Critiquing an article

Lecturer: Dr. Branch

 Lesson objectives
• To understand the difference between a critical
review and a literature review
• To understand the various parts of a critique article
as well as the types of a critique article
• Students should essentially be able to critique a body
of text after this class
 What is a critical review
• A 'critical review', or 'critique', is a complete type of text (or
genre), discussing one particular article or book in detail.
• In critiquing an article, you highlight strong and weak
points, as well as potential paths of further development
• It is in-depth analysis of most important sections of the
article that relies on textual evidence and on wider context
of the area of science in which the article is presented
 What is a critical review
• Writing a critique involves more than pointing out
mistakes. It involves conducting a systematic analysis of a
scholarly article or book and then writing a fair and
reasonable description of its strengths and weaknesses
• A comparative critical review is when you critique two or
three articles in a text.
 What it is not!
• It is not an extensive summary of the article
-You do not need simply to list the points and problems
discovered in the source. The main idea is to critique them.
• It is not a compilation of personal opinions or outright
judgmental claims about the article without evidence
– You need to focus on clear evidence
• It is not a repetitive blabbering about a single aspect of the
article.
• It is not a literature review
 Types of critique
There are different types of critique reviews depending on the body of
work to be critiqued.
1. Article or book review assignment in an academic class
Text: Article or book that has already been published
Audience: Professors
Purpose:
• to demonstrate your skills for close reading and analysis
• to show that you understand key concepts in your field
• to learn how to review a manuscript for your future professional work
 Types of critique
2. Published book review
Text: Book that has already been published
Audience: Disciplinary colleagues
Purpose:
• to describe the book’s contents
• to summarize the book’s strengths and weaknesses
• to provide a reliable recommendation to read (or not read) the book
 Types of critique
3. Manuscript review
Text: Manuscript that has been submitted but has not been published yet
Audience: Journal editor and manuscript authors
Purpose:
• to provide the editor with an evaluation of the manuscript
• to recommend to the editor that the article be published, revised, or
rejected
• to provide the authors with constructive feedback and reasonable
suggestions for revision
 Getting started

• READ, READ, AND THEN, READ!

– Read your article or book as much as possible to understand the
concept of the text. The more you read it, the more the text opens up
to you
• TAKE NOTES!
– Take notes and jot down the ideas, considerations and questions that
cross your mind during reading
 Reading and Taking Notes
After you are familiar with the text, you can make notes on
the following questions (depending on what is suitable)
▪ What kind of article is it (for example does it present data or
does it present purely theoretical arguments)?
▪ What is the main area under discussion?
▪ What are the main findings?
▪ What are the stated limitations?
▪ Where does the author's data and evidence come from? Are
they appropriate / sufficient?
▪ What are the main issues raised by the author?
 Reading and Taking Notes
▪ What questions are raised?
▪ How well are these questions addressed?
▪ What are the major points/interpretations made by the
author in terms of the issues raised?
▪ Is the text balanced? Is it fair / biased?
▪ Does the author contradict herself?
 Reading and Taking Notes
▪ How does all this relate to other literature on this topic?
▪ How does all this relate to your own experience, ideas and
views?
▪ What else has this author written? Do these build /
complement this text?
▪ (Optional) Has anyone else reviewed this article? What did
they say? Do I agree with them?
 Reading and Taking Notes
• Is the article’s title clear and appropriate?
• Is the article’s abstract presented in the correct form, relevant
to the content of the article, and specific?
• Is the purpose stated in the introduction made clear?
• Are there any errors in the author’s interpretations and facts?
• Is the discussion relevant and valuable?
• Has the author cited valid and trusted sources?
• Did you find any ideas that were overemphasized or
underemphasized in the article?
 Reading and Taking Notes
• Do you believe some sections of the piece have to be
expanded, condensed, or omitted?
• Are all statements the author makes clear?
• What are the author’s core assumptions?
• Has the author of the article been objective in his or her
statements?
• Are the approaches and research methods used suitable?
• Are the statistical methods appropriate?
• Is there any duplicated or repeated content?
 Collecting Proof!
1. Define whether the author is following formal logic
▪ Find any logical fallacies! Some examples of logical fallacies and their
examples are given below;
– Ad hominem – when the author attacks someone who is expressing
an opinion with the goal to discredit the other’s point of view.

– Slippery Slope – when the author claims that an action will always end
up to be the worst possible scenario.
 Collecting Proof!
1. Define whether the author is following formal logic
▪ Find any logical fallacies! Some examples of logical fallacies and their
examples are given below;
– Correlation vs. Causation – when the author concludes that since
actions 1 and 2 occurred one after the other, then action 2 must be
the effect of action 1. The problem with such a statement is mostly
because the author draws conclusions about the correlation between
the two actions without looking deeper to see the real causes and
effects.
– Wishful Thinking – when the author believes something that is not
backed up by any proof. This issue typically occurs when someone
believes the given information is true because it makes them feel
good.
 Collecting Proof!
2. Search for any biased opinions in the article
- Are they overemphasising or underemphasising a point based on their
feelings? Are they looking for proof based on their emotions or based on their
desired results rather than evidence?
3. Pay attention to the way the author interprets others’ texts.
- Does he or she look at others’ viewpoints through inappropriate political
lenses?
4. Check cited sources.
- Did the author cite untrustworthy sources of information?
5. Evaluate the language used in the article
- some words have cultural meanings attached to them which can create a sort of
confrontation in the article. Such words can place people, objects, or ideas into the
“them” side in the “us vs. them” scenario.
 Collecting Proof!
6. Question the research methods in the scientific areas
– How is the design of the study? Are there any errors in it?
– How does the piece explain the research methods?
– Was there a control group used for this research?
– Were there any sample size issues?
– Were there any statistical errors?
– Is there a way to recreate the experiment in a laboratory setting?
– Does the research (or experiment) offer any real impact and/or value in its
field of science?
 The anatomy of a critique paper
1. The introduction
2. The body
3. The conclusion

*General format: The general formatting standard is 12 pt font,

Times New Roman, double-spaced with one-inch margins
 Title page
1. Paper title
2. student name
3. College/ University
OR
1. Paper title
2. Student name
3. Course/ Coursework
4. Lecturer
5. Date
 The introduction
• The introductory part of a critical writing involves
introducing your reader to the title of the article, the
authors and main point of the article
• It also involves discussing the two or three specific areas
highlighted in the thesis statement (These areas are the
main things that you would like to address about the
article).
• Suggestions for this include the author's argument and
whether or not it was presented in a logical manner, or the
appropriateness of word usage and vocabulary etc
• These key components all come together in your
introduction.
 Making a Thesis Statement
• A thesis statement is a sentence that states the topic and
purpose of your paper. A good thesis statement will direct the
structure of your essay and will allow your reader to
understand the ideas you will discuss within your paper.
• Your thesis statement should be decisive and explain what
your critique will cover in one to two sentences.
• Your thesis statement always comes somewhere in your
introduction
 How to write a thesis statement
• The kind of thesis statement you write will depend on the
type of paper you are writing.
• Here are some types of thesis statement with examples;
1. An argumentative thesis statement – states the topic of the paper,
your position on the topic and the reason(s) you have for taking that
position
2. An analytical thesis statement - states the topic of your paper, what
specifically you analyzed, and the conclusion(s) you reached as a
result of that analysis.
3. An expository thesis statement - states the topic of your paper
and lists the key aspects of your topic that will be discussed in the
paper.
An argumentative thesis statement
An analytical thesis statement
An expository thesis statement
 The body
1. Analysis
2. Assessment
 The body
Analysis
• The analysis stage is when you dissect a piece of writing into
different sections. This will be based on what you chose to
focus on in your thesis statement.
• After you discuss the makeup of those sections with examples
and illustrations, you will then interpret them and move on to
your evaluation or assessment.
 The body
Assessment
• The assessment stage can be broken down into a few
sections
• For example, you may choose to start your evaluation
with;
– specific judgments based on the areas identified in your
thesis statement
– evidence to back up each statement
– an explanation of how the evidence proves your point
– wrap everything up with a general statement about the
work
 The body
• Some examples of evaluation remarks;
▪ Over the last five / ten years the view of...has increasingly been viewed as
'complicated' (see Author, Year; Author, Year).
▪ However, through trying to integrate...with...the author...
▪ Inevitably, several crucial questions are left unanswered / glossed over by this
insightful / timely / interesting / stimulating book / article. Why should...
▪ This article / book is not without disappointment from those who would
view...as...
▪ This chosen framework enlightens / clouds...
▪ A detailed, well-written and rigorous account of...
▪ The beginning of...provides an informative overview into…
▪ The tables / figures do little to help / greatly help the reader...
▪ This explanation has a few weaknesses that other researchers have pointed out
(see Author, Year; Author, Year). The first is...
▪ On the other hand, the author wisely suggests / proposes that...By combining
these two dimensions...
▪ The author's brief introduction to...may leave the intended reader confused as it
fails to properly...
 Conclusion
• The conclusion is oftentimes used to summarize as well
as unite positive and negative aspects of the work.
• Your conclusion should also include recommendations
for future use.
• Some examples of concluding remarks;
– Overall this article / book is an analytical look at...which within the
field of...is often overlooked.
– Despite its problems, Title offers valuable theoretical insights /
interesting examples / a contribution to pedagogy and a starting point
for students / researchers of...with an interest in...
– This detailed and rigorously argued...
– This first / second volume / book / article by...with an interest in...is
highly informative...
 Language strategies for critiquing
Offering praise and criticism – the “hedging” strategy
1. Modal verbs
– Using modal verbs (could, can, may, might, etc.) allows you to
soften an absolute statement.
Compare:
1. This text is inappropriate for graduate students who are new to the
field.
2. This text may be inappropriate for graduate students who are new to
the field.
 Language strategies for critiquing
Offering praise and criticism – the “hedging” strategy
2. Qualifying adjectives and adverbs
• Using qualifying adjectives and adverbs (possible, likely, possibly,
somewhat, etc.) allows you to introduce a level of probability into your
comments.
Compare:
1. Readers will find the theoretical model difficult to understand.
2. Some readers will find the theoretical model difficult to understand.
3. Some readers will probably find the theoretical model somewhat difficult to
understand completely.
• Note: You can see from the last example that too many qualifiers makes the idea
sound undesirably weak.
 Language strategies for critiquing
Offering praise and criticism – the “hedging” strategy
3. Tentative verbs
• Using tentative verbs (seems, indicates, suggests, etc.) also allows
you to soften an absolute statement.
Compare:
1. This omission shows that the authors are not aware of the current
literature.
2. This omission indicates that the authors are not aware of the current
literature.
3. This omission seems to suggest that the authors are not aware of the
current literature.
 Language strategies for critiquing
Offering suggestions
Whether you are critiquing a published or unpublished text, you
are expected to point out problems and suggest solutions.
• Unpublished manuscripts: “would be X if they did Y”
– For example, if the problem is “unclear methodology,” reviewers may
write that “the methodology would be more clear if …” plus a suggestion.
- If the author can use the suggestions to revise, the grammar is “X would
be better if the authors did Y” (would be + simple past suggestion).
- The tables would be clearer if the authors highlighted the key results.
- The discussion would be more persuasive if the authors accounted for the
discrepancies in the data.
 Language strategies for critiquing
Offering suggestions
Published manuscripts: “would have been X if they had done Y”
If the authors cannot revise based on your suggestions, use the past unreal
conditional form “X would have been better if the authors had done Y”
(would have been + past perfect suggestion).
– The tables would have been clearer if the authors had highlighted key
results.
– The discussion would have been more persuasive if the authors had
accounted for discrepancies in the data.
 Some words used in a critique
• Neutral but effective words that are appropriate and useful
to your audience are often the best means of expression
– Its important to clearly convey your message while at the same
time not appear biased or excessive in your views for or against the
author.
• For critical writing a few keywords that are used frequently
are as follows;
– examples - argument -objective- logical -reasoning-
evidence - support -sources- organization - describe -
connect - facts - opinions - flawed - fallacy - development -
accurate - relevant - insufficient - fallacies - statistics
 In Summary
Introduction
✓ The name of the author and 1
title of the article.
✓ The core idea of the author.
✓ A clear thesis that reflects the
direction of your critique.
Summary
✓ The main idea of the article. 2
✓ The main arguments
presented in the article.
✓ The conclusion/ findings of
the article.
 In Summary
Critique
✓ Highlight the strong and weak sides of the
article. 3
✓ Express an educated opinion regarding the
relevancy, clarity, and accuracy of the
article. Backup your claims with direct
examples from the piece.
Conclusion
✓ Summary of the key points of the article.
✓ Finalization of your conclusion with your
comments on the relevancy of the
research.
4
✓ If you claim the research is relevant, make a
statement of why further study in this field
can be useful.
 Samples
▪ sample-article-critique-cse.pdf (bestcustomwriting.com)
▪ Sample Article Critique (ashford.edu)
 Question
• A thesis statement should not directly announce your topic by
using phrases such as, “This essay will talk about …” or “I am
going to tell you …” Which of the following makes the best
thesis statement?
a. Even though marriage is a strong and respected institution in
Russia, more and more people are choosing to live together
before marriage, despite the cultural pressures.
b. I am going to explain why many couples in Russia are choosing
to live together rather than get married.
c. Marriage in Russia.
 Question
• A thesis statement is a complete sentence or sentences. A
thesis statement is not a question. Which of these is a thesis
statement?
a. Knowing a foreign language.
b. Why should people know a foreign language?
c. Knowing a foreign language is a very useful skill that can help
one advance in a career, relate better to others, and open one’s
mind to the ideas of another culture.
 Question
• A thesis statement states an attitude or opinion on a topic. It
doesn't just state the topic, itself. A thesis should not be a
fact. Which of these is a thesis statement?
a. Michaelangelo’s artwork is powerful because of its strong
spiritual undertones.
b. Michaelangelo’s artwork is famous and is admired by many.
c. Michaelangelo was a great artist in Rome during the 1500’s.
 Question
• Which of the following is not used in the ‘hedging strategy’?
a. Modal verbs
b. Tentative verbs
c. Qualifying verbs
 Question
• A thesis statement that states the topic of your paper and the
key elements that will be discussed is?
a. An argumentative thesis statement
b. An analytical thesis statement
c. An expository thesis statement
 References
• Daniel Pn. (2020, May 7). How to critique an article.
EssayPro.com. https://essaypro.com/blog/article-critique
• University of Arizona Global Cambridge Writing Center. (n.d.). Writing a thesis
statement. https://writingcenter.uagc.edu/writing-a-thesis
• University College London. (2020, August 31). Writing a critique. IOE Writing
Centre. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/ioe-writing-centre/critical-reading-and-writing/critical-review