Please read the read the article you have signed-up for:

  1. Benson, M., & Lewis, C. (2019). Brexit, British People of Colour in the EU-27 and everyday racism in Britain and Europe. Ethnic and Racial Studies42(13), 2211-2228.
  2. Nayak, A. (2019). Re‐scripting place: Managing social class stigma in a former steel‐making region. Antipode51(3), 927-948.
  3. Mirza, H. S. (2014). Decolonizing higher education: Black feminism and the intersectionality of race and gender. Journal of Feminist Scholarship7(7), 1-12.

And answer the following questions:

  1. What is the article’s key argument? (every peer-reviewed piece will be making an argument – intending to persuade the reader to share their position).
  2. What specific problem or problems has the author tried to solve and/ or what questions does the author claim to address? (why is the author writing this? It might be an empirical or theoretical problem, puzzle or question).
  3. What is its claim to significance? (every peer-reviewed publication will be making some claim to significance, the ‘so what’ question. Is it originality, a new perspective on old debates, new empirical data?)
  4. What is its methodology (how has the study been designed, what kind of data has been collected?).
  5. What concepts is the article using to analyse the data? (these may be individual concepts or a more encompassing theoretical framework). Do they develop these concepts in the article?
  6. Is the concept of intersectionality used in this article? If yes, in what way is it used? If no, what intersectional dimensions can you identify in the data presented?
  7. What academic literature/ conversations is it engaging with? What stance is it taking in these conversations/ debates?
  8. How convincing do you find these arguments? (what strengths and weaknesses can you identify. For example, is there weaknesses in the evidence they are drawing on? Are there important questions they haven’t addressed?). Nb. You can critically engage with research and still find it useful.