A citation is a shortcut for trust. It says I didn't make this up, someone researched it, here's who and where. That shortcut only works if you've actually read what you're pointing to.
Knowing the source means more than the reference itself. It means knowing what question the authors set out to answer, what evidence the claims were built on, and whether they ever went back and revised their own work later.
Most people skip that last part. It means reading past the one sentence that supports your point, to the sentences right after it that complicate it. A claim that leadership matters usually comes with a caveat that the effect is moderate and indirect. Often, nobody quotes the caveat.
Cherry-picking isn't always dishonest on purpose. Sometimes it's just easier. Read the abstract, pull the line that fits, move on. I get it, reading a whole paper takes time and most people don't have it, or think they don't. But the whole value of citing research is borrowing its rigour, and rigour doesn't transfer through one sentence. It transfers through the whole argument, caveats included.
Before you cite something, ask yourself honestly: have I read this, or have I read a version of this that already agrees with me? If it's the second one, the research isn't backing your position. You're backing it into a role it was never built for.
Reading the whole paper is the minimum, and anyone can do it. But when I question a citation, I reach out the author. Many in educational research are generous and happy to answer any questions about their research.
Thank you to those who continue to keep me connected with educational research.
No comments:
Post a Comment