After reading through " Learning to Read Critically in Teaching and Learning" there was two figures in the text that I want to make note while building my draft. Figure 1.1 on page 24 outlines how Theoretical, Research and Practice Knowledge intertwine to work(Wallace, 2003). This is condusive to the how article is written with the each of those being a piece with building the theory. 

Another point that provides some guidance on buiding some structure to my draft is the idea of "Framing an issue as a question" (Wallace, 2003) pg 34. The question I want to frame is we don’t know who we are and what we mean until we have read what we have written. This is a common theme is the article and brings through the activities. What are the strengths within that arguement? 

I need to key in on some of weaknesses within the article to have a sound reflection. Parts of the article that didn't support the improvement of "bad writers". 

• no research done to define a "bad writer" 
• how are they testing writing skills?
• what is the base line being used?
• results are being stated of improved grades using what criteria? 
• the author references reasons for students being "bad writers" ie home life, bilingual but again it is not developed in the article. 

Excersise one on page 39 in "Learning to Read Critically in Teaching and Learning" (Wallace, 2003) has a great outline the provides more questions to help me think critically. Build those questions into my notes to help support my critique of the article and rough copy. 

"What does the literature reviewed suggest may be key factors promoting or inhibiting the effectiveness?" (Wallace, 2003) pg.39. 

Wallace, Mike. Learning to Read Critically in Teaching and Learning, edited by Louise Poulson, and Mike Wallace, SAGE Publications, 2003. ProQuest Ebook Central, https://0-ebookcentral-proquest-com.aupac.lib.athabascau.ca/lib/athabasca-ebooks/detail.action?docID=254628.