dissertations 5 ref, plagiarism, own crit-analysis [handout]

Dissertations & Major Project Writing

Week 5 of 5:

Referencing, bibliographies, plagiarism & the ‘final stages’

Robert Walsha, LDU City campus, Calcutta House, CM2-22

An LDU short course presentation

Dissertations & Major Project Writing week 5

This week’s topics:

• Referencing & Bibliographies;

• Plagiarism – and how to avoid it;

• The final stages:– Writing & focusing your introduction &

conclusion– Critical analysis of your own work, editing

& proofreading, troubleshooting.

• Damage limitation

&'bibliographies''bibliographies'

'referencing''referencing'

&'references'references' 'citation''citation'

Referencing & Bibliographies

• Everything in the next 17 slides should be a reminder of what you hopefully know well already ~– it’s all about good practice in bibliographies

and referencing.– In this sense, your dissertation/project should

be no different from what you have been trying to do with other written assignments so far.

• A Bibliography is a listing, placed at the very end of your work, of every source referenced in your assignment. – In Psychology, the Bibliography section is called

‘References’.

• Referencing is what you do within the written sections of your work to show evidence of where you are incorporating any thinking or other material that is not your own. In other words, you reference to show where you are utilising material derived from your various sources.– In Psychology, referencing is referred to as ‘citations’.


• Written Assignments require BOTH a Bibliography AND Referencing

– not one or the other!!


• ... should provide a full listing in one place of all the sources you have referred to in your assignment.

• … should list sources in alphabetical order, by author surname.

• … should not include page references - that is the job of referencing.

• What should I include in my bibliography? Basically, every source you have used in working on your assignment. Only include material you directly reference in your work.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Your bibliography ...

• There are two basic bibliography formats, the ‘Cambridge’ (or‘British Standard’) and the ‘Harvard’ Systems.

• This is Harvard:

Ball, Stuart (1988), Baldwin and the Conservative Party: The Crisis of 1929-1931, London: Yale University Press.Carlton, David (1969), ‘The Anglo-French Compromise on Arms Limitation 1928’, Journal of British Studies, 8, pp. 141-62.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Format of your Bibliography

• There are two basic bibliography formats, the ‘Cambridge’ (or‘British Standard’) and the ‘Harvard’ Systems.

• This is Harvard:

Ball, Stuart (1988), Baldwin and the Conservative Party: The Crisis of 1929-1931, London: Yale University Press.Carlton, David (1969), ‘The Anglo-French Compromise on Arms Limitation 1928’, Journal of British Studies, 8, pp. 141-62.

• This is Cambridge:

Ball, Stuart, Baldwin and the Conservative Party: The Crisis of 1929-1931, London: Yale University Press, 1988.Carlton, David, ‘The Anglo-French Compromise on Arms Limitation 1928’, Journal of British Studies, 1969, no. 8, pp. 141-62.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Format of your Bibliography

• You may benefit from breaking down your bibliography into sub-sections, such as ‘Primary sources’, and ‘Secondary sources’ perhaps including sub-sub-sections such as: ‘books’, ‘journal articles’ and ‘web-based sources’.

• What should not be included in a bibliography? There are some things which you should not include: for example, mentioning your lecture notes is unnecessary, as is any general reference materials such as dictionaries or thesauruses.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Bibliographies

• Please note that, in some disciplines, two lists at the end of assignments is encouraged, both listing their respective sources in alphabetical order by surname:

(i) ‘References’: sources visited and referred to in your written sections;

(ii) ‘Bibliography’: other sources that were useful to you, but which you do not reference in your work.

Consult your supervisor over his/her preferences with regard to this.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Bibliographies

• Referencing provides proof of exactly where you are taking ideas and facts from, at the point of use of those ideas/facts in your work.

• The italicised section above is the justification for referencing: the reason why we must both provide both references and a bibliography.

• There are different forms of referencing. Certain departments favour one approach over others, though with some departments you may have a choice.

– Stick with department-favoured models or consult your supervisor over your options.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Referencing

Referencing options(?)

• (the ‘Harvard system’)• ‘British Standard’ a.k.a. ‘Cambridge’

system, which may take two forms:

(i) ‘footnoting’; or

(ii)‘endnoting’.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Referencing

• The Harvard System makes its references in the main text itself, and appears within brackets. For example:

... The consequent publicity pushed the issue of ... The consequent publicity pushed the issue of race relations to a very high place on the political race relations to a very high place on the political agenda agenda (Seymour-Ure, 1974, pp. 99-136)(Seymour-Ure, 1974, pp. 99-136). The.... The...

Under this system you must include:(i) author surname(ii) date of publication, and(iii) page references.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Harvard Referencing

• Long, difficult sentences are made longer by having to include additional bracketed reference information – and thus become even more confusing. For students who struggle with grammar and written communication, this can be a problem.

ADVANTAGES:

DISADVANTAGES:

• Efficient with space … cuts down a lot of repetition between references and bibliography (in Cambridge). For fuller information, cross-reference with the full information located in the bibliography (title and publication details are confined to the bibliography).

Referencing & Bibliographies:Harvard Referencing

• The Cambridge System makes its references via a system of number references, corresponding to detailed references … i. … at the bottom of the page (footnoting’) or ii. … at the end of each chapter, or by chapter at

the end of the written sections (endnoting).

... The consequent publicity pushed the issue of race ... The consequent publicity pushed the issue of race relations to a very high place on the political agenda.relations to a very high place on the political agenda.33 Another blah blah blah blah blah more text blah blah Another blah blah blah blah blah more text blah blah blah blah blah more text blah blah blah blah etc. etc. ...blah blah blah more text blah blah blah blah etc. etc. ...__________________

3 Colin Seymour-Ure, Colin Seymour-Ure, The Political Impact Of The Mass MediaThe Political Impact Of The Mass Media (London: Constable, 1974), pp. 99-136.(London: Constable, 1974), pp. 99-136.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Cambridge Referencing

• To create and manage your references, use Microsoft Word’s ‘Referencing’ function (called ‘Footnote’ in pre-Office 2003 versions of Word) to create your references: – when you reorder text, it will automatically re-

sequence your references in the new correct order.

1. Click at the point at where you want to insert a reference in your main text (e.g., the end of a sentence).


2. Click on ‘Insert’, then, on the drop-down menu, ‘Reference’, then click on ‘Footnote’.



3. Choose your options from the command box (left), then click on ‘Insert’. A footnote number is created, with a space to enter the desired reference text.

• Note: whether using Cambridge or Harvard for your actual referencing, you can also use footnoting to include (small amounts of) useful supplementary information that would distract if in your main text. (Larger useful additional information should be placed in appendices).

• First reference to book sources: – Include full author name(s), full title (italics or underline), place of

publication, publisher, date of publication, page reference(s)

1313 Stanley Cohen, Stanley Cohen, Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of Mods and Rockersof Mods and Rockers, Oxford: Blackwell, 1972, p. 137., Oxford: Blackwell, 1972, p. 137.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Cambridge Referencing:

BOOKS

• Second & subsequent references to the same source (short version):– author surname, short version of title (italics or underline), page

reference(s).

1616 Cohen,Cohen, Folk Devils and Moral PanicsFolk Devils and Moral Panics,, p. 137.p. 137.

• First reference to journal sources: include:– full article author name(s), ‘full title of article’ (in quote-marks), in full

title of journal publication (italics or underline), place of publication, publisher, volume, number, year of publication, page reference(s).

1414 Richard S. Grayson, ‘Mods, Rockers and Juvenile Richard S. Grayson, ‘Mods, Rockers and Juvenile Delinquency in 1964: The Government Response’, in Delinquency in 1964: The Government Response’, in Contemporary British HistoryContemporary British History, London: Frank Cass, , London: Frank Cass,

vol. 12, no. 1, 1998, p. 33.vol. 12, no. 1, 1998, p. 33.


JOURNAL ARTICLES

• Second & subsequent references to the same article in the same source (short version): – author surname, ‘short version of title’ (in quote-marks), page refs.

1717 Grayson, ‘Mods, Rockers and Juvenile Delinquency’Grayson, ‘Mods, Rockers and Juvenile Delinquency’,, p. 33.p. 33.

• Second & subsequent references to the same article in the same source (short version): – surname article author(s), ‘short version of title’ (in quote-marks),

page reference(s).

1515 Gordon A. Craig, ‘Churchill and Germany’, in Robert Blake Gordon A. Craig, ‘Churchill and Germany’, in Robert Blake and Wm. Roger Lewis (eds.), and Wm. Roger Lewis (eds.), ChurchillChurchill, Oxford: Oxford , Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993, p. 25.University Press, 1993, p. 25.


EDITED (ANTHOLOGY) TITLES• First reference to edited collections: include:

– full article author name(s), ‘full title of article’ (in quote-marks), in full editor name(s) (ed.(s)), full title of publication (italics or underline), place of publication, publisher, date of publication, page reference(s)

1818 Craig, ‘Churchill and Germany’,Craig, ‘Churchill and Germany’, p. 25.p. 25.

… they’d look like this (bracketed within the main text)!• Books:

• Journals:

• Articles in Edited titles:

(NB, with Harvard, the reader has to cross-reference with the Bibliography to find out the nature of the source, i.e., whether it is book, journal, other).

(Cohen, 1972,(Cohen, 1972, p. 137)p. 137)

Referencing & Bibliographies:If these same references were in Harvard …

(Grayson, 1998, p. 33)(Grayson, 1998, p. 33)

(Craig, 1993, p. 25)(Craig, 1993, p. 25)

Richard Davis, ‘New Zealand Labour Government and the ALP, 1939-40’, The Electronic Journal of Australian and New Zealand History, 1996. <http://www.jcu.edu.au/aff/history/ articles/davis.htm> (5 Feb 2007).

1. Author name, if known

2. Full title of document in

‘ ’ quote marks.

4. Dateof publication (or

last revision) if known

5. Thefull http address

(URL) within < > angle

brackets

3. Thetitle of the

complete work, if applicable (italics

or underline)

Referencing & Bibliographies:

referencing e-based sources

6. The date of your access in

( ) brackets

• This example is for web-site referencing (Cambridge)

In your references:(Davis, 1996)

In your bibliography:Davis, Richard (1996), ‘New Zealand Labour Government and the ALP, 1939-40’, The Electronic Journal of Australian and New Zealand History. <http://www.jcu.edu.au/aff/history/articles/davis.htm> (5 Feb. 2007).

Referencing & Bibliographies:

referencing e-based sources

• … and if it was Harvard …

7 ‘Taking On The Taliban: the Soldiers’ Story’, Panorama, BBC documentary, first broadcast 5 Nov. 2007.

Referencing & Bibliographies:Other sources

• Apply the logic of conventional referencing to other sources. For example, referencing a TV documentary might follow this format:

• Newspapers:8 James Bloom, ‘Power from the final frontier’, Guardian ‘Technology’ section, 1 Nov. 2007, p.1.

• Surveys, polls, etc.:9 Gallup poll on ‘British Attitudes to Race Relations’ (following the publication of the MacPherson Report), Apr. 1999.

13 Interview with Gordon Brown, MP (5 Nov. 2007).

17 Interview with Matt Phillips, Communications Manager, British Phonographic Industry (16 Apr. 2006).

Referencing & Bibliographies:Referencing primary sources

• Interviews:– Referencing (Cambridge):

Interview with Gordon Brown, MP (5 Nov. 2007).

Interview with Matt Phillips, Communications Manager, British Phonographic Industry (16 Apr. 2006).

– In the bibliography:

(Interview with Gordon Brown, MP, 5 Nov. 2007)

(Interview with Matt Phillips, 16 Apr. 2006).

– Referencing (Harvard): use footnotes as above, or in main text:


13 L.S. Amery, 14 Jul. 1918, in Barnes, John & Nicolson, David (eds.), The Leo Amery Diaries: vol.1, London: Hutchinson, 1980, p.226.

17 Austen Chamberlain to Ida Chamberlain, 20 Jan. 1924, AC5/1/303, Birmingham University Library.

• Private papers:– Referencing (Cambridge):

[name of collection] [location of source] L.S. Amery Barnes, John & Nicolson, David (eds.), The

Leo Amery Diaries: vol.1, London: Hutchinson, 1980.

Austen Chamberlain MSS Birmingham University Library.


– Referencing (Harvard ): use footnotes as above, or in main text:

(Amery diary, 14 Jul. 1918, 226)

(A. Chamberlain to Ida Chamberlain, 20 Jan. 1924, AC5/1/303)


13 Cabinet decision to go to war, CAB 23/100 folders 474-83; see also: FO 800/317 folder 84.

17 ATOC minutes of Extraordinary General Meeting, 2 Mar. 2005.

• Public papers (government, business, etc.):– Referencing (Cambridge):

[name of collection] [location of source]Cabinet Papers (CAB) (23 series) Public Record Office, KewForeign Office (FO) (800 series) Public Record Office, Kew

Papers of the Association of Train ATOC Headquarters, London Operating Companies (ATOC)


– Referencing (Harvard ): use footnotes as above, or in main text:

(CAB 23/100 folders 474-83); FO 800/317 folder 84)

(ATOC EGM minutes, 2 Mar. 2005)


13 Observations of staff interaction by author during work experience in Waitrose Product Buying department, London, 27 Jul.-17 Aug. 2007.

• Other:– Referencing (Cambridge):

Observational studies: The present author’s work experience at Waitrose Product Buying Department, London (where it was agreed with line managers that log records could be taken examining the interaction of the Asia buying team).


– Referencing (Harvard ): use footnotes as above, or write in main text:

… certainly no evidence of outward intimidation or bullying, during the period in which the current author was undertaking her work experience (27 Jul.-17 Aug. 2007).

• Plagiarism is the passing off of others’ ideas or writing as if they were your own.

• It is a serious offence to Plagiarise. There are serious penalties if you are found to have taken material from other sources and failed to credit them.

• It is easy to accidentally commit plagiarism through error or slackness, yet the penalties for being found to have committed plagiarism are no less forgiving.– Because of the length of time involved in producing larger projects

and dissertations, it is easier to accidentally commit plagiarism in these than it is with most other assignments.

– This is because, if your note-taking is less than thorough, when writing up weeks or months later, you can easily forget whether ideas or words are your own or someone else’s.

• So how can you guard against committing plagiarism accidentally?

Plagiarism – and how to avoid it

At note-taking / research stages:• Be thorough & focused with your research note-

taking – – always record the source details at the top of the page;– Always record page number information by the side of

every piece of information you record – whether you are quoting or summarising in your own words;

– For any paragraphs, sentences or even phrases that you take word-for-word (for possible quotation in your work), remember to place the word-for-word information in your notes in quotation marks ‘ ’;

– Always record where the idea originates and where your thoughts are your own.


At the writing-up stages – referencing• Remember, referencing is all about being

transparent with where you are obtaining source information:– Solid, thorough, honest referencing constitutes your

primary means of conveying where you are obtaining material to build your argument – and therefore avoiding accidental plagiarism.

• Get in the habit of inserting references early: – i.e., from your first-draft onwards, or …– … if this disrupts your written flow, then insert references

immediately after writing your first draft;– Update your references in a similar way with each

subsequent redraft;


At the writing-up stages – referencing (cont.)• Be thorough, methodical & consistent with your

referencing:– Many students under-use referencing. There’s nothing

wrong with multiple references on a single page;– By contrast, there may be something suspicious if there

are only ever 1 or 2 references per page (sections commenting purely on your own research are an exception).

– Remember, you must not only reference ‘direct quotes’ (where you are using the words of others) …

– … but also reference where you summarise the ideas of others in your own words.

– Consistency of referencing style is important and will also help you to be sure all the required information is present.


At the writing-up stage – ‘in-text signposting’• Referencing is not the only means by which you can attribute

your use of evidence from other sources – and thus avoid charge of plagiarism. – You can also augment this with selected in-text

attributions, where helpful for the readability of the work to do so. See ‘signposting’ the ideas of others in week 4 (Academic Writing).

– Here is an example from Psychology, using Harvard:


As Liverant (1960) has pointed out, we may indeed inherit an intellectual potential, but that potential will vary depending upon the environment we encounter during development.

E.Jerry Phares, Introduction to Personality, (3rd edn.), 1991, p.429

At the writing-up stage – ‘in-text signposting’– Here is another example:


It is open to question whether any real understanding had ever existed between the two parties. Stephen Brooke raises this doubt in his account of the Labour Party during wartime, claiming that debates about reconstruction within the Coalition ‘invariably fell along party lines’ and that ‘in terms of policy and ideology Labour retained a distinctive programme’.16 …_________16 Brooke, 1992, pp.9-10.

Nick Ellison, ‘Consensus Here, Consensus there …’, in Jones & Kandiah (eds.), The Myth Of Consensus, 1996, p.19-20

At the writing-up stage (cont.)• If you are thorough with both referencing and

in-text signposting, then any information left non-attributed in your work will rightly be recognised as your own contribution to the debate – and therefore not require referencing! Top stuff!


• ‘Legitimised’ Plagiarism: ‘a grey area’ of ‘virtual plagiarism’ that can still land people in trouble … avoid! – Quotations of others’ work should not be an excuse to do

no thinking or writing of your own.– Therefore, avoid overuse of over-large quotations.

Large quotes should be an exception rather than the rule, reserved for especially important or particularly quotable information.

– A bad assignment, with large chunks of quoted material – properly referenced but with minimal linking sentences of the student’s own – may not technically constitute full-blown plagiarism, but can still land students in trouble. This kind of ‘legitimised plagiarism’ should be avoided – you will not get good grades for uncritically lifting others’ views, no matter how well referenced that material is.


• ‘Legitimised’ Plagiarism (cont) – Most of your presentation of others’ ideas should involve

summarise the point in your words, ‘flitting in and out’ of quotation as necessary. Let’s look again at the example above, with the relevant section now highlighted. See how this academic maintains effective written flow by using only selected key passages from the argument of Brooke that he is presenting in order to build his own argument.


Stephen Brooke raises this doubt in his account of the Labour Party during wartime, claiming that debates about reconstruction within the Coalition ‘invariably fell along party lines’ and that ‘in terms of policy and ideology Labour retained a distinctive programme’.16

Focusing & writing your introduction & conclusion

Your introduction:• When should I start writing my introduction?• Your Introduction should be set up to be a

powerful ‘signposting’ tool, that eases the reader into your topic & explains exactly what will be looked at.

• Don’t forget, an Introduction should properly ‘introduce’ the topic:– This may sound obvious, but bear in mind:– Depending on the nature of your project, there will be

a range of things your Introduction should be addressing in order to be properly fulfilling in Intro function.

A checklist of things your Introduction could or should do


Your Introduction checklist (tick when/if achieved) Interpreting the title. Identify: is the project clear

from the title?- Is there anything that needs defining, in brief, from

the outset, in terms of focus or approach?;- Any possible ambiguity that could be cleared

up in relation to the title? Anything that could

be interpreted in more than one way?;- Any technical terms requiring immediate

explanation?;- If so, clarify.- Is it helpful to explain how you will interpret your title / question?


Your Introduction checklist (tick when/if

achieved) must contain helpful background information, to

ease the reader into your topic. Think in terms of:

- ‘setting the scene’;

- providing necessary context:

- any helpful (brief) overview of the history

surrounding your subject;

- perhaps an identification of how this area of

investigation fits into a wider context.

- What it is helpful and/or useful for the reader to

know from the start about your project;

Focusing & writing your introduction & conclusionYour Introduction checklist (tick when/if

achieved) must identify the overall aims / focus of the project:- If you have a hypothesis (or hypotheses), identify;

- Likewise it will help to identify any central focus around

which the dissertation is built; following on this, identify any key themes that ‘cut

across chapters’ or which can be seen to ‘underpin’ your dissertation as a whole. (This is

more appropriate for Cat. A projects, as defined in

week 4).

A: Issue-structured (arts-humanities model)

B: Experiment / survey / results-led (i.e., scientific-model)


Your Introduction checklist (tick when/if

achieved)

could usefully outline why the subject is of

interest / why it demands attention;

- be temperate in your judgement – don’t overplay

the importance of your study;

- nevertheless, you should be able to identify relative

importance in terms of what makes your project

worthy of investigation;

maybe say a little about your own interest in the

subject, perhaps how your interest in the area

developed;




Your Introduction (continued) If yours is a cat. ‘A’ project (see week 4), you are strongly advised to provide a chapter-by-chapter breakdown of coverage.- It is as powerful a ‘signposting’ mechanism as one can have, making promises as to what will follow in subsequent chapters;- You must, of course, make sure that you deliver on all these promises, both in terms of structure & content, in all your main chapters that follow – in precisely the way you have indicated in your Introduction.






Your Introduction (continued) If yours is a cat. ‘A’ project (see week 4), you are strongly advised to provide a chapter-by-chapter breakdown of coverage.- It is as powerful a ‘signposting’ mechanism as one can have, making promises as to what will follow in subsequent chapters;- You must, of course, make sure that you deliver on all these promises, both in terms of structure & content, in all your main chapters that follow – in precisely the way you have indicated in your Introduction.



For example:Chapter one will analyse the extent to which … and the

relationship between […] and […]. It will explore how […] and ascertain whether this was a product of […] or other forces.

The nature of […] is explored in chapter two. Whether […] can be seen to have influenced […] will be addressed, along with […]. The question of whether […] was a factor will be investigated, as well as the extent to which […].

Chapter three will examine […] …It will be concluded that […] …


Your Introduction (continued)

could contain a review of the literature (if not

required in own section, following the Introduction

– see week 4). could contain a discussion of research methods

(if not required in own section, following the

Introduction – see week 4).


Your introduction:• Remember, consideration of what to include in an

introduction should always be measured by whether it is helpful to include that information;

• If you wish, you can use an introduction to make a bold assertion – provided you later explore and justify this in your main body.

• That stated, don’t be sensationalist for the sake of it …but try to make your writing engaging to the reader.

• You could open your Introduction (and, indeed, other sections) with a well-chosen quote. Stylistically this may be desirable, but only do so if you have a quote perfectly suited to the purpose.


Your introduction:• Keep your introduction to a reasonable size:

– It depends greatly on what needs to be stated, but as a general rule, think between 1/7th and 1/10th of your overall written sections (e.g., excluding appendices and bibliography).

– Maybe a little bigger still if your Intro contains a necessarily sizeable ‘literature review’ and/or ‘research methods’ aspects (i.e., not in separate sections)

• What should I call my Introduction?– ‘Introduction’ is fine, – though you might wish to title it more specifically, i.e.

‘An introduction to …’, might do, or any other variations.


Your conclusion:• You should have a final concluding (usually fairly

short) chapter in which you ‘wrap up’ your project in its entirety. This should:– Summarise / bring together all the main points you

have dealt with;– stress key findings; and: – if appropriate, make recommendations (if not in its

own section following: ‘Recommendations’ sections being more of a characteristic of cat. B projects) ~




Your conclusion:• Should I use the conclusion to introduce any

new points? – No, except perhaps if you need to briefly

contextualise what you have discussed as part of a wider or related issue.

A checklist of things your Conclusion could or should do


Conclusion checklist (tick when/if achieved)

should draw together the key findings of your

main body chapters.

should make overall concluding remarks, where

appropriate summarising how the different

themes and findings may be seen to relate to

one another; could benefit from referring back to the

question / title, and pointing to how the

question has successfully been addressed …

- … or reasonably successfully addressed:

don’t claim more than your project

deserves – it’s better to admit its limitations (in

a considered, academic way) than to pretend

these don’t exist;

Focusing & writing your introduction & conclusionConclusion checklist (tick when/if achieved) should indicate how any constraints on the evidence hampered your research; could, if relevant, comment on changes you would make to your research were you to have the opportunity to research the topic again, and/or:

could and/or point to potential areas that would benefit further investigation; could benefit from ‘stepping back’ and speculating how your findings fit within any wider context (this must be reasonably brief and it must be helpful to do so, otherwise you are digressing); could outline your recommendations for further action.


Your conclusion:• Should I present my own opinions in the

Conclusion?– Yes, of course, provided …

• … you write these academically; • … the points you are making are to ‘wrap up’

discussion of your topic(s), reminding the reader of your findings or bringing together points previously addressed individually;

• … that it is not opinion better placed in your main sections, as part of your main body discussion – remember the Conclusion is not the only place for original thinking: it is primarily for summarising key themes & findings established in the main body.

Critical analysis of your own work: editing, proofreading, ‘troubleshooting’

• Weeks 1 & 2 concentrated on the critical analytical questioning that is essential to obtaining the best evidence to build an effective dissertation / project ~ how to get the best material from the work of others.

• Critical analysis questioning must also be applied to your own work, which is as vital as critically analysing the assertions of others’.


– Use the following slides to routinely self-diagnose the standard of your work from your first draft onwards.

– In the final stages of writing, careful critical analysis of your work is a powerful ‘troubleshooting’ tool for gauging the effectiveness of your work on multiple fronts;

– Use the checkboxes to tick off ‘’ all the categories only when you feel you have reached sufficiently high standards.

Critical analysis is all about YOU being YOUR severest critic!! (you will get constructive feedback from your supervisor, but only you can be your best critic …).


1. ‘Structural / focus / coverage considerations’;

2. ‘The academic nature of my work’;3. ‘Bibliography and referencing: technical’;4. ‘Constructive use of sources to “build an

argument”’;5. ‘Readability’ & effective written

communication’;6. ‘Stats and figures’;7. ‘The importance of consistency’.


1. ‘Structural / focus / coverage considerations’

Is the structure sensible … overall? Is the structure sensible … within each

individual chapter / section? Is everything covered relevant … and in

the right place? Is there appropriate fullness of coverage? Is there a sensible, logical progression

through each component theme?


2. ‘The academic nature of my work’ Have I written in the ‘third person’

consistently throughout? To the best of my ability, does my work

aspire to sound academic writing practices – i.e., attempt to be balanced, unbiased, impartial in observation & accurate in reflecting the research / views of others’?


2. ‘… academic nature …’ (cont) Have opportunities to introduce ‘original

thinking’ have been seized upon, with arguments based on prior discussion

(i.e., the literature) and defended well?

Is there sufficient analytical depth to my investigation?


3. ‘Bibliography and referencing: technical’ Is my referencing OK:

– Accurate?– Thorough?– Consistent in style throughout?

… including page number or full web pathway information?

Is my bibliography accurate, thorough, consistent, complete, etc..


4. ‘Constructive use of sources to “build an argument”’

Am I using others’ material (in my words or theirs) effectively, i.e., in order:

1. to build / progress my arguments?, or:2. to compare & contrast with

information/views from elsewhere?, or:3. to let me convey information useful to get me

to a point where I can satisfy 1. or 2.; or:4. help me wrap up & move to the next point?

… all fully credited by accurate, honest referencing?


4. ‘Constructive use of sources …’ (cont) Have I presented all the information &

arguments correctly, fairly & accurately – with no misrepresenting of others’ ideas?

Have I analysed & evaluated the source evidence fairly & with sufficient depth? Is there anything more I need to say? Have I said too much?

Have I identified strengths? … weaknesses? … flaws in thinking?

(If required) is my primary research well interpreted & effectively presented?


5. ‘Readability’ & effective written communication

Have all necessary technical terms been explained (and checked for accuracy)?

Have all unnecessary technical terms & jargon been replaced?

Does my Introduction properly introduce? Do my main sections deliver on promises

signposted in my Introduction?


5. ‘Readability’ & ... communication’ (cont) Is my ‘signposting’ - linking - use of

connectives present and effective … within and across chapters?

Does my Conclusion emphasise and draw together all my key findings from my main sections?

Is there sufficient clarity throughout in terms of remembering periodically to ‘refer the reader back to the question / title’)?


5. ‘Readability’ & … communication’ (cont) Is there sufficient descriptive material to

ensure good linking and flow between all the points I raise?;

Is my paragraphing sensible (1 ‘topic sentence’ + thereafter only ‘support sentences’, per single paragraph)?;

Have I achieved effective clarity of written expression: proper identification &

tackling of difficult points, sentences worked & reworked to ensure any possible ambiguities or potential misunderstandings have been removed?


6. ‘Presenting stats and figures’ Is the chosen data always relevant? Is my diagram-based information clearly

presented? Have I sufficiently commented upon (in

writing) my findings, & is my analysis of the data solid/ interpretation correct?

Have I presented my findings well, with no hint of ambiguity?

Have I introduced appropriate cautionary / qualifying remarks?


7. ‘The importance of Consistency’Consistency of referencing & bibliography has been emphasised. What about:

consistency of written expression / communication (throughout and within individual sections)?

consistency of argument (throughout and within individual sections)?

consistency of presentational style (throughout and within individual sections)?


dissertations 5 ref, plagiarism, own crit-analysis [handout]

Education

different forms of referencing

bibliographies plagiarism

isthe job of referencing

bibliography section

written sections bibliography

basic bibliography formats

harvard systems

references references