Journal Articles vs Books: the verdict

Students ask me sometimes if journals are better than books which is rather like asking if rivers are better than mountains; my answer is both have their place, they complement each other and if you're lucky you can experience both simultaneously.

How far you're currently into your course will partly dictate how familiar you are with reading and using journal articles. If you're relatively new to study then you'll probably be using mostly books and if you're currently writing a dissertation then journals should be your main source of reading.

But that somewhat oversimplifies the situation. The reason for this is straightforward-books and journals are both useful throughout your course and need to be used as and when they're required.

Here's an example; if you're a third year currently reading journal articles about a sociological issue related to feminism you need to understand feminist theory. A journal article won't explain that to you in any depth because it'll probably assume you already know enough. So sometimes going back to the books for the underlying theories is absolutely the right thing to do. Similarly, if you're a first year who's looking at journal articles which keep referring to theorists who you've never heard of, then you can't possibly understand what you're reading. In which case find a book chapter on that theorist to help with the background.

So ultimately it comes down to 'do I understand what I'm reading and is it useful for the task in hand?'
I'm currently writing a new Prezi on the benefits of reading so hopefully I'll get the chance to show it to you before too long.