Distance Learning Support Kit: Welcome

Students are generally very good at locating sources relevant to their task, but are often not so good at using them well. What tends to happen is that students report what they have read, rather than use the sources to answer the question and support their arguments. For example, a student writing on the effect of gender on the ability to read body language might write:

Example 1

Smith (1999) states that women are better than men at reading body language. Brown (2000) found in his study that women are good at reading facial expressions. Earlier this year, Green(2003) presented results on gender difference in ability to appreciate body language messages in communication. He reports that women perform better in certain circumstances. In contrast, Wright (1998) mentions no significant difference between the sexes in communication.

In this slightly exaggerated example, the student has simply listed the articles and summarised what looks like the main points. What this student didn't do was integrate the information and use it for a particular purpose.

Another student might write:

Example 2

Smith (1999) and Green (2003) state that women are better than men at reading body language. Similarly, Brown (2000) in his study of reading of facial expressions found that women performed better than men in such tasks. However, earlier work by Wright (1998) found no difference.

This student has attempted to group papers which basically say the same thing. However, it is still no more than reporting what was read.

A better way would be:

Example 3

There is general agreement in the literature (e.g. Smith, 1999; Green, 2003) that body language, including facial expression plays an important part in communication. However, the question of whether one sex is better than the other at reading body language remains unresolved. While studies by Smith (1999), Brown (2000) and Green (2003) generally claim that women are superior to men at understanding body language, Wright (1998) has found no difference. Furthermore, methodological problems raise questions about the positive results. For example, Brown's (2000) work looked solely at facial expressions asking participants to make judgements by looking at photographs. Whether these findings would be valid in real-life situations was not explored. In addition, Green (2003) used university students with a mean age of 21 as her sample, and one might question whether this sample is representative of the wider population...

Clearly the student who wrote this last piece did more than report what was read. She:

Kept in mind the topic and ensured that what she wrote related directly to this topic.
Read several articles and thought about the whole body of literature she had collected and not each one individually. That allowed her to assess what is known (or argued/claimed) and to judge the findings in relation to each other.
Looked at possible limitations of the methods used and the findings presented by different authors, and in this way she came to conclusions about how well these findings could be generalised.

In other words, this student was able to critically assess and integrate the material, something that is always required in assignments. She stayed focused on the topic and was able to build her argument. Ultimately she went beyond merely reporting what she had read but used the material to present her own opinion on the topic (without ever saying "in my opinion").

When reading and writing are approached in this way, students are in no danger of unwittingly plagiarising materials, something that students worry about and indeed the University treats seriously (see Avoiding plagiarism).

Useful links in this kit

Referencing
Avoiding plagiarism