Graduate Certificate in Policy Analysis: Critical Reading Report

This report analyzes a critical reading of Catherine Althaus's article on different paradigms of evidence and knowledge in policy analysis. The report summarizes the main arguments, which center on the dominance of Western paradigms and the importance of recognizing Indigenous ways of knowing and being as valid forms of evidence in policymaking. The report highlights the author's discussion of debates surrounding evidence-informed policymaking, the contribution of Indigenous knowledge, and the implications of these perspectives for public administration. The analysis also includes a discussion of the hierarchy of evidence, knowledge management, and the application of these concepts to real-world examples, such as the Donald Trump election. The strongest section of the article, according to the report, is the discussion on Science, Evidence and Civilizations due to its strong evidential support and diagrams. The report identifies the introduction as the weakest part due to a perceived dichotomy and lack of precision. The report also includes a critical evaluation of the article's strengths and weaknesses, providing a comprehensive overview of the key themes and arguments presented.

Graduate Certificate in Policy Analysis – Critical Reading Report
Student Name: Please Fill
Full article
citation Althaus, C. Different paradigms of evidence and knowledge: Recognising, honouring, and
celebrating Indigenous ways of knowing and being. Australian Journal of Public Administration.
Main
argument(s)
made by the
author(s) Debates regarding evidence of informed policy making is made predominantly structuring of the western
paradigm of ontology as well as epistemology. The article also discusses about the contribution that is
provided by the indigenous process of understanding as well as providing alternative form of evidences
that inform the processing of policy making. Donald Trump’s election process is also considered in this
section process. Several questions have been asked in the article regarding the election process.
Questions regarding evidence play have been considered as well in this case. Discussion regarding
public administration have been also focussed in the article. The benefits that will be received due to the
implementation of public administration is also discussed. The different aspects that benefits the public
administration process is also stated in the section. Different trajectories of public administration has also
been one of the major aspect that is to be considered. Prioritization of evidence is also stated in the
article. Proper visualization of this prioritization process is also well stated in the process. Discussion
regarding Science, Prioritization, evidence and civilization is also well. Proper discussion of the hierarchy
of evidence is also considered in the process. The reliability have been on an increasing node. The steps
that are considered in the process are namely assessing anecdotal, expert opinion, case study,
randomised controlled trials, meta analysis and systematic reviews. Again the article also focusses on
proper assessing of the hierarchy of case study. Proper understanding of the qualitative health research
have been discussed in the process as well. The entire hierarchy have been diversified in 4 levels. They
are namely Level 1, Generalized case study. Level 2, Conceptual Studies, Level 3, Descriptive studies
and Level 4, Single Case Study. Knowledge management pyramid is also well stated and properly
discussed. Indigenous ways of knowing and being is have also been a main argument that is considered.
Different barriers that are present as well as the barriers and respectful opportunities that are important in
in promoting the indigenous knowledge uptake have been focussed as well. Proper distinguishing in
between Western/Scientific Knowledge and Indigenous/ Local knowledge is well described as well.
Differentiation of policies that might occur during the indigenous evidence is also considered.
Evidence and
examples used
Donald Trump’s election process have been discussed as an example. There a lot of references that are
provided as per the report requirement.

Which parts of
the text are
strong and
convincing and
why.
Science, Evidence and Civilizations have been the strongest section of the entire article. The main
reason that this section is chosen is because the data that are provided in this section are well supported
with evidential data. Proper referencing of the data that are provided are also performed. This section
ensures that the using the data for future usage. Another major reason that it is considered to be a strong
section of data is that the data that are provided are well demonstrated with diagrams. This diagrammatic
demonstration ensures that better procurement of data can be made. Even the diagrams that are
provided are well referenced. There are a total of 5 diagrams that are present in the section. This section
also ensures that the hierarchy of evidence is well demonstrated. This demonstration helps in having a
visual representation as well. The hierarchy of evidence is also provided for performing the qualitative
health research process. This have been the major aspect that is considered. Proper visual
demonstration of the hierarchy of knowledge have been provided as well. The impact of law, principles,
concepts and facts are also well stated in the section. Proper demonstration of Knowledge management
cognitive pyramid is also stated. Temporal DIKW pyramid is also well demonstrated with the help a
diagram which is again well referenced. It is seen that the data that are represented by diagrams are also
well supported with referenced information.

Which parts of
the text are
weak and
unconvincing
and why.
The sole weak part that is considered in this article is the introduction section. The main reason of
considering this section to be weak is because, there was a dichotomy in the discussion section.
Discussion regarding Donald Trump’s election is also stated in the section. This section can be politically
as well as evidentially challenged and issues can be created. Another issue that is seen in this case is
that proper description of the topics that will be discussed is absent and hence preciseness of the section
can be questioned.