How to Write Better Essays

Reading for comprehension

In your first reading you might aim just for the lower ability range, for

comprehension, just to understand the author ’s arguments. It may be

a subject you’ve never read about before, or it may include a number

of unfamiliar technical terms that you need to think about carefully

each time they are used.

Reading for analysis and structure

In the next reading you should be able to analyse the passage into

sections and subsections, so that you can see how you’re going to

organise it in your notes. If the text is not too difficult you may be

able to accomplish both of these tasks (comprehension and analysis)

in one reading, but always err on the cautious side, don’t rush it.

Remember, now that you’ve identified just those few pages that you

have to read, rather than the whole book, you can spend more time

processing the ideas well.

Reading for criticism and evaluation

The third reading involves criticising and evaluating your authors’

arguments. It’s clear that in this and the second reading our process-

ing is a lot more active. While in the second we’re analysing the passage

to take out the structure, in this, the third, we’re maintaining a

dialogue with the authors, through which we’re able to criticise and

evaluate their arguments. To help you in this, keep the following

sorts of questions in mind as you read.

• Are the arguments consistent or are they contradictory?


• Are they relevant (i.e. do the authors use arguments they know
  you’ll agree with, but which are not relevant to the point they’re
  making)?


• Do they use the same words to mean different things at
  different stages of the argument (what’s known as the fallacy
  of equivocation)?


• Are there underlying assumptions that they haven’t justified?


• Can you detect bias in the argument?


• Do they favour one side of the argument, giving little attention to
  the side for which they seem to have least sympathy? For example,
  do they give only those reasons that support their case, omitting
  those that don’t (the fallacy of special pleading)?


• Is the evidence they use relevant?

84 Research

HTW12 7/26/01 9:04 PM Page 84