what key message is being communicated in the newspaper report, book, article, incident, problem, etc. that stimulated your interest? what is the quality of the evidence on which the stimulus is based? How does this influence the credibility of the argument/interpretation presented? what is the particular perspective of the author/parties involved? How does this influence the nature of their message and the argument they offer? What have they forgotten/left out? How does your own reading contribute alternative information or perspective? What are the implications of this? Or you might start from your encounter with a new theory/workplace and reflect on how this can make us see things in a different light.