Hi there.

I've just embarked on a Masters level course and as a Maths graduate, I've no experience in evaluating text and therefore I'm struggling with the absolute basics.

I'm looking for advice on how to critique the document 'Leadership and management: Spotting the difference Expert perspective'.

This is a very short (non-assessed) task, but alas, my inexperience means I'm struggling. Do you have any advice on how I could answer the question:

Consider the writers final thoughts on the social distance and political distance in both the English and Scottish systems; compare and contrast this with your own experiences. You may wish to include this in your journal.

It has to be answered with reference to the questions

Why is it of interest to you?

What did you agree with?

What did you disagree with?

What questions did the article raise for you?

How does it relate to what you have learned in the class and your professional context?

How does it relate to other articles on the topic?

How does it equate with your experience as a professional?

How well have they made their argument?

Are there any omissions or flaws in their argument?

Have they over-stated their case?

The reason I'm struggling is that I agree almost entirely with what the author is saying and I'm unsure of how to approach a critique when my only thoughts are 'yes, I agree'.

I'd be most grateful for even the most basic, simple pointers you could offer.