Critical Writing in Academia

80~~/100~~

Verdict High Trust Mostly reliable: educational guidance in line with mainstream university advice. It contains some unquantified...

This is an academic-writing guide by Grad Coach (https://gradcoach.com/analytical-vs-descriptive-writing/), a commercial dissertation-coaching company.

✓ 6 checks out ✕ 2 disputed ? 3 unverified

☰ Full analysis The complete summary ⌄

This is an academic-writing guide by Grad Coach (https://gradcoach.com/analytical-vs-descriptive-writing/), a commercial dissertation-coaching company. It explains the difference between descriptive and analytical (critical) writing. Its main teaching points are well supported by independent university study-skills guidance from Hull, Sheffield Hallam, Suffolk, Leeds, Westminster and UCD. Those points are: descriptive writing covers the 'what, where, when, who'; critical writing covers the 'so what'; some description is needed as groundwork; and 'too descriptive' is common negative feedback. Three issues reduce the score. (1) The claim that descriptive writing is 'probably the biggest killer of marks' is not quantified and could not be checked against any data. (2) Saying there are 'two main types' of academic writing is a simplification. The University of Sydney names four: descriptive, analytical, persuasive and critical. (3) Using 'critical' and 'analytical' interchangeably blurs a distinction that some institutions draw. The worked economics example is a hypothetical teaching device. Its reasoning (devaluation raises import prices) matches published research on exchange-rate pass-through, though the real-world size of the effect varies. The publisher has a commercial interest, but the text is not misleading.

What checked out (6)

Descriptive writing communicates the 'what', 'where', 'when' or 'who', while analytical writing goes beyond the facts. This matches the UCD Writing Centre handout (https://www.ucd.ie/writingcentre/t4media/Descritive%20vs%20Analytical%20Writing%20SoRh_upd.pdf) and the University of Hull guidance (https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/criticalwriting/descriptive-critical).
Some descriptive writing is needed to lay the foundation for critical writing. The University of Suffolk guide (https://libguides.uos.ac.uk/academic-writing/critical-thinking-writing) says some description is generally necessary to support critical writing. Leeds (https://library.leeds.ac.uk/info/1401/academic-skills/105/critical-thinking/5) also says some description may be necessary.
Too much description is a well-known problem that costs marks. The University of Westminster (https://libguides.westminster.ac.uk/critical-thinking-and-writing/critical-writing) and the University of Leeds both list 'too descriptive' as common negative feedback from lecturers.
Critical writing should explain relevance to the argument or research focus (the 'link back to research aims' advice). This is consistent with the University of Hull guidance on showing relevance to your argument and to the focus of the assignment.
Grad Coach works with 'thousands of students'. This is self-reported: the Grad Coach homepage (https://gradcoach.com/) claims 10,000+ students coached, and a 2020-era press release syndicated on Yahoo Finance mentions 'thousands of students'. It is plausible but has not been independently audited.
The economic reasoning in the example (currency devaluation leads to higher import prices and a higher cost of living) is directionally consistent with the evidence. A CEPR/VoxEU study across 46 countries (https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/state-dependent-exchange-rate-pass-through) finds that depreciation passes through to consumer prices, and more strongly to import prices.

✕ Disputed claims 2 claims ⌄

Partly disputed (simplification, not false): 'there are two main types' of academic writing, descriptive and critical. The University of Sydney (https://www.sydney.edu.au/students/study-skills/writing/types-of-academic-writing.html) says the four main types are descriptive, analytical, persuasive and critical. The two-way split is a teaching simplification and is not technically wrong for the article's narrow purpose.
Partly disputed (simplification): treating 'critical' and 'analytical' writing as interchangeable. The University of Sydney's framework lists analytical and critical writing as separate types, so many institutions do distinguish them.

? Unverified claims 3 claims ⌄

That descriptive writing is 'probably the biggest killer of marks in dissertations, theses and research papers'. No systematic data on markers' feedback was found to rank it against other causes of lost marks. It is presented as practitioner opinion ('probably') and is plausible, but not confirmed.
That descriptive writing is an 'incredibly pervasive problem' across Grad Coach's students. This rests on the company's internal experience and cannot be checked independently.
That writing critically is 'one of the most important skills' for an academic journey. This is a value judgement that is widely echoed in university guidance, but it cannot be tested as a fact.

⌕ Sources & how we checked Search journal, source grades, confidence ⌄

Confidence

High — The article is mostly conceptual guidance, not a news report, and its core claims are supported by at least six independent university study-skills sources. The score is held at 80, not higher, for three reasons: the headline superlative ('biggest killer of marks') has no evidence and stays Unverified; the two-type framework and the merging of critical with analytical writing are simplifications contradicted by at least one authoritative university source; and the publisher has a commercial interest and relies on self-reported metrics. None of the claims involve fast-changing facts, so the risk of the assessment going out of date is low.

Secondary sources

https://gradcoach.com/analytical-vs-descriptive-writing/

Search journal

Grad Coach descriptive vs analytical writing

descriptive vs critical writing university study skills guide

four main types of academic writing descriptive analytical persuasive critical

https://www.sydney.edu.au/students/study-skills/writing/types-of-academic-writing.html

too descriptive common feedback dissertation marks critical analysis

currency depreciation import prices cost of living pass-through

Grad Coach thousands of students dissertation coaching

Article metrics

Emotion 7% · Reading grade 11.4 · 810 words

≡ The article we checked Full text as retrieved ⌄

Across the thousands of students [we work with]( descriptive writing (as opposed to critical or analytical writing) is an **incredibly pervasive problem**. In fact, it’s probably the biggest killer of marks in dissertations, theses and [research papers]( In this post, **we’ll explain the difference** between descriptive and analytical writing in straightforward terms, along with plenty of practical examples.

## What’s the difference?

Writing **critically** is one of the **most important skills** you’ll need to master for your academic journey, but what exactly does this mean?

Well, when it comes to writing, at least for academic purposes, there are **two main types** – **descriptive** writing and **critical** writing. Critical writing is also sometimes referred to as **analytical** writing, so we’ll use these two terms interchangeably.

To understand what constitutes critical (or analytical) writing, it’s useful to compare it against its opposite, descriptive writing. At the most basic level, descriptive writing merely communicates the “**what**”, “**where**”, “**when**” or “**who**”. In other words, it describes a thing, place, time or person. It doesn’t consider anything beyond that or explore the situation’s impact, importance or meaning. Here’s an example of a descriptive sentence:

_“Yesterday, the president unexpectedly fired the minister of finance.”_

As you can see, this sentence just states **what** happened, **when** it happened and who was involved. Classic descriptive writing.

Contrasted to this, critical writing takes things a step further and unveils the “**so what?**” – in other words, it explains the **impact** or **consequence** of a given situation. Let’s stick with the same event and look at an example of analytical writing:

_“The president’s unexpected firing of the well-respected finance minister had an immediate negative impact on investor confidence. This led to a sharp decrease in the value of the local currency, especially against the US dollar. This devaluation means that all dollar-based imports are now expected to rise in cost, thereby raising the cost of living for citizens, and reducing disposable income.”_

As you can see in this example, the descriptive version only tells us **what** happened (the president fired the finance minister), whereas the critical version goes on to discuss some of the **impacts** of the president’s actions.

Ideally, critical writing should always **link back to the broader objectives** of the paper or project, explaining what each thing or event means in relation to those objectives. In a dissertation or thesis, this would involve linking the discussion back to the **research aims,** objectives and **research questions** – in other words, the [golden thread](

**Sounds a bit fluffy and conceptual?** Let’s look at an example:

If your research aims involved understanding how the local environment impacts demand for specialty imported vegetables, you would need to explain how the devaluation of the local currency means that the imported vegetables would become more expensive relative to locally farmed options. This in turn would likely have a negative impact on sales, as consumers would turn to cheaper local alternatives.

As you can see, critical (or analytical) writing goes beyond just **describing** (that’s what descriptive writing covers) and instead focuses on the **meaning** of things, events or situations, especially in relation to the core research aims and questions.

## But wait, there’s more.

This “_what vs so what”_ distinction is important in understanding the difference between description and analysis, but it is **not the only difference** – the differences go deeper than this. The table below explains some other key differences between descriptive and analytical writing.

| Descriptive Writing | Analytical writing |
|  |  |
| States what happened (the event). | Explain what the impact of the event was (especially in relation to the research question/s). |
| Explains what a theory says. | Explains how this is relevant to the key issue(s) and research question(s). |
| Notes the methods used. | Explains whether these methods were relevant or not. |
| States what time/date something happened. | Explains why the timing is important/relevant. |
| Explains how something works. | Explains whether and why this is positive or negative. |
| Provides various pieces of information. | Draws a conclusion in relation to the various pieces of information. |
|  |  |

## Should I avoid descriptive writing altogether?

Not quite. For the most part, you’ll need _some_ descriptive writing to **lay the foundation** for the critical, analytical writing. In other words, you’ll usually need to state the “what” before you can discuss the “so what”. Therefore, description is simply unavoidable and in fact quite **essential**, but you do want to **keep it to a minimum** and focus your word count on the analytical side of things.

As you write, a good rule of thumb is to **identify every what** (in other words, every descriptive point you make) and then check whether it is **accompanied by a so what** (in other words, a critical conclusion regarding its meaning or impact).

Of course, this won’t always be necessary as some conclusions are fairly obvious and go without saying. But, this basic practice should help you minimize description, maximize analysis, and most importantly, earn you marks!

← Check another article or image

Share this fact check