Don’t take everything in a scientific journal at face value, students learn in this new module
In the ‘Educatips’ column, psychology lecturers share their most important insights on teaching. This month: Anouk van der Weiden, together with a team of colleagues and students, developed a module on critical reading, application, and writing. 'Students often think: who am I to criticise a published article?'
Van der Weiden frequently encountered blank stares when she asked her students whether they had critically engaged with the scientific articles after completing a discussion essay. "Their initial reaction was, ‘How are we supposed to do that?’ This frustrated me at first, until I realised: we’ve never actually taught them how to do it properly. That was something we needed to address." In response, she spearheaded the development of a new module, ‘Critical Literacy’, an online course designed to teach Master’s students in Economic and Consumer Psychology how to read, apply, and write more critically, all within twelve hours. Students have generally responded positively, finding the material both useful and insightful. Last month, Van der Weiden, along with a team of colleagues and student assistants, including Susana Filgueiras, was awarded the Faculty’s Casimir prize for innovative education. So, what lessons have they learned from this project?
Lesson 1: Students are essential in developing new ideas
Van der Weiden: 'We began our project by interviewing students to gain insight into their perspectives on critical reading, application, and writing, as well as to identify any gaps in their knowledge. If we, as lecturers, had conducted the interviews ourselves, we might have received more socially acceptable responses and not explored the issues as thoroughly. That’s why we involved Susana and Yara (Tobé, a student assistant in Economic and Consumer Psychology) from the very start.'
Filgueiras: 'Using a collaboratively designed interview framework, we interviewed 25 students. How did they approach reading articles? Did they use any specific strategies? After the interviews, we analysed the responses using thematic analysis. This was a new method for me, so I learned a great deal from it.'
Van der Weiden: 'Alongside the interviews, my colleagues Coen Wirtz, Hester Ruigendijk, and I conducted a literature review to explore effective methods for teaching critical thinking and reading. Drawing on the insights from both the interviews and the literature review, we developed learning objectives and exercises. The student assistants also acted as a valuable sounding board for us. We might come up with all sorts of engaging exercises, but how do they resonate with students? If they’re too challenging, you risk damaging students’ self-confidence, which is the opposite of what we want to achieve.'
4 questions about the 'Critical Literacy' module
How is the module structured?
This module has been designed to help students with critical reading, application, and writing of academic texts. The ‘critical reading’ and ‘critical application’ modules are currently integrated into courses within the Master's specialisation in Economic and Consumer Psychology. The ‘critical writing’ module is optional and linked to the thesis.
What do students think of it?
Evaluations show that students feel significantly more confident in their critical reading skills, although the ‘critical application’ module still requires some refinement. There is not yet enough data on the ‘critical writing’ module to draw any conclusions.
Who else contributed to this project?
The module was developed with the support of Mineke van der Salm and Thijmen Zaalberg from SOLO, and Chantal de Beun and Maarten van de Ven, both from LLinC, the Leiden Learning & Innovation Centre.
Can lecturers or students outside the Master's in Economic & Consumer Psychology also use the module?
At present, the module is only accessible via Brightspace, but Van der Weiden hopes to eventually make the course materials, including manuals and evaluations, available online. This would allow lecturers to adapt the exercises to their own course literature. Are you interested in the course or have any questions about it? Feel free to send a message to a.van.der.weiden@fsw.leidenuniv.nl.
Lesson 2: Critical reading, application, and writing are not second nature for students
Filgueiras: 'The interviews showed that most students had a good grasp of what critical reading involves: linking literature to prior knowledge, checking if the argumentation is logical, and considering whether other variables might influence the conclusion. However, many found it hard to explain how to actually do this. A lot of students felt that critical reading was distant from their everyday reality, something they wouldn’t need for their assignments. There was a great deal of uncertainty in that regard.'
Van der Weiden: 'Many students also think, ‘Who am I to criticise a published article?’ But these critical skills are essential for the work they’ll do after graduation. For example, if you’re designing campaigns or providing policy advice, you need to critically interpret and translate scientific literature into practical interventions in different contexts. Otherwise, your policy could backfire.'
Filgueiras: 'One tip I took from the module was to really focus on the methodology. Many students quickly skim through the methods section and concentrate on the results, but that’s exactly where you need to slow down. Ask yourself: was this done well? Are there other ways this research question could have been answered? This tip was incredibly helpful when I was writing my thesis.'
Lesson 3: Question what’s written in scientific journals
Van der Weiden: 'Researchers often have a theory in mind that they aim to confirm, rather than disprove. We all have our blind spots, and reviewers are no exception. Moreover, a theory can be tested in various ways. You might run one, two, or three experiments, choosing a method for each. Had you designed the experiment differently, you might have come to different conclusions. And these findings can often be interpreted in more than one way. So, you don’t always have to agree with the author’s conclusion.'
Filgueiras: 'Much of the scientific literature is biased—everyone writes from a particular viewpoint. When you read critically, you ask yourself: is this well-supported? If you simply assume that because it’s scientific it must be true, you overlook the nuances.'
Van der Weiden: 'In this module, we don’t aim to present only extreme examples but to show the full spectrum. We don’t teach students to criticise everything, but rather to recognise when an article is particularly strong. One methodological approach isn’t necessarily better than another; there are many valid ways to approach research. Being aware of this helps you make more informed decisions and explain why you didn’t choose an alternative method. It’s crucial to remember that a single study never tells the entire story.'
Share your educatip?
Are you a lecturer at the Institute of Psychology and do you want to tell colleagues about how you teach? Or would you like to nominate an inspiring colleague for the next column? You can send a mail to news.psy@fsw.leidenuniv.nl putting ‘Educatip’ in the subject field.
Send message