article critique apa format example Source:
To be sure you are doing everything right, we recommend you use an article critique example APA. It can be found by every search engine within 5 minutes and couple of mouse clicks. A good composed article critique example APA will gradually decrease chances of making typical mistakes.
ARTICLE CRITIQUE APA FORMAT EXAMPLE RELATED ,
A critique of an article is the objective analysis of a literary or scientific article with emphasis on whether or not the author supported his main points with reasonable and applicable arguments based on facts. It's easy to get caught up in simply summarizing the points of an article without truly analyzing and challenging it. A good critique demonstrates your impressions of the article, while providing ample evidence to back up your impressions. Follow the suggestions below to learn to write a thorough and impressive article critique.
So your assignment is to critique a journal article. This handout will give you a few guidelines to follow as you go. But wait, what kind of a journal article is it: an empirical/research article, or a review of literature? Some of the guidelines offered here will apply to critiques of all kinds of articles, but each type of article may provoke questions that are especially pertinent to that type and no other. Read on. First of all, for any type of journal article your critique should include some basic information: 1. Name(s) of the author(s) 2. Title of article 3. Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page numbers 4. Statement of the problem or issue discussed 5. The author’s purpose, approach or methods, hypothesis, and major conclusions. The bulk of your critique, however, should consist of your qualified opinion of the article. Read the article you are to critique once to get an overview. Then read it again, critically. At this point you may want to make some notes to yourself on your copy (not the library’s copy, please). The following are some questions you may want to address in your critique no matter what type of article you are critiquing. (Use your discretion. These points don’t have to be discussed in this order, and some may not be pertinent to your particular article.) 1. Is the title of the article appropriate and clear?
Already tired of bringing all pieces together in your article critique? It’s quite understandable, as composing a good critique is a challenging task! Writing an article critique is an in-depth analysis of the article, evaluating its success in conveying the objective of the article. To write an effective critique of article you must have sufficient knowledge of the subject and possess good writing skills. One of the most important things you should be familiar with when writing critique is article critique format. In most cases you will be asked to perform your critique assignment using APA formatting. The APA article critique style is accepted by a number of universities. To write a critique in this style, you must familiarize yourself with the general rules and guidelines of the APA format relating to margins, spacing, fonts, texts, abstracts, quotations, title page, body and so on.For writing an effective article critique you must understand the subject of your critique, assess the structure, relevance of the topic, the author’s style and other important features. However, if you are unfamiliar with the style of writing, example of a critique will come in handy. One can make use of the article critique example to construct their own critics.Also refer to the course presentations and our discussions concerning what is feminist research methodologies. Due: April 11. (Worth 20% of the course grade) Purpose: To critically read and evaluate published feminist research. Preparation: We will continue to study different research designs to prepare you to do this assignment. However, I thought that you might want the assignment now so that you could select 3 articles to critique between now and April 11. My experience has been that students increase in their ability to read and critique published research as the course progresses. I have provided tradtional formats to critique research articles described in the "Standards" section below. Standards: I have provided "Standards of Adequacy" as links so that you use them to critique your selection of 3 research articles comparing the study to what is expected for each type of study. Use these guidelines or standards to evaluate the research within the traditions to help you see how the feminist research adheres or differs from these standards: (link 1) an introduction on how to read research (read this first) (link 2) how to read quantitative research (link 3) standards of adequacy for true experimental designs, quasiexperimental designs, and single-subject designs (link 4) standards of adequacy for descriptive research, correlational research, survey research, and ex post facto research (link 5) standards of adequacy for a narrative literature review (use these criteria to critique a literature review chapter in a dissertation) (link 6) standards of adequacy for qualitative designs--case studies (link 7) standards of adequacy for ethnographic methodology (link 8) credibility standards for analytical research such as historical and legal studies (link 9) guidelines for a research proposal (these guidelines will be used to constructively critique your research proposal due on May 7, 2002) Each link has the type of research methodology written on the top and the page numbers from the McMillian, J. and Schumacher, S. (1997). Research in education: A conceptual introduction (4th edition) textbook so that you may refer to it for further clarification. Definition of terms may be found in the chapter or in the glossary of this textbook. 4. Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable a reader to duplicate them? (Another good one! You’d be surprised at the respectable researchers who cut corners in their writing on this point.) 5. Scan and spot-check calculations. Are the statistical methods appropriate? 6. Do you find any content repeated or duplicated? A common fault is repetition in the text of data in tables or figures. Suggest that tabular data be interpreted of summarized, nor merely repeated, in the text. A word about your style: let your presentation be well-reasoned and objective. If you passionately disagree (or agree) with the author, let your passion inspire you to new heights of thorough research and reasoned argument. First of all, in looking for an instructional website on how to write a critique of a journal article, I found nothing online giving the steps to take to structure a critique of a journal article. So, here goes; what I'm going to do is give you the elements of putting together a journal article critique below from an old instructional course book for political science writers. The following steps are taken from The Political Science Student Writer's Manual, 4th Edition, by Gregory M. Scott and Stephen M. Garrison: 1. The first step is to select an appropriate journal article; the best articles are taken from scholarly journals. 2. Browse journals until you find a topic that interests you; this makes for a better critique. 3. Select an article that fits your current level of knowledge. Do not include statistics unless you are versed in those statistics. 4. Try to select articles that are current; pick an article written within the preceding 12 months. 5. Writing the critique will cover five areas, after you have read the article thoroughly: thesis, methods, evidence of thesis support, contribution to the literature, recommendations. 6. Tips on the five elements: (1) Clearly state the thesis. (2) Under methods, answer the following questions. "What methods did the author use to investigate the topic? Were the appropriate methods used? Did the author's approach to supporting the thesis make sense? Did the author employ the methods correctly? Did you discover any errors in the way the research was conducted?" (3) To be able to write a good article critique paper is important for several reasons. First, individuals and groups of individuals build their research on the foundations of prior research. Therefore, one must be able to research what has been previously established, whether through the development of theory or through empirical evidence. That means examining the reliability and validity of what others have provided or proposed through theory building or evidence. In addition, one must be able to show how the thoughts or findings of others relate to one's own research questions or opinions. Furthermore, one must be able to accurately summarize what others report as it relates to one's own findings.