Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

INDIGENOUS STUDIES 3H03 - Indigenous Medicine I - Philosophy

How to Evaluate Resources

Not sure if a source is valid? This video explains how you can tell -- by using the CRAAP test. (2:10)

Transcript (PDF) | Transcript (.docx)

Critical Reading Strategies

1. Preview: See what you can learn about a text before reading it.

2. Contextualize: Situate a text in its historical, biographical and cultural contexts.

3. Question: Ask questions about the text in order to understand it.

4. Reflect: Consider whether this text challenged any of your preexisting beliefs. 

5. Summarize: Outline and identify main ideas in your own words.

6. Evaluate: Assess the credibility and logic of the text.

7. Compare:Consider similarities and differences between this text and others.

(adapted from: http://www.salisbury.edu/counseling/new/7_critical_reading

_strategies.html)

Scholarly Versus Popular

Reading scholarly papers. To start, read the IMRD.  I – Introduction: Creates interest, provides enough information for basic understanding of the article & provides focus  M – Methods: Details the experiments done to answer the question in the Introduction, technical language, & provides a high level of detail R – Results: Statements of what was found by the experiments D – Discussion: Provides clear answer to the question posed in the Introduction & explains how the results support the conclusion.   Read the article twice.  1st reading: Re-read the Abstract and the Introduction again. Skim the methods section. Read the results section. Read the discussion section thoroughly. Study the charts, figures and tables.  2nd reading: Skim the entire article – start to finish, maybe several times! Highlight words you don’t know. Underline key points. Make note of questions or ideas.  Read critically: Are the authors attempting to solve the right problem? What are the limitations of the solution/methodology/conclusion? Are the assumptions reasonable? Is the logic clear? Was the correct data gathered? Was their interpretation reasonable? Read creatively: What are the good ideas in the paper? Are there other applications that the authors hadn’t thought about? Are there improvements to the paper that might make important differences? If this was your launching point, what is the next thing you’d do?

Ask Chat is Offline - Send an Email