IMPORTANT ELEMENTS TO CONSIDER WHEN WRITING A CRITIQUE
© Bobbi A. Kerlin, PhD
HEADING
The critique should have a heading that includes the following information:
- Author
- Title
- Journal/Book
- Pages
- Date
- Publisher
- Reviewer(s)
INTRODUCTION
An introductory or background statement of purpose.
- Did the article appear in a refereed journal?)
- What does the title tell you about the scope of the work, the content, the principle subject, argument, or tone? What role does the subtitle play?
PRECIS
A short precis or review of the critical issues and main argument addressed in the article. This should include an examination of the structure, meaning and value of the work:
- How many parts are there to the study? How is the work organized: by subject, issue, theme? What space is allocated to each part? Do the pieces fit together?
- What is the author's main purpose in writing the piece? Is it political? Why is the author writing this piece now? What is the BIG or hidden message?
- What are the main arguments and questions being presented? What drives the article or pushes it along?
- How are the words being spent? Words have two values: the designated meaning should be consistent throughout and the expressive value must be accurate.
- What meaning does this work have for scholars within this discipline? Does it inform us about thought and/or practice?
- Is the work credible? What is the evidence?
ANALYSIS
- What theoretical perspective is articulated or implied?
- What are the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments?
- Does the author provide primary or secondary evidence? How strong is the argument? How convincing is it? Is the evidence sufficient to sustain the argument? What other sources could have been used? Are the selected sources appropriate?
- What assumptions does the author make and which of these should be questioned?
- What are the strengths, weaknesses, omissions, limitations of the article?
- What areas does the author emphasize or neglect/omit; what is NOT in the article?
- How are the critical issues stitched together? Is the logic appropriate?
- What values does the author project?
- Are the main arguments explicit or implicit or both?
- Consistency: are the meanings of words used consistently throughout? You want to avoid intellectual and linguistic "slippage", e.g. re the term, progressive; one person's meaning is different from another.
EVALUATION and INTERPRETATION
- What is the author's central thesis? What is she (he, they) trying to do in the piece? What are the most important or new ideas presented?
- What is the theoretical framework being employed? How is it used?
- What does this piece contribute to our understanding of issues such as gender, race, class, ethnicity, religion, nationality, or other factors ?
- What assumptions about gender, race, class, etc. are implicit? Why do you think the author holds these views? Do you agree or disagree with the author(s) views?
- What criticisms can you make? Do you find any particular bias in the reading? What (if anything) is missing in this piece? Are there glaring defects? Are these trivial or fundamental?
- Relate critical issues to similar work by other authors. How does this piece compare to what we have read so far? Use any dimension that seems useful to you for your comparison (e.g., topic, tone, ideas, thesis, approach, method, etc.)
- How does the work stand up to criticism?
REFERENCES APA STYLE
(Titles, journal names, and volumes should be underlined.)Cuban, L. (1984). How teachers taught: constancy and change in
American classrooms, 1890-1980. New York, NY: Longman.Gutierrez, R. and Slavin, R. E. (1992). Achievement effects of the
non-graded elementary school: A best evidence synthesis.
Review of Educational Research, 62(4).
 |