essay interpretation meaning

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

18.2 What is Literary Interpretation?

Defining literary interpretation.

In many ways, writing a literary interpretation will feel like the other essays you compose in this course. You will use the same close reading skills, the same kinds of critical thinking, and the same investigative approaches to ideas that interest you. Literary interpretation employs multiple modes of critical thought and writing, including summary, description, and analysis. In writing your literary interpretation essay, you will need to do the following:

Summarize : What happens in this literary work?

Describe : What are the components and details of this literary work?

Analyze : What does this literary work mean?

However, literary interpretation requires a bit more than the basic components of summary, description, and analysis. Literary interpretation requires a process of inquiry and a methodology. To make sure you interpret rather than summarize, don’t just ask “what” questions, but also ask “how” and “why” questions.

Summary asks: What happens in this literary work?

Interpretation asks: Why does it that happen?

Description asks: What are the components and details of this literary work?

Interpretation asks: How has author crafted the components and details of this literary work? Why has the author made those particular choices: in plot, images, settings, narration, characterizations, word choice, and so on?

Analysis asks: What does this literary work mean?

Interpretation asks: What does this literary work mean when analyzed through the lens of a particular methodology? For instance: How might we understand the topics of media bias and safe water rights in Henrik Ibsen’s An Enemy of the People by applying a Cultural Historical, Marxist, Environmental Studies, or Presentist approach? How might a feminist theorist interpret the scenes between Desdemona and Othello compared to how a postcolonial theorist might interpret them?

Adding these sort of “why” and “how” questions—as well as adding another level of complexity to the standard “what” questions—will help you to come up with an interpretive argument rather than just a summary, description, personal response, opinion, or evaluation.

To sum up: In many ways, a literary interpretation paper will feel like the other writing assignments you complete in this course. You will use the same close reading skills, the same kinds of critical thinking, and the same investigative approaches to ideas that interest you. However, because literary interpretation focuses on an inventive work, a work of fiction, drama, poetry, or creative non-fiction, it will require special attention to how literary texts work in different ways—and set out to achieve different purposes—than the non-fiction essays addressed in other assignments. To make sure you interpret rather than summarize, don’t just ask “what happened?” but also ask “why did that happen?” or “why did that matter?”

Multiple Interpretations, Discovery, and the Importance of Your Perspective

Most works of literature are open to more than one interpretation. We have discussed the importance of reading through various interpretive lenses by applying established methodologies, but the most important perspective is yours. Ultimately, you will be the one to come up with your overall interpretive argument about the literature. Your goal from the beginning, then, is to read closely on your path to discovery. Discovery often involves looking at something from a different perspective.

To illustrate this point, consider this excerpt from the essay by scholar Walter Benjamin entitled “Unpacking My Library: A Talk about Book Collecting.” In this essay, Benjamin recounts how unpacking his books after having moved inspired him to look at his books differently. Once he looks at his books from a different perspective, Benjamin has a moment of discovery:

I am unpacking my library. Yes, I am. The books are not yet on the shelves, not yet touched by the mild boredom of order. I cannot march up and down their ranks to pass them in review before a friendly audience. You need not fear any of that. Instead, I must ask you to join me in the disorder of crates that have been wrenched open, the air saturated with the dust of wood, the floor covered with torn paper, to join me among piles of volumes that are seeing daylight again after two years of darkness, so that you may be ready to share with me a bit of the mood—it is certainly not an elegiac mood but, rather, one of anticipation which these books arouse in a genuine collector. For such a man is speaking to you, and on closer scrutiny he proves to be speaking only about himself. Would it not be presumptuous of me if, in order to appear convincingly objective and down-to-earth, I enumerated for you the main sections or prize pieces of a library, if I presented you with their history or even their usefulness to a writer? I, for one, have in mind something less obscure, something more palpable than that; what I am really concerned with is giving you some insight into the relationship of a book collector to his possessions, into collecting rather than a collection. If I do this by elaborating on the various ways of acquiring books, this is something entirely arbitrary. This or any other procedure is merely a dam against the spring tide of memories which surges toward any collector as he contemplates his possessions. Every passion borders on the chaotic, but the collector’s passion borders on the chaos of memories. More than that: the chance, the fate, that suffuse the past before my eyes are conspicuously present in the accustomed confusion of these books. For what else is this collection but a disorder to which habit has accommodated itself to such an extent that it can appear as order? You have all heard of people whom the loss of their books has turned into invalids, or of those who in order to acquire them became criminals. These are the very areas in which any order is a balancing act of extreme precariousness. “The only exact knowledge there is,” said Anatole France, “is the knowledge of the date of publication and the format of books.” And indeed, if there is a counterpart to the confusion of a library, it is the order of its catalogue. [1]

Note Benjamin’s theorizing about his library, even in the chaotic state that accompanies unpacking. Even to Benjamin, owner of the books, they seem different to him in these new circumstances. The same is true with interpretation. The act of interpretation asks us to pull apart a text, to think of it as disorderly parts without the connections of a narrative thread. Interpretation allows us a more arbitrary approach.

Take for instance, the main character of a novel, who may be introduced on one page, fall in love a few chapters later, and have a child closer to the end of the story. Character analysis allows you to pull these discrete elements into an essay without paying any attention to the intervening events. Just as Benjamin sees his collection as more than the sum of the individual books, so does the author of a character analysis see the protagonist as a complex, even flawed, character who represents some facet of human behavior.

If Benjamin had never written his essay, we wouldn’t think of his collection in precisely this way. Similarly, your interpretation will make a similar contribution to the existing bank of knowledge—providing insights available only from your unique perspective.

One important takeaway from this discussion is: you do not have to be an English major to write a great literary interpretation essay. In fact, when students approach the literary work through their varied majors, career goals, or personal interests, it often results in a fascinating, new perspective on the literature. For instance,

In English 161, a Culinary Arts major wrote about the food as symbolic of the character’s cultural identities in Josefina Lopez’s play Real Women Have Curves .
In English 162, an Engineering/Game Design major wrote about how Suzanne Collins incorporates video gaming techniques into the characterization and plot of The Hunger Games throughout the entire novel.
In English 161, a student who was studying to take the state license exam in Real Estate interpreted Lorainne Hansberry’s A Raisin in the Sun through the perspective of the historical changes in his chosen profession, outlawing realtors from committing discriminatory actions such as blockbusting, redlining, and steering.

As you think about the best approach to take when reading and interpreting literature, add another question to your list. You are asking not just “What happens in this literary work?”—and also not just “why does that matter?”—but also “why does this literary work matter to me?”

The Literary Interpretation Essay

A good literary interpretation essay includes:

A strong thesis statement that makes an interpretive argument,
Your main points (sometimes called topic sentences or claims) that lead each paragraph or section of the essay,
Your ample and thorough collection of relevant evidence from the literary work—including examples, passages, scenes, details, and quotations, and
Your detailed analyses of that textual evidence, showing how the evidence relates to the main points of the interpretation as well as the overall thesis statement.

In the following sections, we will discuss these four components in the order that you will probably present them in your essay, but of course that is not the order in which they occur in the overall process of composing the essay. It’s not as though anyone begins reading a play, or writing an essay about a novel, with an interpretive thesis statement already formed. Before you get to the stage in the process where you are ready to write your interpretive thesis statement, you will probably go through an initial reading of the literary work and a second, closer reading in which you have a topic or two in mind. Your instructor may have your class read the literary work through a specific interpretive lens from the very beginning, or you may be introduced to multiple methodologies and asked to choose which one you will apply. Remember that interpretation is a journey to discovery that involves seeing things from a different perspective. However, the path that you take along the journey—the order in which you take the steps needed to write a strong interpretation essay—will depend upon your instructor’s guidance and your own sense of the process that works best for you.

[1] Quoted from “The Long(ish) Read: Walter Benjamin Unpacking His Library.” Arch Daily. https://www.archdaily.com/771939/the-long-ish-read-walter-benjamin-unpacking-his-library . Benjamin’s appeared first in German, in Literarische Welt (1931); it was translated into English and republished in Benjamin’s Illuminations (1999).

Continue Reading: 18.3 The Literary Interpretation Essay

Composition for Commodores Copyright © 2023 by Mollie Chambers; Karin Hooks; Donna Hunt; Kim Karshner; Josh Kesterson; Geoff Polk; Amy Scott-Douglass; Justin Sevenker; Jewon Woo; and other LCCC Faculty is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

How to Write an Interpretive Essay: A Step-by-Step Guide & an Example

Apr 28, 2024 | 0 comments

Apr 28, 2024 | Blog | 0 comments

Interpretive essays are a common assignment in academic writing, requiring students to analyze and interpret a piece of literature, art, or cultural phenomenon. Writing an interpretive essay involves more than just summarizing the content; it requires a thoughtful analysis of the text and the development of a cohesive argument. This type of essay, also known as an analysis essay, showcases a student’s ability to critically think and articulate their thoughts clearly. In this step-by-step guide, we will explore the key components of writing an interpretive essay, from selecting a topic to crafting a thesis statement and supporting arguments. Whether you’re a novice writer looking to improve your essay writing skills or a seasoned academic writer seeking to enhance your analytical abilities, this guide will provide you with the tools necessary to excel in interpretive essay writing.

What is an Interpretive Essay?

When you hear the word “interpretive”, what comes to mind? For me, it’s fortune telling, language interpretation, and—of course—Professor Trelawney’s class in Harry Potter! Now, imagine you’re one of her students, and she’s asked you to interpret the tea leaves. You’d have to look at them differently and come up with your own unique perspective. That’s exactly what you do in an interpretive essay!

An interpretive essay is a type of essay where you analyse and interpret another piece of writing, such as a literary work, art, or even a historical event. It’s a chance to express your opinions and ideas about the original text and offer your own interpretation.

Why Write Interpretive Essays?

Now, you might be wondering why your instructors love assigning these essays. Well, interpretive essays are a great way for teachers to understand your thinking and see if you can apply key concepts and theories. They also reflect your research and organisational skills, and they’re a fantastic assessment tool because there are no “right” or “wrong” answers. It’s all about explaining your thoughts and backing them up with evidence.

Critical Thinking Writing Service

Unlock your potential with our Critical Thinking Writing Service - the ultimate solution for crafting compelling arguments and outsmarting the competition!

How to Write an Interpretive Analysis Essay?

Step 1: choose a literary work.

The first step in writing an interpretive essay is to select a literary work that interests you. This could be a poem, novel, or play that you’ve studied in class or one that you’re passionate about. For example, let’s say you’re interested in analyzing Edward Taylor’s poem “Huswifery.” This poem is a great choice because it’s rich in literary elements, such as metaphors, imagery, and symbolism. This step will help you write an interpretive essay that analyzes literature

Step 2: Read and Analyze the Literary Work

Once you’ve chosen your literary work, it’s time to read and analyze it. This is where you’ll identify the main literary elements, such as themes, motifs, and symbols. Ask yourself questions like:

What is the author trying to say?
What themes are present in the text?
How does the author use language to convey meaning?

Take notes and annotate the text as you read. This will help you identify patterns and connections that you can explore in your essay.

Step 3: Do Your Research

Before you start writing, it’s important to check other sources and see what other people have said about the text. This could include critics, professionals in the field, or even just your classmates’ opinions. This step is crucial because it helps you develop your own ideas and see things from different perspectives. You might even find contrasting ideas that you can discuss in your essay.

Step 4: Make a Plan

Now, it’s time to make a plan for your essay. Interpretive essays usually follow a standard structure with an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. In the introduction, you want to hook the reader and introduce the literary work. Be creative! You could start with a funny story, a relevant social issue, or even your own interpretation of a story. Just make sure to include a thesis statement that outlines your interpretive focus.

Step 5: Analyze the Literary Elements

To write a strong interpretive essay, you’ll need to carefully analyze the various literary elements present in the literary work. This may include things like:

Characterization: How are the characters developed and how do they contribute to the overall meaning of the work?
Themes: What are the central themes of the literary work, and how do they connect to your interpretation?
Symbolism: What symbols or metaphors are present in the literary work, and how do they support your interpretation?
Tone and Narrative Style: How does the author’s use of language, tone, and narrative style contribute to the overall meaning and interpretation of the literary work?

Step 6: Write the Body

The body paragraphs are where you really get to dig into your ideas. Each paragraph should focus on a single element you’re interpreting and include quotations and paraphrases from the text to support your arguments. Don’t forget to analyse and interpret these quotations; simply listing them won’t make for a strong essay. Compare and contrast different parts of the text and feel free to include outside sources to strengthen your points.

Step 7: Provide Examples and Evidence

To strengthen your interpretive essay, be sure to include specific examples and evidence from the literary work to support your analysis and interpretation. This could include direct quotes, references to specific scenes or passages, or descriptions of key moments or characters.

Remember, your interpretive essay should not simply restate the plot or summary of the literary work. Instead, you should use evidence from the text to support your own unique interpretation and analysis.

Step 6: Conclude and Reflect

In the conclusion, summarise your key points and interpretations. Reflect on the broader significance of your analysis and consider how it contributes to our understanding of society or literature. You can also include any final thoughts or recommendations for your readers to ponder.

Step 7: Revise and Edit

As with any essay, it’s important to take the time to revise and edit your interpretive essay before submitting it. This may involve refining your thesis statement, reorganizing your body paragraphs, or clarifying your analysis.

Additionally, be sure to proofread your essay for any grammatical or spelling errors. A well-polished and professionally presented interpretive essay will make a strong impression on your reader.

Essay Editing Services | Proofreading Service

Unlock the full potential of your writing with our Essay Editing Services | Proofreading Service – your key to polished, professional essays that stand out

Examples of interpretive essays on different subjects:

Art Interpretation: An interpretive essay on a piece of art, such as a painting or a sculpture, where you explore the artist’s techniques, themes, and messages.
Film Analysis: An essay interpreting a film, such as exploring the themes, characters, and symbolism in “The Matrix”.
Historical Event Interpretation: Interpreting a historical event, like the French Revolution, by analysing its causes, consequences, and impact on society.
Philosophical Text Analysis: An interpretive essay on a philosophical text, such as Plato’s “Republic”, where you explore his ideas, arguments, and their relevance today.
Social Issue Exploration: Interpreting a social issue, like gender equality or climate change, by examining its causes, effects, and potential solutions through a critical lens.
Music Interpretation: An essay analysing a piece of music, such as Beethoven’s “Moonlight Sonata”, where you explore its structure, themes, and emotional impact.
Political Speech Analysis: Interpreting a political speech, such as Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream”, by examining its rhetorical devices, arguments, and impact on society.
Scientific Theory Interpretation: An essay interpreting a scientific theory, such as Darwin’s theory of evolution, by exploring its evidence, implications, and impact on our understanding of the world.
Autobiographical Reflection: Interpreting an autobiography, like Nelson Mandela’s “Long Walk to Freedom”, by reflecting on the author’s experiences, lessons, and their impact on your own life.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Before you begin writing, it’s important to know some common pitfalls to avoid. Firstly, don’t write a summary. Interpretive essays are not about describing the text—they’re about digging deeper and making connections.

Secondly, avoid simply listing facts. Always explain how these facts support your interpretation. Finally, don’t make conjectures or speculate without evidence.

Tips for Success

Here are some extra tips to help you write a brilliant interpretive essay:

Suggest unexpected interpretations . Interpretive essays are all about offering new perspectives, so be bold and think outside the box!
Provide reasons for your interpretations. Support your ideas with evidence and examples from the text.
Create a roadmap for your readers. Start each paragraph with a clear topic sentence and use implicit questions to guide your readers through your essay.
Use a thesaurus to enhance your vocabulary and make your essay more engaging.
Read your work out loud to catch any imperfections and improve the flow.

Example of Interpretive Essay: Harrison Bergeron Interpretive Essay on Freedom

To give you a better idea of how to write an interpretive essay, here’s an example of an interpretive essay on Kurt Vonnegut’s “Harrison Bergeron”:

Get Help With Your Interpretive Paper

Looking for help with your interpretive paper? Look no further! Our writing services are the best in the industry when it comes to literary analysis and interpretive analysis essays. If you need a guide to writing a good interpretive essay or analytical essay , our expert writers are here to assist you through the writing process. Don’t stress about your upcoming essay assignment – our team specializes in critical analysis and can help you write a good interpretive essay or literary analysis essay. Place your order today by clicking the ORDER NOW button above to get our expert writing help! Your essay may just be a click away from being completed.

How do I write an interpretive essay?

An interpretive essay involves analyzing and interpreting a piece of literature or artwork, providing your perspective and insights on its meaning and significance. To write one, start by carefully reading and understanding the text or artwork, then develop a thesis statement that captures your interpretation. Support your thesis with evidence from the text or artwork, and analyze how these elements contribute to the overall meaning. Finally, conclude by summarizing your interpretation and its implications.

What does interpretive mean in writing?

Interpretive in writing refers to the process of analyzing and explaining the meaning of a particular text or piece of art. It involves delving beyond surface-level details to uncover deeper layers of meaning, themes, and significance. An interpretive approach challenges readers to look beyond what is explicitly stated and consider the broader context and implications of the work.

What is essay interpretation?

Essay interpretation involves critically analyzing and explaining the meaning of a written work or artwork. It requires the writer to interpret the text or artwork through a specific lens or perspective, drawing out underlying themes, symbols, and messages. Effective essay interpretation requires a deep understanding of the subject matter and the ability to articulate and defend one’s interpretation using evidence from the work.

How to write an interpretive text?

To write an interpretive text , start by selecting a piece of literature, artwork, or other media to analyze. Next, carefully read or view the material multiple times to gain a thorough understanding of its content and context. Develop a thesis statement that conveys your interpretation or analysis of the work. Use specific examples, quotes, and evidence from the text to support your analysis. Organize your ideas logically, and conclude by summarizing your interpretation and its significance.

Experienced writer and dedicated professor with a passion for crafting compelling narratives and nurturing the next generation of critical thinkers

Step-By-Step Guide on How To Write A Process Essay (W/ Essay Example)

Most Popular Articles

Racism thesis statement example, how to rephrase a thesis statement, capstone project topic suggestions, how to write an abortion essay, should students wear school uniforms essay, list causal essay topics write, respect essay, signal words, great synonyms, informative speech examples, essay writing guide, introduction paragraph for an essay, argumentative essay writing, essay outline templates, write an autobiographical essay, personal narrative essay ideas, descriptive essay writing, how to write a reflective-essay, how to write a lab report abstract, how to write a grant proposal, point of view in an essay, debate topics for youth at church, theatre research paper topics, privacy overview.

Literary English

Summary and Analysis of The Good Morrow

In this article, you will learn about introduction to the poet John Donne, introduction to the poem The Good Morrow, summary of the poem, and critical appreciation of The Good Morrow.

Text of the Poem | The Good Morrow by John Donne

I wonder, by my troth, what thou and I

Did, till we loved? Were we not weaned till then?

But sucked on country pleasures, childishly?

Or snorted we in the Seven Sleepers’ den?

’Twas so; but this, all pleasures fancies be.

If ever any beauty I did see,

Which I desired, and got, ’twas but a dream of thee.

And now good-morrow to our waking souls,

Which watch not one another out of fear;

For love, all love of other sights controls,

And makes one little room an everywhere.

Let sea-discoverers to new worlds have gone,

Let maps to other, worlds on worlds have shown,

Let us possess one world, each hath one, and is one.

My face in thine eye, thine in mine appears,

And true plain hearts do in the faces rest;

Where can we find two better hemispheres,

Without sharp north, without declining west?

Whatever dies, was not mixed equally;

If our two loves be one, or, thou and I

Love so alike, that none do slacken, none can die.

Introduction to the Poet John Donne

John Donne was an outstanding English poet, born in a Roman Catholic family and later in 1590s converted to Anglicanism. He is one of the famous metaphysical poets. Metaphysical poetry is a poetry that is not worldly or common but it goes beyond the physical world.it is a very intellectual form of poetry as it explores the spiritual world. The main theme of Donne’s metaphysical poetry is philosophical and the main subjects of Donne’s poetry is love, religion, God, beauty and faith.

Introduction to John Donne’s Poem The Good Morrow

The Good Morrow is one of Donne’s love songs. This song is purely an aubade, a song of morning love. Donne’s main part of poetry is on faith and religion but this song is secular in its nature. His many works contrast heavily with his later sacred works.

The song, “The Good Morrow” was probably written when Donne was a young man and recently married but published little after the poet’s death; in 1633. This song has three stanzas. All three stanzas have iambic pentameter with some variations. Each stanza has its own metaphors, images, and thoughts that gives a unity to the main theme of the poem. The main idea of the poem revolves around love. John done describe love in three phases in this song.

Rhyme Scheme and Meter of the Poem “The Good-Morrow”

The Good-Morrow poem consists of the stanzas. Each stanza has iambic pentameter with some variations. The poem has total 21 lines and out of 21, 13 lines have pure iambic pentameter with a regular daDUM daDUM beat.. Most of the poem has five regular beats and ten syllables in each line as in below lines:

· I won / der, by / my troth, / what thou / and I

· Did, till / we loved? / Were we / not weaned / till then?

The last line of the stanza has twelve syllables, so count as hexameters (six feet). Look at the line below:

· Which I / desired, / and got, / ’twas but / a dream / of thee.

Out of 21 lines, 8 lines ( line no 1,6, 8, 13, 16,17,19, and 20) have variations. The variations are in term of syllable counts. Some lines have an extra beat e.g. 11 syllables as the line below:

· Or snor / ted we / in the Sev / en Sleep / ers’ den?

Stanza Wise Summary of the Poem The Good Morrow

A reader can comprehend the main idea of the poem by reading out a summary of the poem “The Good Morrow”. The poem consists of three stanzas and each stanza is explained below. Each stanza has its own metaphors, images, and thoughts that gives a unity to the main theme of the poem. The main idea of the poem revolves around love. John done describe love in three phases in this song.

In the first phase, the speaker describes the life of a child before the stage of love. He describes this phase of life as a meaningless life, which they lived without any charm. During this period of life, people around them fed them up. They were unaware about purpose of life. The speaker sketches a period of childish life as a deep slumber that was dormant and boring. He like nothing now if he has any desire for beauty and dreams it is to get her love.

In the second stanza of the song, Donne poet explains about the second phase where he is living a life full of love with his wife. Donne welcomes this phase of life with welcome salutation; good-morrow. Title of the poem is also taken from the first line of a second stanza that is “And now good-morrow to our waking souls”.

The last stanza of the song focuses on how aligned the both lovers are. They are one being instead of two, and together they make up a whole world by true love. He poet further requests her beloved to stay with him in this little room because for him this little room is their world they should not be bothered about the new discoveries of the world outside this room. The poets says that her beloved is very beautiful, and he is looking continuously in her beloved’s eyes and in return; she is also looking into his eyes; thus, they are looking their own faces in each other’s eyes. The poet is very satisfied with the moments he is enjoying and he has no fear of death because they have a true love for one another and even death cannot would fail to kill them.

How to Write an Interpretive Essay and Literary Analysis

Trent Lorcher
Categories : High school english lesson plans grades 9 12
Tags : High school lesson plans & tips

How to NOT Write an Interpretive Essay

Remember when you assigned a literary analysis or an interpretive essay and all you got was 237 summaries of a short story you’d already read 15 times, so you slammed your hand in the filing cabinet drawer until you drew blood and broke every finger? The better option, of course, would have been to teach students how to write an interpretive essay or to teach students how to write a literary analysis.

Use the following guidelines for teaching how to write an interpretive essay or how to write a literary analysis:

The introduction must introduce the literary work, capture the reader’s attention, and include a clearly written thesis statement that contains the literary interpretation.
The body of the essay must support the thesis statement through evidence–facts, examples, summaries–and commentary–opinions, analysis, interpretation, insight.
The conclusion summarizes the interpretation and allows the writer to draw attention to the most important aspects of the analysis.

An ‘A’ essay does the following:

Identifies the author, title, and gives a brief summary of the literary work.
Provides a clear interpretation of the author’s message and purpose.
Provides details, quotations, and other evidence to support the interpretation.

Drafting and Revising

When teaching how to write a literary analysis or interpretive essay, emphasize the following:

Reread the literary work several times. This seems logical to teachers. It’s not logical for students. Read through the first time to get a feel for the work. Reread and look for passages and ideas that stand out or have special meaning.
Before drafting, brainstorm possible interpretations. A good strategy is to write annotations as you read.
Discuss the interpretation with others who have read the work. As a teacher, it’s important to have class discussions on works being analyzed.
What is the main point of the essay? This main point should be clearly identified in the thesis statement .
What evidence best supports the interpretation?
Are there any points that should be added to clarify the interpretation?
Is there any superfluous evidence that could be deleted?

Common Pitfalls of Literary Analysis

Following are the most common errors with literary analysis:

Writing a Summary: No matter how many times you emphasize that you do not want a summary, you’ll still get them. The only way to eliminate this error is to model analysis and give really low grades to students who summarize rather than analyze.
Listing Facts: A close relative of the summary is listing facts. It’s also called the, “I’ll list as many facts as I can about this literary work and hope the teacher doesn’t grade it very closely” syndrome. Explain that listing facts without explaining how the fact supports the thesis statement or why that fact is important is useless.
Having No Evidence: At the other end of the bad analysis spectrum is the no evidence analysis. It consists of nothing but conjecture.

Mini Lesson

Teach how to write a literary analysis or how to write an interpretive essay and avoid the common pitfalls before you assign the essay. Try this exercise:

Write down a specific quotation or example from a literary work.
Underneath the quote write the phrase this shows________ .
Complete the sentence two times for each quotation.
Discuss answers and point out the difference between analysis and summary.
Once students have the basic idea down, assign the essay.
Another option is to have them answer discussion questions in the following format: 1 detail from the story, with 2 pieces of analysis.

Find an entire semester of lesson plans and handouts coordinated with language arts standards with this English syllabus .

This post is part of the series: Different Types of Essays

Implement these strategies for different types of essays.

Lesson Plan: How to Write a Reflective Essay
Interpretive Essay Lesson Plan: How to Write a Literary Analysis
Writing a Career Research Paper
Lesson Plan: How to Write a Problem/Solution Essay
American History Project Ideas: Capturing Oral History

Ai, ethics & human agency, collaboration, information literacy, writing process, interpretation, interpretative frameworks.

What is Interpretation?

Interpretation is

the act of literacy, the human process of making inferences, of ascribing meaning to signs and symbols, the act of signification .

People make interpretations of texts and events in order to make sense of world.

Interpretation is a deeply subjective process. Different people can see the exact same event and infer contrasting interpretations. Critics often disagree about the relative merits of movies, songs, and other texts .

For readers, listeners, users , interpretation is challenging. At any given moment, people experience a tsunami of information coming at them at warp speed.

Personal experience shapes interpretation. Our world view is shaped by our contexts—our families, schools, communities, and workplaces. The rhetorical stances we can imagine adopting in response to exigencies, calls for discourse, are shaped by our interpretations about what exists and what is possible.

Key Concepts: Rhetorical Stance ; Semiotics ;

People are rhetorically situated. Their interpretations are shaped by their discourse communities, their communities of practice. For instance, The Association of College and Research Libraries has identified six interpretative frameworks that underlie critical literacy practices:

Authority is Constructed & Contextual
Information Creation as a Process
Information Has Value
Research as Inquiry
Scholarship as a Conversation
Searching as Strategic Exploration

Much of the library-orientated training students receive in the U.S. concern these six frameworks.

Interpretive Frameworks

Consider how critics use theory to interprets works of art and literature:

Critical Disability Studies
Feminist Criticism
LGBTQ + Criticism
Marxist Criticism
New Historicist Criticism
Post-Colonial Criticism
Post-Structuralist, Deconstructive Criticism
Psychological Criticism
Reader-Response Criticism
Russian Formalism and New Criticism
Structuralist Criticism

Critical Race Theory - Beyond Myths: What the Debate Misses

Textual Analysis - How to Engage in Textual Analysis

Suggested edits.

Please select the purpose of your message. * - Corrections, Typos, or Edits Technical Support/Problems using the site Advertising with Writing Commons Copyright Issues I am contacting you about something else
Your full name
Your email address *
Page URL needing edits *
Name This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Kendra N. Bryant

Critical Race Theory (CRT) explores how the social constructs of race and ethnicity impinge on composing, interpretation, power relations, and communication. CRT traces its roots to Sojourner Truth’s 1851 “Ain’t...

Jennifer Janechek

Featured Articles

Student engrossed in reading on her laptop, surrounded by a stack of books

Academic Writing – How to Write for the Academic Community

Professional Writing – How to Write for the Professional World

Credibility & Authority – How to Be Credible & Authoritative in Speech & Writing

How to Write an Interpretive Essay?

An essay is one of the most common types of tasks assigned to students in high school and college. If you are wondering why instructors give you this writing project once you’ve just finished with a previous one, keep reading the article!

Why interpretive essays are assigned so often? First of all, such tasks reflect your thinking, so teachers can see whether you understand key concepts and theories in their discipline. In fact, it’s impossible to fake your knowledge with random information because experienced instructors can easily notice it. Secondly, essays are considered better assessment tools than tests.

Why so? Probably, because it’s impossible to guess answers or find clues. Also, essays demonstrate a wide set of skills you’ve gained in class. Alongside your understanding of a certain discipline, an essay paper indicates how you can make research, organize your thoughts, and provide arguments.

What is an interpretive essay?

An interpretive essay is a type of writing often required in subjects like English, history, literature, philosophy, and religion. In this essay, you are expected to critically think about a topic and then present your ideas to readers in a way that can be either objective or subjective, depending on the assignment’s requirements.

If you are looking for the most comprehensive interpretive essay definition, here it is: an interpretive essay is a piece of writing that identifies, evaluates, and analyzes the methods used by the author in a particular work. The interpretation answers the questions like ‘What were the main characters and events?’, ‘What tone was used by the author?’, ‘Where was the setting?’, and so on.

An interpretive essay is a piece of writing that identifies, evaluates, and analyzes the methods used by the author in a particular work.

The key focus of an interpretive essay is on your personal feelings, analysis, and presentation of a subject. It involves making a case for your ideas, aiming to be informative and persuasive, while also keeping the writing interesting. This form of writing is distinctly personal, reflecting your views, arguments, and subjective opinions.

This type of assignment allows you to provide any opinion about a piece of writing as long as you can support it. In fact, there is no “right or wrong” answer because it’s all about explaining your thoughts about the piece. An interpretive essay requires profound knowledge and genuine interest in the writing piece you’ve chosen. You also need to make thorough research of the subject to provide a defendable interpretation and build it logically.

The effectiveness of an interpretive essay depends on how well you can persuade and critically engage with the subject, which is influenced by the specific guidelines of the assignment. Understanding the purpose of your writing and who your audience is plays a crucial role in crafting an effective interpretive essay. Additionally, it’s important to be aware of your instructor’s expectations and be familiar with different writing formats. If you’re ever uncertain, it’s advisable to ask questions and use available resources like a reading writing center.

How to write an interpretive essay?

Before you start writing an interpretive essay, read the poem, story, or novel chapter you were assigned a few times. While reading, highlight various literary elements like symbols, character descriptions, activities, settings, etc. Then write down those of them that you are going to interpret. Once you have a full list of literary elements to analyze, you can move to the introduction. Let’s consider in detail how to write it.

1️⃣ Introduction

Start your introduction with a short summary of the piece. Write it in 3-4 sentences, so the reader can get familiar with the content. You shouldn’t give your opinion about it, just summarize the work. Don’t forget to mention the full title of the writing piece, the author’s name and the literary elements you will interpret in body paragraphs. Then come up with your thesis statement in one sentence.

The essay body is the part where you have to do your analysis by stating what you think the text is about. Note that your opinion must be supported with relevant examples, so add quotations and paraphrases to your arguments. If you provide some ideas about patterns, symbols and themes, make sure you can back up each of them.

Analyzing literary elements requires you to explain their meaning, compare them and contrast them with each other. Your teacher will also appreciate it if you apply a literary theory to each element. Basically, logical analysis with the right structure will definitely bring you the highest grade.

It’s really important to organize your paragraphs in order of the elements you are going to interpret. Start each of them with a statement to create the roadmap for your readers.

Generally, every paragraph must include a particular idea answering the questions like:

“What do you think about…?”
“Do you agree with…?”
“Is it true that…?”

as well as supporting arguments and a clear takeaway message.

It would be great to pose implicit questions that engage the reader in reflection. They may sound like “Although the author doesn’t mention it, there is the reason to believe…”, “The idea is very ambiguous, and there’s room for dispute…”, etc.

3️⃣ Conclusion

In conclusion, you have to unify the main literary elements you have interpreted in your essay. In general, this part of your paper summarizes the main points of your analysis. Basically, it must explain how the interpreted piece of writing fits into the big picture of life or literature as well as how it added to your personal growth. You can also make it clear how your analysis could contribute to understanding the society or literature of people who read it.

Some helpful life hacks to help you write an interpretive essay

📌 create a mind map.

One of the most powerful tools to organize your thoughts before writing itself is visualization. You can draw an essay map on paper or use a smartphone app for this purpose. When you see the whole picture of your ideas and the connections between them, it will be much easier to start writing your essay.

📌 Make a list of questions

This action has a similar goal to the previous one, which is basically to guide you while writing. To make your paper properly structured, create a list of questions that must be necessarily answered in your essay. Then rearrange them in the best way possible and start answering one question in each paragraph.

📌 Use a thesaurus

If you check the best interpretive essay examples, you will notice that they have a rich vocabulary. To enhance the wording, use a thesaurus. It will help you to get rid of tautologies across the text, replace some words with more appropriate equivalents, and choose synonyms.

📌 Read your work out loud

To spot imperfections and improve your essay, you should reread it after finishing your work. It would be better to read the text out loud, so you can better understand what thoughts may seem unclear or vague.

Final thoughts

In short, an excellent paper provides a brief summary of the literary work in its introduction, gives a clear interpretation of the author’s message as well as includes details, quotes, and other evidence supporting your interpretation.

Interpretive writing can take various forms, including summaries, analyses, critiques, research papers, and essays. Each of these forms requires a unique approach but shares the common goal of presenting a thoughtful, well-reasoned interpretation of the subject matter.

So if you want to get the highest grade for your essay, make sure to add all the mentioned above to it. Although a solid interpretive essay requires much effort and time, it’s much easier to complete if you follow the tips given above.

3. Historical Analysis and Interpretation

One of the most common problems in helping students to become thoughtful readers of historical narrative is the compulsion students feel to find the one right answer, the one essential fact, the one authoritative interpretation. “Am I on the right track?” “Is this what you want?” they ask. Or, worse yet, they rush to closure, reporting back as self-evident truths the facts or conclusions presented in the document or text.

These problems are deeply rooted in the conventional ways in which textbooks have presented history: a succession of facts marching straight to a settled outcome. To overcome these problems requires the use of more than a single source: of history books other than textbooks and of a rich variety of historical documents and artifacts that present alternative voices, accounts, and interpretations or perspectives on the past.

Students need to realize that historians may differ on the facts they incorporate in the development of their narratives and disagree as well on how those facts are to be interpreted. Thus, “history” is usually taken to mean what happened in the past; but written history is a dialogue among historians, not only about what happened but about why and how events unfolded. The study of history is not only remembering answers. It requires following and evaluating arguments and arriving at usable, even if tentative, conclusions based on the available evidence.

To engage in historical analysis and interpretation students must draw upon their skills of historical comprehension . In fact, there is no sharp line separating the two categories. Certain of the skills involved in comprehension overlap the skills involved in analysis and are essential to it. For example, identifying the author or source of a historical document or narrative and assessing its credibility (comprehension) is prerequisite to comparing competing historical narratives (analysis). Analysis builds upon the skills of comprehension; it obliges the student to assess the evidence on which the historian has drawn and determine the soundness of interpretations created from that evidence. It goes without saying that in acquiring these analytical skills students must develop the ability to differentiate between expressions of opinion, no matter how passionately delivered, and informed hypotheses grounded in historical evidence.

Well-written historical narrative has the power to promote students’ analysis of historical causality–of how change occurs in society, of how human intentions matter, and how ends are influenced by the means of carrying them out, in what has been called the tangle of process and outcomes. Few challenges can be more fascinating to students than unraveling the often dramatic complications of cause. And nothing is more dangerous than a simple, monocausal explanation of past experiences and present problems.

Finally, well-written historical narratives can also alert students to the traps of lineality and inevitability . Students must understand the relevance of the past to their own times, but they need also to avoid the trap of lineality, of drawing straight lines between past and present, as though earlier movements were being propelled teleologically toward some rendezvous with destiny in the late 20th century.

A related trap is that of thinking that events have unfolded inevitably–that the way things are is the way they had to be, and thus that individuals lack free will and the capacity for making choices. Unless students can conceive that history could have turned out differently, they may unconsciously accept the notion that the future is also inevitable or predetermined, and that human agency and individual action count for nothing. No attitude is more likely to feed civic apathy, cynicism, and resignation–precisely what we hope the study of history will fend off. Whether in dealing with the main narrative or with a topic in depth, we must always try, in one historian’s words, to “restore to the past the options it once had.”

HISTORICAL THINKING STANDARD 3

The student engages in historical analysis and interpretation:

Therefore, the student is able to:

Compare and contrast differing sets of ideas , values, personalities, behaviors, and institutions by identifying likenesses and differences.
Consider multiple perspectives of various peoples in the past by demonstrating their differing motives, beliefs, interests, hopes, and fears.
Analyze cause-and-effect relationships bearing in mind multiple causation including (a) the importance of the individual in history; (b) the influence of ideas , human interests, and beliefs; and (c) the role of chance, the accidental and the irrational.
Draw comparisons across eras and regions in order to define enduring issues as well as large-scale or long-term developments that transcend regional and temporal boundaries.
Distinguish between unsupported expressions of opinion and informed hypotheses grounded in historical evidence.
Compare competing historical narratives.
Challenge arguments of historical inevitability by formulating examples of historical contingency, of how different choices could have led to different consequences.
Hold interpretations of history as tentative , subject to changes as new information is uncovered, new voices heard, and new interpretations broached.
Evaluate major debates among historians concerning alternative interpretations of the past.
Hypothesize the influence of the past , including both the limitations and opportunities made possible by past decisions.

Interesting links

1. Chronological Thinking
2. Historical Comprehension
4. Historical Research Capabilities
5. Historical Issues-Analysis and Decision-Making
BLM Situation
Covid 19: Making History
Current Projects
Developing Standards in Grades K-4
Food Connects Us
Historical Reflections on the George Floyd Protests. By Ian Price
History Standards
How to create a successful application
How to enroll in History 195
Internship Application
Internship Sites
LA Neighborhood Project
Living through the Great Plague of London
Moving Forward
Poverty in the British Popular Imagination
Significance of History for the Educated Citizen
There’s a Reason Why COVID-19 Is Killing Black and Brown Americans: It’s Called Racism
United States Era 1
Use It Don’t Waste It: Vital Lessons of the Covid-19 Pandemic & Navigating Our “New Normal”
World History Era 1
World History Era 2
World History Era 3
World History Era 4
World History Era 5
World History Era 6
World History Era 7
World History Era 8
World History Era 9
World History Resources
About this project
Definition of Standards
Historical Thinking Standards
HistoryCorps Internships
United States Era 2
Criteria for the Development of Standards
National Center for History in the Schools
Public History Courses at UCLA
Structural Racism and Public Health
United States History Content Standards
A Global Pandemic
Developing Standards
Topical Organization
United States Era 3
World History Content Standards
4. Historical Research Capabilities
Climate Change
Content Standards for K-4
Historical Understanding
Meet Our Interns
Standards FAQ
United States Era 4
5. Historical Issues
Covid and the Performing Arts
Historical Thinking
Policy Issues
Standards for Grades K-4
United States Era 5
Covid and the 2020 Presidential Elections
Integrating Thinking and Understandings
Putting Historical Thinking Skills to Work
United States Era 6
United States Era 7
United States Era 8
United States Era 9
Alignment to Common Core Standards
United States Era 10
World History Across the Eras
October 2016
February 2016

How To Write An Interpretive Analysis Essay

Views 94196
Author Sandra W.

How To Write An Interpretation Essay

An interpretive essay is an essay that provides an analysis of another piece of writing. An assignment to interpret a work of literature can seem overwhelming. Figuring out where to start, what literary elements to analyze and what to interpret does not have to be an impossible task. Here at iwriteessays.com we make the task of writing an interpretive essay simple.

What is An Interpretive Analysis Essay

Just like the name suggests, interpretive analysis essays asks students to interpret or critically analyze a subject (such as a work of art or, a person, or event) into its constituent parts, and offer a meaning--or alternative meanings of each of the components. An interpretive or critical analysis is a common type of research papers inthe arts, literature, and the other humanities. Most students will be asked to write an interpretive analysis essay in their introductory literature courses as well as in their intermediate and advanced classes. The most common way for this type of essay to start is by giving an interpretive question, such as "What is the relationship of Romeo to his father,"

How To Write An Interpretation Essay: Writer's Goal or Assignment Requirement

As stated above, the main goal of a literary analysis essay is to take a piece of work and look at the interesting segments in that literary work. The best way to begin is to first choose a scene, character, activity, line, or some other segment of a literary work, then break this segment into small parts, and analyze each of them individually.

The best way to analyze these segments of the literary work is to use the elements of literature to help explain the meanings, compare and contrast each part with other parts of the work or apply a literary theory to each part.

Your analysis should be logical. In addition, you should check the structure to come up with a balanced essay, which contains a brief introduction, a number of well-organized body paragraphs that focus on one idea, and a brief conclusion. Upon the instructor request, you can also include a brief first body section after the introduction to summarize the main elements of the work to introduce the work.

What To Include In The Interpretive Analysis Essay

The Interpretive Analysis Essay should have an introduction, body, and a conclusion. The writer must consistently quote and paraphrase the literary work in the introduction, body, and conclusion to help them in their analysis and in determining the possible meanings. These quotations and paraphrases help the writer to support their arguments by showing clearly, what the author of the work has written and prevising their own interpretations to the quoted text.

Apart from this, the writer must include quotations, paraphrases, and references from other literary works and professional critics. The additional quotations will help the writer develop a well-supported claim to the meanings of the work that they are analyzing. Finally, the writer must then add in text citations and a full bibliography on either APA, MLA or the style that the lecturer specifies.

Additional Tips On Writing An Interpretive Essay:

Ensure you come up with a new, interesting, or unique way of interpreting the literacy work.
You may decide go for the larger meanings of the whole work or some specific meaning of part of the work such as traits, symbol or setting aspects.
Give numerous kinds of reasons why you feel that your interpretation is true. In addition, assume that the audience had already read the literacy work.
Each reason should have its body division and in each body ensure that you provide a reason with a quote or paraphrase from the work.
The final draft of the work must contain the introduction section and the conclusion that provides the summary of the whole paper.

30 Interpretation Strategies: Appropriate Concepts

Allen Trent, College of Education, University of Wyoming

Jeasik Cho, Department of Educational Studies, University of Wyoming

Published: 04 August 2014
Cite Icon Cite
Permissions Icon Permissions

This essay addresses a wide range of concepts related to interpretation in qualitative research, examines the meaning and importance of interpretation in qualitative inquiry, and explores the ways methodology, data, and the self/researcher as instrument interact and impact interpretive processes. Additionally, the essay presents a series of strategies for qualitative researchers engaged in the process of interpretation. The article closes by presenting a framework for qualitative researchers designed to inform their interpretations. The framework includes attention to the key qualitative research concepts transparency, reflexivity, analysis, validity, evidence, and literature. Four questions frame the article: What is interpretation, and why are interpretive strategies important in qualitative research? How do methodology, data, and the researcher/self impact interpretation in qualitative research? How do qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation? And, in what ways can a framework for interpretation strategies support qualitative researchers across multiple methodologies and paradigms?

“All human knowledge takes the form of interpretation.” In this seemingly simple statement, the late German philosopher Walter Benjamin asserts that all knowledge is mediated and constructed. He makes no distinction between physical and social sciences, and so situates himself as an interpretivist, one who believes that human subjectivity, individuals’ characteristics, feelings, opinions, and experiential backgrounds impact observations, analysis of these observations, and resultant knowledge/truth constructions. Contrast this perspective with positivist claims that knowledge is based exclusively on external facts, objectively observed and recorded. Interpretivists then, acknowledge that, if positivistic notions of knowledge and truth are inadequate to explain social phenomena, then positivist, hard science approaches to research (i.e., the scientific method and its variants) are also inadequate. So, although the literature often contrasts quantitative and qualitative research as largely a difference in kinds of data employed (numerical vs. linguistic), instead, the primary differentiation is in the foundational, paradigmatic assumptions about truth, knowledge, and objectivity.

This chapter is about interpretation and the strategies that qualitative researchers use to interpret a wide variety of “texts.” Knowledge, we assert, is constructed, both individually (constructivism) and socially (constructionism). We accept this as our starting point. Our aim here is to share our perspective on a broad set of concepts associated with the interpretive or meaning-making process. Although it may happen at different times and in different ways, interpretation is a part of almost all qualitative research.

Qualitative research is an umbrella term that encompasses a wide array of paradigmatic views, goals, and methods. Still, there are key unifying elements that include a generally constructionist epistemological standpoint, attention to primarily linguistic data, and generally accepted protocols or syntax for conducting research. Typically, qualitative researchers begin with a starting point—a curiosity, a problem in need of solutions, a research question, or a desire to better understand a situation from the perspectives of the individuals who inhabit that context (what qualitative researchers call the “emic,” or insider’s, perspective).

From this starting point, researchers determine the appropriate kinds of data to collect, engage in fieldwork as participant-observers to gather these data, organize the data, look for patterns, and then attempt to make sense out of the data by synthesizing research “findings,” “assertions,” or “theories” in ways that can be shared so that others may also gain insights from the conducted inquiry.

Although there are commonalities that cut across most forms of qualitative research, this is not to say that there is an accepted, linear, standardized approach. To be sure, there are an infinite number of variations and nuances in the qualitative research process. For example, some forms of inquiry begin with a firm research question, others without even a clear focus for study. Grounded theorists begin data analysis and interpretation very early in the research process, whereas some case study researchers, for example, may collect data in the field for a period of time before seriously considering the data and its implications. Some ethnographers may be a part of the context (e.g., observing in classrooms), but they may assume more observer-like roles, as opposed to actively participating in the context. Alternatively, action researchers, in studying issues about their own practice, are necessarily situated toward the “participant” end of the participant–observer continuum.

Our focus here is on one integrated part of the qualitative research process, interpretation, the process of collective and individual “meaning making.” As we discuss throughout this chapter, researchers take a variety of approaches to interpretation in qualitative work. Four general questions guide our explorations:

What is interpretation, and why are interpretive strategies important in qualitative research?

How do methodology, data, and the researcher/self impact interpretation in qualitative research?

How do qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation?

In what ways can a framework for interpretation strategies support qualitative researchers across multiple methodological and paradigmatic views?

We address each of these guiding questions in our attempt to explicate our interpretation of “interpretation,” and, as educational researchers, we include examples from our own work to illustrate some key concepts.

What Is Interpretation, and Why Are Interpretive Strategies Important in Qualitative Research?

Qualitative researchers and those writing about qualitative methods often intertwine the terms analysis and interpretation . For example, Hubbard and Power (2003) describe data analysis as, “bringing order, structure, and meaning to the data” (p. 88). To us, this description combines analysis with interpretation. Although there is nothing wrong with this construction, our understanding aligns more closely with Mills’s (2007) claim that, “put simply, analysis involves summarizing what’s in the data, whereas interpretation involves making sense of—finding meaning in—that data” (p. 122). For the purpose of this chapter, we’ll adhere to Mills’s distinction, understanding analysis as summarizing and organizing, and interpretation as meaning making. Unavoidably, these closely related processes overlap and interact, but our focus will be primarily on the more complex of these endeavors, interpretation. Interpretation, in this sense, is in part translation, but translation is not an objective act. Instead, translation necessarily involves selectivity and the ascribing of meaning. Qualitative researchers “aim beneath manifest behavior to the meaning events have for those who experience them” ( Eisner, 1991 , p. 35). The presentation of these insider/emic perspectives is a hallmark of qualitative research.

Qualitative researchers have long borrowed from extant models for fieldwork and interpretation. Approaches from anthropology and the arts have become especially prominent. For example, Eisner’s form of qualitative inquiry, “educational criticism” (1991), draws heavily on accepted models of art criticism. Barrett (2000) , an authority on art criticism, describes interpretation as a complex set of processes based on a set of principles. We believe many of these principles apply as readily to qualitative research as they do to critique. The following principles, adapted from Barrett’s principles of interpretation (2000, pp. 113–120), inform our examination:

Qualitative phenomena have “aboutness ”: All social phenomena have meaning, but meanings in this context can be multiple, even contradictory.

Interpretations are persuasive arguments : All interpretations are arguments, and qualitative researchers, like critics, strive to build strong arguments grounded in the information, or data, available.

Some interpretations are better than others : Barrett notes that, “some interpretations are better argued, better grounded with evidence, and therefore more reasonable, more certain, and more acceptable than others” (p. 115). This contradicts the argument that “all interpretations are equal,” heard in the common refrain, “well, that’s just your interpretation.”

There can be different, competing, and contradictory interpretations of the same phenomena : As noted at the beginning of this chapter, we acknowledge that subjectivity matters, and, unavoidably, it impacts one’s interpretations. As Barrett notes (2000) , “Interpretations are often based on a worldview” (p. 116).

Interpretations are not (and can’t be) “right,” but instead, they can be more or less reasonable, convincing, and informative : There is never one “true” interpretation, but some interpretations are more compelling than others.

Interpretations can be judged by coherence, correspondence, and inclusiveness : Does the argument/interpretation make sense (coherence)? Does the interpretation fit the data (correspondence)? Have all data been attended to, including outlier data that don’t necessarily support identified themes (inclusiveness)?

Interpretation is ultimately a communal endeavor : Initial interpretations may be incomplete, nearsighted, and/or narrow, but eventually, these interpretations become richer, broader, and more inclusive. Feminist revisionist history projects are an exemplary case. Over time, the writing, art, and cultural contributions of countless women, previously ignored, diminished, or distorted, have come to be accepted as prominent contributions given serious consideration.

So, meaning is conferred; interpretations are socially constructed arguments; multiple interpretations are to be expected; and some interpretations are better than others. As we discuss later in this chapter, what makes an interpretation “better” often hinges on the purpose/goals of the research in question. Interpretations designed to generate theory, or generalizable rules, will be “better” for responding to research questions aligned with the aims of more traditional quantitative/positivist research, whereas interpretations designed to construct meanings through social interaction, to generate multiple perspectives, and to represent the context-specific perspectives of the research participants are “better” for researchers constructing thick, contextually rich descriptions, stories, or narratives. The former relies on more “atomistic” interpretive strategies, whereas the latter adheres to a more “holistic” approach ( Willis, 2007 ). Both approaches to analysis/interpretation are addressed in more detail later in this chapter.

At this point, readers might ask, why does interpretation matter, anyway? Our response to this question involves the distinctive nature of interpretation and the ability of the interpretive process to put unique fingerprints on an otherwise relatively static set of data. Once interview data are collected and transcribed (and we realize that even the process of transcription is, in part, interpretive), documents are collected, and observations are recorded, qualitative researchers could just, in good faith and with fidelity, represent the data in as straightforward ways as possible, allowing readers to “see for themselves” by sharing as much actual data (e.g., the transcribed words of the research participants) as possible. This approach, however, includes analysis, what we have defined as summarizing and organizing data for presentation, but it falls short of what we actually reference and define as interpretation—attempting to explain the meaning of others’ words and actions. “While early efforts at qualitative research might have stopped at description, it is now more generally accepted that a qualitative researcher adds understanding and interpretation to the description” ( Lichtman, 2006 , p. 8).

As we are fond of the arts and arts-based approaches to qualitative research, an example from the late jazz drummer, Buddy Rich, seems fitting. Rich explains the importance of having the flexibility to interpret: “I don’t think any arranger should ever write a drum part for a drummer, because if a drummer can’t create his own interpretation of the chart, and he plays everything that’s written, he becomes mechanical; he has no freedom.” The same is true for qualitative researchers; without the freedom to interpret, the researcher merely regurgitates, attempting to share with readers/reviewers exactly what the research subjects shared with him or her. It is only through interpretation that the researcher, as collaborator with unavoidable subjectivities, is able to construct unique, contextualized meaning. Interpretation then, in this sense, is knowledge construction.

In closing this section, we’ll illustrate the analysis versus interpretation distinction with the following transcript excerpt. In this study, the authors ( Trent & Zorko, 2006 ) were studying student teaching from the perspective of K–12 students. This quote comes from a high school student in a focus group interview. She is describing a student teacher she had:

The right-hand column contains “codes” or labels applied to parts of the transcript text. Coding will be discussed in more depth later in this chapter, but, for now, note that the codes are mostly summarizing the main ideas of the text, sometimes using the exact words of the research participant. This type of coding is a part of what we’ve called analysis—organizing and summarizing the data. It’s a way of beginning to say, “what is” there. As noted, though, most qualitative researchers go deeper. They want to know more than “what is”; they also ask, “what does it mean?” This is a question of interpretation.

Specific to the transcript excerpt, researchers might next begin to cluster the early codes into like groups. For example, the teacher “felt targeted,” “assumed kids were going to behave inappropriately,” and appeared to be “overwhelmed.” A researcher might cluster this group of codes in a category called “teacher feelings and perceptions” and may then cluster the codes “could not control class,” and “students off task” into a category called “classroom management.” The researcher then, in taking a fresh look at these categories and the included codes, may begin to conclude that what’s going on in this situation is that the student teacher does not have sufficient training in classroom management models and strategies and may also be lacking the skills she needs to build relationships with her students. These then would be interpretations, persuasive arguments connected to the study’s data. In this specific example, the researchers might proceed to write a memo about these emerging interpretations. In this memo, they might more clearly define their early categories and may also look through other data to see if there are other codes or categories that align with or overlap with this initial analysis. They might write further about their emergent interpretations and, in doing so, may inform future data collection in ways that will allow them to either support or refute their early interpretations. These researchers will also likely find that the processes of analysis and interpretation are inextricably intertwined. Good interpretations very often depend on thorough and thoughtful analyses.

How Do Methodology, Data, and the Researcher/Self Impact Interpretation in Qualitative Research?

Methodological conventions guide interpretation and the use of interpretive strategies. For example, in grounded theory and in similar methodological traditions, “formal analysis begins early in the study and is nearly completed by the end of data collection” ( Bogdan & Biklen, 2003 , p. 66). Alternatively, for researchers from other traditions, for example, case study researchers, “Formal analysis and theory development [interpretation] do not occur until after the data collection is near complete” (p. 66).

Researchers subscribing to methodologies that prescribe early data analysis and interpretation may employ methods like analytic induction or the constant comparison method. In using analytic induction, researchers develop a rough definition of the phenomena under study; collect data to compare to this rough definition; modify the definition as needed, based on cases that both fit and don’t fit the definition; and finally, establish a clear, universal definition (theory) of the phenomena (Robinson, 1951, cited in Bogdan & Biklen, 2003 , p. 65). Generally, those using a constant comparison approach begin data collection immediately; identify key issues, events, and activities related to the study that then become categories of focus; collect data that provide incidents of these categories; write about and describe the categories, accounting for specific incidents and seeking others; discover basic processes and relationships; and, finally, code and write about the categories as theory, “grounded” in the data ( Glaser, 1965 ). Although processes like analytic induction and constant comparison can be listed as “steps” to follow, in actuality, these are more typically recursive processes in which the researcher repeatedly goes back and forth between the data and emerging analyses and interpretations.

In addition to methodological conventions that prescribe data analysis early (e.g., grounded theory) or later (e.g., case study) in the inquiry process, methodological approaches also impact the general approach to analysis and interpretation. Ellingson (2011) situates qualitative research methodologies on a continuum spanning “science”-like approaches on one end juxtaposed with “art”-like approaches on the other.

Researchers pursuing a more science-oriented approach seek valid, reliable, generalizable knowledge; believe in neutral, objective researchers; and ultimately claim single, authoritative interpretations. Researchers adhering to these science-focused, post-positivistic approaches may count frequencies, emphasize the validity of the employed coding system, and point to intercoder reliability and random sampling as criteria that bolsters the research credibility. Researchers at or near the science end of the continuum might employ analysis and interpretation strategies that include “paired comparisons,” “pile sorts,” “word counts,” identifying “key words in context,” and “triad tests” ( Ryan & Bernard, 2000 , pp. 770–776). These researchers may ultimately seek to develop taxonomies or other authoritative final products that organize and explain the collected data.

For example, in a study we conducted about preservice teachers’ experiences learning to teach second-language learners, the researchers collected larger datasets and used a statistical analysis package to analyze survey data, and the resultant findings included descriptive statistics. These survey results were supported with open-ended, qualitative data. For example, one of the study’s findings was “a strong majority of candidates (96%) agreed that an immersion approach alone will not guarantee academic or linguistic success for second language learners.” In narrative explanations, one preservice teacher remarked, “there has to be extra instructional efforts to help their students learn English... they won’t learn English by merely sitting in the classrooms” ( Cho, Rios, Trent, & Mayfield, 2012 , p. 75).

Methodologies on the “art” side of Ellingson’s (2011) continuum, alternatively, “value humanistic, openly subjective knowledge, such as that embodied in stories, poetry, photography, and painting” (p. 599). Analysis and interpretation in these (often more contemporary) methodological approaches strive not for “social scientific truth,” but instead are formulated to “enable us to learn about ourselves, each other, and the world through encountering the unique lens of a person’s (or a group’s) passionate rendering of a reality into a moving, aesthetic expression of meaning” (p. 599). For these “artistic/interpretivists, truths are multiple, fluctuating and ambiguous” (p. 599). Methodologies taking more artistic, subjective approaches to analysis and interpretation include autoethnography, testimonio, performance studies, feminist theorists/researchers, and others from related critical methodological forms of qualitative practice.

As an example, one of us engaged in an artistic inquiry with a group of students in an art class for elementary teachers. We called it “Dreams as Data” and, among the project aims, we wanted to gather participants’ “dreams for education in the future” and display these dreams in an accessible, interactive, artistic display (see Trent, 2002 ). The intent here was not to statistically analyze the dreams/data; instead, it was more universal. We wanted, as Ellingson (2011) noted, to use participant responses in ways that “enable us to learn about ourselves, each other, and the world.” The decision was made to leave responses intact and to share the whole/raw dataset in the artistic display in ways that allowed the viewers to holistically analyze and interpret for themselves. The following text is an excerpt from one response:

Almost a century ago, John Dewey eloquently wrote about the need to imagine and create the education that ALL children deserve, not just the richest, the Whitest, or the easiest to teach. At the dawn of this new century, on some mornings, I wake up fearful that we are further away from this ideal than ever.... Collective action, in a critical, hopeful, joyful, anti-racist and pro-justice spirit, is foremost in my mind as I reflect on and act in my daily work.... Although I realize the constraints on teachers and schools in the current political arena, I do believe in the power of teachers to stand next to, encourage, and believe in the students they teach—in short, to change lives. ( Trent, 2002 , p. 49)

In sum, researchers whom Ellingson (2011) characterizes as being on the science end of the continuum typically use more detailed or “atomistic” strategies to analyze and interpret qualitative data, whereas those toward the artistic end most often employ more holistic strategies. Both of these general approaches to qualitative data analysis and interpretation, atomistic and holistic, will be addressed later in this chapter.

As noted, qualitative researchers attend to data in a wide variety of ways depending on paradigmatic and epistemological beliefs, methodological conventions, and the purpose/aims of the research. These factors impact the kinds of data collected and the ways these data are ultimately analyzed and interpreted. For example, life history or testimonio researchers conduct extensive individual interviews, ethnographers record detailed observational notes, critical theorists may examine documents from pop culture, and ethnomethodologists may collect videotapes of interaction for analysis and interpretation.

In addition to the wide range of data types that are collected by qualitative researchers (and most qualitative researchers collect multiple forms of data), qualitative researchers, again influenced by the factors noted earlier, employ a variety of approaches to analyzing and interpreting data. As mentioned earlier in this article, some advocate for a detailed/atomistic, fine-grained approach to data (see e.g., Miles & Huberman, 1994 ); others, a more broad-based, holistic, “eyeballing” of the data. “Eyeballers reject the more structured approaches to analysis that break down the data into small units and, from the perspective of the eyeballers, destroy the wholeness and some of the meaningfulness of the data” ( Willis, 2007 , p. 298).

Regardless, we assert, as illustrated in Figure 30.1 , that as the process evolves, data collection becomes less prominent later in the process, as interpretation and making sense/meaning of the data becomes more prominent. It is through this emphasis on interpretation that qualitative researchers put their individual imprints on the data, allowing for the emergence of multiple, rich perspectives. This space for interpretation allows researchers the “freedom” Buddy Rich alluded to in his quote about interpreting musical charts. Without this freedom, Rich noted that the process would be simply “mechanical.” Furthermore, allowing space for multiple interpretations nourishes the perspectives of many

As emphasis on data/data collection decreases, emphasis on interpretation increases.

others in the community. Writer and theorist Meg Wheatley explains, “everyone in a complex system has a slightly different interpretation. The more interpretations we gather, the easier it becomes to gain a sense of the whole.”

In addition to the roles methodology and data play in the interpretive process, perhaps the most important is the role of the self/the researcher in the interpretive process. “She is the one who asks the questions. She is the one who conducts the analyses. She is the one who decides who to study and what to study. The researcher is the conduit through which information is gathered and filtered” ( Lichtman, 2006 , p. 16). Eisner (1991) supports the notion of the researcher “self as instrument,” noting that expert researchers don’t simply know what to attend to, but also what to neglect. He describes the researcher’s role in the interpretive process as combining sensibility , the ability to observe and ascertain nuances, with schema , a deep understanding or cognitive framework of the phenomena under study.

Barrett (2007) describes self/researcher roles as “transformations” (p. 418) at multiple points throughout the inquiry process: early in the process, researchers create representations through data generation, conducting observations and interviews and collecting documents and artifacts. Another “transformation occurs when the ‘raw’ data generated in the field are shaped into data records by the researcher. These data records are produced through organizing and reconstructing the researcher’s notes and transcribing audio and video recordings in the form of permanent records that serve as the ‘evidentiary warrants’ of the generated data. The researcher strives to capture aspects of the phenomenal world with fidelity by selecting salient aspects to incorporate into the data record” (p. 418). Transformation continues when the researcher analyzes, codes, categorizes, and explores patterns in the data (the process we call analysis). Transformations also involve interpreting what the data mean and relating these “interpretations to other sources of insight about the phenomena, including findings from related research, conceptual literature, and common experience.... Data analysis and interpretation are often intertwined and rely upon the researcher’s logic, artistry, imagination, clarity, and knowledge of the field under study” ( Barrett, 2007 , p. 418).

We mentioned the often-blended roles of participation and observation earlier in this chapter. The role(s) of the self/researcher are often described as points along a “participant/observer continuum” (see, e.g., Bogdan & Biklen, 2003 ). On the far “observer” end of this continuum, the researcher situates as detached, tries to be inconspicuous (so as not to impact/disrupt the phenomena under study), and approaches the studied context as if viewing it from behind a one-way mirror. On the opposite, “participant” end, the researcher is completely immersed and involved in the context. It would be difficult for an outsider to distinguish between researcher and subjects. For example, “some feminist researchers and some postmodernists take on a political stance as well and have an agenda that places the researcher in an activist posture. These researchers often become quite involved with the individuals they study and try to improve their human condition” ( Lichtman, 2006 , p. 9).

We assert that most researchers fall somewhere between these poles. We believe that complete detachment is both impossible and misguided. In doing so, we, along with many others, acknowledge (and honor) the role of subjectivity, the researcher’s beliefs, opinions, biases, and predispositions. Positivist researchers seeking objective data and accounts either ignore the impact of subjectivity or attempt to drastically diminish/eliminate its impact. Even qualitative researchers have developed methods to avoid researcher subjectivity affecting research data collection, analysis, and interpretation. For example, foundational phenomenologist Husserl (1962/1913) developed the concept of “bracketing,” what Lichtman describes as “trying to identify your own views on the topic and then putting them aside” (2006, p. 13). Like Slotnick and Janesick (2011) , we ultimately claim, “it is impossible to bracket yourself” (p. 1358). Instead, we take a balanced approach, like Eisner, understanding that subjectivity allows researchers to produce the rich, idiosyncratic, insightful, and yet data-based interpretations and accounts of lived experience that accomplish the primary purposes of qualitative inquiry. “Rather than regarding uniformity and standardization as the summum bonum, educational criticism [Eisner’s form of qualitative research] views unique insight as the higher good” ( Eisner, 1991 , p. 35). That said, we also claim that, just because we acknowledge and value the role of researcher subjectivity, researchers are still obligated to ground their findings in reasonable interpretations of the data. Eisner (1991) explains:

This appreciation for personal insight as a source of meaning does not provide a license for freedom. Educational critics must provide evidence and reasons. But they reject the assumption that unique interpretation is a conceptual liability in understanding, and they see the insights secured from multiple views as more attractive than the comforts provided by a single right one. (p. 35)

Connected to this participant/observer continuum is the way the researcher positions him- or herself in relation to the “subjects” of the study. Traditionally, researchers, including early qualitative researchers, anthropologists, and ethnographers, referenced those studied as “subjects.” More recently, qualitative researchers better understand that research should be a reciprocal process in which both researcher and the foci of the research should derive meaningful benefit. Researchers aligned with this thinking frequently use the term “participants” to describe those groups and individuals included in a study. Going a step farther, some researchers view research participants as experts on the studied topic and as equal collaborators in the meaning-making process. In these instances, researchers often use the terms “co-researchers” or “co-investigators.”

The qualitative researcher, then, plays significant roles throughout the inquiry process. These roles include transforming data, collaborating with research participants or co-researchers, determining appropriate points to situate along the participant/observer continuum, and ascribing personal insights, meanings, and interpretations that are both unique and justified with data exemplars. Performing these roles unavoidably impacts and changes the researcher. “Since, in qualitative research the individual is the research instrument through which all data are passed, interpreted, and reported, the scholar’s role is constantly evolving as self evolves” ( Slotnick & Janesick, 2011 , p. 1358).

As we note later, key in all this is for researchers to be transparent about the topics discussed in the preceding section: what methodological conventions have been employed and why? How have data been treated throughout the inquiry to arrive at assertions and findings that may or may not be transferable to other idiosyncratic contexts? And, finally, in what ways has the researcher/self been situated in and impacted the inquiry? Unavoidably, we assert, the self lies at the critical intersection of data and theory, and, as such, two legs of this stool, data and researcher, interact to create the third, theory.

How Do Qualitative Researchers Engage in the Process of Interpretation?

Theorists seem to have a propensity to dichotomize concepts, pulling them apart and placing binary opposites on far ends of conceptual continuums. Qualitative research theorists are no different, and we have already mentioned some of these continua in this chapter. For example, in the last section, we discussed the participant–observer continuum. Earlier, we referenced both Willis’s (2007) conceptualization of “atomistic” versus “holistic” approaches to qualitative analysis and interpretation and Ellingson’s (2011) science–art continuum. Each of these latter two conceptualizations inform “how qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation.”

Willis (2007) shares that the purpose of a qualitative project might be explained as “what we expect to gain from research” (p. 288). The purpose, or “what we expect to gain,” then guides and informs the approaches researchers might take to interpretation. Some researchers, typically positivist/postpositivist, conduct studies that aim to test theories about how the world works and/or people behave. These researchers attempt to discover general laws, truths, or relationships that can be generalized. Others, less confident in the ability of research to attain a single, generalizable law or truth, might seek “local theory.” These researchers still seek truths, but “instead of generalizable laws or rules, they search for truths about the local context... to understand what is really happening and then to communicate the essence of this to others” ( Willis, 2007 , p. 291). In both of these purposes, researchers employ atomistic strategies in an inductive process in which researchers “break the data down into small units and then build broader and broader generalizations as the data analysis proceeds” (p. 317). The earlier mentioned processes of analytic induction, constant comparison, and grounded theory fit within this conceptualization of atomistic approaches to interpretation. For example, a line-by-line coding of a transcript might begin an atomistic approach to data analysis.

Alternatively, other researchers pursue distinctly different aims. Researchers with an “objective description” purpose focus on accurately describing the people and context under study. These researchers adhere to standards and practices designed to achieve objectivity, and their approach to interpretation falls between the binary atomistic/holistic distinction.

The purpose of hermeneutic approaches to research is to “understand the perspectives of humans. And because understanding is situational, hermeneutic research tends to look at the details of the context in which the study occurred. The result is generally rich data reports that include multiple perspectives” ( Willis, 2007 , p. 293).

Still other researchers see their purpose as the creation of stories or narratives that utilize “a social process that constructs meaning through interaction... it is an effort to represent in detail the perspectives of participants... whereas description produces one truth about the topic of study, storytelling may generate multiple perspectives, interpretations, and analyses by the researcher and participants” ( Willis, 2007 , p. 295).

In these latter purposes (hermeneutic, storytelling, narrative production), researchers typically employ more holistic strategies. “Holistic approaches tend to leave the data intact and to emphasize that meaning must be derived for a contextual reading of the data rather than the extraction of data segments for detailed analysis” (p. 297). This was the case with the “Dreams as Data” project mentioned earlier.

We understand the propensity to dichotomize, situate concepts as binary opposites, and to create neat continua between these polar descriptors. These sorts of reduction and deconstruction support our understandings and, hopefully, enable us to eventually reconstruct these ideas in meaningful ways. Still, in reality, we realize most of us will, and should, work in the middle of these conceptualizations in fluid ways that allow us to pursue strategies, processes, and theories most appropriate for the research task at hand. As noted, Ellingson (2011) sets up another conceptual continuum, but, like ours, her advice is to “straddle multiple points across the field of qualitative methods” (p. 595). She explains, “I make the case for qualitative methods to be conceptualized as a continuum anchored by art and science, with vast middle spaces that embody infinite possibilities for blending artistic, expository, and social scientific ways of analysis and representation” (p. 595).

We explained at the beginning of this chapter that we view analysis as organizing and summarizing qualitative data, and interpretation as constructing meaning. In this sense, analysis allows us to “describe” the phenomena under study. It enables us to succinctly answer “what” and “how” questions and ensures that our descriptions are grounded in the data collected. Descriptions, however, rarely respond to questions of “why?” Why questions are the domain of interpretation, and, as noted throughout this text, interpretation is complex. “Traditionally, qualitative inquiry has concerned itself with what and how questions... qualitative researchers typically approach why questions cautiously, explanation is tricky business” ( Gubrium & Holstein, 2000 , p. 502). Eisner (1991) describes this distinctive nature of interpretation: “it means that inquirers try to account for [interpretation] what they have given account of ” (p. 35).

Our focus here is on interpretation, but interpretation requires analysis, for without having clear understandings of the data and its characteristics, derived through systematic examination and organization (e.g., coding, memoing, categorizing, etc.), “interpretations” resulting from inquiry will likely be incomplete, uninformed, and inconsistent with the constructed perspectives of the study participants. Fortunately for qualitative researchers, we have many sources that lead us through analytic processes. We earlier mentioned the accepted processes of analytic induction and the constant comparison method. These detailed processes (see e.g., Bogdan & Biklen, 2003 ) combine the inextricably linked activities of analysis and interpretation, with “analysis” more typically appearing as earlier steps in the process and meaning construction—“interpretation”—happening later.

A wide variety of resources support researchers engaged in the processes of analysis and interpretation. Saldaña (2011) , for example, provides a detailed description of coding types and processes. He shows researchers how to use process coding (uses gerunds, “-ing” words to capture action), in vivo coding (uses the actual words of the research participants/subjects), descriptive coding (uses nouns to summarize the data topics), versus coding (uses “vs.” to identify conflicts and power issues), and values coding (identifies participants’ values, attitudes, and/or beliefs). To exemplify some of these coding strategies, we include an excerpt from a transcript of a meeting of a school improvement committee. In this study, the collaborators were focused on building “school community.” This excerpt illustrates the application of a variety of codes described by Saldaña to this text:

To connect and elaborate the ideas developed in coding, Saldaña (2011) suggests researchers categorize the applied codes, write memos to deepen understandings and illuminate additional questions, and identify emergent themes. To begin the categorization process, Saldaña recommends all codes be “classified into similar clusters... once the codes have been classified, a category label is applied to them” (p. 97). So, in continuing with the study of school community example coded here, the researcher might create a cluster/category called: “Value of Collaboration,” and in this category might include the codes, “relationships,” “building community,” and “effective strategies.”

Having coded and categorized a study’s various data forms, a typical next step for researchers is to write “memos” or “analytic memos.” Writing analytic memos allows the researcher(s) to “set in words your interpretation of the data... an analytic memo further articulates your... thinking processes on what things may mean... as the study proceeds, however, initial and substantive analytic memos can be revisited and revised for eventual integration into the report itself” ( Saldaña, 2011 , p. 98). In the study of student teaching from K–12 students’ perspectives ( Trent & Zorko, 2006 ), we noticed throughout our analysis a series of focus group interview quotes coded “names.” The following quote from a high school student is representative of many others:

I think that, ah, they [student teachers] should like know your face and your name because, uh, I don’t like it if they don’t and they’ll just like... cause they’ll blow you off a lot easier if they don’t know, like our new principal is here... he is, like, he always, like, tries to make sure to say hi even to the, like, not popular people if you can call it that, you know, and I mean, yah, and the people that don’t usually socialize a lot, I mean he makes an effort to know them and know their name like so they will cooperate better with him.

Although we didn’t ask the focus groups a specific question about whether or not student teachers knew the K–12 students’ names, the topic came up in every focus group interview. We coded the above excerpt and the others, “knowing names,” and these data were grouped with others under the category “relationships.” In an initial analytic memo about this, the researchers wrote:

STUDENT TEACHING STUDY—MEMO #3 “Knowing Names as Relationship Building” Most groups made unsolicited mentions of student teachers knowing, or not knowing, their names. We haven’t asked students about this, but it must be important to them because it always seems to come up. Students expected student teachers to know their names. When they did, students noticed and seemed pleased. When they didn’t, students seemed disappointed, even annoyed. An elementary student told us that early in the semester, “she knew our names... cause when we rose [sic] our hands, she didn’t have to come and look at our name tags... it made me feel very happy.” A high schooler, expressing displeasure that his student teacher didn’t know students’ names, told us, “They should like know your name because it shows they care about you as a person. I mean, we know their names, so they should take the time to learn ours too.” Another high school student said that even after 3 months, she wasn’t sure the student teacher knew her name. Another student echoed, “same here.” Each of these students asserted that this (knowing students’ names) had impacted their relationship with the student teacher. This high school student focus group stressed that a good relationship, built early, directly impacts classroom interaction and student learning. A student explained it like this: “If you get to know each other, you can have fun with them... they seem to understand you more, you’re more relaxed, and learning seems easier.” Meeting Transcript . Process Coding . Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Talking Sharing Building Listening Collaborating Understanding IN VIVO CODING Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Talking about what we want to get out of this Each of us sharing Hearing each of us reflecting Collaboration will be extremely valuable Relationships DESCRIPTIVE CODING Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Open, participatory discussion Identification of effective strategies Collaborative, productive relationships Robust Understandings VERSUS CODING Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Effective vs. Ineffective strategies Positive reflections vs. negative reflections VALUES CODING Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Sharing Building community Reflection Collaboration Relationships Deeper Understandings Meeting Transcript . Process Coding . Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Talking Sharing Building Listening Collaborating Understanding IN VIVO CODING Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Talking about what we want to get out of this Each of us sharing Hearing each of us reflecting Collaboration will be extremely valuable Relationships DESCRIPTIVE CODING Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Open, participatory discussion Identification of effective strategies Collaborative, productive relationships Robust Understandings VERSUS CODING Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Effective vs. Ineffective strategies Positive reflections vs. negative reflections VALUES CODING Let’s start talking about what we want to get out of this. What I’d like to hear is each of us sharing what we’re doing relative to this idea of building community. “Here’s what I’m doing. Here’s what worked. Here’s what didn’t work. I’m happy with this. I’m sad with this,” and just hearing each of us reflecting about what we’re doing I think will be interesting. That collaboration will be extremely valuable in terms of not only our relationships with one another, but also understanding the idea of community in more specific and concrete ways. Sharing Building community Reflection Collaboration Relationships Deeper Understandings Open in new tab

As noted in these brief examples, coding, categorizing, and writing memos about a study’s data are all accepted processes for data analysis and allow researchers to begin constructing new understandings and forming interpretations of the studied phenomena. We find the qualitative research literature to be particularly strong in offering support and guidance for researchers engaged in these analytic practices. In addition to those already noted in this chapter, we have found the following resources provide practical, yet theoretically grounded approaches to qualitative data analysis. For more detailed, procedural, or atomistic approaches to data analysis, we direct researchers to Miles and Huberman’s classic 1994 text, Qualitative Data Analysis , and Ryan and Bernard’s (2000) chapter on “Data Management and Analysis Methods.” For analysis and interpretation strategies falling somewhere between the atomistic and holistic poles, we suggest Hesse-Biber and Leavy’s (2011) chapter, “Analysis and Interpretation of Qualitative Data,” in their book, The Practice of Qualitative Research (2nd edition); Lichtman’s chapter, “Making Meaning From Your Data,” in her book Qualitative Research in Education: A User’s Guide; and “Processing Fieldnotes: Coding and Memoing” a chapter in Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw’s (1995) book, Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes . Each of these sources succinctly describes the processes of data preparation, data reduction, coding and categorizing data, and writing memos about emergent ideas and findings. For more holistic approaches, we have found Denzin and Lincoln’s (2007) Collecting and Interpreting Qualitative Materials , and Ellis and Bochner’s (2000) chapter “Autoethnography, Personal Narrative, Reflexivity,” to both be very informative.

We have not yet mentioned the use of computer software for data analysis. The use of CAQDAS (Computer Assisted Qualitative Data Analysis Software) has become prevalent. That said, it is beyond the scope of this chapter because, generally, the software is very useful for analysis, but only human researchers can interpret in the ways we describe. Multiple sources are readily available for those interested in exploring computer-assisted analysis. We have found the software to be particularly useful when working with large sets of data.

Even after reviewing the multiple resources for treating data included here, qualitative researchers might still be wondering, “but exactly how do we interpret?” In the remainder of this section, and in the concluding section of this chapter, we more concretely provide responses to this question, and, in closing, propose a framework for researchers to utilize as they engage in the complex, ambiguous, and yet exciting process of constructing meanings and new understandings from qualitative sources.

These meanings and understandings are often presented as theory, but theories in this sense should be viewed more as “guides to perception” as opposed to “devices that lead to the tight control or precise prediction of events” ( Eisner, 1991 , p. 95). Perhaps Erickson’s (1986) concept of “assertions” is a more appropriate aim for qualitative researchers. He claimed that assertions are declarative statements; they include a summary of the new understandings, and they are supported by evidence/data. These assertions are open to revision and are revised when disconfirming evidence requires modification. Assertions, theories, or other explanations resulting from interpretation in research are typically presented as “findings” in written research reports. Belgrave and Smith (2002) emphasize the importance of these interpretations (as opposed to descriptions), “the core of the report is not the events reported by the respondent, but rather the subjective meaning of the reported events for the respondent” (p. 248).

Mills (2007) views interpretation as responding to the question, “So what?” He provides researchers a series of concrete strategies for both analysis and interpretation. Specific to interpretation, Mills suggests a variety of techniques, including the following:

“ Extend the Analysis ”: In doing so, researchers ask additional questions about the research. The data appear to say X, but could it be otherwise? In what ways do the data support emergent finding X? And, in what ways do they not?

“ Connect Findings with Personal Experience ”: Using this technique, researchers share interpretations based on their intimate knowledge of the context, the observed actions of the individuals in the studied context, and the data points that support emerging interpretations, as well as their awareness of discrepant events or outlier data. In a sense, the researcher is saying, “based on my experiences in conducting this study, this is what I make of it all.”

“ Seek the Advice of ‘Critical’ Friends ”: In doing so, researchers utilize trusted colleagues, fellow researchers, experts in the field of study, and others to offer insights, alternative interpretations, and the application of their own unique lenses to a researcher’s initial findings. We especially like this strategy because we acknowledge that, too often, qualitative interpretation is a “solo” affair.

“ Contextualize the Findings in the Literature ”: This allows researchers to compare their interpretations to others writing about and studying the same/similar phenomena. The results of this contextualization may be that the current study’s findings correspond with the findings of other researchers. The results might, alternatively, differ from the findings of other researchers. In either instance, the researcher can highlight his or her unique contributions to our understanding of the topic under study.

“ Turn to Theory” : Mills defines theory as “an analytical and interpretive framework that helps the researcher make sense of ‘what is going on’ in the social setting being studied.” In turning to theory, researchers search for increasing levels of abstraction and move beyond purely descriptive accounts. Connecting to extant or generating new theory enables researchers to link their work to the broader contemporary issues in the field. (p. 136)

Other theorists offer additional advice for researchers engaged in the act of interpretation. Richardson (1995) reminds us to account for the power dynamics in the researcher–researched relationship and notes that, in doing so, we can allow for oppressed and marginalized voices to be heard in context. Bogdan and Biklen (2003) suggest that researchers engaged in interpretation revisit foundational writing about qualitative research, read studies related to the current research, ask evaluative questions (e.g., is what I’m seeing here good or bad?), ask about implications of particular findings/interpretations, think about the audience for interpretations, look for stories and incidents that illustrate a specific finding/interpretation, and attempt to summarize key interpretations in a succinct paragraph. All of these suggestions can be pertinent in certain situations and with particular methodological approaches. In the next and closing section of this chapter, we present a framework for interpretive strategies we believe will support, guide, and be applicable to qualitative researchers across multiple methodologies and paradigms.

In What Ways Can a Framework for Interpretation Strategies Support Qualitative Researchers Across Multiple Methodological and Paradigmatic Views?

The process of qualitative research is often compared to a journey, one without a detailed itinerary and ending, but instead a journey with general direction and aims and yet an open-endedness that adds excitement and thrives on curiosity. Qualitative researchers are travelers. They travel physically to field sites; they travel mentally through various epistemological, theoretical, and methodological grounds; they travel through a series of problem finding, access, data collection, and data analysis processes; and, finally—the topic of this chapter—they travel through the process of making meaning out of all this physical and cognitive travel via interpretation.

Although travel is an appropriate metaphor to describe the journey of qualitative researchers, we’ll also use “travel” to symbolize a framework for qualitative research interpretation strategies. By design, this is a framework that applies across multiple paradigmatic, epistemological, and methodological traditions. The application of this framework is not formulaic or highly prescriptive, it is also not an “anything goes” approach. It falls, and is applicable, between these poles, giving concrete (suggested) direction to qualitative researchers wanting to make the most out of the interpretations that result from their research, and yet allows the necessary flexibility for researchers to employ the methods, theories, and approaches they deem most appropriate to the research problem(s) under study.

TRAVEL, a Comprehensive Approach to Qualitative Interpretation

In using the word “TRAVEL” as a mnemonic device, our aim is to highlight six essential concepts we argue all qualitative researchers should attend to in the interpretive process: Transparency, Reflexivity, Analysis, Validity, Evidence, and Literature. The importance of each is addressed here.

Transparency , as a research concept seems, well... transparent. But, too often, we read qualitative research reports and are left with many questions: How were research participants and the topic of study selected/excluded? How were the data collected, when, and for how long? Who analyzed and interpreted these data? A single researcher? Multiple? What interpretive strategies were employed? Are there data points that substantiate these interpretations/findings? What analytic procedures were used to organize the data prior to making the presented interpretations? In being transparent about data collection, analysis, and interpretation processes, researchers allow reviewers/readers insight into the research endeavor, and this transparency leads to credibility for both researcher and researcher’s claims. Altheide and Johnson (2011) explain, “There is great diversity of qualitative research.... While these approaches differ, they also share an ethical obligation to make public their claims, to show the reader, audience, or consumer why they should be trusted as faithful accounts of some phenomenon” (p. 584). This includes, they note, articulating “what the different sources of data were, how they were interwoven, and... how subsequent interpretations and conclusions are more or less closely tied to the various data... the main concern is that the connection be apparent, and to the extent possible, transparent” (p. 590).

In the “Dreams as Data” art and research project noted earlier, transparency was addressed in multiple ways. Readers of the project write-up were informed that interpretations resulting from the study, framed as “themes,” were a result of collaborative analysis that included insights from both students and instructor. Viewers of the art installation/data display had the rare opportunity to see all participant responses. In other words, viewers had access to the entire raw dataset (see Trent, 2002 ). More frequently, we encounter only research “findings” already distilled, analyzed, and interpreted in research accounts, often by a single researcher. Allowing research consumers access to the data to interpret for themselves in the “dreams” project was an intentional attempt at transparency.

Reflexivity , the second of our concepts for interpretive researcher consideration, has garnered a great deal of attention in qualitative research literature. Some have called this increased attention the “reflexive turn” (see e.g., Denzin & Lincoln, 2004 :

Although you can find many meanings for the term reflexivity, it is usually associated with a critical reflection on the practice and process of research and the role of the researcher. It concerns itself with the impact of the researcher on the system and the system on the researcher. It acknowledges the mutual relationships between the researcher and who and what is studied... by acknowledging the role of the self in qualitative research, the researcher is able to sort through biases and think about how they affect various aspects of the research, especially interpretation of meanings. ( Lichtman, 2006 , pp. 206–207)

As with transparency, attending to reflexivity allows researchers to attach credibility to presented findings. Providing a reflexive account of researcher subjectivity and the interactions of this subjectivity within the research process is a way for researchers to communicate openly with their audience. Instead of trying to exhume inherent bias from the process, qualitative researchers share with readers the value of having a specific, idiosyncratic positionality. As a result, situated, contextualized interpretations are viewed as an asset, as opposed to a liability.

LaBanca (2011) , acknowledging the often solitary nature of qualitative research, calls for researchers to engage others in the reflexive process. Like many other researchers, LaBanca utilizes a researcher journal to chronicle reflexive thoughts, explorations and understandings, but he takes this a step farther. Realizing the value of others’ input, LaBanca posts his reflexive journal entries on a blog (what he calls an “online reflexivity blog”) and invites critical friends, other researchers, and interested members of the community to audit his reflexive moves, providing insights, questions, and critique that inform his research and study interpretations.

We agree this is a novel approach worth considering. We, too, understand that multiple interpreters will undoubtedly produce multiple interpretations, a richness of qualitative research. So, we suggest researchers consider bringing others in before the production of the report. This could be fruitful in multiple stages of the inquiry process, but especially so in the complex, idiosyncratic processes of reflexivity and interpretation. We are both educators and educational researchers. Historically, each of these roles has tended to be constructed as an isolated endeavor, the solitary teacher, the solo researcher/fieldworker. As noted earlier and in the “analysis” section that follows, introducing collaborative processes to what has often been a solitary activity offers much promise for generating rich interpretations that benefit from multiple perspectives.

Being consciously reflexive throughout our practice as researchers has benefitted us in many ways. In a study of teacher education curricula designed to prepare preservice teachers to support second-language learners, we realized hard truths that caused us to reflect on and adapt our own practices as teacher educators. Reflexivity can inform a researcher at all parts of the inquiry, even in early stages. For example, one of us was beginning a study of instructional practices in an elementary school. The communicated methods of the study indicated that the researcher would be largely an observer. Early fieldwork revealed that the researcher became much more involved as a participant than anticipated. Deep reflection and writing about the classroom interactions allowed the researcher to realize that the initial purpose of the research was not being accomplished, and the researcher believed he was having a negative impact on the classroom culture. Reflexivity in this instance prompted the researcher to leave the field and abandon the project as it was just beginning. Researchers should plan to openly engage in reflexive activities, including writing about their ongoing reflections and subjectivities. Including excerpts of this writing in research account supports our earlier recommendation of transparency.

Early in this chapter, for the purposes of discussion and examination, we defined analysis as “summarizing and organizing” data in a qualitative study, and interpretation as “finding” or “making” meaning. Although our focus has been on interpretation as the primary topic here, the importance of good analysis cannot be underestimated for, without it, resultant interpretations are likely incomplete and potentially uninformed. Comprehensive analysis puts researchers in a position to be deeply familiar with collected data and to organize these data into forms that lead to rich, unique interpretations, and yet to interpretations clearly connected to data exemplars. Although we find it advantageous to examine analysis and interpretation as different but related practices, in reality, the lines blur as qualitative researchers engage in these recursive processes.

We earlier noted our affinity for a variety of approaches to analysis (see e.g., Lichtman, 2006 ; Saldaña, 2011 ; or Hesse-Biber & Leavy 2011 ). Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (1995) present a grounded approach to qualitative data analysis: in early stages, researchers engage in a close, line-by-line reading of data/collected text and accompany this reading with open coding , a process of categorizing and labeling the inquiry data. Next, researchers write initial memos to describe and organize the data under analysis. These analytic phases allow the researcher(s) to prepare, organize, summarize, and understand the data, in preparation for the more interpretive processes of focused coding and the writing up of interpretations and themes in the form of integrative memos .

Similarly, Mills (2007) provides guidance on the process of analysis for qualitative action researchers. His suggestions for organizing and summarizing data include coding (labeling data and looking for patterns), asking key questions about the study data (who, what, where, when, why, and how), developing concept maps (graphic organizers that show initial organization and relationships in the data), and stating what’s missing by articulating what data are not present (pp. 124–132).

Many theorists, like Emerson, Fretz, and Shaw (1995) and Mills (2007) noted here, provide guidance for individual researchers engaged in individual data collection, analysis, and interpretation; others, however, invite us to consider the benefits of collaboratively engaging in these processes through the use of collaborative research and analysis teams. Paulus, Woodside, and Ziegler (2008) wrote about their experiences in collaborative qualitative research: “Collaborative research often refers to collaboration among the researcher and the participants. Few studies investigate the collaborative process among researchers themselves” (p. 226).

Paulus, Woodside, and Ziegler (2008) claim that the collaborative process “challenged and transformed our assumptions about qualitative research” (p. 226). Engaging in reflexivity, analysis, and interpretation as a collaborative enabled these researchers to reframe their views about the research process, finding that the process was much more recursive, as opposed to following a linear progression. They also found that cooperatively analyzing and interpreting data yielded “collaboratively constructed meanings” as opposed to “individual discoveries.” And finally, instead of the traditional “individual products” resulting from solo research, collaborative interpretation allowed researchers to participate in an “ongoing conversation” (p. 226).

These researchers explain that engaging in collaborative analysis and interpretation of qualitative data challenged their previously held assumptions. They note, “through collaboration, procedures are likely to be transparent to the group and can, therefore, be made public. Data analysis benefits from an iterative, dialogic, and collaborative process because thinking is made explicit in a way that is difficult to replicate as a single researcher” ( Paulus, Woodside, & Ziegler, 2008 , p. 236). They share that during the collaborative process, “we constantly checked our interpretation against the text, the context, prior interpretations, and each other’s interpretations” (p. 234).

We, too, have engaged in analysis similar to these described processes, including working on research teams. We encourage other researchers to find processes that fit with the methodology and data of a particular study, use the techniques and strategies most appropriate, and then cite to the utilized authority to justify the selected path. We urge traditionally solo researchers to consider trying a collaborative approach. Generally, we suggest researchers be familiar with a wide repertoire of practices. In doing so, they’ll be in better positions to select and use strategies most appropriate for their studies and data. Succinctly preparing, organizing, categorizing, and summarizing data sets the researcher(s) up to construct meaningful interpretations in the forms of assertions, findings, themes, and theories.

Researchers want their findings to be sound, backed by evidence, justifiable, and to accurately represent the phenomena under study. In short, researchers seek validity for their work. We assert that qualitative researchers should attend to validity concepts as a part of their interpretive practices. We have previously written and theorized about validity, and, in doing so, we have highlighted and labeled what we consider to be two distinctly different approaches, transactional and transformational ( Cho & Trent, 2006 ). We define transactional validity in qualitative research as an interactive process occurring among the researcher, the researched, and the collected data, one that is aimed at achieving a relatively higher level of accuracy. Techniques, methods, and/or strategies are employed during the conduct of the inquiry. These techniques, such as member checking and triangulation, are seen as a medium with which to ensure an accurate reflection of reality (or, at least, participants’ constructions of reality). Lincoln and Guba’s (1985) widely known notion of trustworthiness in “naturalistic inquiry” is grounded in this approach. In seeking trustworthiness, researchers attend to research credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmability. Validity approaches described by Maxwell (1992) as “descriptive” and “interpretive” also proceed in the usage of transactional processes.

For example, in the write-up of a study on the facilitation of teacher research, one of us ( Trent, 2012 , p. 44) wrote about the use of transactional processes: “‘Member checking is asking the members of the population being studied for their reaction to the findings’ ( Sagor, 2000 , p. 136). Interpretations and findings of this research, in draft form, were shared with teachers (for member checking) on multiple occasions throughout the study. Additionally, teachers reviewed and provided feedback on the final draft of this article.” This member checking led to changes in some resultant interpretations (called findings in this particular study) and to adaptations of others that shaped these findings in ways that made them both richer and more contextualized.

Alternatively, in transformational approaches, validity is not so much something that can be achieved solely by way of certain techniques. Transformationalists assert that because traditional or positivist inquiry is no longer seen as an absolute means to truth in the realm of human science, alternative notions of validity should be considered to achieve social justice, deeper understandings, broader visions, and other legitimate aims of qualitative research. In this sense, it is the ameliorative aspects of the research that achieve (or don’t achieve) its validity. Validity is determined by the resultant actions prompted by the research endeavor.

Lather (1993) , Richardson (1997) , and others (e.g., Lenzo, 1995 ; Scheurich, 1996 ) propose a transgressive approach to validity that emphasizes a higher degree of self-reflexivity. For example, Lather has proposed a “catalytic validity” described as “the degree to which the research empowers and emancipates the research subjects” ( Scheurich, 1996 , p. 4). Beverley (2000 , p. 556) has proposed “testimonio” as a qualitative research strategy. These first-person narratives find their validity in their ability to raise consciousness and thus provoke political action to remedy problems of oppressed peoples (e.g., poverty, marginality, exploitation).

We, too, have pursued research with transformational aims. In the earlier mentioned study of preservice teachers’ experiences learning to teach second-language learners ( Cho, Rios, Trent, & Mayfield, 2012 ), our aims were to empower faculty members, evolve the curriculum, and, ultimately, better serve preservice teachers so that they might better serve English-language learners in their classrooms. As program curricula and activities have changed as a result, we claim a degree of transformational validity for this research.

Important, then, for qualitative researchers throughout the inquiry, but especially when engaged in the process of interpretation, is to determine the type(s) of validity applicable to the study. What are the aims of the study? Providing an “accurate” account of studied phenomena? Empowering participants to take action for themselves and others? The determination of this purpose will, in turn, inform researchers’ analysis and interpretation of data. Understanding and attending to the appropriate validity criteria will bolster researcher claims to meaningful findings and assertions.

Regardless of purpose or chosen validity considerations, qualitative research depends on evidence . Researchers in different qualitative methodologies rely on different types of evidence to support their claims. Qualitative researchers typically utilize a variety of forms of evidence including texts (written notes, transcripts, images, etc.), audio and video recordings, cultural artifacts, documents related to the inquiry, journal entries, and field notes taken during observations of social contexts and interactions. “Evidence is essential to justification, and justification takes the form of an argument about the merit(s) of a given claim. It is generally accepted that no evidence is conclusive or unassailable (and hence, no argument is foolproof). Thus, evidence must often be judged for its credibility, and that typically means examining its source and the procedures by which it was produced [thus the need for transparency discussed earlier]” ( Schwandt, 2001 , p. 82).

Qualitative researchers distinguish evidence from facts. Evidence and facts are similar but not identical. We can often agree on facts, e.g., there is a rock, it is harder than cotton candy. Evidence involves an assertion that some facts are relevant to an argument or claim about a relationship. Since a position in an argument is likely tied to an ideological or even epistemological position, evidence is not completely bound by facts, but it is more problematic and subject to disagreement. ( Altheide & Johnson, 2011 , p. 586)

Inquirers should make every attempt to link evidence to claims (or findings, interpretations, assertions, conclusions, etc.). There are many strategies for making these connections. Induction involves accumulating multiple data points to infer a general conclusion. Confirmation entails directly linking evidence to resultant interpretations. Testability/falsifiability means illustrating that evidence does not necessarily contradict the claim/interpretation, and so increases the credibility of the claim ( Schwandt, 2001 ). In the “learning to teach second-language learners” study, for example, a study finding ( Cho, Rios, Trent, & Mayfield, 2012 , p. 77) was that “as a moral claim , candidates increasingly [in higher levels of the teacher education program] feel more responsible and committed to ELLs [English language learners].” We supported this finding with a series of data points that included the following preservice teacher response: “It is as much the responsibility of the teacher to help teach second-language learners the English language as it is our responsibility to teach traditional English speakers to read or correctly perform math functions.” Claims supported by evidence allow readers to see for themselves and to both examine researcher assertions in tandem with evidence and to form further interpretations of their own.

Some postmodernists reject the notion that qualitative interpretations are arguments based on evidence. Instead, they argue that qualitative accounts are not intended to faithfully represent that experience, but instead are designed to evoke some feelings or reactions in the reader of the account ( Schwandt, 2001 ). We argue that, even in these instances where transformational validity concerns take priority over transactional processes, evidence still matters. Did the assertions accomplish the evocative aims? What evidence/arguments were used to evoke these reactions? Does the presented claim correspond with the study’s evidence? Is the account inclusive? In other words, does it attend to all evidence or selectively compartmentalize some data while capitalizing on other evidentiary forms?

Researchers, we argue, should be both transparent and reflexive about these questions and, regardless of research methodology or purpose, should share with readers of the account their evidentiary moves and aims. Altheide and Johnson (2011) call this an “evidentiary narrative” and explain:

Ultimately, evidence is bound up with our identity in a situation.... An “evidentiary narrative” emerges from a reconsideration of how knowledge and belief systems in everyday life are tied to epistemic communities that provide perspectives, scenarios, and scripts that reflect symbolic and social moral orders. An “evidentiary narrative” symbolically joins an actor, an audience, a point of view (definition of a situation), assumptions, and a claim about a relationship between two or more phenomena. If any of these factors are not part of the context of meaning for a claim, it will not be honored, and thus, not seen as evidence. (p. 686)

In sum, readers/consumers of a research account deserve to know how evidence was treated and viewed in an inquiry. They want and should be aware of accounts that aim to evoke versus represent, and then they can apply their own criteria (including the potential transferability to their situated context). Renowned ethnographer and qualitative research theorist Harry Wolcott (1990) urges researchers to “let readers ‘see’ for themselves” by providing more detail rather than less and by sharing primary data/evidence to support interpretations. In the end, readers don’t expect perfection. Writer Eric Liu (2010) explains, “we don’t expect flawless interpretation. We expect good faith. We demand honesty.”

Last, in this journey through concepts we assert are pertinent to researchers engaged in interpretive processes, we include attention to the “ literature .” In discussing “literature,” qualitative researchers typically mean publications about the prior research conducted on topics aligned with or related to a study. Most often, this research/literature is reviewed and compiled by researchers in a section of the research report titled, “literature review.” It is here we find others’ studies, methods, and theories related to our topics of study, and it is here we hope the assertions and theories that result from our studies will someday reside.

We acknowledge the value of being familiar with research related to topics of study. This familiarity can inform multiple phases of the inquiry process. Understanding the extant knowledge base can inform research questions and topic selection, data collection and analysis plans, and the interpretive process. In what ways do the interpretations from this study correspond with other research conducted on this topic? Do findings/interpretations corroborate, expand, or contradict other researchers’ interpretations of similar phenomena? In any of these scenarios (correspondence, expansion, contradiction), new findings and interpretations from a study add to and deepen the knowledge base, or literature, on a topic of investigation.

For example, in our literature review for the study of student teaching, we quickly determined that the knowledge base and extant theories related to the student teaching experience was immense, but also quickly realized that few if any studies had examined student teaching from the perspective of the K–12 students who had the student teachers. This focus on the literature related to our topic of student teaching prompted us to embark on a study that would fill a gap in this literature: most of the knowledge base focused on the experiences and learning of the student teachers themselves. Our study then, by focusing on the K–12 students’ perspectives, added literature/theories/assertions to a previously untapped area. The “literature” in this area (at least we’d like to think) is now more robust as a result.

In another example, a research team ( Trent et al., 2003 ) focused on institutional diversity efforts, mined the literature, found an appropriate existing (a priori) set of theories/assertions, and then used this existing theoretical framework from the literature as a framework to analyze data; in this case, a variety of institutional activities related to diversity.

Conducting a literature review to explore extant theories on a topic of study can serve a variety of purposes. As evidenced in these examples, consulting the literature/extant theory can reveal gaps in the literature. A literature review might also lead researchers to existing theoretical frameworks that support analysis and interpretation of their data (as in the use of the a priori framework example). Finally, a review of current theories related to a topic of inquiry might confirm that much theory already exists, but that further study may add to, bolster, and/or elaborate on the current knowledge base.

Guidance for researchers conducting literature reviews is plentiful. Lichtman (2006) suggests researchers conduct a brief literature review, begin research, and then update and modify the literature review as the inquiry unfolds. She suggests reviewing a wide range of related materials (not just scholarly journals) and additionally suggests researchers attend to literature on methodology, not just the topic of study. She also encourages researchers to bracket and write down thoughts on the research topic as they review the literature, and, important for this chapter, she suggests researchers “integrate your literature review throughout your writing rather than using a traditional approach of placing it in a separate chapter [or section]” (p. 105).

We agree that the power of a literature review to provide context for a study can be maximized when this information isn’t compartmentalized apart from a study’s findings. Integrating (or at least revisiting) reviewed literature juxtaposed alongside findings can illustrate how new interpretations add to an evolving story. Eisenhart (1998) expands the traditional conception of the literature review and discusses the concept of an “interpretive review.” By taking this interpretive approach, Eisenhart claims that reviews, alongside related interpretations/findings on a specific topic, have the potential to allow readers to see the studied phenomena in entirely new ways, through new lenses, revealing heretofore unconsidered perspectives. Reviews that offer surprising and enriching perspectives on meanings and circumstances “shake things up, break down boundaries, and cause things (or thinking) to expand” (p. 394). Coupling reviews of this sort with current interpretations will “give us stories that startle us with what we have failed to notice” (p. 395).

In reviews of research studies, it can certainly be important to evaluate the findings in light of established theories and methods [the sorts of things typically included in literature reviews]. However, it also seems important to ask how well the studies disrupt conventional assumptions and help us to reconfigure new, more inclusive, and more promising perspectives on human views and actions. From an interpretivist perspective, it would be most important to review how well methods and findings permit readers to grasp the sense of unfamiliar perspectives and actions. ( Eisenhart, 1998 , p. 397)

And so, our journey through qualitative research interpretation and the selected concepts we’ve treated in this chapter nears an end, an end in the written text, but a hopeful beginning of multiple new conversations among ourselves and in concert with other qualitative researchers. Our aims here have been to circumscribe interpretation in qualitative research; emphasize the importance of interpretation in achieving the aims of the qualitative project; discuss the interactions of methodology, data, and the researcher/self as these concepts and theories intertwine with interpretive processes; describe some concrete ways that qualitative inquirers engage the process of interpretation; and, finally, to provide a framework of interpretive strategies that may serve as a guide for ourselves and other researchers.

In closing, we note that this “travel” framework, construed as a journey to be undertaken by researchers engaged in the interpretive process, is not designed to be rigid or prescriptive, but instead is designed to be a flexible set of concepts that will inform researchers across multiple epistemological, methodological, and theoretical paradigms. We chose the concepts of transparency, reflexivity, analysis, validity, evidence, and literature (TRAVEL) because they are applicable to the infinite journeys undertaken by qualitative researchers who have come before and to those who will come after us. As we journeyed through our interpretations of interpretation, we have discovered new things about ourselves and our work. We hope readers also garner insights that enrich their interpretive excursions. Happy travels to all— Bon Voyage !

Altheide, D. , & Johnson, J. M. ( 2011 ). Reflections on interpretive adequacy in qualitative research. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 595–610). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Google Scholar

Google Preview

Barrett, T. ( 2000 ). Criticizing art: Understanding the contemporary . New York: McGraw Hill.

Barrett, J. ( 2007 ). The researcher as instrument: learning to conduct qualitative research through analyzing and interpreting a choral rehearsal. Music Education Research , 9 (3), 417–433.

Belgrave, L. L. , & Smith, K. J. ( 2002 ). Negotiated validity in collaborative ethnography. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The qualitative inquiry reader (pp. 233–255). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Beverly, J. ( 2000 ). Testimonio, subalternity, and narrative authority. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research, second edition (pp. 555–566). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Bogdan, R. C. , & Biklen, S. K. ( 2003 ). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods . Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Cho, J. , Rios, F. , Trent, A. , & Mayfield, K. ( 2012 ). Integrating language diversity into teacher education curricula in a rural context: Candidates’ developmental perspectives and understandings. Teacher Education Quarterly , 39 (2), 63–85.

Cho, J. , & Trent, A. ( 2006 ). Validity in qualitative research revisited. QR—Qualitative Research Journal , 6 (3), 319–340.

Denzin, N. M. , & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). ( 2004 ). Handbook of qualitative research . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Denzin, N. M. , & Lincoln, Y. S. ( 2007 ). Collecting and interpreting qualitative materials . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Eisenhart, M. ( 1998 ). On the subject of interpretive reviews. Review of Educational Research , 68 (4), 391–393.

Eisner, E. ( 1991 ). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice . New York: Macmillan.

Ellingson, L. L. ( 2011 ). Analysis and representation across the continuum. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 595–610). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Ellis, C. , & Bochner, A. P. ( 2000 ). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research , second edition (pp. 733–768). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Emerson, R. , Fretz, R. , & Shaw, L. ( 1995 ). Writing ethnographic fieldwork . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Erickson, F. ( 1986 ). Qualitative methods in research in teaching and learning. In M. C. Wittrock Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp 119–161). New York: Macmillan.

Glaser, B. ( 1965 ). The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. Social Problems , 12 (4), 436–445.

Gubrium, J. F. , & Holstein, J. A. ( 2000 ). Analyzing interpretive practice. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research , second edition (pp. 487–508). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hesse-Biber, S. N. , & Leavy, P. ( 2011 ). The practice of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hubbard, R. S. , & Power, B. M. ( 2003 ). The art of classroom inquiry: A handbook for teacher researchers . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Husserl, E. ( 1962 ). Ideas: general introduction to pure phenomenology . ( W. R. Boyce Gibson , Trans.). London, New York: Collier, Macmillan. (Original work published 1913)

LaBanca, F. ( 2011 ). Online dynamic asynchronous audit strategy for reflexivity in the qualitative paradigm. Qualitative Report , 16 (4), 1160–1171.

Lather, P. ( 1993 ). Fertile obsession: Validity after poststructuralism. Sociological Quarterly , 34 (4), 673–693.

Lenzo, K. ( 1995 ). Validity and self reflexivity meet poststructuralism: Scientific ethos and the transgressive self. Educational Researcher , 24 (4), 17–23, 45.

Lichtman, M. ( 2006 ). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Liu, E. (2010). The real meaning of balls and strikes. Retrieved September 20, 2012, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-liu/the-real-meaning-of-balls_b_660915.html

Lincoln, Y. S. , & Guba, E. G. ( 1985 ). Naturalistic inquiry . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Maxwell, J. ( 1992 ). Understanding and validity in qualitative research. Harvard Educational Review , 62 (3), 279–300.

Miles, M. B. , & Huberman, A. M. ( 1994 ). Qualitative data analysis . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mills, G. E. ( 2007 ). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Paulus, T. , Woodside, M. , & Ziegler, M. ( 2008 ). Extending the conversation: Qualitative research as dialogic collaborative process. Qualitative Report , 13 (2), 226–243.

Richardson, L. ( 1995 ). Writing stories: Co-authoring the “sea monster,” a writing story. Qualitative Inquiry , 1 , 189–203.

Richardson, L. ( 1997 ). Fields of play: Constructing an academic life . New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Ryan, G. W. , & Bernard, H. R. ( 2000 ). Data management and analysis methods. In N. M. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research , second edition (pp. 769–802). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Sagor, R. ( 2000 ). Guiding school improvement with action research . Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Saldaña, J. ( 2011 ). Fundamentals of qualitative research . New York: Oxford University Press.

Scheurich, J. ( 1996 ). The masks of validity: A deconstructive investigation. Qualitative Studies in Education , 9 (1), 49–60.

Slotnick, R. C. , & Janesick, V. J. ( 2011 ). Conversations on method: Deconstructing policy through the researcher reflective journal. Qualitative Report , 16 (5), 1352–1360.

Schwandt, T. A. ( 2001 ). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Trent, A. ( 2002 ). Dreams as data: Art installation as heady research, Teacher Education Quarterly , 29 (4), 39–51.

Trent, A. ( 2012 ). Action research on action research: A facilitator’s account. Action Learning and Action Research Journal , 18 (1), 35–67.

Trent, A. , Rios, F. , Antell, J. , Berube, W. , Bialostok, S. , Cardona, D. , et al. ( 2003 ). Problems and possibilities in the pursuit of diversity: An institutional analysis. Equity & Excellence , 36(3), 213–224.

Trent, A. , & Zorko, L. ( 2006 ). Listening to students: “New” perspectives on student teaching. Teacher Education & Practice , 19 (1), 55–70.

Willis, J. W. ( 2007 ). Foundations of qualitative research: Interpretive and critical approaches . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wolcott, H. ( 1990 ). On seeking-and rejecting-validity in qualitative research. In E. Eisner & A. Peshkin (Eds.), Qualitative inquiry in education: The continuing debate (pp. 121–152). New York: Teachers College Press.

About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Critical Analysis in Composition

Glossary of Grammatical and Rhetorical Terms

An Introduction to Punctuation
Ph.D., Rhetoric and English, University of Georgia
M.A., Modern English and American Literature, University of Leicester
B.A., English, State University of New York

In composition , critical analysis is a careful examination and evaluation of a text , image, or other work or performance.

Performing a critical analysis does not necessarily involve finding fault with a work. On the contrary, a thoughtful critical analysis may help us understand the interaction of the particular elements that contribute to a work's power and effectiveness. For this reason, critical analysis is a central component of academic training; the skill of critical analysis is most often thought of in the context of analyzing a work of art or literature, but the same techniques are useful to build an understanding of texts and resources in any discipline.

In this context, the word "critical" carries a different connotation than in vernacular, everyday speech. "Critical" here does not simply mean pointing out a work's flaws or arguing why it is objectionable by some standard. Instead, it points towards a close reading of that work to gather meaning, as well as to evaluate its merits. The evaluation is not the sole point of critical analysis, which is where it differs from the colloquial meaning of "criticize."

Examples of Critical Essays

"Jack and Gill: A Mock Criticism" by Joseph Dennie
"Miss Brill's Fragile Fantasy": A Critical Essay About Katherine Mansfield's Short Story "Miss Brill" and "Poor, Pitiful Miss Brill"
"On the Knocking at the Gate in Macbeth " by Thomas De Quincey
A Rhetorical Analysis of Claude McKay's "Africa"
A Rhetorical Analysis of E B. White's Essay "The Ring of Time"
A Rhetorical Analysis of U2's "Sunday Bloody Sunday"
"Saloonio: A Study in Shakespearean Criticism" by Stephen Leacock
Writing About Fiction: A Critical Essay on Hemingway's Novel The Sun Also Rises

Quotes About Critical Analysis

" [C]ritical analysis involves breaking down an idea or a statement, such as a claim , and subjecting it to critical thinking in order to test its validity." (Eric Henderson, The Active Reader: Strategies for Academic Reading and Writing . Oxford University Press, 2007)
"To write an effective critical analysis, you need to understand the difference between analysis and summary . . . . [A] critical analysis looks beyond the surface of a text—it does far more than summarize a work. A critical analysis isn't simply dashing off a few words about the work in general." ( Why Write?: A Guide to BYU Honors Intensive Writing . Brigham Young University, 2006)
"Although the main purpose of a critical analysis is not to persuade , you do have the responsibility of organizing a discussion that convinces readers that your analysis is astute." (Robert Frew et al., Survival: A Sequential Program for College Writing . Peek, 1985)

Critical Thinking and Research

"[I]n response to the challenge that a lack of time precludes good, critical analysis , we say that good, critical analysis saves time. How? By helping you be more efficient in terms of the information you gather. Starting from the premise that no practitioner can claim to collect all the available information, there must always be a degree of selection that takes place. By thinking analytically from the outset, you will be in a better position to 'know' which information to collect, which information is likely to be more or less significant and to be clearer about what questions you are seeking to answer." (David Wilkins and Godfred Boahen, Critical Analysis Skills For Social Workers . McGraw-Hill, 2013)

How to Read Text Critically

"Being critical in academic enquiry means: - adopting an attitude of skepticism or reasoned doubt towards your own and others' knowledge in the field of enquiry . . . - habitually questioning the quality of your own and others' specific claims to knowledge about the field and the means by which these claims were generated; - scrutinizing claims to see how far they are convincing . . .; - respecting others as people at all times. Challenging others' work is acceptable, but challenging their worth as people is not; - being open-minded , willing to be convinced if scrutiny removes your doubts, or to remain unconvinced if it does not; - being constructive by putting your attitude of skepticism and your open-mindedness to work in attempting to achieve a worthwhile goal." (Mike Wallace and Louise Poulson, "Becoming a Critical Consumer of the Literature." Learning to Read Critically in Teaching and Learning , ed. by Louise Poulson and Mike Wallace. SAGE, 2004)

Critically Analyzing Persuasive Ads

"[I]n my first-year composition class, I teach a four-week advertisement analysis project as a way to not only heighten students' awareness of the advertisements they encounter and create on a daily basis but also to encourage students to actively engage in a discussion about critical analysis by examining rhetorical appeals in persuasive contexts. In other words, I ask students to pay closer attention to a part of the pop culture in which they live. " . . . Taken as a whole, my ad analysis project calls for several writing opportunities in which students write essays , responses, reflections, and peer assessments . In the four weeks, we spend a great deal of time discussing the images and texts that make up advertisements, and through writing about them, students are able to heighten their awareness of the cultural 'norms' and stereotypes which are represented and reproduced in this type of communication ." (Allison Smith, Trixie Smith, and Rebecca Bobbitt, Teaching in the Pop Culture Zone: Using Popular Culture in the Composition Classroom . Wadsworth Cengage, 2009)

Critically Analyzing Video Games

"When dealing with a game's significance, one could analyze the themes of the game be they social, cultural, or even political messages. Most current reviews seem to focus on a game's success: why it is successful, how successful it will be, etc. Although this is an important aspect of what defines the game, it is not critical analysis . Furthermore, the reviewer should dedicate some to time to speaking about what the game has to contribute to its genre (Is it doing something new? Does it present the player with unusual choices? Can it set a new standard for what games of this type should include?)." (Mark Mullen, "On Second Thought . . ." Rhetoric/Composition/Play Through Video Games: Reshaping Theory and Practice , ed. by Richard Colby, Matthew S.S. Johnson, and Rebekah Shultz Colby. Palgrave Macmillan, 2013)

Critical Thinking and Visuals

"The current critical turn in rhetoric and composition studies underscores the role of the visual, especially the image artifact, in agency. For instance, in Just Advocacy? a collection of essays focusing on the representation of women and children in international advocacy efforts, coeditors Wendy S. Hesford and Wendy Kozol open their introduction with a critical analysis of a documentary based on a picture: the photograph of an unknown Afghan girl taken by Steve McCurry and gracing the cover of National Geographic in 1985. Through an examination of the ideology of the photo's appeal as well as the 'politics of pity' circulating through the documentary, Hesford and Kozol emphasize the power of individual images to shape perceptions, beliefs, actions, and agency." (Kristie S. Fleckenstein, Vision, Rhetoric, and Social Action in the Composition Classroom . Southern Illinois University Press, 2010)

Related Concepts

Analysis and Critical Essay
Book Report
Close Reading
Critical Thinking
Discourse Analysis
Evaluation Essay
Explication
Problem-Solution
Rhetorical Analysis
Definition and Examples of Explication (Analysis)
Rhetorical Analysis Definition and Examples
Quotes About Close Reading
How to Write a Critical Essay
What Is a Critique in Composition?
Definition and Examples of Analysis in Composition
Definition and Examples of Evaluation Essays
Understanding the Use of Language Through Discourse Analysis
What Is a Written Summary?
Critical Thinking in Reading and Composition
Critical Thinking Definition, Skills, and Examples
Miss Brill's Fragile Fantasy
6 Skills Students Need to Succeed in Social Studies Classes
Stylistics and Elements of Style in Literature
Informal Logic
literary present (verbs)

Home » Critical Analysis – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Critical Analysis – Types, Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Critical Analysis

Definition:

Critical analysis is a process of examining a piece of work or an idea in a systematic, objective, and analytical way. It involves breaking down complex ideas, concepts, or arguments into smaller, more manageable parts to understand them better.

Types of Critical Analysis

Types of Critical Analysis are as follows:

Literary Analysis

This type of analysis focuses on analyzing and interpreting works of literature , such as novels, poetry, plays, etc. The analysis involves examining the literary devices used in the work, such as symbolism, imagery, and metaphor, and how they contribute to the overall meaning of the work.

Film Analysis

This type of analysis involves examining and interpreting films, including their themes, cinematography, editing, and sound. Film analysis can also include evaluating the director’s style and how it contributes to the overall message of the film.

Art Analysis

This type of analysis involves examining and interpreting works of art , such as paintings, sculptures, and installations. The analysis involves examining the elements of the artwork, such as color, composition, and technique, and how they contribute to the overall meaning of the work.

Cultural Analysis

This type of analysis involves examining and interpreting cultural artifacts , such as advertisements, popular music, and social media posts. The analysis involves examining the cultural context of the artifact and how it reflects and shapes cultural values, beliefs, and norms.

Historical Analysis

This type of analysis involves examining and interpreting historical documents , such as diaries, letters, and government records. The analysis involves examining the historical context of the document and how it reflects the social, political, and cultural attitudes of the time.

Philosophical Analysis

This type of analysis involves examining and interpreting philosophical texts and ideas, such as the works of philosophers and their arguments. The analysis involves evaluating the logical consistency of the arguments and assessing the validity and soundness of the conclusions.

Scientific Analysis

This type of analysis involves examining and interpreting scientific research studies and their findings. The analysis involves evaluating the methods used in the study, the data collected, and the conclusions drawn, and assessing their reliability and validity.

Critical Discourse Analysis

This type of analysis involves examining and interpreting language use in social and political contexts. The analysis involves evaluating the power dynamics and social relationships conveyed through language use and how they shape discourse and social reality.

Comparative Analysis

This type of analysis involves examining and interpreting multiple texts or works of art and comparing them to each other. The analysis involves evaluating the similarities and differences between the texts and how they contribute to understanding the themes and meanings conveyed.

Critical Analysis Format

Critical Analysis Format is as follows:

I. Introduction

Provide a brief overview of the text, object, or event being analyzed
Explain the purpose of the analysis and its significance
Provide background information on the context and relevant historical or cultural factors

II. Description

Provide a detailed description of the text, object, or event being analyzed
Identify key themes, ideas, and arguments presented
Describe the author or creator’s style, tone, and use of language or visual elements

III. Analysis

Analyze the text, object, or event using critical thinking skills
Identify the main strengths and weaknesses of the argument or presentation
Evaluate the reliability and validity of the evidence presented
Assess any assumptions or biases that may be present in the text, object, or event
Consider the implications of the argument or presentation for different audiences and contexts

IV. Evaluation

Provide an overall evaluation of the text, object, or event based on the analysis
Assess the effectiveness of the argument or presentation in achieving its intended purpose
Identify any limitations or gaps in the argument or presentation
Consider any alternative viewpoints or interpretations that could be presented
Summarize the main points of the analysis and evaluation
Reiterate the significance of the text, object, or event and its relevance to broader issues or debates
Provide any recommendations for further research or future developments in the field.

VI. Example

Provide an example or two to support your analysis and evaluation
Use quotes or specific details from the text, object, or event to support your claims
Analyze the example(s) using critical thinking skills and explain how they relate to your overall argument

VII. Conclusion

Reiterate your thesis statement and summarize your main points
Provide a final evaluation of the text, object, or event based on your analysis
Offer recommendations for future research or further developments in the field
End with a thought-provoking statement or question that encourages the reader to think more deeply about the topic

How to Write Critical Analysis

Writing a critical analysis involves evaluating and interpreting a text, such as a book, article, or film, and expressing your opinion about its quality and significance. Here are some steps you can follow to write a critical analysis:

Read and re-read the text: Before you begin writing, make sure you have a good understanding of the text. Read it several times and take notes on the key points, themes, and arguments.
Identify the author’s purpose and audience: Consider why the author wrote the text and who the intended audience is. This can help you evaluate whether the author achieved their goals and whether the text is effective in reaching its audience.
Analyze the structure and style: Look at the organization of the text and the author’s writing style. Consider how these elements contribute to the overall meaning of the text.
Evaluate the content : Analyze the author’s arguments, evidence, and conclusions. Consider whether they are logical, convincing, and supported by the evidence presented in the text.
Consider the context: Think about the historical, cultural, and social context in which the text was written. This can help you understand the author’s perspective and the significance of the text.
Develop your thesis statement : Based on your analysis, develop a clear and concise thesis statement that summarizes your overall evaluation of the text.
Support your thesis: Use evidence from the text to support your thesis statement. This can include direct quotes, paraphrases, and examples from the text.
Write the introduction, body, and conclusion : Organize your analysis into an introduction that provides context and presents your thesis, a body that presents your evidence and analysis, and a conclusion that summarizes your main points and restates your thesis.
Revise and edit: After you have written your analysis, revise and edit it to ensure that your writing is clear, concise, and well-organized. Check for spelling and grammar errors, and make sure that your analysis is logically sound and supported by evidence.

When to Write Critical Analysis

You may want to write a critical analysis in the following situations:

Academic Assignments: If you are a student, you may be assigned to write a critical analysis as a part of your coursework. This could include analyzing a piece of literature, a historical event, or a scientific paper.
Journalism and Media: As a journalist or media person, you may need to write a critical analysis of current events, political speeches, or media coverage.
Personal Interest: If you are interested in a particular topic, you may want to write a critical analysis to gain a deeper understanding of it. For example, you may want to analyze the themes and motifs in a novel or film that you enjoyed.
Professional Development : Professionals such as writers, scholars, and researchers often write critical analyses to gain insights into their field of study or work.

Critical Analysis Example

An Example of Critical Analysis Could be as follow:

Research Topic:

The Impact of Online Learning on Student Performance

Introduction:

The introduction of the research topic is clear and provides an overview of the issue. However, it could benefit from providing more background information on the prevalence of online learning and its potential impact on student performance.

Literature Review:

The literature review is comprehensive and well-structured. It covers a broad range of studies that have examined the relationship between online learning and student performance. However, it could benefit from including more recent studies and providing a more critical analysis of the existing literature.

Research Methods:

The research methods are clearly described and appropriate for the research question. The study uses a quasi-experimental design to compare the performance of students who took an online course with those who took the same course in a traditional classroom setting. However, the study may benefit from using a randomized controlled trial design to reduce potential confounding factors.

The results are presented in a clear and concise manner. The study finds that students who took the online course performed similarly to those who took the traditional course. However, the study only measures performance on one course and may not be generalizable to other courses or contexts.

Discussion :

The discussion section provides a thorough analysis of the study’s findings. The authors acknowledge the limitations of the study and provide suggestions for future research. However, they could benefit from discussing potential mechanisms underlying the relationship between online learning and student performance.

Conclusion :

The conclusion summarizes the main findings of the study and provides some implications for future research and practice. However, it could benefit from providing more specific recommendations for implementing online learning programs in educational settings.

Purpose of Critical Analysis

There are several purposes of critical analysis, including:

To identify and evaluate arguments : Critical analysis helps to identify the main arguments in a piece of writing or speech and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses. This enables the reader to form their own opinion and make informed decisions.
To assess evidence : Critical analysis involves examining the evidence presented in a text or speech and evaluating its quality and relevance to the argument. This helps to determine the credibility of the claims being made.
To recognize biases and assumptions : Critical analysis helps to identify any biases or assumptions that may be present in the argument, and evaluate how these affect the credibility of the argument.
To develop critical thinking skills: Critical analysis helps to develop the ability to think critically, evaluate information objectively, and make reasoned judgments based on evidence.
To improve communication skills: Critical analysis involves carefully reading and listening to information, evaluating it, and expressing one’s own opinion in a clear and concise manner. This helps to improve communication skills and the ability to express ideas effectively.

Importance of Critical Analysis

Here are some specific reasons why critical analysis is important:

Helps to identify biases: Critical analysis helps individuals to recognize their own biases and assumptions, as well as the biases of others. By being aware of biases, individuals can better evaluate the credibility and reliability of information.
Enhances problem-solving skills : Critical analysis encourages individuals to question assumptions and consider multiple perspectives, which can lead to creative problem-solving and innovation.
Promotes better decision-making: By carefully evaluating evidence and arguments, critical analysis can help individuals make more informed and effective decisions.
Facilitates understanding: Critical analysis helps individuals to understand complex issues and ideas by breaking them down into smaller parts and evaluating them separately.
Fosters intellectual growth : Engaging in critical analysis challenges individuals to think deeply and critically, which can lead to intellectual growth and development.

Advantages of Critical Analysis

Some advantages of critical analysis include:

Improved decision-making: Critical analysis helps individuals make informed decisions by evaluating all available information and considering various perspectives.
Enhanced problem-solving skills : Critical analysis requires individuals to identify and analyze the root cause of a problem, which can help develop effective solutions.
Increased creativity : Critical analysis encourages individuals to think outside the box and consider alternative solutions to problems, which can lead to more creative and innovative ideas.
Improved communication : Critical analysis helps individuals communicate their ideas and opinions more effectively by providing logical and coherent arguments.
Reduced bias: Critical analysis requires individuals to evaluate information objectively, which can help reduce personal biases and subjective opinions.
Better understanding of complex issues : Critical analysis helps individuals to understand complex issues by breaking them down into smaller parts, examining each part and understanding how they fit together.
Greater self-awareness: Critical analysis helps individuals to recognize their own biases, assumptions, and limitations, which can lead to personal growth and development.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

Cluster Analysis – Types, Methods and Examples

Data Collection – Methods Types and Examples

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Discriminant Analysis – Methods, Types and...

Research Process – Steps, Examples and Tips

Research Design – Types, Methods and Examples

Interpretation Strategies

Related Documents

Interpretation In Qualitative Research: What, Why, How

This chapter addresses a wide range of concepts related to interpretation in qualitative research, examines the meaning and importance of interpretation in qualitative inquiry, and explores the ways methodology, data, and the self/researcher as instrument interact and impact interpretive processes. Additionally, the chapter presents a series of strategies for qualitative researchers engaged in the process of interpretation and closes by presenting a framework for qualitative researchers designed to inform their interpretations. The framework includes attention to the key qualitative research concepts transparency, reflexivity, analysis, validity, evidence, and literature. Four questions frame the chapter: What is interpretation, and why are interpretive strategies important in qualitative research? How do methodology, data, and the researcher/self impact interpretation in qualitative research? How do qualitative researchers engage in the process of interpretation? And, in what ways can a framework for interpretation strategies support qualitative researchers across multiple methodologies and paradigms?

A Comparison of Physiological Demand between Self-Propelled and Motorized Treadmill Exercise

There are a wide range of options for individuals to choose from in order to engage in aerobic exercise; from outdoor running to computer controlled and self-propelled treadmills. Recently, self-propelled treadmills have increased in popularity and provide an alternative to a motorized treadmill. Twenty subjects (10 men, 10 women) ranging in age from 19-23 with a mean of 20.4 ± 0.8 SD were participants in this study. The subjects visited the laboratory on three occasions. The purpose of the first visit was to familiarize the subject with the self-propelled treadmill (Woodway Curve 3.0). The second visit, subjects were instructed to run on the self-propelled treadmill for 3km at a self-determined pace. Speed data were collected directly from the self-propelled treadmill. The third visit used speed data collected during the self-propelled treadmill run to create an identically paced 3km run for the subjects to perform on a motorized treadmill (COSMED T150). During both the second and third visit, oxygen consumption (VO2) and respiratory exchange ratio (R) data were collected with COSMED’s Quark cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) metabolic mixing chamber system. The VO2 mean value for the self-propelled treadmill (44.90 ± 1.65 SE ml/kg/min) was significantly greater than the motorized treadmill (34.38 ± 1.39 SE ml/kg/min). The mean R value for the self-propelled treadmill (0.91 ± 0.01 SE) was significantly greater than the motorized treadmill (0.86 ± 0.01 SE). Our study demonstrated that a 3km run on a self-propelled treadmill does elicit a greater physiological response than a 3km run at on a standard motorized treadmill. Self-propelled treadmills provide a mode of exercise that offers increased training loads and should be considered as an alternative to motorized treadmills.

Expressing the Self

This book addresses different linguistic and philosophical aspects of referring to the self in a wide range of languages from different language families, including Amharic, English, French, Japanese, Korean, Mandarin, Newari (Sino-Tibetan), Polish, Tariana (Arawak), and Thai. In the domain of speaking about oneself, languages use a myriad of expressions that cut across grammatical and semantic categories, as well as a wide variety of constructions. Languages of Southeast and East Asia famously employ a great number of terms for first-person reference to signal honorification. The number and mixed properties of these terms make them debatable candidates for pronounhood, with many grammar-driven classifications opting to classify them with nouns. Some languages make use of egophors or logophors, and many exhibit an interaction between expressing the self and expressing evidentiality qua the epistemic status of information held from the ego perspective. The volume’s focus on expressing the self, however, is not directly motivated by an interest in the grammar or lexicon, but instead stems from philosophical discussions of the special status of thoughts about oneself, known as de se thoughts. It is this interdisciplinary understanding of expressing the self that underlies this volume, comprising philosophy of mind at one end of the spectrum and cross-cultural pragmatics of self-expression at the other. This unprecedented juxtaposition results in a novel method of approaching de se and de se expressions, in which research methods from linguistics and philosophy inform each other. The importance of this interdisciplinary perspective on expressing the self cannot be overemphasized. Crucially, the volume also demonstrates that linguistic research on first-person reference makes a valuable contribution to research on the self tout court, by exploring the ways in which the self is expressed, and thereby adding to the insights gained through philosophy, psychology, and cognitive science.

Charles Olson and American Modernism

The Practice of the Self situates the work of American poet Charles Olson (1910–70) at the centre of the early postwar American avant-garde. It shows Olson to have been one of the major advocates and theorists of American modernism in the late 1940s and early 1950s; a poet who responded fully and variously to the political, ethical, and aesthetic urgencies driving innovation across contemporary American art. Reading Olson’s work alongside that of contemporaries associated with the New York Schools of painting and music (as well as the exiled Frankfurt School), the book draws on Olson’s published and unpublished writings to establish an original account of early postwar American modernism. The development of Olson’s work is seen to illustrate two primary drivers of formal innovation in the period: the evolution of a new model of political action pivoting around the radical individual and, relatedly, a powerful new critique of instrumental reason and the Enlightenment tradition. Drawing on extensive archival research and featuring readings of a wide range of artists—including, prominently, Barnett Newman, Mark Rothko, David Smith, Wolfgang Paalen, and John Cage—The Practice of the Self offers a new reading of a major American poet and an original account of the emergence of postwar American modernism.

Do It for the Culture: The Case for Memes in Qualitative Research

Memes are a prominent feature of global life in the 21st century. The author asserts that memes are significant to current and future qualitative research. In particular, the text establishes memes as: (a) part of everyday communication, expression, and explanation, thus useful in qualitative research; (b) valuable cultural units and symbols; (c) forms of rapport building and cultivating relational research; (d) approaches that bolster and sustain remote data collection; (e) methods that infuse agency, humor, and creativity into the research process. The author then showcases distinctive ways memes can be effectively incorporated in qualitative research pursuits and publications. The article concludes with the necessity of data collection and representation approaches that advance the meaningfulness and cultural-relevance of qualitative inquiry.

Conceptualizing Qualitative Data

Qualitative research is practiced across diverse disciplines and contexts, and this produces a wide range of perspectives on the role of conceptualization and theory development. It also results in a hugely varied mix of submissions to qualitative research journals in terms of their level of conceptual elevation. This editorial explores why we conceptualize qualitative data, and some common challenges evident in current qualitative practice.

Ethical Dilemmas of a Clinician/Researcher Interviewing Women who have Grown up in a Family Where There was Domestic Violence

This paper attempts to illuminate some of the ethical dilemmas of a clinician/researcher interviewing women about a sensitive topic- their experience of having witnessed domestic violence in the family they grew up in, as part of a grounded theory study. Vignettes are presented to illustrate the self-reflexive process of the researcher and how she understood the effects of the interview process on her and the participants. The authors argue that doing in-depth qualitative research interviewing is an intervention in the life of the participants, especially, but not only, when the researchers are clinically-trained. However, this clinical training may also be an important resource from which to draw from, to act ethically and understand some of the complexity of the interaction between researcher and participants.

The Power of Constructivist Grounded Theory for Critical Inquiry

The pragmatist roots of constructivist grounded theory make it a useful method for pursuing critical qualitative inquiry. Pragmatism offers ways to think about critical qualitative inquiry; constructivist grounded theory offers strategies for doing it. Constructivist grounded theory fosters asking emergent critical questions throughout inquiry. This method also encourages (a) interrogating the taken-for-granted methodological individualism pervading much of qualitative research and (b) taking a deeply reflexive stance called methodological self-consciousness, which leads researchers to scrutinize their data, actions, and nascent analyses. The article outlines how to put constructivist grounded theory into practice and ends with where this practice could take us.

Beyond Bias: Critical Analysis and Layered Reading of Mao-Era Sources

Abstract Scholars of Mao-era history adopt a wide range of approaches to the selection and treatment of source material. Some scholars regard published sources as propaganda, and therefore as biased and unreliable. For many, archival sources are the gold standard; others question the reliability even of the archive and favor materials that escaped the filtering fingers of the state to be found in flea markets or garbage piles. Avoiding the false choice of either accepting sources as received wisdom or dismissing them as biased, the author argues that how scholars read their sources is more important than which they keep and which they throw away. She advocates for a layered approach that accounts for contexts of production and circulation, and further emphasizes the need to make this process of reading sources visible in our writing. A critical, layered reading of three unlikely sources demonstrates the myriad possibilities for analysis that combines the empirical, the discursive, and the self-reflexive.

Reddit Users’ Experiences of Suicidal Thoughts During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Analysis of r/Covid19_support Posts (Preprint)

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic is having considerable impacts on population-level mental health, with research illustrating an increased prevalence in suicidal thoughts due to pandemic stressors. While the drivers of suicidal thoughts amid the pandemic are poorly understood, qualitative research holds great potential for expanding upon projections from pre-pandemic work and contextualizing emerging epidemiological data. Despite calls for qualitative inquiry, there is a paucity of qualitative research examining experiences of suicidality related to COVID-19. The use of publicly available data from social media offers timely and pertinent information into ongoing pandemic-related mental health, including individual experiences of suicidal thoughts. OBJECTIVE The objective of this paper is to examine online posts that discuss suicidal thoughts within one Reddit community r/COVID19_support with the aim to identify contributing stressors and coping strategies related to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS This study draws on online posts from within the Reddit community r/COVID19_support that describe users’ suicidal thoughts during and related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were collected from creation of this subreddit on February 12, 2020 until December 31, 2020. Using the search term “suicide”, we used the NCapture add-on tool, hosted by NVivo, to conduct our investigation. A qualitative thematic analysis, as described by Braun and Clarke, was conducted to generate themes reflecting users’ experiences of suicidal thoughts. RESULTS A total of 83 posts from 57 users were included in the analysis. Reddit posts described a range of users’ lived experiences of suicidal thoughts related to the pandemic, including deterioration in mental health, complex emotions associated with suicidal thinking, and concern that suicidal thoughts may progress to action. Seven prominent and compounding stressors were identified as contributing to Reddit users’ suicidal thoughts, including social isolation, employment and finances, virus exposure and COVID-19 illness, uncertain timeline of the pandemic, news and social media, pre-existing mental health conditions, and lack of access to mental health resources. Some users described individual coping strategies used in attempt to manage suicidal thoughts, however these were recognized as insufficient for addressing the multilevel stressors of the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS Multiple and intersecting stressors have contributed to individuals’ experiences of suicidal thoughts in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, requiring thoughtful and complex public health and policy responses. While ongoing challenges exist with self-disclosure of mental health challenges on social media, Reddit and other online platforms may a supportive space for users to share suicidal thoughts and discuss potential coping strategies.

Export Citation Format

Share document.

Featured Essay The Love of God An essay by Sam Storms Read Now
Faithfulness of God
Saving Grace
Adoption by God

U.S. Edition

Arts & Culture
Bible & Theology
Christian Living
Current Events
Faith & Work
As In Heaven
Gospelbound
Post-Christianity?
TGC Podcast
You're Not Crazy
Churches Planting Churches
Help Me Teach The Bible
Word Of The Week
Upcoming Events
Past Conference Media
Foundation Documents
Church Directory
Global Resourcing
Donate to TGC

To All The World

The world is a confusing place right now. We believe that faithful proclamation of the gospel is what our hostile and disoriented world needs. Do you believe that too? Help TGC bring biblical wisdom to the confusing issues across the world by making a gift to our international work.

Interpreting Scripture: A General Introduction

Other essays.

Interpreting Scripture is the process of personally discovering what God through his human authors intended the biblical text to mean and effect. Through exegesis and theology one assesses, synthesizes, and applies God’s inerrant Word.

This study clarifies why we must interpret Scripture, synthesizes what presuppositions should guide our interpretation, and offers a process for how to interpret. Scripture plays a foundational place in all of life, and Scripture itself stresses the need to faithfully interpret in order to stand unashamed before the Lord. Interpreting Scripture faithfully necessitates that we view Scripture as God’s Word, assumes that Scripture’s truths are knowable, requires that we respond appropriately, and demands that we engage in the task depending on God. The interpretive process is about personally discovering what God through his human authors intended the biblical text to mean and effect. It includes assessing, synthesizing, and applying God’s inerrant word by means of exegesis and theology––both the narrow activity of identifying and drawing out what God was actually saying through his human authors in specific passages and the broader activity of relating this message to God’s overarching purpose in redemption culminating in Christ, with specific application to our present situation. The move from exegesis to theology includes at least twelve interrelated steps: (1) genre, (2) literary units and text hierarchy, (3) text criticism, (4) translation, (5) clause and text grammar, (6) argument-tracing, (7) word and concept studies, (8, 9) historical and literary context, (10, 11, 12) biblical, systematic, and practical theology.

Why Must We Interpret Scripture?

Moses stressed that a right relationship with the Lord is only possible when one hears God’s Word in a way that leads to fearing and following him (Deut. 31:12–13; cf. 6:1–3; 17:19–20; John 6:44–45). The Bible, therefore, “is no empty word for you, but your very life” (Deut. 32:47)! Similarly, David highlighted that God’s words are perfect, sure, right, pure, true, righteous, desirable, and sweet and that these same words revive the soul, give wisdom, rejoice the heart, enlighten the eyes, inspire fear, warn, and guide obedience unto great reward (Psa. 19:7–11). Only through an encounter with God’s pure, perfect, true, and abiding Word (Pss. 12:6; 119:96, 160) can people be

Reborn in Christ and indwelt by the Spirit (Psa. 119:93; Rom. 10:17; Gal. 3:2; Jas. 1:18; 1Pet. 1:23);
Empowered for holiness (Psa. 119:50; John 17:17; 2Tim. 3:17; 2Pet. 1:4),
Sustained to glory (Deut. 8:3; Rom. 1:16; 2Tim. 3:15),
Satisfied always (Pss. 1:2; 19:10; 1Pet. 2:3).

Man lives through “every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4; cf. Deut. 8:3), so we must saturate our whole being with Scripture (Deut. 6:7; Josh. 1:7–8; Pss. 1:3; 78:5–8). We must seek its truths like silver (Prov. 2:4) and do so in a way that moves us to tremble in surrender and awe (Isa. 66:2).

God has given his Word to the simple and not just the scholar (Psa. 19:7; 119:130), and it is because of this that we are even to instruct children in its teachings (Deut. 6:6–7; Psa. 78:5–8; Eph. 6:4). Nevertheless, following the pattern of the priest-scribe Ezra, we must study the Word so that we can loyally do what it calls for and then teach it faithfully (Ezra 7:10). The Lord calls Christians to think maturely, which means yearning for the clear Word of God, rightly understanding what is good, and then being innocent to what is evil (1Cor. 14:20). Ignorant and unstable people are those who misappropriate God’s Word, but those who are knowledgeable and steady can rightly understand the Scriptures (2Pet. 3:16). Paul charged Timothy, “Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything” (2Tim. 2:7). Biblical interpretation is not an option. Christians must rigorously think over God’s Book and do so in a way that looks to God for illumination––God’s Spirit guiding the human mind and altering the human heart so that the interpreter can grasp Scripture’s message (1Cor. 2:13–14). “Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth” (2Tim. 2:15). The biblical interpreter handles God’s Word without shame only when the Lord himself approves of the interpretation. We must, therefore, carefully interpret Scripture.

What Presuppositions Should Guide Our Interpreting Scripture?

At least four foundational presuppositions should guide our interpreting Scripture.

1. Biblical interpretation necessitates that we view Scripture as God’s Word.

The only way to truly arrive at what the biblical authors intended is to believe (as they did) that they were reading and writing God’s very Word (Isa. 8:20; 1Cor. 2:13; 14:37). This requires a submissive disposition to Scripture’s authority. We must be willing to let our understanding and application of truth be conformed to the Bible’s declarations, all in accordance with God’s revealed intention. The Bible is special revelation—God’s disclosure of himself and his will in a way that we can understand (1Cor. 14:37; 2Tim. 3:16; 2Pet. 1:20–21). The very words, and not just the ideas, are God-inspired (Matt. 5:17–18; 1Cor. 2:13; 2Tim. 3:16–17). And the “words of the Lord are pure” (Psa. 12:6); his “law is true” (Psa. 119:142); “every one of [his] righteous rules endures forever” (Psa. 119:160); and his “commandments are right” (Psa. 119:172). Jesus said, “Scripture cannot be broken” (John 10:35), and Paul said that this is so because “all Scripture is breathed out by God” (2Tim. 3:16). Indeed, as Peter said, “No prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2Pet. 1:21).

These truths imply that Scripture is both authoritative and accurate in all it declares. In order to stress that the Bible’s assertions are both reliable and unerring, the church has historically stated that (a) in matters of faith (doctrine) and practice (ethics), Scripture’s teaching is infallible —a sure and safe guide, and that (b) in matters of fact (whether history, chronology, geography, or the like), Scripture’s claims are inerrant —entirely true and trustworthy. 1 Both terms mean something comparable but address different spheres, and both are rightly understood only in relation to what the authors, led by the Spirit, intended to convey by their texts. That is, submitting to Scripture’s authority means respecting the biblical authors’ intentions and the literary conventions under which they wrote. We must allow for partial reporting from different perspectives, paraphrasing, and summarizing and must not require the Bible to give definitive or exhaustive information on every topic (e.g., the failure of Chronicles to mention David’s sin with Bathsheba [2Sam. 11–12] or Solomon’s idolatry [1Kgs. 11]; the instigator of David’s census being Yahweh in 2Sam. 24:1 but Satan in 1Chr 21:1; the additional information that Manasseh repented from his deep wickedness in 2Chr. 33:10–19 [cf. 2Kgs. 21:10–18]). We must allow for phenomenological language, with which the authors describe a phenomenon as they observed it or experienced it, not necessarily how it scientifically occurred (e.g., Josh. 10:12–13; Matt. 5:45). And we must allow for the reporting of a speech without the endorsement of that speech’s truthfulness; a biblical character may truly say something that is not true (e.g., Exod. 1:17–21; Josh. 2:1–7; Acts 5:1–11). Scripture is the very Word of God, so as we interpret it we must trust it to never lead us astray and approach it as the highest influence in our lives.

2. Biblical interpretation assumes that Scripture’s truths are knowable.

Proper understanding of Scripture assumes that the Bible is, by nature, clear in what it teaches. In short, truth can be known. Peter recognized that “there are some things in [Paul’s letters] that are hard to understand,” but he went on to say that it is “the ignorant and unstable” who “twist” these words “to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures” (2Pet. 3:16). The psalmists were convinced that God’s Word enlightens our path and imparts understanding (Psa. 119:105, 130). Paul wrote his words plainly (2Cor. 1:13) and called others to “think over” what he said, trusting that “the Lord will give you understanding in everything” (2Tim. 2:7).

The very nature of God’s Word demands that its message can be understood in any culture and in any age. Historically, the church has called this the doctrine of Scripture’s perspicuity or clarity. The Bible is sufficiently clear, but not everything in it is equally clear. It is sufficiently clear to allow us to grasp the portrait of God’s supremacy and his overarching kingdom purposes climaxing in the saving work of Jesus, but some other elements in Scripture are less lucid. Wayne Grudem has helpfully noted that the Bible itself testifies that we can understand it, but: 2

Not all at once;
Not without effort;
Not without ordinary means;
Not without the reader’s willingness to obey it;
Not without the help of the Holy Spirit;
Not without human misunderstanding;
Never completely.

These things stated, we must interpret Scripture convinced that what God intends for us to know we can know.

3. Biblical interpretation requires that we respond appropriately.

We as biblical interpreters are not finished with our task once we discover what God has spoken. We must then move on to recognize that his Word is “profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” (2Tim. 3:16). We must grasp not only the biblical author’s intended meaning (which is possible for nonbelievers) but also his intended effect (which is possible only for believers, Rom. 8:7–8; 1Cor. 2:14). To rightly grasp God’s truth bound up in his Book, we must employ the necessary habits of heart and mind captured in the order of Ezra resolve: “Ezra set his heart to study the Law of the LORD, and to do it and to teach his statutes and rules in Israel” (Ezra 7:10). To study means observing carefully, understanding rightly, and evaluating fairly; to do includes feeling appropriately and applying wisely; to teach involves expressing articulately, faithfully, and boldly. 3 These are the necessary habits of the heart and mind needed for rightly grasping truth in God’s Book. Biblical interpretation demands that we respond to Scripture appropriately.

4. Biblical interpretation that culminates in application demands God-dependence.

The process of moving from study to practice is something that only God can enable, and he does so only through Jesus. In 1 Corinthians 2:14, Paul writes, “The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.” By “understand” here, Paul means “embrace, affirm, align with, delight in, apply.” Only in Christ is the veil of hardness toward God’s Word taken away (2Cor. 3:14), but in Christ, the Word becomes near us, in our mouth and in our heart (Rom. 10:8). The biblical authors’ ultimate intent included a transformed life, the foundation of which is a personal encounter with the living God. We will not experience this apart from the Lord’s help.

Putting the Bible under a microscope (careful study) should always result in finding ourselves under its microscope, as Scripture changes us more into Christ’s likeness. We engage in exegesis and theology in order to encounter God. We approach humbly and dependently and never with manipulation or force. Biblical interpretation should create servants, not kings.

What Is a Process for Interpreting Scripture?

The English term exegesis is a transliteration of the Greek noun exēgēsis ( ek “from, out of” + agō “to bring, move [something]”), meaning an “account, description, narration.” Narrowly defined, exegesis of Scripture is the interpretive activity of identifying or drawing out what God was actually saying through his human authors in specific passages within specific books. Texts convey meaning; they do not produce it. Following God’s leading, the biblical authors purposely wrote the words they did with specific sense and purpose. “Men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit” (2Pet. 1:21). We have to carefully read what the Lord through his human servants gives us in Scripture. In exegesis we discover what is there, which includes both the specific meaning that the authors convey and its implications—those inferences in a text of which the authors may or may not have been aware but that legitimately fall within the principle or pattern of meaning that they willed.

The English term theology comes from the Latin theologia , which derives from a combination of the Greek nouns theos (“God”) and logos (“a formal accounting, reckoning”). In short, theology is a “study of God.” Because Scripture is God’s Word for all time and because every biblical passage has a broader context (historical, literary, and biblical), exegesis (narrowly defined) naturally and necessarily moves us into various theological disciplines:

Biblical theology considers how God’s Word progresses, integrates, and climaxes in Christ.
Systematic theology examines what the Bible teaches about certain theological topics.
Practical theology details the proper Christian response to the Bible’s truths.

Biblical interpreters do not stop until they consider every passage in light of all God’s special revelation. Then they must apply the passage through lives of worship. Exegesis moves to theology, and the whole process is to result in a personal encounter with the living God disclosed in Scripture. Doxology—the practice of glorifying or praising God—should color all biblical study. (For more, see Naselli’s “Theological Method.”)

There are at least twelve steps in the move from exegesis to theology and from personal study to practice and then instruction. While one can discuss the various stages independently, the interpretive process is more like a spiral by which we continually revisit various interpretive questions en route to biblical faithfulness. For ease of recollection, I have tagged the whole process TOCMA , which stands for Text, Observation, Context, Meaning, and Application. Each of the twelve steps falls within one of these overarching categories, the first nine covering exegesis and the last three theology.

T EXT—“What is the makeup of the passage?”

1. Genre: Determine the literary form, subject matter, and function of the passage, compare it to similar genres, and consider the implications for interpretation.

2. Literary units and text hierarchy: Determine the limits and basic structure of the passage.

3. Text criticism: Establish the passage’s original wording.

4. Translation: Translate the text and compare other translations.

O BSERVATION—“How is the passage communicated?”

5. Clause and text grammar: Assess the makeup and relationship of words, phrases, clauses, and larger text units.

6. Argument-tracing: Finish tracing the literary argument and create a message-driven outline that is tied to the passage’s main point.

7. Word and concept studies: Clarify the meaning of key words, phrases, and concepts.

C ONTEXT—“Where does the passage fit?”

8. Historical context: Understand the historical situation from which the author composed the text and identify any historical details that the author mentions or assumes.

9. Literary context: Comprehend the role that the passage plays in the whole book.

M EANING—“What does the passage mean?”

10. Biblical theology: Consider how your passage connects to the Bible’s overall flow and message and points to Christ.

11. Systematic theology: Discern how your passage theologically coheres with the whole Bible, assessing key doctrines especially in direct relation to the gospel.

A PPLICATION—“Why does the passage matter?”

12. Practical theology: Apply the text to yourself, the church, and the world, stressing the centrality of Christ and the hope of the gospel.

To faithfully interpret Scripture requires asking the right questions. In exegesis, we are asking the biblical author, “What are you saying?” (the grammar, text-criticism, and translation question), and, “Why do you say it like that?” (the genre, structure, argument, and historical and literary context question). In theology we are asking, “What do you mean?” (the biblical and systematic theology question), and “What is the significance of this passage for us today? (the practical theology question). May your journey of interpreting Scripture lead you to discover beautiful truths and encounter the living God in the face of Christ. May you increasingly study, practice, and teach God’s Word with care and faithfulness for the glory of God and the good of his church.

The Intricacies of Interpretation: the Role of the Essay Reader

This essay about the pivotal role of essay readers in academia and beyond. It highlights how essay readers decode complex texts, foster critical dialogue, and uphold the integrity of written communication. They serve as interpreters, guiding scholars and shaping scholarly discourse. Beyond academia, they play crucial roles in ensuring quality and integrity in publishing, media, and legal realms. Ultimately, essay readers enrich scholarly discourse, foster critical thinking, and contribute to the advancement of knowledge and understanding.

How it works

Essay writing is a craft that demands not only the art of expression but also the skill of interpretation. As such, the role of the essay reader becomes pivotal in the academic landscape. Beyond merely evaluating the coherence and structure of an essay, essay readers delve into the nuances of language, argumentation, and critical thinking. In this discourse, we explore the multifaceted responsibilities of essay readers, shedding light on their integral role in shaping scholarly discourse.

At the heart of the essay reader’s task lies the art of comprehension.

Beyond surface-level understanding, essay readers must decipher the underlying messages, themes, and arguments embedded within the text. This requires a keen eye for detail, an astute grasp of language, and an ability to discern implicit meanings. Whether analyzing a literary masterpiece or a scientific treatise, essay readers serve as custodians of interpretation, unraveling the layers of meaning woven into the fabric of the text.

Furthermore, essay readers play a pivotal role in fostering critical dialogue within academic circles. Through their feedback and assessments, they not only provide guidance to aspiring scholars but also challenge established paradigms and perspectives. By engaging with essays thoughtfully and constructively, essay readers contribute to the continuous evolution of knowledge, pushing the boundaries of inquiry and discourse.

Moreover, the role of the essay reader extends beyond the confines of academia, permeating various spheres of society. In professional settings, such as publishing houses and media outlets, essay readers serve as gatekeepers of quality and integrity, ensuring that only the most rigorous and compelling works reach the public domain. Similarly, in legal and governmental contexts, essay readers scrutinize documents and reports, offering invaluable insights that inform decision-making processes.

In conclusion, the role of the essay reader is both nuanced and indispensable in the realm of academia and beyond. By embracing the responsibilities of comprehension, critique, and engagement, essay readers enrich scholarly discourse, foster critical thinking, and uphold the integrity of written communication. As we navigate the complex terrain of interpretation, let us recognize and celebrate the profound contributions of essay readers to the advancement of knowledge and understanding.

Cite this page

The Intricacies of Interpretation: the Role of the Essay Reader. (2024, May 12). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-intricacies-of-interpretation-the-role-of-the-essay-reader/

"The Intricacies of Interpretation: the Role of the Essay Reader." PapersOwl.com , 12 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-intricacies-of-interpretation-the-role-of-the-essay-reader/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Intricacies of Interpretation: the Role of the Essay Reader . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-intricacies-of-interpretation-the-role-of-the-essay-reader/ [Accessed: 15 May. 2024]

"The Intricacies of Interpretation: the Role of the Essay Reader." PapersOwl.com, May 12, 2024. Accessed May 15, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-intricacies-of-interpretation-the-role-of-the-essay-reader/

"The Intricacies of Interpretation: the Role of the Essay Reader," PapersOwl.com , 12-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-intricacies-of-interpretation-the-role-of-the-essay-reader/. [Accessed: 15-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Eloise Braun

Customer Reviews

We value every paper writer working for us, therefore we ask our clients to put funds on their balance as proof of having payment capability. Would be a pity for our writers not to get fair pay. We also want to reassure our clients of receiving a quality paper, thus the funds are released from your balance only when you're 100% satisfied.

IMAGES

What is an Essay? Definition, Types and Writing Tips by HandMadeWriting
How to write an Interpretation essay
How to Write a Definition Essay: Writing Guide with Sample Essays
How to write a written analysis. Writing a Good Data Analysis Report: 7
😝 How to write a literary essay step by step. How to Write a Literary
🏆 Different styles of essays. Different Styles of Essay Writing. 2022-11-01

VIDEO

Free CSS Essay Class| Topic interpretation| Dr Hajra Niaz
Interpretation meaning in Urdu
Opinion Essay/IELTS Writing Task 2/ IELTS Academic/ Essay Structure/ Essay Templates
"Mastering IELTS Writing Task 1: Analyzing Academic Line Graphs
Another America ~ Films From a Place Called Home: Born to Win
Article 31C

COMMENTS

How to Write a Literary Analysis Essay
Table of contents. Step 1: Reading the text and identifying literary devices. Step 2: Coming up with a thesis. Step 3: Writing a title and introduction. Step 4: Writing the body of the essay. Step 5: Writing a conclusion. Other interesting articles.
Interpretive Essay Guide
An interpretive essay goes beyond merely summarizing or describing a work; it requires a deeper examination. At its core, this essay type is an analytical work that requires a writer to not only delve into the underlying themes and messages of a piece (be it literature, art, or film) but also to weave in their personal interpretation and insights.
18.2 What is Literary Interpretation?
However, literary interpretation requires a bit more than the basic components of summary, description, and analysis. Literary interpretation requires a process of inquiry and a methodology. To make sure you interpret rather than summarize, don't just ask "what" questions, but also ask "how" and "why" questions.
How to Write an Insightful Interpretive Essay
1. A thoughtful thesis. Like any essay you write for class, you're going to want a thesis statement for your interpretive essay. A thesis usually consists of one, sometimes two sentences that tell the reader what you're going to write about. It clearly states your viewpoint and offers a summary of your supporting reasons for that viewpoint.
Step-by-Step Guide: How To Write An Interpretive Essay
An interpretive essay involves analyzing and interpreting a piece of literature or artwork, providing your perspective and insights on its meaning and significance. To write one, start by carefully reading and understanding the text or artwork, then develop a thesis statement that captures your interpretation.
WRITING AN INSIGHTFUL INTERPRETIVE ESSAY
An interpretive essay is a piece of writing that focuses on a writer's ability to analyze and interpret an author's specific literature or subject. As a genre, this is where creative writing is born as it draws on the elements that are central to storytelling. To put it another way, an interpretative essay is prepared to offer a writer's ...
How to Write an Interpretive Essay and Literary Analysis
The Basics. Use the following guidelines for teaching how to write an interpretive essay or how to write a literary analysis: The introduction must introduce the literary work, capture the reader's attention, and include a clearly written thesis statement that contains the literary interpretation. The body of the essay must support the thesis ...
Interpretation, Interpretative Frameworks
Interpretation is. the act of literacy, the human process of making inferences, of ascribing meaning to signs and symbols, the act of signification. People make interpretations of texts and events in order to make sense of world. Interpretation is a deeply subjective process. Different people can see the exact same event and infer contrasting ...
How to Write an Interpretive Essay?
The key focus of an interpretive essay is on your personal feelings, analysis, and presentation of a subject. It involves making a case for your ideas, aiming to be informative and persuasive, while also keeping the writing interesting. This form of writing is distinctly personal, reflecting your views, arguments, and subjective opinions.
Essay
essay, an analytic, interpretative, or critical literary composition usually much shorter and less systematic and formal than a dissertation or thesis and usually dealing with its subject from a limited and often personal point of view. Some early treatises—such as those of Cicero on the pleasantness of old age or on the art of "divination ...
Interpreting Literary Meaning: How to Use Text to Guide Your Interpretation
To interpret literature is to try and find the meaning or theme of the story. Discover how to use the text to guide your interpretation with key elements such as plot, characters, setting, symbols ...
The Four Main Types of Essay
An essay is a focused piece of writing designed to inform or persuade. There are many different types of essay, but they are often defined in four categories: argumentative, expository, narrative, and descriptive essays. Argumentative and expository essays are focused on conveying information and making clear points, while narrative and ...
3. Historical Analysis and Interpretation
HISTORICAL THINKING STANDARD 3. The student engages in historical analysis and interpretation: Therefore, the student is able to: Compare and contrast differing sets of ideas, values, personalities, behaviors, and institutions by identifying likenesses and differences. Consider multiple perspectives of various peoples in the past by ...
How To Write An Interpretation Essay
The Interpretive Analysis Essay should have an introduction, body, and a conclusion. The writer must consistently quote and paraphrase the literary work in the introduction, body, and conclusion to help them in their analysis and in determining the possible meanings. These quotations and paraphrases help the writer to support their arguments by ...
30 Interpretation Strategies: Appropriate Concepts
This essay addresses a wide range of concepts related to interpretation in qualitative research, examines the meaning and importance of interpretation in qualitative inquiry, and explores the ways methodology, data, and the self/researcher as instrument interact and impact interpretive processes. Additionally, the essay presents a series of ...
Definition and Examples of Critical Analyses
In composition, critical analysis is a careful examination and evaluation of a text, image, or other work or performance. Performing a critical analysis does not necessarily involve finding fault with a work. On the contrary, a thoughtful critical analysis may help us understand the interaction of the particular elements that contribute to a ...
Critical Analysis
Definition: Critical analysis is a process of examining a piece of work or an idea in a systematic, objective, and analytical way. It involves breaking down complex ideas, concepts, or arguments into smaller, more manageable parts to understand them better. Types of Critical Analysis. Types of Critical Analysis are as follows: Literary Analysis
Interpretation Strategies
Interpretation Strategies. This essay addresses a wide range of concepts related to interpretation in qualitative research, examines the meaning and importance of interpretation in qualitative inquiry, and explores the ways methodology, data, and the self/researcher as instrument interact and impact interpretive processes.
Art and Interpretation
Interpretation in art refers to the attribution of meaning to a work. A point on which people often disagree is whether the artist's or author's intention is relevant to the interpretation of the work. In the Anglo-American analytic philosophy of art, views about interpretation branch into two major camps: intentionalism and anti ...
Interpreting Scripture: A General Introduction
1. Biblical interpretation necessitates that we view Scripture as God's Word. The only way to truly arrive at what the biblical authors intended is to believe (as they did) that they were reading and writing God's very Word (Isa. 8:20; 1Cor. 2:13; 14:37). This requires a submissive disposition to Scripture's authority.
The Intricacies of Interpretation: the Role of the Essay Reader
Essay Example: Essay writing is a craft that demands not only the art of expression but also the skill of interpretation. As such, the role of the essay reader becomes pivotal in the academic landscape. Beyond merely evaluating the coherence and structure of an essay, essay readers delve into
Textualism and Constitutional Interpretation
Textualism is a mode of legal interpretation that focuses on the plain meaning of the text of a legal document. Textualism usually emphasizes how the terms in the Constitution would be understood by people at the time they were ratified, as well as the context in which those terms appear. 1 Footnote See Hon. Antonin Scalia, A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and the Law 2 3-38 (Amy ...
Judicial Precedent and Constitutional Interpretation
The most commonly cited source of constitutional meaning is the Supreme Court's prior decisions on questions of constitutional law. 1 Footnote Michael J. Gerhardt, The Power of Precedent 147-48 (2008) ([I]t is practically impossible to find any modern Court decision that fails to cite at least some precedents in support.This essay's concept of judicial precedent is limited to prior ...
Essay Interpretation Meaning
The money will be there until you confirm that you are fully satisfied with our work and are ready to pay your paper writer. If you aren't satisfied, we'll make revisions or give you a full refund. Your credit card will be billed as Writingserv 938-777-7752 / Devellux Inc, 1012 E Osceola PKWY SUITE 23, KISSIMMEE, FL, 34744. $ 10.91.