With the help of such samples you will be able to save lots of times and nerves, which will definitely contribute to the overall results. It is not a secret that most of professors pay careful attention not only to the content of the assignment but also how well it is formatted.
That is why you need to be very attentive, when shaping your work and adding final changes. One of the most popular formatting styles, while completing an article critique is American Psychological Association APA format, which has its specific rules and guidelines.
Your paper should be double-spaced, using 1-inch margins and Times New Roman font in 12 point. The general structure of your critique should consist of a title page, abstract, body and references. When formatting the title page, you should indicate name of your paper and school, as well as your personal data. In-text citations should be made using the author-date system, which means that you only need to indicate name of the author, followed by the year of publication.
If you want to quote a certain part of the paper, you need to include the page name at the end. If you know how to write an article critique, you will easily complete the assignment not depending on its complexity and formatting peculiarities. Consider the author's interpretations of other texts. If the author makes a claim about another's work, read the original work and see if you agree with the analysis provided in the article.
Such conflict may bear fruit when it comes time to write your review. See what other scholars have to say. If several scholars from diverse backgrounds have the same opinion about a text, that opinion should be given more weight than an argument with little support. Notice if the author cites untrustworthy evidence. Does the author cite an irrelevant text from fifty years ago that no longer holds weight in the discipline at hand? If the author cites unreliable sources, it greatly diminishes the credibility of the article.
Pay attention to obscure word choices and the author's tone throughout the article. This is particularly helpful for non-scientific articles dealing with aspects of literature, for example. For example, an article written in a heated, overzealous tone might be ignoring or refusing to engage with contradictory evidence in its analysis.
Always look up the definitions of unfamiliar words. A word's definition can completely change the meaning of a sentence, especially if a particular word has several definitions. Question why an author chose one particular word instead of another, and it might reveal something about their argument.
Question research methods in scientific articles. If critiquing an article containing a scientific theory, be sure to evaluate the research methods behind the experiment. Ask yourself questions such as these: Is the study designed without major flaws? Is there a problem with the sample size? Was a control group created for comparison? Are all of the statistical calculations correct? Would another party be able to duplicate the experiment in question?
Is the experiment significant for that particular field of study? Use your existing knowledge, educated opinions, and any research you can gather to either support or disagree with the author's article.
Provide empirical arguments to support your stance. Make sure each source provides something unique to your critique. Additionally, don't allow your use of sources to crowd out your own opinions and arguments. Remember that a critique doesn't have to be entirely positive or negative. You can provide contradictory evidence to an argument while still maintaining that a particular point of view is the correct one. Forcefully express your defensible points of agreement and disagreement.
Method 2 Quiz What are examples of biases you may find in an article? Misappropriating evidence to make false conclusions. Including personal, unfounded opinions. Blaming a specific race for a problem.
All of the above. Begin with an introduction that outlines your argument. The introduction should be no more than two paragraphs long and should lay out the basic framework for your critique.
Start off by noting where the article in question fails or succeeds most dramatically and why. The introduction is not the place to provide evidence for your opinions. Your evidence will go in the body paragraphs of your critique. Be bold in your introductory assertions and make your purpose clear right off the bat. Skirting around or not fully committing to an argument lessens your credibility.
Provide evidence for your argument in the body paragraphs of your critique. Each body paragraph should detail a new idea or further expand your argument in a new direction.
Don't feel like you have to condense the entire paragraph into the topic sentence, however. This is purely a place to transition into a new or somehow different idea. End each body paragraph with a transitional sentence that hints at, though does not explicitly state, the content of the paragraph coming next. For example, you might write, "While John Doe shows that the number of cases of childhood obesity is rising at a remarkable rate in the U.
Complicate your argument near the end of the critique. No matter how solid your argument is, there is always at least one dramatic way in which you can provide a final twist or take your argument one step further and suggest possible implications. Do this in the final body paragraph before your conclusion to leave the reader with a final, memorable argument. You might, for instance, utilize a counterargument, in which you anticipate a critique of your critique and reaffirm your position.
Present your arguments in a well-reasoned, objective tone. Avoid writing in an overzealous or obnoxiously passionate tone, as doing so can be a turn-off to many readers.
Let your passion shine through in your ability to do thorough research and articulate yourself effectively. Conclude your critique by summarizing your argument and suggesting potential implications. It is important to provide a recap of your main points throughout the article, but you also need to tell the reader what your critique means for the discipline at large. Do your best to make a lasting mark on the reader in the conclusion by using assertive language to demonstrate the importance of your work: Method 3 Quiz What should you include in the introduction to your critique?
The title of the article. Possible implications of the author's arguments. Identify the claims made in the article, and determine whether they are supported by convincing evidence and clearly expressed. Look for strengths and weaknesses in the content and style of the article, and provide supported evidence regarding ways in which the article could be improved.
Not Helpful 1 Helpful What do you mean by "A critic does not have to be entirely positive or entirely negative"? People tend to view the terms critic or criticism in a negative light, but in fact they refer in this context to a detailed, defensible analysis of the content and claims in another's work. A good critique doesn't have to rip the article to shreds, nor does it need to hail it as the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Rather, try to identify the various strengths and weaknesses in the piece under review. Not Helpful 4 Helpful Follow many of the same guidelines you would use critiquing a scholarly article. Ask yourself whether the learning objective clearly presents its main concepts and establishes their importance; whether the organization, structure, and content are sensible and easy to follow; and how you would approach it differently and why.
Not Helpful 1 Helpful 9. Make sure you've read the medical case report. Then, evaluate the information in the case report for accuracy, usefulness, etc. Not Helpful 2 Helpful 8. It should both contain and justify the exact specifications of selection criteria, sample size, response rate and any statistics used. This will demonstrate how the study is capable of achieving its aims. Things to consider in this section are:.
At other times the barrier is harder, or even impossible to cross. Communication difficulties arise even when a translator is available, and non-verbal messages may be missed by the patient or even by the health professional. Results should be statistically analysed and presented in a way that the average reader of the journal will understand. Graphs and tables should be clear and promote clarity of the text. Negative results are just as relevant as research that produces positive results but as mentioned previously may be omitted in publication due to editorial bias.
This should show insight into the meaning and significance of the research findings. It should not introduce any new material, but should address how the aims of the study have been met.
The discussion should use previous research work and theoretical concepts as the context in which the new study can be interpreted. Any limitations of the study, including bias, should be clearly presented. You will need to evaluate whether the author has clearly interpreted the results of the study, or whether the results could be interpreted another way. These should be clearly stated and will only be valid if the study was reliable, valid and used a representative sample size.
Step'by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research Michaei Coughian, Patricia Cronin, Frances Ryan This article is a step-by step-approach advanced reviewers to critique research studies (Tanner, ). These tools generally ask questions that can help the.
Let’s briefly examine some basic pointers on how to perform a literature review. If you’ve managed to get your hands on peer-reviewed articles, then you may wonder why it is necessary for you to perform your own article critique.
How To Critique A Journal Article Sponsored by The Center for Teaching and Learning at UIS Last Edited 4/9/ Page 1 of 2 So your assignment is to critique a journal article. This handout will give you a few guidelines to In addition, here are some questions that are more specific to empirical/research articles. (Again. Here is a really good example of a scholary research critique written by a student in EDRS The student who submitted this paper last semester earned a on his critique.
This checklist and explanation for a literature review and/or reading and critiquing a research article was very helpful. As I only have 2 more classes to get my degree, I wish I knew this info 2 semesters ago! This article explores certain concepts relating to critiquing research papers. These include considering the peer review process for publication, demonstrating the need for critiquing, providing a way to carefully evaluate research papers and exploring the role of impact factors.