Article Review:

Will provide the article******

You have been assigned one article from the course reading list and your goal for this paper is to write a comprehensive review of that article. A review is a critical evaluation of a article/article etc., which provides a brief summary and also makes an argument. The most important element of a review is that it is a commentary, not a summary. It allows you to enter into a literary dialog and discussion with the work’s creator and with other audiences. You can offer agreement or disagreement and identify what you believe to be its strengths and weaknesses in areas such as: knowledge, judgments, research, or organization. You should clearly state your opinion of the work in question (without using personal pronouns such as “I” or “My”), and that statement should resemble other types of academic writing, with a thesis statement, supporting body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

There is no definitive method to completing a review, although some critical thinking about the work at hand is necessary before you actually begin writing. Thus, writing a review is a two-step process: developing an argument about the article under consideration (by making notes as you read), and making that argument as you write an organized and well-supported draft.

Ok, so what is a “Critical” review?

What follows is a series of critical/analytical questions to focus your thinking as you dig into the work at hand. If you consider these questions, you’ll be happier with your essay mark:

What is the thesis—or main argument—of the article? If the author wanted you to get one idea from the article, what would it be? What has the article accomplished? Did the author successfully accomplish what he/she set out to do in the article? What time period and geographical location is being discussed in the article?
What exactly is the subject or topic of the article? Does the author cover the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion? Was he/shebiased? In what way was he/she biased? What is the approach to the subject (topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive)? What theoretical framework(s) does the author use, (race, class, gender, free-market, etc.), and how does he/she implement that framework? How does the framework shape the author’s argument?
How does the author support his or her argument? What are the other main arguments in the article? What evidence does she use to prove his/her point? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Was there enough evidence? Was the evidence used effectively?
How does the author structure his/her argument? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense? Does it persuade you? Why or why not?
How has this article helped the reader understand the subject? How does it help the reader better understand the time period? Has the article provided a meaningful contribution to the overall understanding of the subject?
What are the main strengths and weaknesses of the article? Explain these strengths and weaknesses fully.

Conversely, what follows is a series of questions that are NOT critical/analytical, and answering them, or referring to them in your essay should altogether be avoided. Just to be clear: doNOT answer these questions in your essay as they are NOT critical:

Was the article boring?
Was it long?
Did you love it or hate it?
Did reading it confuse you?
How does this article relate to your everyday life?
Was there an interesting experience you had one time, or have you once watched something on TV, which, in some way, relates to the article and you therefore feel like an expert on the subject?

This essay is meant to be a critical review. As such, please ensure that everything you write is something that I would consider to be critical and analytical.

Essay Breakdown:

If you follow this structure you’ll get a better mark than if you don’t:

1) Introduction: brief (one or two paragraphs); provide background and thesis. Background = identify the article and author under review along with any essential historical or historiographical background: What time period and region are discussed? What is the historical question or topic that the article addresses?

Thesis = somewhere in your introduction (generally toward the end) you must provide a succinct, clear evaluation of the article. This evaluation is the thesis for your article review. Your thesis should encompass three main components:

a) What the main argument of the article is.

b) Your evaluation of the article such as its strengths and contributions or weaknesses and shortcomings.

c) Why and/or in what ways you think the work demonstrates these strengths and weaknesses.

2) Summary of Key Arguments:

After your introduction, you should generally provide a brief summary or overview of the article. Take great care not to simply repeat or mirror everything in the article. Step back and identify what its essential arguments are and briefly summarize them.

You may want to comment on:

What is the article’s thesis? How is it similar to or different from other historians’ work on a similar topic? How is it organized? What are the major arguments?

What types of evidence are presented? (See above for other ‘critical’ questions).

3) Evaluation/Analysis

This section should constitute the bulk of your review. In it, you need to explain and develop the evaluation made in your thesis. Make sure to use examples but use no direct quotations from the article to illustrate and prove your assessment of the work. For example, if your thesis argues that the article provides a careful and detailed examination of a topic, you should point toward places in the article where it does so. Similarly, if you argue that the work fails to recognize a particular perspective, give examples of places in the article that you think would have benefited from attention to that perspective.

Common Problems in Article Reviews

Article reviews take time, preparation, and practice. Below we list some of the common problems that confound students as they write their first article reviews. Pay attention to these problems and avoid them! If you avoid these problems, your mark will be better than if you don’t:
Summarizing rather than analyzing an article: Some students are so concerned about summarizing everything that the article says that they fail to provide analysis and evaluation. Try to step back and see the big picture of the article. Only discuss its main arguments and supporting evidence.
Writing a research paper rather than a article review: Some students forget that their goal is to review how the author of a particular article has interpreted an event and instead begin to write a research report on the event itself. Stay focused on the article. If, for example, you are reviewing Craig Heron’s article on Alcohol and Temperance, keep in mind that your topic is his not Alcohol and Temperance itself, it is Craig Heron’s article!
Writing a paper that does not reflect a thorough reading of the article. Some students begin to write before they have spent time reading and evaluating an article with care. The result is often a paper that lacks detailed examples or only provides examples and ideas from one section of the article. Put time and thought into reading and reflecting on your article; it really is key to writing a successful review.
Not having a clear method of organization. Like any paper, a review needs a clear, logical structure that the reader can follow. Your reader should be able to predict what topic you will discuss next from your thesis and topic sentences.
Relying on personal opinions rather than reasoned judgments. Some students write reviews based on their personal feelings toward an article deeming it “boring” or “exciting,” “bad” or “good.” Avoid this! Although it is important to have opinions about the article, it is more essential to base your opinions on a reasoned and careful assessment of the work.