Overview
Purpose:
Critical reading is an active way of reading that privileges deep engagement with a text. When
we read critically, we use our critical thinking skills to question both the text and our own
reading of it. To read critically, you must think critically. This involves analysis, interpretation,
and evaluation. Each of these processes helps you to interact with the text in different ways:
highlighting important points and examples, brainstorming, outlining, describing aspects of the
text or argument, reflecting on your own reading and thinking, raising objections to the ideas or
evidence presented, drawing connections to others texts, and so on.
This assignment will encourage you to develop your critical reading skills, your academic
writing skills, and your verbal presentation skills, as you draft a two-page response to a course
reading and the present that response paper to the class.
Instructions:
Write a two-page response to your assigned reading. The response should be comprised of three
sections: (1) a brief summary of the reading, (2) an analysis of the reading, and (3) two
discussion questions.
Your first paragraph should be a summary of the reading. The summary should include the main
argument presented in the article or book chapter, and it should identify the evidence the author
uses to support his/her/their argument. Your summary should be concise – you do not need to
cover all points made in the reading; use your best judgment to determine which parts of the
reading are most important.
Your analysis paragraph should follow. In this paragraph, you will present a claim about the
reading. First, think about the main argument of the reading. Did you find that argument and the
evidence used to support it compelling? Why or why not? If not, what information would you
need to see to be convinced of the author’s argument? How could the author strengthen
his/her/their argument? Second, think about the reading and its main argument in comparison to
the other arguments we have covered. How does this reading fit in with the other readings we
have discussed in class? Does the author make an argument that is consistent with or that
contradicts the other arguments about law and courts?
TOPIC:
Marc Galanter (1974) “Why the Haves Comes Out Ahead” Law & Society Review
(pp 95-160)