Place Order

Critical review

Notes 119 Nov 1

Critical Review:

 

This week’s workload is slightly lighter than previous weeks and lighter than next weeks when we get to the discussions about and components of the final project.

So for this week:

  • You have one peer reviewed journal article from your field to read carefully, and draft a Critical Review on it to submit on Nov 8. CR peer feedback will be due next week.
  • Deadline is hard and fast as there’s a peer feedback assignment on this.

 

Posted to week 8 include:

  • Short article on Peer review.
  • Quotation, summary, paraphrase link; important for writing reviews
  • Student sample of CR, from U of T.
  • CR rubric.

 

(from the article posted: U of T Critical Review short reading)

What is CR:

  • “analyze the content and presentation of a book or an article objectively.”

You “determine the strengths and weaknesses of the text and provide an evaluation of the author’s discussion of the subject matter.”

  • “assessment of the author’s thesis and evidence to support it.”
  • “you’ll need to do more than understand the key ideas of the text. Remember, your end goal is to analyze and evaluate the text’s arguments.”

How to:

  • Read and skim

What is the organization? What are the sections in the article? Can you identify the thesis and the evidence that supports it?

  • Analyze:

Read critically and take notes.

Identify the thesis: as you summarize the key ideas of each section and ask how they support the thesis.

According to the U of T article:

 

Nine Questions to Start Your Critical Review 

  1. What is the thesis of the work? Was it clear? Why or why not?
  2. Does the author make an argument? Is it valid? Why or why not?
  3. What kinds of evidence does the author use to back up his or her argument? Is the evidence used effectively? Why or why not?
  4. If appropriate, does the author use both primary and secondary sources? Are these sources used effectively? Why or why not?
  5. What is the overall organization of the piece? Is the structure effective? Why or why not?
  6. Does the article or book contribute to the scholarly discussion or to topics in your course?
  7. Does the author set out plans for future discussion? What are these plans?
  8. Does the author have a bias? Is it problematic or explicable? Why or why not?
  9. What are the credentials of the author?

 

  • Write

Now you can begin writing your critical review. Your goal is to argue if the text was effective in its intentions. Justify your arguments with evidence from the text.

  • Create a thesis based on your evaluation of the text. How:

 

Was the text effective in its intentions? Comment on both the strengths and weaknesses of the text in your thesis.

Select an organization – please also see last week’s notes.

 

A general format: (please also see last week’s more detailed notes)

Introduction 

Introduce the text you reviewed and comment briefly upon its subject matter. Refer to the text’s thesis. Establish your thesis.

Summary 

This section is often one third of the total length of the critical review. Include only the need-to-know information about the text: its thesis, main claims, and structure.

Analysis 

Assess the strengths and weaknesses of the text. You may want to comment upon its sources and its organization. Regardless of what you write, remember that you are analyzing the text’s claims and NOT its subject matter. You may not agree with the thesis, but you need to comment upon how well the author argued the thesis and supported it with logic and argumentation. Support your arguments with evidence from the text.

Conclusion 

Sum up the most important points and restate your evaluation of the text.

 

 

Source: U of T Critical Review Article posted to Learn week 7.

 

Format and style Instructions on the CR assignment:

  • Write around 1000 words, or 3 pages,
  • double spaced,
  • any regular font type and
  • please submit to the CR draft dropbox for feedback.
  • Also share this with your partner for peer feedback.
  • Any citation style is good; I encourage a style commonly used in your field.

 

 

For peer feedback:

  • Be clear, specific with the points you suggest or with your words of praise.
  • Be balanced; cover both strengths and areas for improvement.
  • Try to write as clearly as you can, you can have clear sections for your review; headings, and subtitles.
  • This is a short essay; so give some organization to your short peer review; for example you can start with the general and then focus on specifics, the details with examples.
  • Please submit two components as one file;
    • first annotate the writer’s Critical Review draft with notes, edits, suggestions, comments etc.
    • then write a full page of commentary; around 350 words.
    • Please take a look at the CR rubric (accessible in week 8) before writing your feedback and even before drafting your own CR.

 

SAssignments for this week:

  • Write a post, respond to 2-3 other posts
  • Complete the self-assessment quiz for this week.
  • Cover weeks 7-8 content including these notes.
  • Write your CR draft and share your CR with your partners to submit on Nov 8. (rubric in week 8). Due date for this will not be pushed back. Your CR should be written on an article in your field from a peer reviewed journal.
  • Peer feedback on CR is due on Nov 15
  • CR final is due on Nov 20.

 

You will be assigned to groups for the final project this week.