GROUP

7
Grade 11 - ICT
 CYRUS DAVE D. ALOMIA

IAN DAVE S. BARZO

MEMBERS
MARK JUVIDA

KENT LLOYD LANGUITA

 What is Critique?
• A critique of an article is the objective analysis of a literary or
scientific piece, with emphasis on whether or not the author
supported the main points with reasonable and applicable
arguments based on facts. It’s easy to get caught up it. A good
English for Academic and Professional critique demonstrates your impressions of the article, while
Purposes providing ample evidence to back up your impressions. As the
critic, take time to read carefully and thoughtfully, prepare your
arguments and evidence, and write clearly and cogently.

Quarter 1- Module 7: Critique Writing

• In writing a critique, it necessitates some in simply summarizing
the points of an article without truly analyzing and challenging
active reading which constitutes the following: read through the
article once to get the main idea; mark up the text as you read
through it again; create a legend for your markings; take some
longer notes during subsequent readings; and develop a
preliminary concept for your critique. These processes therefore
made the writing of a critique to have at least the required
foundation to start with.
In this module, you will be able to:

• write an objective/balance review or critique of

a work of art, an event or program.

Specifically, you are expected to:

1. Evaluate a text, or performance either one’s own

(a self-critique) or someone else’s;

2. Peer review an article for publication in a scholarly

journal; or in education setting;

3. Critique the work emphasizing the contribution of

the work to the field; and

4. Appraise the work in terms of its shortcoming or

limitations.
 • A critique is a genre of academic writing that
briefly summarizes and critically evaluates a work
or concept. Critiques can be used to carefully
Lesson 7: Critique Writing analyze a variety of works such as: Creative works
– novels, exhibits, film, images, and academic
texts.
 1. Organize your critical evaluations. These should
form the bulk of your critique and should be a
minimum of three paragraphs. You can choose
to organize your critique differently depending
on how you want to approach your critique.
However, you should devote a paragraph to
each main topic, using the rest of the steps in
this section to develop each paragraph’s
Guidelines in Writing the Three-body Paragraphs: discussion.

2. Discuss the techniques or styles used in the

work. This is particularly important when
evaluating creative works, such as literature, art,
and music. Offer your evaluation of how
effectively the creator uses the techniques or
stylistic choices she/he has made to promote
her/his purpose.
3. Explain what types of evidence or argument are
used. This may be more useful in a critique of a
media item or research article. Consider how
the author of the work uses other sources, their
own evidence, and logic in their arguments.

4. Determine what the work adds to the

understanding of its topic. There are a couple of
ways to approach this. Your goal in this section
should be an assessment of the overall
usefulness of the work.

5. Use examples for each point. Back up your

assertions with evidence from your text or work
that support your claim about each point. For
example, if you were critiquing a novel and
found the writing dull, you might provide a
particularly boring quotation as evidence, and
then explain why the writing did not appeal to
you.
 1. State your overall assessment of the work. This
should be a statement about the overall success
of the work. Did it accomplish the creator’s goal
or purpose? If so, how did it achieve this
success? If not, what went wrong?

Writing the Conclusion Paragraph and References: 2. Summarize your key reasons for this assessment.
While you should have already presented
evidence for your claims in the body paragraphs,
you should provide a short restatement of your
key reasons here. This could be as simple as one
sentence that says something like “Because of
the researcher’s attention to detail, careful
methodology, and clear description of the
results, this article provides a useful overview of
topic X.”
3. Recommend any areas for improvement, if
appropriate. Your assignment or prompt will
usually say if recommendations are appropriate
for the critique. This element seems to be more
common when critiquing a research article or
media item, but it could also apply to critiques of
creative works as well.

4. Provide a list of references. How you present

these will depend on your instructor’s
preferences and the style (MLA, APA, Chicago,
etc.) that is appropriate to your discipline.
However you format this list, you should always
include all the sources you used in your critique.
 1. Give the fundamental data about the work. The
primary section is first experience with the work,
and you should give the fundamental data about
it in this passage. This data will incorporate the
creator’s or maker’s name(s), the title of the
work, and the date of its creation.

Writing the Introductory Paragraph:

2. Give a setting to the work. The kind of setting
you give will differ dependent on what sort of
work you’re assessing. You should expect to give
the per user some comprehension of what gives
the maker or creator may have been reacting to,
however you don’t have to give a thorough
history. Simply give your per user enough data.
3. Sum up the maker’s objective or reason in
making the work. This component ought to
consider what the proposal or motivation behind
the work is. In some cases, this might be
obviously expressed, for example, in an
examination article. For different writings or
inventive works, you may need to define what
you accept to be the maker’s objective or reason
yourself.

4. Sum up the central matters of the work. Depict,

quickly, how the central matters are made. For
instance, you may discuss a work’s utilization of
characters or imagery to portray its point about
society, or you could discuss the exploration
questions and theories in a diary article.

5. Present your underlying evaluation. This will fill

in as your proposition explanation and should
make a case about the work’s overall adequacy
and additional handiness. Is your assessment
going to be essentially certain, negative, or
blended?
 1. Question whether the essayist’s general message
is sensible. Test the theory and contrast it with
other comparative models.

2. Quest the article for any inclinations, regardless

of whether deliberate or unexpected. In the
event that the writer has anything to pick up
from the ends exhibited in the article, it’s
Social occasion Evidence: conceivable that some predisposition has been
illustrated.

3. Think about the creator’s translations of different

writings. The writer makes a case about
another’s work, perused the first work and check
whether you concur with the examination given
in the article. Complete the understanding is
clearly redundant or even likely; yet consider
whether the creator’s translation is solid.
4. Notice if the creator refers to deceitful proof.
Does the creator refer to an immaterial book
from fifty years prior that no longer holds weight
in the current order? If the author cites
unreliable sources, is greatly diminishes the
credibility of the article.

5. Don’t totally overlook expressive components.

The substance of the article is likely the most
significant angle for your abstract investigate, yet
don’t disregard the formal and additionally
scholarly methods that the writer may utilize.
Focus on dark word decisions and the writer’s
tone all through the article. This is especially
useful for non-logical articles managing parts of
writing, for instance.
6. Question research techniques in logical articles.
If critiquing an article containing a scientific
theory, be sure to evaluate the research methods
behind the experiment. Ask yourself inquiries, for
example, these:

• Does the creator detail the strategies completely?

• Is the examination planned without significant

blemishes?

• Is there an issue with the example size?

• Was a benchmark group made for correlation?

• Are all of the statistical calculations correct?

7. Burrow profound. Utilize your current
information, taught assessments, and any
exploration you can assemble to either uphold or
differ with the writer’s article. Give exact
contentions to help your position.

8. Recall that a study doesn’t need to be altogether

certain or negative. An author scholarly evaluates
and never differs with the creator; rather, they
expand upon or confuse the creator’s thought
with extra proof.
 1. 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.

2. Provide evidence for your argument in the body

paragraphs of your critique. Each body paragraph
should detail a new idea or further expand your
Formatting Your Critique argument in a new direction.

3. 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.
4. 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.

5. 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.
 • Guidelines in Writing the Three-body
Paragraphs:

1. Organize your critical evaluations.

2. Discuss the techniques or styles used in the

work.

Review: 3. Explain what types of evidence or argument

are used.

4. Determine what the work adds to the

understanding of its topic.

5. Use examples for each point.

 • Writing the Conclusion Paragraph and
References:

1. State your overall assessment of the work.

2. Summarize your key reasons for this

assessment.

Review: 3. Recommend any areas for improvement,

if appropriate.

4. Provide a list of references.

 • Writing the Introductory Paragraph:

1. Give the fundamental data about the

work.

2. Give a setting to the work.

3. Sum up the maker’s objective or reason in

Review: making the work.

4. Sum up the central matters of the work.

5. Present your underlying evaluation.

 • Social occasion Evidence:

1. Question whether the essayist’s general

message is sensible.
2. Quest the article for any inclinations,
regardless of whether deliberate or
unexpected.
3. Think about the creator’s translations of
different writings.
Review: 4. Notice if the creator refers to deceitful
proof.
5. Don’t totally overlook expressive
components.
6. Question research techniques in logical
articles.
7. Burrow profound.
8. Recall that a study doesn’t need to be
altogether certain or negative.
 • Formatting Your Critique:

1. Begin with an introduction that outlines

your argument.

2. Provide evidence for your argument in the

body paragraphs of your critique.

3. Complicate your argument near the end of

Review: the critique.

4. Present your arguments in a well-

reasoned, objective tone.

5. Conclude your critique by summarizing

your argument and suggesting potential
implications.
 Directions: A. Read each questions carefully.
Choose the letter only of the correct answer and
write it on ¼ piece of paper.

1. It is an analysis of any form of academic piece of

writing.
a. Essay
b. Critique
c. Editorial
d. Creative
2. What does a critique aim to?
QUIZ a. Analyse how well the points in the article
are made.
b. Prove the inconsistency of a literary work.
c. Synthesize the original text.
d. Entertain the readers.
3. A critique must be done_____based on
observations of the text.
e. Subjectively
f. Objectively
g. Psychologically
h. Opinion
 4. Which of the following is the benefit of writing
critique?
a. Critiques help the writer improve his work.
b. Critiques encourage to continue different
line of work.
c. Critiques give the writer concrete ideas for
more text.
d. Critiques develop skills in writing.
5. Which of the following is the first step in writing a
critique?
QUIZ e. State the conclusion.
f. Read and understand the text.
g. Orient the readers regarding the text.
h. Edit and revise the text.
6. Which of the following is considered a good
critique?
i. Discusses the weaknesses of the text.
j. Presents the ideas objectively and fairly.
k. Focuses only on the good points of the text.
l. Evaluates one part of the text.
 7. Which of the following statement about critique is
not true?
a. Critique benefits only the writer of the
original text.
b. Good critique presents both the strengths
and weaknesses of the text.
c. Critique writing involves critical thinking and
analytical skills.
d. Critique persuades the readers.
8. Rowell needs to write a critique of an article but
QUIZ he does not know how. Which of the following
should he do?
e. He should find a familiar essay.
f. He should summarize the essay.
g. He should analyze the essay.
h. He should paraphrase the essay.
9. Below are the characteristics of an effective
critique paper, except:
i. Consistency
j. Accuracy
k. Subjectivity
l. Objectivity
 10. Which characteristic of an effective critique
shows pointing out what the creator or author of the
work being evaluated has done well and what s/he
has not?
a. Objectivity
b. Balance
c. Relevance
d. Emphasis
B. Write True if the statement is correct; False if it is
wrong.
1. A critique does not include the summary of the
work being evaluated.
QUIZ 2. A critique should point out the strengths of the
work being evaluated, not just its weaknesses
and flaws.
3. The writer should be subjective in writing a
critique as one cannot critically examine a piece
of work without emotion or feelings involved.
4. The introduction of a critique should clearly
provide evidence or proof to the writer’s claim or
assertion.
5. In answering a critique, the writer may present
counter arguments to deal with oppositions and
reaffirm his/her position.
 A.
1. B.
2. A.
3. B.
4. A.
5. B.
6. B.
7. A.
8. C.
9. C.
ANSWERS 10. B.

B.
11. FALSE
12. TRUE
13. FALSE
14. FALSE
15. TRUE