerce, entertainment, leisure activities, social media (see Jackson’s chapter)—is another domain in which arguments can be found, although (arguably) mere assertion predominates there. In the various roles we play as we go through life—child, parent, spouse or partner, student, worker, patient, subordinate or supervisor, citizen (voter, jurist, community member), observer or participant, etc.—we are invited with arguments to agree or disagree, approve or disapprove, seek or avoid. We see others arguing with one another and are invited to judge the merits of the cases they make. Some of these arguments are cogent and their conclusions merit our assent, but others are not and we should not be influenced by them. Yet others are suggestive and deserve further thought.

We can simply ignore many of these arguments, but others confront us and force us to decide whether or not to accept them. Often it is unclear whether someone has argued or done something else: just vented, perhaps, or explained rather than argued, or merely expressed an opinion without arguing for it, or was confused. So we initially might have to decide whether there is an argument that we need to deal with. When it is an argument, often in order to make up our minds about it we need first to get clear about exactly what the argument consists of. So even before we evaluate this argument we have to identify and analyze it. (These operations are discussed in Chapter 12.)

In the end we have to decide for ourselves whether the argument makes its case or falls short. Does the conclusion really follow from the premises? Is there enough evidence to justify the conclusion? Is it the right kind of evidence? Are there well-known objections or arguments against the conclusion that haven’t been acknowledged and need to be answered satisfactorily? Can they be answered? And are the premises themselves believable or otherwise acceptable? Are there other arguments, as good or better, that support the claim?

Critical thinking can (and should!) come into all of these decisions we need to make in the identification, the analysis and the assessment of arguments.

2 .2  Critical thinking about things other than arguments

Many critical thinking textbooks focus exclusively on the analysis and evaluation of arguments. While the centrality of arguments to the art of critical thinking is unquestionable, a strong case can be made that critical thinking has other objectives in addition to appreciating arguments. In their analysis of the concept of critical thinking, Fisher and Scriven suggest the following definition:

Critical thinking is skilled and active interpretation and evaluation of o b servations and communications , information and argumentation. (1997, p. 21, emphasis added)

We agree with the gist of this claim, but notice what Fisher and Scriven propose as the objects to which critical thinking applies. Not just argumentation, but as well observations, communications and information. About observations, they note that:

What one sees (hears, etc.) are usually things and happenings, and one often has to interpret what one sees, sometimes calling on critical thinking skills to do so, most obviously in cases where the context involves weak lighting, strong emotions, possible drug effects, or putatively magical or parapsychological phenomena. Only after the application of critical thinking—and sometimes not even then—does one know what one “really saw”. … When the filter of critical thinking has been applied to the observations, and only then, one can start reasoning towards further conclusions using these observations as premises. ( Ibid ., p, 37)

An example is the recent large number of convictions in the U.S.A. that originally relied on eyewitness testimony but that have been overturned on the basis of DNA evidence. [2] ,  [3]

The DNA evidence proved that the accused was not the culprit, so the moral certainty of the eyewitness had to have been mistaken. The observation of the eyewitness was flawed. He or she did not think critically about whether the conditions need ed to make a reliable o b servation were present (e.g., were strong emotions like fear involved? was the lighting good? has he or she ordinarily a good memory for faces? was there time to observe carefully? were there distractions present?). Neither, probably, did the lawyers on either side, or else they immorally suppressed what should have been their doubts. As a consequence, innocent people languished in jail for years and guilty parties went free.

Communications are another object for critical thought. When in reply to Harry’s question, “How are you doing?” Morgan says, in a clipped and dull voice and a strained expression on her face, “I’m fine”, Harry needs to be aware that “How are you doing?” often functions as equivalent to a simple greeting, like “Hi” and so the response “Fine” could similarly be functioning as a polite return of the greeting, like “Hi back to you”, and not as an accurate report of the speaker’s condition. Harry needs to notice and interpret other aspects of Morgan’s communication—her lethargic tone of voice and her anxious facial expression—and to recognize the incompatibility between those signals and the interpretation of her response as an accurate depiction of Morgan’s state of well-being. He needs to employ critical interpretive skills to realize that Morgan has communicated that she is not fine at all, but for some reason isn’t offering to talk about it.

If President Trump did in fact say to his then F.B.I. director James Comey, about the F.B.I. investigation of former National Security Advisor Michaell Flynn “I hope you can let this go”, was it legitimate for Comey to interpret the President’s comment as a directive? And was Comey’s response, which was simply to ignore President Trump’s alleged comment, an appropriate response? What was going on? It takes critical thinking to try to sort out these issues. Taking the President’s alleged comment literally, it just expresses his attitude towards the FBI investigation of Flynn. But communications from the President in a tête-à-tête in the White House with the Director of the FBI are not occasions for just sharing attitudes. This was not an occasion on which they could step out of their political roles and chat person-to-person. The President can legitimately be presumed to be communicating his wishes as to what his FBI Director should do, and such expressions of wishes are, in this context, to be normally understood as directives. On the other hand, for the President to direct that an ongoing investigation by the FBI be stopped, or that it come up with a pre-determined finding, is illegal: it’s obstruction of justice. So Comey seemed faced with at least two possible interpretations of what he took the President to be saying: either an out-of-place expression of his attitude towards the outcome of the Flynn investigation or an illegal directive. Which was the President’s intention? However, there are other possibilities.

Was President Trump a political tyro whose lack of political experience might have left him ignorant of the fact that the FBI Director has to keep investigations free of political interference? Or might Trump have thought that the Presidency conveys the authority to influence the outcome of criminal investigations? Or might President Trump have been testing Mr. Comey to see if he could be manipulated? And Mr. Comey could have responded differently. He could have said, “I wish we could let this go too, Mr. President, but there are questions about General Flynn’s conduct that have to be investigated, and as you know, we cannot interfere with an ongoing FBI investigation”. Such a response would have forced the President to take back what he allegedly said, withdrawing any suggestion that his comment was a directive, or else to make it plain that he was indeed directing Comey to obstruct justice. In the event, apparently Mr. Comey did not take this way out, which would at once have displayed loyalty to the President (by protecting him from explicitly obstructing justice) and also have affirmed the independence of the FBI from interference from the White House. Perhaps he thought that the President clearly had directed him to obstruct justice, and judged that giving him an opportunity explicitly to withdraw that directive amounted to overlooking that illegal act, which would be a violation of his responsibilities as Director of the FBI. If so, however, simply not responding to the President’s comment, the path Comey apparently chose, also amounted to turning a blind eye to what he judged to be President Trump’s illegal directive.

As these two examples illustrate, the interpretation of communications, and the appropriate response to them can require critical thinking: recognizing different functions of communication, and being sensitive to the implications of different contexts of communication; being sensitive to the roles communicators occupy and to the rights, obligations, and limits attached to such roles.

As Fisher and Scriven acknowledge, “defining information is itself a difficult task.” They make a useful start by distinguishing information from raw data (“the numbers or bare descriptions obtained from measurements or observations”, op . cit., p. 41). No critical thinking is required for the latter; just the pains necessary to record raw data accurately, In many cases, though, the interpretation of raw data, the meaning or significance that they are said to have, can require critical thinking.

One might go beyond Fisher and Scriven’s list of other things besides arguments to which critical thinking can be applied. A thoughtful appreciation of novels or movies, plays or poetry, paintings or sculptures requires skilled interpretation, imagining alternatives, thoughtful selection of appropriate criteria of evaluation and then the selection and application of appropriate standards, and more. A good interior designer must consider the effects and interactions of space and light and color and fabrics and furniture design, and coordinate these with clients’ lifestyles, habits and preferences. Advanced practical skills in various sciences come into play. A coach of a sports team must think about each individual team member’s skills and deficiencies, personality and life situation; about plays and strategies, opponents’ skills sets; approaches to games; and much more. Conventional approaches need to be reviewed as to their applicability to the current situation. Alternative possibilities need to be creatively imagined and critically assessed. And all of this is time-sensitive, sometimes calling for split-second decisions. The thinking involved in carrying out the tasks of composing a review of some work of literature or art or of coaching a sports team can be routine and conventional, or it can be imaginative, invoking different perspectives and challenging standard criteria.

The list could go on. The present point is that, while argument is central to critical thinking, critical thinking about and using arguments is not all there is to critical thinking. [4]

Bailin, Sharon & Battersby, Mark. (2010). Reason in the Balance , An I n quiry Approach to Critical Thinking , 1 st ed. Toronto: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.

Beardsley, Monroe C. (1950). Practical L ogic . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Chaffee, John. 1985. Thinking Critically . Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Dewey, John. (1910, 1991). How We Think . Lexington, MAD.C. Heath; Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books.

Diestler, Sherry. (2005). Becoming a Critical Thinker , 4 th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Ennis, Robert H. (1996). Critical Thinking . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Feldman, Richard. (1993). Reason and Argument , 2 nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Fisher, Alex.(2001). Critical Thinking, An Introduction . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fisher, Alec & Scriven, Michael. (1997). Critical Thinking, Its Definition and Assessment . Point

Reyes, CA: EdgePress; Norwich, UK: Center for Research in Critical Thinking.

Fogelin, Robert & Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter. (2001). Understanding A r guments , An Introduction to Informal Logic , 6 th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Freeman, James B. (1988.) Thinking Logically , Basic Concepts of Reaso n ing . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Grennan, Wayne . (1984). Argument Evaluation . Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Govier, Trudy. (2001). A Practical Study of Argument , 5 th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

O’Keefe, Daniel J. (1977). Two concepts of argument. Journal of the Amer i can Forensic Association , 13 , 121-128.

O‘Keefe, Daniel J. (1982). The concepts of argument and arguing. In J. R. Cox & C. A. Willard (Eds.), Advances in Argumentation Theory and R e search , pp. 3-23. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

• © J. Anthony Blair ↵
• According to the Innocence Project, “Eyewitness misidentification is the greatest contributing factor to wrongful convictions proven by DNA testing, playing a role in more than 70% of convictions [in the U.S.A.] overturned through DNA testing nationwide.” (https://www.innocenceproject.org/causes/eyewitness-misidentification/, viewed August 2017). ↵
• I owe the general organization and many of the specific ideas of this chapter to a series of lectures by Jean Goodwin at the Summer Institute on Argumentation sponsored by the Centre for Research in Reasoning, Argumentation and Rhetoric at the University of Windsor. ↵

Studies in Critical Thinking Copyright © by J. Anthony Blair is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

4 – Critical Writing

Critical writing depends on critical thinking. Your writing will involve reflection on written texts: that is, critical reading.

[Source: Lane, 2021, Critical Thinking for Critical Writing ]

Critical writing entails the skills of critical thinking and reading. At college, the three skills are interdependent, reflected in the kinds of assignments you have to do.

Now let’s look at some real university-level assignments across different majors. Pay attention to the highlighted words used in the assignment descriptions.

As you can tell, all the assignments have both critical reading and writing components. You have to read a lot (e.g., “Use at least 5 current Economics research articles,” “refer to 2 other documents,” and “Select 4-5 secondary sources”) and critically before you form your own opinions and then start to write. Sometimes reading is for ideas and evidence (i.e., reasons, examples, and information from sources), and other times reading is to provide an evaluation of information accuracy (e.g., research designs, statistics). Without critical thinking and reading, critical writing will have no ground. Critical thinking and reading are the prerequisites for critical writing. A clear definition of critical writing is provided below.

What is Critical Writing?

Critical writing is writing which analyses and evaluates information, usually from multiple sources, in order to develop an argument. A mistake many beginning writers make is to assume that everything they read is true and that they should agree with it, since it has been published in an academic text or journal. Being part of the academic community, however, means that you should be critical of (i.e. question) what you read, looking for reasons why it should be accepted or rejected, for example by comparing it with what other writers say about the topic, or evaluating the research methods to see if they are adequate or whether they could be improved.

[Source: Critical Writing ]

If you are used to accepting the ideas and opinions stated in a text, you have to relearn how to be critical in evaluating the reliability of the sources, particularly in the online space as a large amount of online information is not screened. In addition, critical writing is different from the types of writing (e.g., descriptive writing) you might have practiced in primary and secondary education.

The following table gives some examples to show the difference between descriptive and critical writing (adapted from the website ). Pay attention to the different verbs used in the Table for the comparisons.

You might feel familiar with the verbs used in the column describing critical writing. If you still remember, those words are also used to depict the characteristics of critical thinking and reading.

ACTIVITY #1:

Read the two writing samples, identify which one is descriptive writing and which one is critical writing, and explain your judgment.

Sample 1: Recently, President Jacob Zuma made the decision to reshuffle the parliamentary cabinet, including the firing of finance minister, Pravin Gordhan. This decision was not well received by many South Africans.

Sample 2: President Zuma’s firing of popular finance minister, Gordhan drastically impacted investor confidence. This led to a sharp decrease in the value of the Rand. Such devaluation means that all USD-based imports (including petrol) will rise in cost, thereby raising the cost of living for South Africans, and reducing disposable income. This puts both cost and price pressure on Organisation X as an importer of USD-based goods Y, requiring it to consider doing Z. Furthermore, political instability has the added impact of encouraging immigration, particularly amongst skilled workers whose expertise is valued abroad (brain drain).

[Source: Jansen, 2017, Analytical Writing vs Descriptive Writing ]

Further, to write critically, you also have to pay attention to the rhetorical and logical aspects of writing:

Writing critically involves:

• Providing appropriate and sufficient arguments and examples
• Choosing terms that are precise, appropriate, and persuasive
• Making clear the transitions from one thought to another to ensure the overall logic of the presentation
• Editing for content, structure, and language

An increased awareness of the impact of choices of content, language, and structure can help you as a writer to develop habits of rewriting and revision.

Regarding the content, when writing critically, you cannot just rely on your own ideas, experiences, and/or one source. You have to read a wide range of sources on the specific topic you are exploring to get a holistic picture of what others have discussed on the topic, from which you further make your own judgment. Through reading other sources, you not only form your own judgment and opinions but also collect evidence to support your arguments. Evidence is so important in critical writing. In addition to the collection of evidence, you also need to use different ways (e.g., quoting, paraphrasing, and synthesizing) to integrate the evidence into your writing to increase your critical analysis.

Using quotes is always an issue. Some students like to quote a lot and/or too long throughout their papers, and others do not know why they quote. Remember that when you use direct quotations, you are using others’ ideas, not yours. You should limit the use of quotes to the minimum because readers are always interested in your opinions. In other words, you need to use quotes critically.

When you quote directly from a source, use the quotation critically. This means that you should not substitute the quotation for your own articulation of a point. Rather, introduce the quotation by laying out the judgments you are making about it, and the reasons why you are using it. Often a quotation is followed by some further analysis.

[Source: Knott , n.d., Critical Reading Towards Critical Writing ]

Barna (2017) stated that “A good rule of thumb is that the evidence should only be about 5-10% of the piece.” Further, according to the EAP Foundation.org , you need to avoid doing a laundry list in critical writing:

You cannot just string quotes together (A says this, B says that, C says something else), without looking more deeply at the information and building on it to support your own argument.

This means you need to break down the information from other sources to determine how the parts relate to one another or to an overall structure or purpose [analysing], and then make judgements about it, identifying its strengths and weaknesses, and possibly ‘grey areas’ in between, which are neither strengths nor weaknesses [evaluating]. Critical reading skills will help you with this, as you consider whether the source is reliable, relevant, up-to-date, and accurate.

When and Why do you quote?

When should you use quotes?

Using quotations is the easiest way to include source material, but quotations should be used carefully and sparingly. While paraphrasing and summarizing provide the opportunity to show your understanding of the source material, quoting may only show your ability to type it.

Having said that, there are a few very good reasons that you might want to use a quote rather than a paraphrase or summary:

• Accuracy: You are unable to paraphrase or summarize the source material without changing the author’s intent.
• Authority: You may want to use a quote to lend expert authority for your assertion or to provide source material for analysis.
• Conciseness: Your attempts to paraphrase or summarize are awkward or much longer than the source material.
• Unforgettable language: You believe that the words of the author are memorable or remarkable because of their effectiveness or historical flavor. Additionally, the author may have used a unique phrase or sentence, and you want to comment on words or phrases themselves.

When you decide to quote, be careful of relying too much upon one source or quoting too much of a source and make sure that your use of the quote demonstrates an understanding of the source material. Essentially, you want to avoid having a paper that is a string of quotes with occasional input from you.

[Source: Decide when to Quote, Paraphrase and Summarize ]

How do you quote?

• With a complete sentence
• With “according to”
• With a reporting verb
• With a “that” clause
• As part of your sentence

Citing the islands of Fiji as a case in point, Bordo notes that “until television was introduced in 1995, the islands had no reported cases of eating disorders. In 1998, three years after programs from the United States and Britain began broadcasting there, 62 percent of the girls surveyed reported dieting” (149-50). Bordo’s point is that the Western cult of dieting is spreading even to remote places across the globe.

[Source: Lane, 2020, Quoting: When and How to Use Quotations ]

The firm belief which has been widely advertised is that “international students should be given equal rights and respect while studying abroad” (Lane, 2020, p. 19).

Smith, an agent working at an international company, put forward the seriousness of economic recession brought by the COVID-19 pandemic: “our economy will soon collapse, followed by business failures, elevated unemployment, and social turbulence ” (2021, p. 87).

Dominguez (2002) suggested, “teachers should reflect on their teaching constantly and proactively” to avoid teacher burnout and attrition (pp. 76-79).

According to the IEP student manual, “To study in the IEP you must be 18 years old and your English level must be ‘high beginner’ or higher” (p. 6).

[Source: Five Ways to Introduce Quotations ]

Now move on to the language aspect of critical writing, you should pay attention to the analytical verbs used in critical writing.

Analytical verbs are verbs that indicate critical thinking. They’re used in essays to dissect a text and make interpretive points, helping you to form a strong argument and remain analytical. If you don’t use analytical verbs, you may find yourself simply repeating plot points, and describing a text, rather than evaluating and exploring core themes and ideas.

[Source: What are Analytical Verbs? ]

The use of analytical verbs is also important to show your precision and appropriateness in language use. For example, instead of using says and talks, replace those verbs with states, discusses, or claims. Not only does it enhance the formality of the language, but also it helps to create the tone of writing. This further means that you have to understand the specific meaning, purpose, and function of each verb in a specific context as shown in the table below.

[Source: Impressive Verbs to use in your Research Paper ]

The verbs listed under each category are NOT synonyms and are different based on context. Please ensure that the selected verb conveys your intended meaning.

It is recommended that you check out Academic Phrasebank for more advanced and critical language use.

The accuracy of language use that is important for critical writing is also reflected in the use of hedges .

Hedging is the use of linguistic devices to express hesitation or uncertainty as well as to demonstrate politeness and indirectness.

People use hedged language for several different purposes but perhaps the most fundamental are the following:

• to minimize the possibility of another academic opposing the claims that are being made
• to conform to the currently accepted style of academic writing
• to enable the author to devise a politeness strategy where they are able to acknowledge that there may be flaws in their claims

[Source: What Is Hedging in Academic Writing?]

There are different types of hedges used in writing to make your claim less certain but more convincing. For example, what is the difference between the two sentences as shown below?

No hedging: We already know all the animals in the world.

With hedging: It’s possible that we may already know most animals in the world.

[Source: Hedges and Boosters ]

Check this table for different types of hedges.

[Source: Features of academic writing]

Practice how to tone down the arguments.

ACTIVITY #2

Add hedges to the following arguments.

Except for the content and language aspects of critical writing, the last aspect is the organization, including both the overall structure and the paragraph level.

Here is one example of a critical writing outline.

One easy-to-follow outline format is alphanumeric, which means it uses letters of the alphabet and numbers to organize text.

For example:

• Hook: _____________________
• Transition to thesis: _____________________
• Thesis statement with three supporting points:_____________________
• Topic sentence: _____________________
• Evidence (data, facts, examples, logical reasoning): _____________________
• Connect evidence to thesis: _____________________
• Restate thesis: _____________________
• Summarize points: _____________________
• Closure (prediction, comment, call to action): _____________________

[Source: Academic Writing Tip: Making an Outline ]

1. Introduction

• Thesis statement

2. Topic one

• First piece of evidence
• Second piece of evidence

3. Topic two

4. Topic three

5. Conclusion

• Summary/synthesis
• Importance of topic
• Strong closing statement

[Source: Caulfield, 2021, How to Write an Essay Outline]

ACTIVITY #3:

The following essay was adapted from a student’s writing. Please identify the components of each paragraph.

Artificial Intelligence: An Irreplaceable Assistant in Policy-making

Do you understand artificial intelligence (AI)? Are you excited that humans can create these machines that think like us? Do you ever worry that they develop too advanced to replace humans? If you have thought about these questions, you are already in the debate of the century. AI is a term used to describe machine artifacts with digital algorithms that have the ability to perceive contexts for action and the capacity to associate contexts to actions (Bryson & Winfield, 2017). The 21st century has witnessed a great number of changes in AI. As AI shows its great abilities in decision-making, humans are relying more on AI to make policies. Despite some concerns about the overuse of AI, AI is no longer to be replaced in policy-making because it has the capabilities that humans cannot achieve, such as transparent decision-making and powerful data processing.

AI has the capacity to use algorithms or systems to make the decision-making process more transparent (Walport & Sedwill, 2016). Many decisions made by humans are based upon their intuition rather than the direct result of the deliberate collection and processing of information (Dane et al., 2012). Intuition is useful in business when considering the outcome of an investment or a new product. However, in politics, the public would often question whether the policy is biased, so a transparent decision-making process should be used instead of intuition. AI can make political decisions more transparent by visualizing digital records (Calo, 2017). AI can make decisions without any discrimination and can have the public better understand of the policies.

In addition, AI can process a large amount of information at a speed faster than the cognitive ability of the most intelligent human policymakers (Jarrahi, 2018). A qualified policy must be based on facts reflected by data, so researching data is an essential part of policy-making. There are two main challenges for the human decision-makers in this area: (1) The amount of data is too large and (2) the relationship between data is too complex. Handling these two problems is where AI is superior. The high computing power of AI makes it an effective tool for retrieving and analyzing large amounts of data, thus reducing the complexity of the logic between problems (Jarrahi, 2018). Without AI, the policymakers would be overwhelmed by tons of data in this modern information age. It is almost impossible for them to convert those data into useful information. For example, data provided to the politician who is responsible for health care is mostly from the electronic health record (HER). HER is just the digital record transported from paper-based forms (Bennett et al., 2012). AI can analyze the data to generate clinical assessments, symptoms, and patient behavior and then link that information with social factors such as education level and economic status. According to the information from AI, the policy maker can make policies for healthcare improvement (Bennett et al., 2012). With the assistance of AI, the government can not only collect data easier but also utilize those data as operable Information.

However, while AI shows its great abilities in policy-making, it also brings considerable risks to contemporary society, and the most significant one is privacy. The only source for AI systems to learn human behavior is data, so AI needs to collect enormous quantities of information about users in order to perform better. Some scholars claim that the main problem with AI data collection is the use of data for unintended purposes. The data is likely to be processed, used, or even sold without the users’ permission (Bartneck et al, 2021). The 2018 Cambridge Analytica scandal showed how private data collected through Facebook can be used to manipulate elections (Bartneck et al, 2021). While privacy is a crucial problem, this is a handleable problem and we cannot deny the benefits brought by using AI. The most appropriate way to solve this problem is to establish a complete regulatory system. In fact, many policies have been made to protect user privacy in AI data collection. One of safeguard in this area is to restrict the centralized processing of data. Researchers are also conducting a lot of research in this area and have achieved some technological breakthroughs. For example, open-source code and open data formats will allow a more transparent distinction between private and transferable information, blockchain-based technologies will allow data to be reviewed and tracked, and “smart contracts” will provide transparent control over how data is used without the need for centralized authority (Yuste & Goering, 2017).

In conclusion, although there may be some privacy-related issues with AI policies, the powerful data collection capabilities and transparent decision-making process of AI will bring many benefits to humans. In the future, AI is more likely to continue to serve as an assistant to humans when making policies under a complete and strict regulatory system.

Bartneck, Christoph. Lütge, Christoph. Wagner, Alan. Welsh, Sean. (2021). Privacy Issues of AI, pp.61-70. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-51110-4_8.

Bennett C, Doub T, Selove R (2012) EHRs Connect Research and Practice: Where Predictive Modeling, Artificial Intelligence, and Clinical Decision Support Intersect https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1204/1204.4927.pdf. Accessed 1 April 2021.

Bryson J and Winfield A (2017) Standardizing Ethical Design Considerations for Artificial Intelligence and Autonomous Systems. http://www.cs.bath.ac.uk/~jjb/ftp/BrysonWinfield17-oa.pdf. Accessed 1 April 2021.

Calo, R (1993) Artificial Intelligence Policy: A Primer and Roadmap. https://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/issues/51/2/Symposium/51-2_Calo.pdf , Accessed 1 April 2021.

Dane, Erik., Rockmann, Kevin. W., & Pratt, Michael G. (2012). When should I trust my gut? Linking domain expertise to intuitive decision-making effectiveness. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 119(2), 187—194.

Jarrahi, M. (2018). Artificial intelligence and the future of work: Human-AI symbiosis in organizational decision making, Business Horizons, Volume 61, Issue 4, Pages 577-586, ISSN 0007-6813, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.03.007.

Walport M, & Sedwill M. (2016). Artificial intelligence: opportunities and implications for the future of decision making. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attach ment_data/file/566075/gs-16-19-artificial-intelligence-ai-report.pdf, Accessed 1 April 2021.

Rafael, Y., & Sara, G. (2017). Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies an AI https://www.nature.com/news/four-ethical-priorities-for-neurotechnologies-and-ai 1.22960. Accessed 1 April 2022.

Apart from the overall structure of critical writing, it is also important to pay attention to the paragraph-level structure. There are different paragraph models for critical writing.

Model 1: TED model for writing critical paragraphs

Paragraph model for critical writing

Often in assignments, you are expected to critically evaluate – this means to assess the relevance and significance of concepts relating to a specific topic or assignment question. Introduce your point. Give examples from reading. Is there support for your argument or can you identify weaknesses? Are there different perspectives to compare and contrast? Build your explanation and create your objective, reasoned argument (case or thesis) based on the evaluation from different perspectives. You will include your conclusion and point of view, communicating your stance, having made a judgment on research you have found and its significance in contributing to answering your assignment question.

Use the TED model to integrate critical thinking into your writing:

Each example of evidence in your writing should have a clear purpose or function. Be explicit and tell the reader what it contributes to your reasoning.

Professional practice is more complex than simply applying theory to practice, since it involves a professional juggling of situational demands, intuition, experiences and knowledge (Schön, 1991). Practitioners do not apply research findings in a simple deductive process; they need time to think, translate and relate the research findings to their particular setting. The extent to which a given piece of evidence is utilised by an individual in practice depends on their sense of the situation and this inevitably involves professional judgement.

Topic (in red); Evidence (in orange); Further explanation (in blue); Discussion (in green)

Model 2: WEED model for writing critical paragraphs

This is a model for writing critical paragraphs. It’s taken from Godwin’s book called ‘Planning your Essay’. Each paragraph should be on a single topic, making a single point. A paragraph is usually around a third of a page.

W is for What

You should begin your paragraph with the topic or point that you’re making so that it’s clear to your lecturer. Everything in the paragraph should fit in with this opening sentence.

E is for Evidence

The middle of your paragraph should be full of evidence – this is where all your references should be incorporated. Make sure that your evidence fits in with your topic.

E is for Examples

Sometimes it’s useful to expand on your evidence. If you’re talking about a case study, the example might be how your point relates to the particular scenario being discussed.

D is for Do

You should conclude your paragraph with the implications of your discussion. This gives you the opportunity to add your commentary, which is very important in assignments that require you to use critical analysis. So, in effect, each paragraph is like a mini-essay, with an introduction, main body, and conclusion.

Example: a good critical paragraph

Exposure to nature and green spaces has been found to increase health, happiness, and wellbeing. Whilst trees and greenery improve air quality by reducing air pollutants, green spaces facilitate physical activity, reduce stress, and provide opportunities for social interaction (Kaplan, 1995; Lachowycz,and Jones, 2011; Ward Thompson et al., 2012; Hartig et al., 2014; Anderson et al., 2016). Older adults have described increased feelings of wellbeing while spending time in green spaces and walking past street greenery (Finaly et al., 2015; Orr et al., 2016). They are more likely to walk on streets which are aesthetically pleasing (Lockett, Willis and Edwards, 2005) while greenery such as flowers and trees play an important role in improving the aesthetics of the environment (Day, 2008). Therefore, greater integration of urban green spaces and street greenery in cities may have the potential to increase physical activity and wellbeing in older adults.

What (in red), Evidence (in orange), Do (in blue).

[Source: Learning Hub, 2021 ]

Please identify the paragraph-level components in the following paragraphs. You can use different colors to indicate different components.

Social Media plays a key role in slowing the spread of vaccine misinformation. According to Nikos-Rose (2021) from the University of California, individuals’ attitudes towards vaccination can negatively be influenced by social media. They can simply post a piece of misleading information to the public, and the deceived ones will share it with their families and friends. The role of media can also help boost the public’s confidence in the vaccination. The media can provide valuable information for the public to know that the vaccine is safe. Almost everyone in the modern era lives with a cell phone now. People on social media can also share their experiences after getting vaccinated. Influences can help boost the public’s confidence. Just as voters would receive “I voted” after casting their ballots, vaccination distribution sites can provide “I got vaccinated” stickers. This can encourage individuals to post on the media that they have received the vaccine (Milkman, 2020). Furthermore, those who spread misleading information should be fined by the authorities. This punishment would be sufficient for them to learn their lesson. People who oversee data and information in social media should be concerned about the spread of misleading information on social media. After deleting the false information, they should put up a notice stating that is fake. This will help the public to understand which information should be trusted or not. Moreover, people who find misleading information online should report it to the administration. This could help prevent false info from circulating on the internet.

Recent studies showed that the contamination of land and water can also negatively affect the production of crops and the food systems as the safety of products can be compromised by the chemicals used by fracking. In addition, the amount of freshwater required for the mixture of the fracking fluids can generate a lack of water supply to the local agricultural industries. The fresh water is the 90-97 % of the fracking fluids, and the water deployed is not possible to recycle efficiently. In fact, the wastewater became a further challenge to the agricultural sector as it can make the soil dry and unusable for crops (Pothukuchi et al. 2018). The challenges faced by the agricultural sector are reflected in the farmlands and livestocks as well. For example, in Pennsylvania, the Dairy farming is one of the major agricultural sectors. This particular sector requires unpolluted water and pasturelands to enable the cows to produce milk. Since 1996 this sector began to fail, but the largest decrease in cows that produce milk took place between 2007 and 2011. It was the exact same period when the fracking industries reached their peak in this area (Pothukuchi et al. 2018). Another piece of evidence is related to the air pollution caused by fracking, specifically, the pollution of agricultural pollinators such as bees. The population of air caused by fracking has led to a huge degradation of that volatiles endangering the local and global food production. Those outcomes are closely related to the low level of planning abilities in rural areas, where fracking usually takes place. Particularly, the gap between fracking industry actors and local officials didn’t allow the development of a proper level of policies and regulations.

References:

Academic writing tip: Making an outline. (2020, December 8). The International Language Institute of Massachusetts. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://ili.edu/2020/12/08/academic-writing-tip-making-an-outline/

Caulfield, J. (2021, December 6). How to Write an Essay Outline | Guidelines & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/essay-outline/

Choudhary, A. (n.d.). Impressive Verbs to use in your Research Paper. Editage. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.editage.com/all-about-publication/research/impressive-Verbs-to-use-in-your-Research-Paper.html

Critical reading towards critical writing. (n.d.). University of Toronto. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/researching/critical-reading/

Critical writing. (n.d.). Teesside University. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://libguides.tees.ac.uk/ld.php?content_id=33286287

Critical writing. (n.d.-b). EAP FOUNDATION.COM. Https://www.eapfoundation.com/writing/critical/

Decide when to quote, paraphrase and summarize. (n.d.). University of Houston-Victoria. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.uhv.edu/curriculum-and-student-achievement/student-success/tutoring/student-resources/a-d/decide-when-to-quote-paraphrase-and-summarize/

Features of academic writing. (n.d.). UEFAP. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from http://www.uefap.com/writing/feature/hedge.htm

Five ways to introduce quotations. (n.d.). University of Georgia. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://dae.uga.edu/iep/handouts/Five-Ways-to-Introduce-Quotations.pdf

Jansen, D. (2017, April). Analytical writing vs descriptive writing. GRADCOACH. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://gradcoach.com/analytical-vs-descriptive-writing/

Hedges and Boosters. (n.d.). The Nature of Writing. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://natureofwriting.com/courses/introduction-to-rhetoric/lessons/hedges-and-boosters/topic/hedges-and-boosters

How to write critically. (n.d.). Teesside University. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://libguides.tees.ac.uk/ld.php?content_id=31275168

Lane, J. (2021, July 9). Critical thinking for critical writing. Simon Fraser University. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.lib.sfu.ca/about/branches-depts/slc/writing/argumentation/critical-thinking-writing

LibGuides: Critical Writing: Online study guide. (n.d.). Sheffield Hallam University. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://libguides.shu.ac.uk/criticalwriting

What are analytical verbs? (n.d.). Twinkl. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.twinkl.com/teaching-wiki/analytical-verbs

What is hedging in academic writing? (2022, May 3). Enago Academy. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.enago.com/academy/hedging-in-academic-writing/

Critical Reading, Writing, and Thinking Copyright © 2022 by Zhenjie Weng, Josh Burlile, Karen Macbeth is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

The Purpose of Argument (How to Be Wrong)

Because people don’t always agree on what is right or reasonable, appropriately constructed argument helps us arrive at what is fair or true. It is used to settle disputes and discover truth. Instructors assign argumentative writing so students can learn to examine their own and other’s ideas in a careful, methodical way. Argument teaches us how to evaluate conflicting claims and judge evidence and methods of investigation. Argument helps us learn to clarify our thoughts and articulate them honestly and accurately and to consider the ideas of others in a respectful and critical manner.

But there are several other purposes to argument as well. Sometimes they are constructed to simply entertain. Other times they are constructed to convince. And still others are constructed to help clarify ideas and facilitate meaningful collaboration with those who have different ideas. Not all arguments are about winning and losing. And some, if you can believe it, are structured to help us lose, and thus learn.

Why do we argue with one another? What is the intention? How do we know when we have “won” or “lost” an argument? What happens then? In this unit, we explore the functions and purposes of argument to reveal the deeper reasons we engage in this complex, frequently stressful activity and what we can gain by having an enhanced perspective on it.

Argument is not in itself an end or a purpose of communication. It is rather a means of discourse, a way of developing what we have to say. We can identify four primary aims or purposes that argument helps us accomplish:

• Negotiation
• View   the Powerpoint:  The Four Aims of Argument

Arguing to Inquire:   Forming our opinions or questioning those we already have.

The ancient Greeks used the word dialectic to identify an argument as inquiry; a more common term might be dialogue or conversation. Arguing to inquire helps us accomplish the following:

• to form opinions
• to question opinions
• to reason our way through conflicts or contradictions

It requires an attitude of patient questioning under non-threatening circumstances, usually done alone or among trusted friends and associates. The primary purpose is a search for the truth. The primary audience is often the writer and fellow inquirers concerned with the same issues.

• Examples: Classroom discussions; journal writing; exploratory essays; letters; late-night bull sessions in a dorm.

Arguing to Convince:   Gaining assent from others through case-making.

While some inquiry may be never-ending, the goal of most inquiry is to reach a conclusion, a conviction. We seek an earned opinion, achieved through careful thought, research, and discussion. And then we usually want others to share this conviction, to secure the assent of an audience by means of reason rather than by force.

• Arguing to inquire centers on asking questions: we want to expose and examine what we think.
• Arguing to convince requires us to make a case, to get others to agree with what we think. While inquiry is a cooperative use of argument, convincing is competitive. We put our case against the case of others in an effort to win the assent of readers.
• Examples: a lawyer’s brief; newspaper editorials; case studies; most academic writing

Arguing to Persuade:  Moving others to action through rational, emotional, personal, and stylistic appeals.

While arguing to convince seeks to earn the assent of readers or listeners, arguing to persuade attempts to influence their behavior, to move them to act upon the conviction. Persuasion aims to close the gap between assent and action. To convince focuses on the logic of an argument; to persuade will often rely on the personal appeal of the writer (what Aristotle called ethos) and involve an appeal to an audience’s emotions (pathos). In addition to these personal and emotional appeals, persuasion exploits the resources of language more fully than convincing does.

• In general, the more academic the audience or the more purely intellectual the issue, the more likely that the writing task involves an argument to convince rather than to persuade. In most philosophy or science assignments, for example, the writer would usually focus on conviction rather than persuasion, confining the argument primarily to thesis, reasons, and evidence. But when you are working with public issues, with matters of policy or questions of right and wrong, persuasion’s fuller range of appeal is usually appropriate.
• Persuasion begins with difference and, when it works, ends with identity.  We expect that before reading our argument, readers will differ from us in beliefs, attitudes, and/or desires. A successful persuasive argument brings readers and writer together, creating a sense of connection between parties.
• Examples: Political speeches, sermons, advertising

Arguing to Negotiate:   Exploring differences of opinion in the hope of reaching agreement and/or cooperation.

If efforts to convince and/or persuade the audience have failed, the participants must often turn to negotiation, resolving the conflict in order to maintain a satisfactory working relationship.

• Each side must listen closely to understand the other side’s case and the emotional commitments and values that support that case. The aim of negotiation is to build consensus, usually by making and asking for concessions. Dialogue plays a key role, bringing us full circle back to argument as inquiry. Negotiation often depends on collaborative problem-solving.
• Examples: Diplomatic negotiations, labor relations, documents in organizational decision-making; essays seeking resolution of conflict between competing parties; also frequent in private life when dealing with disagreements among friends and family members.

The Importance of Being Wrong

In this module, you are reading articles and watching videos that explore the science and logic of why we argue and why being wrong is not something we should try to avoid at all costs or view as “losing.” Collaboration and clarification of ideas are the highest pursuits of argumentative communication and when we are proven wrong, we are given the opportunity to learn, to grow and to enhance our understanding of the complex and vibrant world we inhabit.

• View  the video:  For Argument’s Sake ,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTN9Nx8VYtk&feature=youtu.be
• View the video: On Being Wrong ,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QleRgTBMX88&feature=youtu.be

Both of these talks (above) address the dangers of being too close to our own ideas. They offer examples and insights that show what can go wrong when we would rather “feel” right than “be” right. They also address the opportunities that open up to us when we allow ourselves to be detached enough from our ideas to create the space for growth, doubt, investigation and eventually increased understanding and awareness. When we believe we are right about everything all of the time, we miss the opportunities to learn from one another and from each new perspective we encounter. The following articles address the scientific basis for what embracing being “wrong” can actually offer our individual and collective ways of knowing.

Critical Thinking Copyright © 2019 by Andrew Gurevich is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

4. Teaching Argumentative Writing: Tips To Teaching Critical Thinking Through Writing

Writing is a cornerstone of critical thinking — particularly the practice of argumentative writing. 

Critical thinkers and writers must be able to adjust their views in light of new evidence; hone their arguments by considering criticism from those with opposing views; and be curious about ideas that can strengthen and deepen their thinking. A good critical thinker, like a good writer, recognizes that the thinking process is never-ending.

This parallels between teaching thinking and teaching writing are no accident, since writing is, as the National Commission on Writing puts it, “thought on paper.” As such, teaching critical thinking in writing assignments is a natural fit. The writing process gives students an important and unique opportunity to build their critical thinking skills. This is particularly true for argumentative writing and the teaching of argumentative writing.

Thinking and Writing

The connection between thinking and writing is very strong. Most of our thinking takes place in a fleeting, internal manner — whether in conversation or trying to solve a problem by ourselves. We have thoughts and then put them into action, and then they are, by and large, gone. 

Writing, on the other hand, automatically turns thinking into a longer-term and external process. Writing is not just produced by thought, but, because writing persists on paper and doesn’t disappear, it can be subsequently changed and improved by further thinking.

As one philosophy professor writes, “writing transforms our cognitive abilities.”

This means writing can involve different, more complex, and more sustained kinds of thinking than other kinds of learning activities. The habits of mind one develops through the writing process can also stay with us when we are thinking through issues and arguments outside of the context of writing. As one philosophy professor  writes , “writing transforms our cognitive abilities.”

Revision is not merely an addition to the writing process, nor to the thinking process; it is at the core of what thinking and writing, especially argumentative writing, are all about.

How to Teach Argumentative Writing

The argumentative essay is a powerful way to get students started on critical thinking and writing. It gives students a chance to outline their arguments in a reflective way. 

One way to go about teaching argumentative writing and critical thinking is through the following three-part approach with this sample assignment:

Sample Assignment

This two-part assignment encourages students to work with multiple sources, outline an argument, and develop a clear thesis.

This prompt   comes from the 2011 AP English Language and Literature Exam :

Prompt: The following passage is from Rights of Man , a book written by the pamphleteer Thomas Paine in 1791. Born in England, Paine was an intellectual, a revolutionary, and a supporter of American independence from England. Read the passage carefully. Then write an essay that examines the extent to which Paine’s characterization of America holds true today. Use appropriate evidence to support your argument.

“If there is a country in the world, where concord, according to common calculation, would be least expected, it is America. Made up, as it is, of people from different nations, accustomed to different forms and habits of government, speaking different languages, and more different in their modes of worship, it would appear that the union of such a people was impracticable; but by the simple operation of constructing government on the principles of society and the rights of man, every difficulty retires, and all the parts are brought into cordial unison. There, the poor are not oppressed, the rich are not privileged….Their taxes are few, because their government is just; and as there is nothing to render them wretched, there is nothing to engender riots and tumults.”

Part One: Outline

The purpose of the first part of the assignment is to make sure students pay attention to how to structure an argument before they begin writing. This is particularly true for teaching critical thinking and writing. Teachers might want to work before the assignment on analyzing professionally written essays, like argumentative op-eds , and outlining them, so that students have a model, and so they begin analyzing writing in terms of its claims, arguments, and support.

Teachers might want to work before the assignment on analyzing professionally written essays, like argumentative op-eds.

Outlines can be short to begin with but should:

• contain an explicit one-sentence thesis statement on the topic: the extent to which students think that Paine’s characterization of America holds true today.
• bring in supporting claims that use outside evidence that clearly blacks up the claim.
• organize the supporting claims into discrete blocks that clearly refer back to some element of the thesis.
•   include (abbreviated) analysis of the both text and the outside evidence cited.
•   include ideas for how to introduce and conclude the paper in a compelling and interesting way.

Class time should be spent discussing individual student outlines, and working in small groups to revise outlines with peers. As the outlining process progresses, teachers can also have students spend time, informally and/or formally, reflecting on the process as they go, asking questions like, for example:

• Do you see any weak spots in your argument?
• What have you learned about how to build an argument?
• How has the outlining process changed your approach to the topic?

Part Two: Draft

Once their outlines have been drafted and revised, students can begin the writing process. Again, if possible, teachers should think about building in opportunities for drafting and feedback as much as possible. During the writing process, students should also have an opportunity to present their ideas and arguments orally, in discussion either with the whole class in small groups.

This will give their peers further practice analyzing arguments, and give the writers further ideas for how to improve their arguments. These discussions can prove especially helpful in integrating opposing viewpoints into their argumentative writing. (Some teachers even go so far as to assign students’ to write or argue from a point of view completely opposed to their original point of view.)

During the process of oral discussion, teachers can emphasize that argumentative writing is, in many ways, a formalization of the kind of conversational debate we engage in everyday and that is typical in a healthy democratic society.

Part Three: Feedback

For educators, one of the most difficult parts of teaching writing is trying to find the right tone to strike with writing feedback, as well as whether to prioritize deep feedback (on content and argument) or surface feedback (on things like sentence structure and grammar). Time constraints obviously play a role here too, and teachers must adjust their feedback according to their knowledge of individual student needs.

But, by and large, the best feedback achieves two key objectives:

• Good feedback models good writing and revising skills by explaining exactly how a student’s writing can be improved, why it should be improved, and suggesting concrete improvements. 
• Good feedback helps students begin to reflect on how their writing communicates to the reader. 
• When it comes to good feedback,  reflection on opposing viewpoints is especially important . The best feedback pushes writers to consider opposing viewpoints and integrating them into their argument. Whether the writer then tempers their argument by giving some credence to the other side or is able to successfully argue against it, the result is more nuanced argumentation and more persuasive writing. Papers that only advance a hypothesis without considering counter-arguments will remain limited in their argumentative power.

Other important things to consider about writing feedback is when, how, and how much to give:

• An overwhelming amount of feedback, especially on surface-level issues, can overwhelm students and prevent them from devoting time to reflection, so it might be best to focus on one or two problem areas at a time.
• When grades and comments are given simultaneously, students can consider comments to be simply a way of justifying a grade. Educators can consider ways to separate feedback and grading — formative and summative assessment — in order to ensure that the former is considered seriously by students. The mere presence of a grade can interfere with deeper thinking. 

Peer review can be enormously beneficial. It not only helps students understand how their prose reads to an outside reader, but the practice of reviewing can reveal problems and highlight effective techniques they might find when rereading their own argumentative writing. But focus, again, is key. The peer review process can go off the rails if students are not working on a particular issue: for example, finding clear links between supporting paragraphs and the thesis statement. Providing students with feedback checklists as they examine their peers’ work can work well. Here are some ideas from the University of Wisconsin .

Parting Thoughts: Argumentative Writing and Critical Thinking

Download our teachers’ guide.

(please click here)

Sources and Resources

Çavdar, G., & Doe, S. (2012). Learning through writing: Teaching critical thinking skills in writing assignments . PS: Political Science & Politics , 45(2), 298-306. Targeted at college courses, but offers ample ideas on productive writing assignments and the revision process. Also offers a two-part model assignment, here with a paper draft instead of an outline.

Graham, S., Harris, K., and Hebert, M. A. (2011). Informing writing: The benefits of formative assessment . A Carnegie Corporation Time to Act report. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Report detailing best practices and benefits of formative assessment as it relates to writing. Offers recommendations and guidance, as well as research summaries.

Menary, R. (2007). Writing as thinking. Language sciences , 29(5), 621-632. Philosophical paper drawing on cognitive science to argue that writing can restructure thought.

Underwood, J. S., & Tregidgo, A. P. (2006). Improving student writing through effective feedback: Best practices and recommendations. Journal of Teaching Writing , 22(2), 73-98. Review of research on effective writing feedback. 

Privacy Overview

• Undergraduate Courses
• Postgraduate Taught Courses
• Professional, Part-time and Evening Courses
• PhDs and Research Masters
• Online Courses
• Micro-credentials
• How to Apply
• Fees & Funding
• Modes of Study
• Scholarships

Choosing a course is one of the most important decisions you'll ever make! View our courses and see what our students and lecturers have to say about the courses you are interested in at the links below.

View Courses

• Accommodation Advisory Service
• Campus Activities
• Student Support
• Study Abroad
• International Office
• Mature Students
• Students with Disabilities
• Student Ambassador Programme
• For Parents and Guardians
• Access Student Information
• Life in Galway

University Life

Each year more than 4,000 choose University of Galway as their University of choice. Find out what life at University of Galway is all about here.

Read about life at University of Galway

• News & Events
• Strategy 2020-2025
• Cois Coiribe (Publication)
• University Leadership
• Sustainability

About University of Galway

Since 1845, University of Galway has been sharing the highest quality teaching and research with Ireland and the world. Find out what makes our University so special – from our distinguished history to the latest news and campus developments.

About University of Galway

• Adult Learning and Professional Development
• College of Arts, Social Sciences, & Celtic Studies
• College of Business, Public Policy and Law
• College of Medicine, Nursing & Health Sciences
• College of Science and Engineering

Colleges & Schools

University of Galway has earned international recognition as a research-led university with a commitment to top quality teaching across a range of key areas of expertise.

Colleges and Schools

• Research Areas
• Research Office
• Innovation Office
• Researcher Development Centre
• Research Community Portal
• Research centres, institutes, and units

Research & Innovation

University of Galway’s vibrant research community take on some of the most pressing challenges of our times.

• Career Development Centre (for Employers)
• Business Innovation Centre
• Conference & Event Centre

Guiding Breakthrough Research at University of Galway

We explore and facilitate commercial opportunities for the research community at University of Galway, as well as facilitating industry partnership.

• Latest News
• Alumni Services
• Cois Coiribe
• Alumni Awards
• Follow our Social Channels
• Update Your Details
• Upcoming Alumni Events
• Previous Alumni Events
• NUI Elections

Alumni & Friends

There are 128,000 University of Galway alumni worldwide. Stay connected to your alumni community! Join our social networks and update your details online.

• About Engagement
• Learning with Community
• Community Partnerships
• Research with Communities
• University of Sanctuary

Community Engagement

At University of Galway, we believe that the best learning takes place when you apply what you learn in a real world context. That's why many of our courses include work placements or community projects.

Real Learning

Gateway Pages

• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• Ollscoil na Gaillimhe

• A High Contrast
• Registration
• Office 365 (Email)
• Student Registry Helpdesk
• Fees & Grants
• Exam Timetables
• Academic Skills Hub
• Student Services
• Student Volunteering
• Students' Union
• Financial System (Agresso)
• Academic Records
• Human Resources
• Academic Terms Dates
• Information Solutions & Services (IT Services)
• Buildings & Estates
• Service Desk
• Colleges & Schools
• Evaluating arguments and evidence
• Getting Started
• Getting Organised
• Communication Skills
• IT and Digital Skills
• Reading and Research Skills
• What is Critical Thinking?
• How to develop your critical thinking skills
• Reflective practice and reflective writing
• Maths and Statistics
• Assignments and Exams
• Galway Exams 101

For many students, the terms ‘critical’ and ‘argument’ sound a bit negative. You are probably used to thinking of an ‘argument’ as a disagreement or a row – not a very pleasant thing to experience. But the word ‘argument’ has a different meaning in an academic context.

At university, an argument means a statement that is backed up with some kind of objective evidence. You may be trying to identify the arguments of others, or you may be trying to build your own arguments; for example, while writing an academic essay or report.

Often, there is an ‘overarching argument’ or thesis (for example: there is a strong case for the government increasing student fees and introducing a student loan system) supported by a number of ‘contributing arguments’ (for example: current funding mechanisms are unsustainable and inequitable, such a system can be tweaked so that repayments are linked to income after graduation, and so on). Each contributing argument needs to be backed up with evidence .

Of course, for most arguments, there are also ‘counter-arguments’ – that is, opposing arguments – and these must be fully considered as well (for example, if we stay with the student fees and loans example: there are other options for funding higher education in a sustainable and equitable way, linking repayments to income after graduation can be problematic, and so on). Counter-arguments also need to be evidence-based.

When reading and researching for your course, it is really important to be able to, firstly, identify arguments, and then to analyse and evaluate them. Generally a statement is an ‘argument’ if it:

• Presents a particular point of view
• Bases that view on objective evidence

If you come across an assertion that is not based on evidence that can reasonably be considered objective, it is just that – an assertion, not an argument. Also, a statement of fact is not an argument, although it might be evidence that could be used in support of an argument.

When evaluating an argument, here are some things that you might consider:

• Who is making the argument?
• What gives them authority to make the argument?
• What evidence is given in support of the argument? Has this evidence been tested elsewhere? Could alternative approaches have been used?
• Does the evidence upon which the argument is based come from a reliable and independent source? How do you know? Who funded the research that produced the evidence?
• Are there alternative perspectives or counter-arguments? You should evaluate any counter-arguments in just the same way.
• What are the implications of the argument, for example, for policy or for practice?

See our guide to ‘ Arguments, non-arguments and evidence ’ for more.

You might also find the Reading and Research Skills  section of the Academic Skills Hub useful. 

Arguments, non-arguments, and evidence PDF (181 KB)

Top tips for reflective practice and writing PDF (156 KB)

Manage Cookies

Some features need cookies to work properly. Cookies also let us (a) remember your preferences, (b) collect anonymous usage statistics, and (c) see how well our online ads are working.

No personal data is stored on these cookies but, under EU law, we still need to ask you this every 6 months. To learn more about our use of cookies, view our Privacy Policy .

Founded in 1845, we've been inspiring students for over 175 years. University of Galway has earned international recognition as a research-led university with a commitment to top quality teaching.

University of Galway, University Road, Galway, Ireland H91 TK33 T. +353 91 524411

Get Directions Send Us an Email

Twitter Instagram Facebook YouTube LinkedIn RSS

© 2023 University of Galway. All Rights Reserved. Server AWS University of Galway is a registered charity. RCN 20002107

• Privacy & Cookies
• Contact & Enquiries
• Accessibility

• DOI: 10.1016/J.LINDIF.2013.06.004
• Corpus ID: 143469290

Assessment of argumentative writing and critical thinking in higher education: Educational correlates and gender differences

• David D. Preiss , J. Castillo , +1 author E. Martín
• Published 1 December 2013
• Learning and Individual Differences

36 Citations

University applicants’ critical thinking skills: the case of the finnish educational sciences, unravelling vietnamese students' critical thinking and its relationship with argumentative writing, english education master students’ perceptions on developing critical thinking skills in academic writing, the interrelationship among critical thinking, writing an argumentative essay in an l2 and their subskills.

• Highly Influenced

Development and validation of an instrument to measure undergraduate chemistry students’ critical thinking skills

The effectiveness of semantic mapping as prewriting activity in argumentative writing, writing behaviors and critical thinking styles: the case of blended learning, exploration of critical thinking and self‐regulated learning in online learning during the covid‐19 pandemic, determination of gender differential item functioning in tegal students' scientific literacy skills with integrated science (slisis) test using rasch model, the effects of implicit ct training on efl learners’ l2 writing performance, 52 references, argumentative writing and academic achievement: a longitudinal study, assessing and teaching what we value: the relationship between college-level writing and critical thinking abilities, reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking., genres of high-stakes writing assessments and the construct of writing competence, discrepant sat critical reading and writing scores: implications for college performance, measurement of new attributes for chile's admissions system to higher education. research report. ets rr-11-18., constructs of writing proficiency in us state and national writing assessments: exploring variability, reflections on a century of college admissions tests, are ssats and gpa enough a theory-based approach to predicting academic success in secondary school, a framework for critical thinking, rational thinking, and intelligence., related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

• Philosophical Logic
• Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking Ability in EFL Students' Argumentative Essay Writing: The Difficulties and The Strategies

• September 2020
• JURNAL SERAMBI ILMU 21(2):200-210
• 21(2):200-210
• CC BY-NC-ND 4.0
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Alexandra Gabriela Demera Macías

• Arinta Cahyadewi
• Yuri Lolita
• Ayu Safitri
• Sukri Adani
• Nehal Magdy Hussein Hassan
• Siti Maria Ulfa
• Oikurema Purwati

• Think Skills Creativ

• Asmar Yulastri

• Stefanie Nike Nurtjahyo

• Rinda Fitriana

• Nurul Akmal

• R A R Abdullah
• English Grammar
• Second Semester
• English Department
• George Yule
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up