how to critique evidence in an essay

• AI Essay Writer
• Paraphraser
• AI Text Summarizer
• AI Research Tool
• AI PDF Summarizer
• Outline Generator
• Essay Grader
• Essay Checker

If you ever wondered about how to critique something, a book, a film, or maybe even a research hypothesis, then the answer for you is – to write a critical essay about it. This type of writing revolves around the deep evaluation of the material in front of you. So, in such papers, the goal isn’t to say whether you liked something or not, but rather to analyze it based on evidence and logic. Think of it as taking a step back and asking, “What is really going on here?” and “How did the creator make that happen?”

In a critical essay, you start with a central claim or thesis that makes an argument about the material you’re analyzing. From there, you’ll support your points using evidence, like specific quotes from a book or scenes from a movie. And unlike casual conversations, this type of writing avoids personal opinions or judgments like “I liked it” or “It was boring.” Instead, you’re focused on breaking down the details and exploring themes, techniques, or strategies used by the creator.

For example, rather than saying “Charlie was so lucky to find a Golden Ticket” after watching Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory, a critical essay might explore how the film uses the contrast between wealth and morality to make a statement about society. 

Writing a Perfect Critical Essay: Here’s What to Do

Writing a critical essay doesn’t have to be overwhelming if you approach it with a solid plan. Here’s a step-by-step breakdown of how you can structure your writing process to create a thoughtful, well-organized essay that impresses your readers (and earns you those high grades).

Choose and Fully Understand Your Topic

First things first—you need to select something to write about. This can be a movie, book, piece of music, or artwork. Just make sure it’s something you’re interested in and that you understand well. If your topic is assigned, spend time getting familiar with it. Watch the film or read the book a couple of times, and take notes on key themes, techniques, or elements that stand out. 

Gather Your Sources

You’ll need evidence to support your analysis, so gather relevant material. Use scholarly sources like journal articles, books, and credible websites to back up your claims. The trick here is not just collecting information but understanding it. As such, if you’re writing about a novel, find analyses that discuss the author’s themes or techniques, and use that to build your argument. And remember to always keep track of your sources for proper citations later!

Develop a Strong Thesis Statement

Once you’ve done your research, it’s time to craft your thesis statement. This is the central argument of your essay, and everything you write should connect back to it. For example, if you’re analyzing the use of imagery in Get Out , your thesis might argue how the recurring image of the teacup symbolizes the control and manipulation of Black bodies in the film, reinforcing themes of power and exploitation. Keep your thesis specific, focused, and arguable ad it will carry your entire essay.

Create an Outline

Before you start writing, create an outline to organize your ideas. A typical critical essay includes an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. In the body, each paragraph should focus on a different point that supports your thesis. For instance, one paragraph might discuss symbolism, another might analyze character development, and a third could cover narrative techniques. Outlining helps you see the flow of your writing and make sure that each point has enough evidence to back it up.

Write the Body Paragraphs First

With your outline in place, begin writing the body paragraphs. Each paragraph should start with a topic sentence that introduces the main point, followed by evidence (quotes, examples, or facts) to support it. After presenting the evidence, analyze it and explain how it ties into your thesis. If you’re analyzing a movie, for example, you might focus one paragraph on how the director uses camera angles to create tension in a scene. Stay focused and make sure everything ties back to your central argument.

Write the Conclusion

After finishing the body paragraphs, write the conclusion. This is where you sum up the key points of your essay and restate your thesis in light of the evidence you’ve presented. The conclusion should not introduce new information but instead reinforce your argument, leaving the reader with a clear understanding of your analysis. 

Write the Introduction Last

Now that you’ve got the bulk of the essay written, it’s time to finally build the introduction. Start with a hook to grab the reader’s attention—a bold statement, an intriguing question, or a surprising fact can work well. Then, provide some background information to set the context for your analysis, and finish with your thesis statement that you have already created. Writing the introduction last allows you to make sure it aligns perfectly with the rest of your essay and clearly presents your argument.

Revise, Edit, and Proofread

You’ve got your first draft—congrats! Now, it’s time to bring it to perfection. Read through your essay a few times to improve clarity and flow. Check if all your points are well-supported and if your argument makes sense from start to finish. Edit for grammar, spelling, and style errors, and make sure all citations are correctly formatted. Taking this step seriously can make a huge difference in the overall quality of your essay (and in your grade as well).

Critical Essay Example: Proper Structure & Outline

Now, if you still feel kind of lost in all this information, don’t worry too much. Below you will find an example of what a well-organized critical essay can look like. Check it out to gain some inspiration and you will definitely be able to jump right into the writing process in no time at all.

How should I start a critical essay?

To start a critical essay, begin with an engaging introduction that grabs the reader’s attention. You can use a hook, such as an interesting fact, a bold statement, or even a thought-provoking question. After the hook, provide some background information on the topic you’re discussing to set the stage. Finally, end the introduction with a clear thesis statement outlining the main argument or point you’ll analyze. This thesis will guide your essay and tell readers what to expect from your analysis.

What is a critical essay and example?

A critical essay is a type of writing where you analyze and evaluate a piece of work, such as a book, film, painting, or even a theory. This type of writing is dedicated to exploring the deeper meanings, strengths, weaknesses, and overall impact of its subject. For example, if you’re writing a critical essay about The Great Gatsby, you wouldn’t just summarize the plot—you’d dive into how F. Scott Fitzgerald uses symbolism and themes like the American Dream to convey larger messages.

What is the layout of a critical essay?

The layout of a critical essay usually follows a standard structure: an introduction, body paragraphs, and a conclusion. In the introduction, you present the topic and your thesis. The body paragraphs are where you break down the main points of your analysis, using evidence to support your claims. The conclusion ties everything together, summarizing your key points and restating your thesis in light of the evidence you’ve discussed.

What are the parts of a critical essay?

A critical essay has three main parts: the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion.

• Introduction : This is where you introduce the work you’re analyzing and present your thesis.
• Body Paragraphs : These are the meat of your essay, where you break down your analysis into different points, using evidence and examples to support your arguments.
• Conclusion : Here, you wrap up your analysis, summarizing the main points and reinforcing how they support your thesis.

Related Posts

How to Write an Evaluation Essay

• October 3, 2024
• Comments Off on How to Write an Evaluation Essay

How to Quote a Poem in an Essay

• September 27, 2024
• Comments Off on How to Quote a Poem in an Essay

How to Write a Profile Essay

• Comments Off on How to Write a Profile Essay

Are you ready to write top-quality essays?

Boost Your Essay Writing Skills and Achievements with Textero AI

• No credit card required to start
• Cancel anytime
• 4 different tools to explore

How to Write an Article Critique Step-by-Step

Table of contents

• 1 What is an Article Critique Writing?
• 2 How to Critique an Article: The Main Steps
• 3 Article Critique Outline
• 4 Article Critique Formatting
• 5 How to Write a Journal Article Critique
• 6 How to Write a Research Article Critique
• 7 Research Methods in Article Critique Writing
• 8 Tips for writing an Article Critique

Do you know how to critique an article? If not, don’t worry – this guide will walk you through the writing process step-by-step. First, we’ll discuss what a research article critique is and its importance. Then, we’ll outline the key points to consider when critiquing a scientific article. Finally, we’ll provide a step-by-step guide on how to write an article critique including introduction, body and summary. Read more to get the main idea of crafting a critique paper.

What is an Article Critique Writing?

An article critique is a formal analysis and evaluation of a piece of writing. It is often written in response to a particular text but can also be a response to a book, a movie, or any other form of writing. There are many different types of review articles . Before writing an article critique, you should have an idea about each of them.

To start writing a good critique, you must first read the article thoroughly and examine and make sure you understand the article’s purpose. Then, you should outline the article’s key points and discuss how well they are presented. Next, you should offer your comments and opinions on the article, discussing whether you agree or disagree with the author’s points and subject. Finally, concluding your critique with a brief summary of your thoughts on the article would be best. Ensure that the general audience understands your perspective on the piece.

How to Critique an Article: The Main Steps

If you are wondering “what is included in an article critique,” the answer is:

An article critique typically includes the following:

• A brief summary of the article .
• A critical evaluation of the article’s strengths and weaknesses.
• A conclusion.

When critiquing an article, it is essential to critically read the piece and consider the author’s purpose and research strategies that the author chose. Next, provide a brief summary of the text, highlighting the author’s main points and ideas. Critique an article using formal language and relevant literature in the body paragraphs. Finally, describe the thesis statement, main idea, and author’s interpretations in your language using specific examples from the article. It is also vital to discuss the statistical methods used and whether they are appropriate for the research question. Make notes of the points you think need to be discussed, and also do a literature review from where the author ground their research. Offer your perspective on the article and whether it is well-written. Finally, provide background information on the topic if necessary.

When you are reading an article, it is vital to take notes and critique the text to understand it fully and to be able to use the information in it. Here are the main steps for critiquing an article:

• Read the piece thoroughly, taking notes as you go. Ensure you understand the main points and the author’s argument.
• Take a look at the author’s perspective. Is it powerful? Does it back up the author’s point of view?
• Carefully examine the article’s tone. Is it biased? Are you being persuaded by the author in any way?
• Look at the structure. Is it well organized? Does it make sense?
• Consider the writing style. Is it clear? Is it well-written?
• Evaluate the sources the author uses. Are they credible?
• Think about your own opinion. With what do you concur or disagree? Why?

Article Critique Outline

When assigned an article critique, your instructor asks you to read and analyze it and provide feedback. A specific format is typically followed when writing an article critique.

An article critique usually has three sections: an introduction, a body, and a conclusion.

• The introduction of your article critique should have a summary and key points.
• The critique’s main body should thoroughly evaluate the piece, highlighting its strengths and weaknesses, and state your ideas and opinions with supporting evidence.
• The conclusion should restate your research and describe your opinion.

You should provide your analysis rather than simply agreeing or disagreeing with the author. When writing an article review , it is essential to be objective and critical. Describe your perspective on the subject and create an article review summary. Be sure to use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation, write it in the third person, and cite your sources.

Article Critique Formatting

When writing an article critique, you should follow a few formatting guidelines. The importance of using a proper format is to make your review clear and easy to read.

Make sure to use double spacing throughout your critique. It will make it easy to understand and read for your instructor.

Indent each new paragraph. It will help to separate your critique into different sections visually.

Use headings to organize your critique. Your introduction, body, and conclusion should stand out. It will make it easy for your instructor to follow your thoughts.

Use standard fonts, such as Times New Roman or Arial. It will make your critique easy to read.

Use 12-point font size. It will ensure that your critique is easy to read.

How to Write a Journal Article Critique

When critiquing a journal article, there are a few key points to keep in mind:

• Good critiques should be objective, meaning that the author’s ideas and arguments should be evaluated without personal bias.
• Critiques should be critical, meaning that all aspects of the article should be examined, including the author’s introduction, main ideas, and discussion.
• Critiques should be informative, providing the reader with a clear understanding of the article’s strengths and weaknesses.

When critiquing a research article, evaluating the author’s argument and the evidence they present is important. The author should state their thesis or the main point in the introductory paragraph. You should explain the article’s main ideas and evaluate the evidence critically. In the discussion section, the author should explain the implications of their findings and suggest future research.

It is also essential to keep a critical eye when reading scientific articles. In order to be credible, the scientific article must be based on evidence and previous literature. The author’s argument should be well-supported by data and logical reasoning.

How to Write a Research Article Critique

When you are assigned a research article, the first thing you need to do is read the piece carefully. Make sure you understand the subject matter and the author’s chosen approach. Next, you need to assess the importance of the author’s work. What are the key findings, and how do they contribute to the field of research?

Finally, you need to provide a critical point-by-point analysis of the article. This should include discussing the research questions, the main findings, and the overall impression of the scientific piece. In conclusion, you should state whether the text is good or bad. Read more to get an idea about curating a research article critique. But if you are not confident, you can ask “ write my papers ” and hire a professional to craft a critique paper for you. Explore your options online and get high-quality work quickly.

However, test yourself and use the following tips to write a research article critique that is clear, concise, and properly formatted.

• Take notes while you read the text in its entirety. Right down each point you agree and disagree with.
• Write a thesis statement that concisely and clearly outlines the main points.
• Write a paragraph that introduces the article and provides context for the critique.
• Write a paragraph for each of the following points, summarizing the main points and providing your own analysis:
• The purpose of the study
• The research question or questions
• The methods used
• The outcomes
• The conclusions were drawn by the author(s)
• Mention the strengths and weaknesses of the piece in a separate paragraph.
• Write a conclusion that summarizes your thoughts about the article.
• Free unlimited checks
• All common file formats
• Accurate results
• Intuitive interface

Research Methods in Article Critique Writing

When writing an article critique, it is important to use research methods to support your arguments. There are a variety of research methods that you can use, and each has its strengths and weaknesses. In this text, we will discuss four of the most common research methods used in article critique writing: quantitative research, qualitative research, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis.

Quantitative research is a research method that uses numbers and statistics to analyze data. This type of research is used to test hypotheses or measure a treatment’s effects. Quantitative research is normally considered more reliable than qualitative research because it considers a large amount of information. But, it might be difficult to find enough data to complete it properly.

Qualitative research is a research method that uses words and interviews to analyze data. This type of research is used to understand people’s thoughts and feelings. Qualitative research is usually more reliable than quantitative research because it is less likely to be biased. Though it is more expensive and tedious.

Systematic reviews are a type of research that uses a set of rules to search for and analyze studies on a particular topic. Some think that systematic reviews are more reliable than other research methods because they use a rigorous process to find and analyze studies. However, they can be pricy and long to carry out.

Meta-analysis is a type of research that combines several studies’ results to understand a treatment’s overall effect better. Meta-analysis is generally considered one of the most reliable type of research because it uses data from several approved studies. Conversely, it involves a long and costly process.

Are you still struggling to understand the critique of an article concept? You can contact an online review writing service to get help from skilled writers. You can get custom, and unique article reviews easily.

Tips for writing an Article Critique

It’s crucial to keep in mind that you’re not just sharing your opinion of the content when you write an article critique. Instead, you are providing a critical analysis, looking at its strengths and weaknesses. In order to write a compelling critique, you should follow these tips: Take note carefully of the essential elements as you read it.

• Make sure that you understand the thesis statement.
• Write down your thoughts, including strengths and weaknesses.
• Use evidence from to support your points.
• Create a clear and concise critique, making sure to avoid giving your opinion.

It is important to be clear and concise when creating an article critique. You should avoid giving your opinion and instead focus on providing a critical analysis. You should also use evidence from the article to support your points.

Readers also enjoyed

WHY WAIT? PLACE AN ORDER RIGHT NOW!

Just fill out the form, press the button, and have no worries!

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.

How to Critique an Article: Mastering the Article Evaluation Process

Did you know that approximately 4.6 billion pieces of content are produced every day? From news articles and blog posts to scholarly papers and social media updates, the digital landscape is flooded with information at an unprecedented rate. In this age of information overload, honing the skill of articles critique has never been more crucial. Whether you're seeking to bolster your academic prowess, stay well-informed, or improve your writing, mastering the art of article critique is a powerful tool to navigate the vast sea of information and discern the pearls of wisdom.

How to Critique an Article: Short Description

In this article, we will equip you with valuable tips and techniques to become an insightful evaluator of written content. We present a real-life article critique example to guide your learning process and help you develop your unique critique style. Additionally, we explore the key differences between critiquing scientific articles and journals. Whether you're a student, researcher, or avid reader, this guide will empower you to navigate the vast ocean of information with confidence and discernment. Still, have questions? Don't worry! We've got you covered with a helpful FAQ section to address any lingering doubts. Get ready to unleash your analytical prowess and uncover the true potential of every article that comes your way!

What Is an Article Critique: Understanding The Power of Evaluation

An article critique is a valuable skill that involves carefully analyzing and evaluating a written piece, such as a journal article, blog post, or news article. It goes beyond mere summarization and delves into the deeper layers of the content, examining its strengths, weaknesses, and overall effectiveness. Think of it as an engaging conversation with the author, where you provide constructive feedback and insights.

For instance, let's consider a scenario where you're critiquing a research paper on climate change. Instead of simply summarizing the findings, you would scrutinize the methodology, data interpretation, and potential biases, offering thoughtful observations to enrich the discussion. Through the process of writing an article critique, you develop a critical eye, honing your ability to appreciate well-crafted work while also identifying areas for improvement.

In the following sections, our ' write my paper ' experts will uncover valuable tips on and key points on how to write a stellar critique, so let's explore more!

Unveiling the Key Aims of Writing an Article Critique

Writing an article critique serves several essential purposes that go beyond a simple review or summary. When engaging in the art of critique, as when you learn how to write a review article , you embark on a journey of in-depth analysis, sharpening your critical thinking skills and contributing to the academic and intellectual discourse. Primarily, an article critique allows you to:

• Evaluate the Content : By critiquing an article, you delve into its content, structure, and arguments, assessing its credibility and relevance.
• Strengthen Your Critical Thinking : This practice hones your ability to identify strengths and weaknesses in written works, fostering a deeper understanding of complex topics and critical evaluation skills.
• Engage in Scholarly Dialogue : Your critique contributes to the ongoing academic conversation, offering valuable insights and thoughtful observations to the existing body of knowledge.
• Enhance Writing Skills : By analyzing and providing feedback, you develop a keen eye for effective writing techniques, benefiting your own writing endeavors.
• Promote Continuous Learning : Through the writing process, you continually refine your analytical abilities, becoming an avid and astute learner in the pursuit of knowledge.

How to Critique an Article: Steps to Follow

The process of crafting an article critique may seem overwhelming, especially when dealing with intricate academic writing. However, fear not, for it is more straightforward than it appears! To excel in this art, all you require is a clear starting point and the skill to align your critique with the complexities of the content. To help you on your journey, follow these 3 simple steps and unlock the potential to provide insightful evaluations:

Step 1: Read the Article

The first and most crucial step when wondering how to do an article critique is to thoroughly read and absorb its content. As you delve into the written piece, consider these valuable tips from our custom essay writer to make your reading process more effective:

• Take Notes : Keep a notebook or digital document handy while reading. Jot down key points, noteworthy arguments, and any questions or observations that arise.
• Annotate the Text : Underline or highlight significant passages, quotes, or sections that stand out to you. Use different colors to differentiate between positive aspects and areas that may need improvement.
• Consider the Author's Purpose : Reflect on the author's main critical point and the intended audience. Much like an explanatory essay , evaluate how effectively the article conveys its message to the target readership.

Now, let's say you are writing an article critique on climate change. While reading, you come across a compelling quote from a renowned environmental scientist highlighting the urgency of addressing global warming. By taking notes and underlining this impactful quote, you can later incorporate it into your critique as evidence of the article's effectiveness in conveying the severity of the issue.

Step 2: Take Notes/ Make sketches

Once you've thoroughly read the article, it's time to capture your thoughts and observations by taking comprehensive notes or creating sketches. This step plays a crucial role in organizing your critique and ensuring you don't miss any critical points. Here's how to make the most out of this process:

• Highlight Key Arguments : Identify the main arguments presented by the author and highlight them in your notes. This will help you focus on the core ideas that shape the article.
• Record Supporting Evidence : Take note of any evidence, examples, or data the author uses to support their arguments. Assess the credibility and effectiveness of this evidence in bolstering their claims.
• Examine Structure and Flow : Pay attention to the article's structure and how each section flows into the next. Analyze how well the author transitions between ideas and whether the organization enhances or hinders the reader's understanding.
• Create Visual Aids : If you're a visual learner, consider using sketches or diagrams to map out the article's key points and their relationships. Visual representations can aid in better grasping the content's structure and complexities.

Step 3: Format Your Paper

Once you've gathered your notes and insights, it's time to give structure to your article critique. Proper formatting ensures your critique is organized, coherent, and easy to follow. Here are essential tips for formatting an article critique effectively:

• Introduction : Begin with a clear and engaging introduction that provides context for the article you are critiquing. Include the article's title, author's name, publication details, and a brief overview of the main theme or thesis.
• Thesis Statement : Present a strong and concise thesis statement that conveys your overall assessment of the article. Your thesis should reflect whether you found the article compelling, convincing, or in need of improvement.
• Body Paragraphs : Organize your critique into well-structured body paragraphs. Each paragraph should address a specific point or aspect of the article, supported by evidence and examples from your notes.
• Use Evidence : Back up your critique with evidence from the article itself. Quote relevant passages, cite examples, and reference data to strengthen your analysis and demonstrate your understanding of the article's content.
• Conclusion : Conclude your critique by summarizing your main points and reiterating your overall evaluation. Avoid introducing new arguments in the conclusion and instead provide a concise and compelling closing statement.
• Citation Style : If required, adhere to the specific citation style guidelines (e.g., APA, MLA) for in-text citations and the reference list. Properly crediting the original article and any additional sources you use in your critique is essential.

How to Critique a Journal Article: Mastering the Steps

So, you've been assigned the task of critiquing a journal article, and not sure where to start? Worry not, as we've prepared a comprehensive guide with different steps to help you navigate this process with confidence. Journal articles are esteemed sources of scholarly knowledge, and effectively critiquing them requires a systematic approach. Let's dive into the steps to expertly evaluate and analyze a journal article:

Step 1: Understanding the Research Context

Begin by familiarizing yourself with the broader research context in which the journal article is situated. Learn about the field, the topic's significance, and any previous relevant research. This foundational knowledge will provide a valuable backdrop for your journal article critique example.

Step 2: Evaluating the Article's Structure

Assess the article's overall structure and organization. Examine how the introduction sets the stage for the research and how the discussion flows logically from the methodology and results. A well-structured article enhances readability and comprehension.

Step 3: Analyzing the Research Methodology

Dive into the research methodology section, which outlines the approach used to gather and analyze data. Scrutinize the study's design, data collection methods, sample size, and any potential biases or limitations. Understanding the research process will enable you to gauge the article's reliability.

Step 4: Assessing the Data and Results

Examine the presentation of data and results in the article. Are the findings clear and effectively communicated? Look for any discrepancies between the data presented and the interpretations made by the authors.

Step 5: Analyzing the Discussion and Conclusions

Evaluate the discussion section, where the authors interpret their findings and place them in the broader context. Assess the soundness of their conclusions, considering whether they are adequately supported by the data.

Step 6: Considering Ethical Considerations

Reflect on any ethical considerations raised by the research. Assess whether the study respects the rights and privacy of participants and adheres to ethical guidelines.

Step 7: Identifying Strengths and Weaknesses

Identify the article's strengths, such as well-designed experiments, comprehensive, relevant literature reviews, or innovative approaches. Also, pinpoint any weaknesses, like gaps in the research, unclear explanations, or insufficient evidence.

Step 8: Offering Constructive Feedback

Provide constructive feedback to the authors, highlighting both positive aspects and areas for improvement for future research. Suggest ways to enhance the research methods, data analysis, or discussion to bolster its overall quality.

Step 9: Presenting Your Critique

Organize your critique into a well-structured paper, starting with an introduction that outlines the article's context and purpose. Develop a clear and focused thesis statement that conveys your assessment. Support your points with evidence from the article and other credible sources.

By following these steps on how to critique a journal article, you'll be well-equipped to craft a thoughtful and insightful piece, contributing to the scholarly discourse in your field of study!

Wednesday Addams

Mysterious, dark, and sarcastic

You’re the master of dark humor and love standing out with your unconventional style. Your perfect costume? A modern twist on Wednesday Addams’ gothic look. You’ll own Halloween with your unapologetically eerie vibe. 🖤🕸️

Got an Article that Needs Some Serious Critiquing?

Don't sweat it! Our critique maestros are armed with wit, wisdom, and a dash of magic to whip that piece into shape.

An Article Critique: Journal Vs. Research

In the realm of academic writing, the terms 'journal article' and 'research paper' are often used interchangeably, which can lead to confusion about their differences. Understanding the distinctions between critiquing a research article and a journal piece is essential. Let's delve into the key characteristics that set apart a journal article from a research paper and explore how the critique process may differ for each:

Publication Scope:

• Journal Article: Presents focused and concise research findings or new insights within a specific subject area.
• Research Paper: Explores a broader range of topics and can cover extensive research on a particular subject.

Format and Structure:

• Journal Article: Follows a standardized format with sections such as abstract, introduction, methodology, results, discussion, and conclusion.
• Research Paper: May not adhere to a specific format and allows flexibility in organizing content based on the research scope.

Depth of Analysis:

• Journal Article: Provides a more concise and targeted analysis of the research topic or findings.
• Research Paper: Offers a more comprehensive and in-depth analysis, often including extensive literature reviews and data analyses.
• Journal Article: Typically shorter in length, ranging from a few pages to around 10-15 pages.
• Research Paper: Tends to be longer, spanning from 20 to several hundred pages, depending on the research complexity.

Publication Type:

• Journal Article: Published in academic journals after undergoing rigorous peer review.
• Research Paper: May be published as a standalone work or as part of a thesis, dissertation, or academic report.
• Journal Article: Targeted at academics, researchers, and professionals within the specific field of study.
• Research Paper: Can cater to a broader audience, including students, researchers, policymakers, and the general public.
• Journal Article: Primarily aimed at sharing new research findings, contributing to academic discourse, and advancing knowledge in the field.
• Research Paper: Focuses on comprehensive exploration and analysis of a research topic, aiming to make a substantial contribution to the body of knowledge.

Appreciating these differences becomes paramount when engaging in the critique of these two forms of scholarly publications, as they each demand a unique approach and thoughtful consideration of their distinctive attributes. And if you find yourself desiring a flawlessly crafted research article critique example, entrusting the task to professional writers is always an excellent option – you can easily order essay that meets your needs.

Article Critique Example

Our collection of essay samples offers a comprehensive and practical illustration of the critique process, granting you access to valuable insights.

Tips on How to Critique an Article

Critiquing an article requires a keen eye, critical thinking, and a thoughtful approach to evaluating its content. To enhance your article critique skills and provide insightful analyses, consider incorporating these five original and practical tips into your process:

1. Analyze the Author's Bias : Be mindful of potential biases in the article, whether they are political, cultural, or personal. Consider how these biases may influence the author's perspective and the presentation of information. Evaluating the presence of bias enables you to discern the objectivity and credibility of the article's arguments.

2. Examine the Supporting Evidence : Scrutinize the quality and relevance of the evidence used to support the article's claims. Look for well-researched data, credible sources, and up-to-date statistics. Assess how effectively the author integrates evidence to build a compelling case for their arguments.

3. Consider the Audience's Perspective : Put yourself in the shoes of the intended audience and assess how well the article communicates its ideas. Consider whether the language, tone, and level of complexity are appropriate for the target readership. A well-tailored article is more likely to engage and resonate with its audience.

4. Investigate the Research Methodology : If the article involves research or empirical data, delve into the methodology used to gather and analyze the information. Evaluate the soundness of the study design, sample size, and data collection methods. Understanding the research process adds depth to your critique.

5. Discuss the Implications and Application : Consider the broader implications of the article's findings or arguments. Discuss how the insights presented in the article could impact the field of study or have practical applications in real-world scenarios. Identifying the potential consequences of the article's content strengthens your critique's depth and relevance.

Wrapping Up

In a nutshell, article critique is an essential skill that helps us grow as critical thinkers and active participants in academia. Embrace the opportunity to analyze and offer constructive feedback, contributing to a brighter future of knowledge and understanding. Remember, each critique is a chance to engage with new ideas and expand our horizons. So, keep honing your critique skills and enjoy the journey of discovery in the world of academic exploration!

Tired of Ordinary Critiques?

Brace yourself for an extraordinary experience! Our critique geniuses are on standby, ready to unleash their extraordinary skills on your article!

What Steps Need to Be Taken in Writing an Article Critique?

What is the recommended length for an article critique.

is an expert in nursing and healthcare, with a strong background in history, law, and literature. Holding advanced degrees in nursing and public health, his analytical approach and comprehensive knowledge help students navigate complex topics. On EssayPro blog, Adam provides insightful articles on everything from historical analysis to the intricacies of healthcare policies. In his downtime, he enjoys historical documentaries and volunteering at local clinics.

• Writing well

How to write a critique

• Starting well
• How to write an annotated bibliography
• How to write a case study response
• How to write an empirical article
• How to write an essay
• How to write a literature review
• How to write a reflective task
• How to write a report
• Finishing well

Before you start writing, it is important to have a thorough understanding of the work that will be critiqued.

• Study the work under discussion.
• Make notes on key parts of the work.
• Develop an understanding of the main argument or purpose being expressed in the work.
• Consider how the work relates to a broader issue or context.

Example template

There are a variety of ways to structure a critique. You should always check your unit materials or Canvas site for guidance from your lecturer. The following template, which showcases the main features of a critique, is provided as one example.

Introduction

Typically, the introduction is short (less than 10% of the word length) and you should:

• name the work being reviewed as well as the date it was created and the name of the author/creator
• describe the main argument or purpose of the work
• explain the context in which the work was created - this could include the social or political context, the place of the work in a creative or academic tradition, or the relationship between the work and the creator’s life experience
• have a concluding sentence that signposts what your evaluation of the work will be - for instance, it may indicate whether it is a positive, negative, or mixed evaluation.

Briefly summarise the main points and objectively describe how the creator portrays these by using techniques, styles, media, characters or symbols. This summary should not be the focus of the critique and is usually shorter than the critical evaluation.

Critical evaluation

This section should give a systematic and detailed assessment of the different elements of the work, evaluating how well the creator was able to achieve the purpose through these. For example: you would assess the plot structure, characterisation and setting of a novel; an assessment of a painting would look at composition, brush strokes, colour and light; a critique of a research project would look at subject selection, design of the experiment, analysis of data and conclusions.

A critical evaluation does not simply highlight negative impressions. It should deconstruct the work and identify both strengths and weaknesses. It should examine the work and evaluate its success, in light of its purpose.

Examples of key critical questions that could help your assessment include:

• Who is the creator? Is the work presented objectively or subjectively?
• What are the aims of the work? Were the aims achieved?
• What techniques, styles, media were used in the work? Are they effective in portraying the purpose?
• What assumptions underlie the work? Do they affect its validity?
• What types of evidence or persuasion are used? Has evidence been interpreted fairly?
• How is the work structured? Does it favour a particular interpretation or point of view? Is it effective?
• Does the work enhance understanding of key ideas or theories? Does the work engage (or fail to engage) with key concepts or other works in its discipline?

This evaluation is written in formal academic style and logically presented. Group and order your ideas into paragraphs. Start with the broad impressions first and then move into the details of the technical elements. For shorter critiques, you may discuss the strengths of the works, and then the weaknesses. In longer critiques, you may wish to discuss the positive and negative of each key critical question in individual paragraphs.

To support the evaluation, provide evidence from the work itself, such as a quote or example, and you should also cite evidence from related sources. Explain how this evidence supports your evaluation of the work.

This is usually a very brief paragraph, which includes:

• a statement indicating the overall evaluation of the work
• a summary of the key reasons, identified during the critical evaluation, why this evaluation was formed
• in some circumstances, recommendations for improvement on the work may be appropriate.

Reference list

Include all resources cited in your critique. Check with your lecturer/tutor for which referencing style to use.

• Mentioned the name of the work, the date of its creation and the name of the creator?
• Accurately summarised the work being critiqued?
• Mainly focused on the critical evaluation of the work?
• Systematically outlined an evaluation of each element of the work to achieve the overall purpose?
• Used evidence, from the work itself as well as other sources, to back and illustrate my assessment of elements of the work?
• Formed an overall evaluation of the work, based on critical reading?
• Used a well structured introduction, body and conclusion?
• Used correct grammar, spelling and punctuation; clear presentation; and appropriate referencing style?

Further information

• University of New South Wales: Writing a Critical Review
• University of Toronto: The Book Review or Article Critique

Global links and information

• Referencing and using sources
• Background and development
• Changes to QUT cite|write
• Need more help?
• Current students
• Current staff
• TEQSA Provider ID: PRV12079 (Australian University)
• CRICOS No. 00213J
• ABN 83 791 724 622
• Last modified: 28-May-2024
• Accessibility
• Right to Information
• Feedback and suggestions

Acknowledgement of Traditional Owners

QUT acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the lands where QUT now stands.

• U.S. Locations
• UMGC Europe
• Learn Online
• Find Answers
• 855-655-8682
• Current Students

UMGC Effective Writing Center Writing to Critique

Explore more of umgc.

• Writing Resources

When you hear that your writing assignment is a “critique,” here’s what you do: instantly substitute the word “evaluation.” You see, essentially, that’s what a critique is—an e-value-ation. You rate the value of something. The value can be positive, negative or, most likely, a mix of the two.

Evaluating or critiquing is something that you do every day, whether you are aware of it or not. You do it personally—is this the right outfit for today’s video? I can’t believe my spouse did our townhouse totally in beige.

But you also do it professionally: Will my team’s plans for the new product launch work? Should I hire or promote this person? What’s the best notebook computer for the sales team? All of those contain an evaluation. As a matter of fact, your ability to think critically (in an evaluative fashion) and to offer compelling reasons and evidence for your evaluations is one of the most valued skills in the workplace and will play a crucial role in your career advancement.

Let’s take a look at the typical parts of a critique or evaluation essay and get to know what should be done in each one:

Introduction

Unlike the introduction to most of the essays you write in school, where the main purpose is simply to introduce the thesis, the introduction of a critique or evaluation essay is more complex.

First, you must introduce the author and the title of the work being critiqued. This information is often in the first sentence of a critique’s introduction, but so long as the info is at or near the top you are fine.

Second,  state the author’s main point (whether in the entire work or the section of the work you are critiquing). The main point is sometimes called the “take away”—what the author wants the reader to remember or do after reading.

Third, state in 1-2 sentences your overall evaluation of the work you are critiquing. If “overall evaluation” sounds like your conclusion, bingo, you are correct. So, it may be wise to leave this portion of your intro unwritten until you have finished your first draft.

Fourth, be sure to add any background information the reader needs to place the author’s work in context. What overall topic is the work related to? Is there a controversy involved? Be sure to set the stage since your reader has not read the work.

After the introduction comes part two: the summary of the work or that part of the work under consideration. When writing this summary, you are an objective reporter providing an unbiased statement of two things:

• the author’s overall point or take-away
• the main supports offered for that point

And like a good reporter, your language should be untainted by your own views and certainly be written in the third person—no I’s or you’s. Your goal: After someone reads a good summary (also called an abstract), that reader should know the author’s thesis and main points without detecting any of your opinion.

Part three is the evaluation. This is where you transition from being a reporter to being a judge. Just like a judge at a gymnastics meet, you weigh the strong points and the weak points of the performance, then provide an overall rating. Also, just like at a gymnastics meet, you have a scorecard of criteria that you use to make this judgment, this rating. However, instead of mount and dismount, flexibility and strength, your criteria are more likely to be items like this:

• Accuracy of information
• Presence or lack of definition of key terms
• Hidden assumptions
• Clarity of language
• Fairness—the author weighed both sides without undue bias
• Logic and Organization—do the main points link together in a meaningful way and add up to a valid argument? Are there gaps in the argument?
• Fallacies—these refer to such argument no-no’s as name calling, hasty generalization, oversimplification, substituting emotional language for fact or logic, or the black/white or either/or fallacy, the bandwagon appeal (everybody is doing it, so it must be OK), and so on.

Part four is the response. Now it’s your turn. You are no longer a reporter or a judge. You are you, providing your personal take on this work. How do you do that? Simple: Ask yourself questions like these:

• What do I agree and disagree with?
• What does the author get right, what does she/he get wrong, in my opinion?
• What ultimate merit does this work have—some, a little, none?
• Would I recommend this work as a source on this topic or should it be avoided—why or why not?

The response section is also where you would use outside sources to back up your opinion of this work and its merits or demerits. In that sense, your response section is like a miniature essay, where your thesis is your opinion of the work and your main points support your opinion.

Part five is the wrap up. It doesn’t have to be long. Your main tasks are to:

• Remind your audience of the overall importance of the topic—bring the reader back to ground zero, the topic at hand.
• Bring together your assessment or rating of the work, together with your personal response to it. In doing so, focus on overall strengths and weaknesses. Then use both to state what you believe is the ultimate success of the work .

So there you are—the mysteries of the “critique” demystified. You simply

• Introduce the work
• Summarize the work
• Rate the work based on a set of clear criteria
• Respond to the work in a personal way
• Wrap it up by talking about overall success failure of the work and the importance of the topic it tries to address.

Do those things—in that order—and you will end up with a critique that is sound and meaningful.

Our helpful admissions advisors can help you choose an academic program to fit your career goals, estimate your transfer credits, and develop a plan for your education costs that fits your budget. If you’re a current UMGC student, please visit the Help Center .

Personal Information

Contact information, additional information.

By submitting this form, you acknowledge that you intend to sign this form electronically and that your electronic signature is the equivalent of a handwritten signature, with all the same legal and binding effect. You are giving your express written consent without obligation for UMGC to contact you regarding our educational programs and services using e-mail, phone, or text, including automated technology for calls and/or texts to the mobile number(s) provided. For more details, including how to opt out, read our privacy policy or contact an admissions advisor .

Please wait, your form is being submitted.

By using our website you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more about how we use cookies by reading our  Privacy Policy .

• All eBooks & Audiobooks
• Academic eBook Collection
• Home Grown eBook Collection
• Off-Campus Access
• Literature Resource Center
• Opposing Viewpoints
• ProQuest Central
• Course Guides
• Citing Sources
• Library Research
• Websites by Topic
• Book-a-Librarian
• Research Tutorials
• Use the Catalog
• Use Databases
• Use Films on Demand
• Use Home Grown eBooks
• Use NC LIVE
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary vs. Secondary
• Scholarly vs. Popular
• Make an Appointment
• Writing Tools
• Annotated Bibliographies
• Summaries, Reviews & Critiques
• Writing Center

Service Alert

Article Summaries, Reviews & Critiques

• Writing an article SUMMARY
• Writing an article REVIEW

Writing an article CRITIQUE

• Citing Sources This link opens in a new window
• About RCC Library

Text: 336-308-8801

Email: [email protected]

Call: 336-633-0204

Schedule: Book-a-Librarian

Like us on Facebook

Links on this guide may go to external web sites not connected with Randolph Community College. Their inclusion is not an endorsement by Randolph Community College and the College is not responsible for the accuracy of their content or the security of their site.

A critique asks you to evaluate an article and the author’s argument. You will need to look critically at what the author is claiming, evaluate the research methods, and look for possible problems with, or applications of, the researcher’s claims.

Introduction

Give an overview of the author’s main points and how the author supports those points. Explain what the author found and describe the process they used to arrive at this conclusion.

Body Paragraphs

Interpret the information from the article:

• Does the author review previous studies? Is current and relevant research used?
• What type of research was used – empirical studies, anecdotal material, or personal observations?
• Was the sample too small to generalize from?
• Was the participant group lacking in diversity (race, gender, age, education, socioeconomic status, etc.)
• For instance, volunteers gathered at a health food store might have different attitudes about nutrition than the population at large.
• How useful does this work seem to you? How does the author suggest the findings could be applied and how do you believe they could be applied?
• How could the study have been improved in your opinion?
• Does the author appear to have any biases (related to gender, race, class, or politics)?
• Is the writing clear and easy to follow? Does the author’s tone add to or detract from the article?
• How useful are the visuals (such as tables, charts, maps, photographs) included, if any? How do they help to illustrate the argument? Are they confusing or hard to read?
• What further research might be conducted on this subject?

Try to synthesize the pieces of your critique to emphasize your own main points about the author’s work, relating the researcher’s work to your own knowledge or to topics being discussed in your course.

From the Center for Academic Excellence (opens in a new window), University of Saint Joseph Connecticut

Additional Resources

All links open in a new window.

Writing an Article Critique (from The University of Arizona Global Campus Writing Center)

How to Critique an Article (from Essaypro.com)

How to Write an Article Critique (from EliteEditing.com.au)

• << Previous: Writing an article REVIEW
• Next: Citing Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 15, 2024 9:32 AM
• URL: https://libguides.randolph.edu/summaries

We’re reviewing our resources this fall (September-December 2024). We will do our best to minimize disruption, but you might notice changes over the next few months as we correct errors & delete redundant resources. 

Critical Analysis and Evaluation

Many assignments ask you to   critique   and   evaluate   a source. Sources might include journal articles, books, websites, government documents, portfolios, podcasts, or presentations.

When you   critique,   you offer both negative and positive analysis of the content, writing, and structure of a source.

When   you   evaluate , you assess how successful a source is at presenting information, measured against a standard or certain criteria.

Elements of a critical analysis:

opinion + evidence from the article + justification

Your   opinion   is your thoughtful reaction to the piece.

Evidence from the article  offers some proof to back up your opinion.

The   justification   is an explanation of how you arrived at your opinion or why you think it’s true.

How do you critique and evaluate?

When critiquing and evaluating someone else’s writing/research, your purpose is to reach an   informed opinion   about a source. In order to do that, try these three steps:

• How do you feel?
• What surprised you?
• What left you confused?
• What pleased or annoyed you?
• What was interesting?
• What is the purpose of this text?
• Who is the intended audience?
• What kind of bias is there?
• What was missing?
• See our resource on analysis and synthesis ( Move From Research to Writing: How to Think ) for other examples of questions to ask.
• sophisticated
• interesting
• undocumented
• disorganized
• superficial
• unconventional
• inappropriate interpretation of evidence
• unsound or discredited methodology
• traditional
• unsubstantiated
• unsupported
• well-researched
• easy to understand
• Opinion : This article’s assessment of the power balance in cities is   confusing.
• Evidence:   It first says that the power to shape policy is evenly distributed among citizens, local government, and business (Rajal, 232).
• Justification :  but then it goes on to focus almost exclusively on business. Next, in a much shorter section, it combines the idea of citizens and local government into a single point of evidence. This leaves the reader with the impression that the citizens have no voice at all. It is   not helpful   in trying to determine the role of the common voter in shaping public policy.  

Sample criteria for critical analysis

Sometimes the assignment will specify what criteria to use when critiquing and evaluating a source. If not, consider the following prompts to approach your analysis. Choose the questions that are most suitable for your source.

• What do you think about the quality of the research? Is it significant?
• Did the author answer the question they set out to? Did the author prove their thesis?
• Did you find contradictions to other things you know?
• What new insight or connections did the author make?
• How does this piece fit within the context of your course, or the larger body of research in the field?
• The structure of an article or book is often dictated by standards of the discipline or a theoretical model. Did the piece meet those standards?
• Did the piece meet the needs of the intended audience?
• Was the material presented in an organized and logical fashion?
• Is the argument cohesive and convincing? Is the reasoning sound? Is there enough evidence?
• Is it easy to read? Is it clear and easy to understand, even if the concepts are sophisticated?

IOE - Faculty of Education and Society

Writing critically

Academic writing: Writing critically

Learn how to show critical analysis in academic writing and write critically.

Critical analysis

Writing a critique (or critical review).

What does the term “critical analysis” mean in the context of academic writing? Showing critical analysis in academic writing could mean:

• Demonstrating your understanding of reading/evidence (“this appears to demonstrate that…”; “this implies…”; “this could result in…”).
• Showing reasoning and conclusions from your reading/reflections (“therefore…”; “as such…”).
• Considering questions such as “why”, “what if” and “so what”.
• Showing you understand how different ideas/evidence/perspectives relate to each other (“this is linked to Smith's concept of X…”; Building on Jones (2012), Green (2016) suggests…”).
• Demonstrating an understanding of how theories or research apply in your practice/context.
• Identifying possible limitations of research/theory and how these relate to your own arguments or own context (“in the context of international development…”; “in terms of learning in the Science classroom…”).
• Identifying how something could be interpreted or done differently (in relation to your reading and/or practice).

Back to top

Criticality?

If you have been told your writing is not critical enough, it probably means that your writing treats the knowledge claims as if they are true, well-supported, and applicable in the context you are writing about. This may not always be the case.

In these two examples, the extracts refer to the same section of text. In each example, the section that refers to a source has been highlighted in bold. The note below the example then explains how the writer has used the source material. 

Example a: " There is a strong positive effect on students, both educationally and emotionally, when the instructors try to learn to say students' names without making pronunciation errors (Kiang, 2004)". This is a simple paraphrase with no critical comment. It looks like the writer agrees with Kiang. This is not a good example of critical writing, as the writer has not made any critical comment.

Example b: "Kiang (2004) gives various examples to support his claim that 'the positive emotional and educational impact on students is clear' (p.210) when instructors try to pronounce students' names in the correct way. He quotes one student, Nguyet, as saying that he 'felt surprised and happy' (p.211) when the tutor said his name clearly . The emotional effect claimed by Kiang is illustrated in quotes such as these, although the educational impact is supported more indirectly through the chapter. Overall, he provides more examples of students being negatively affected by incorrect pronunciation, and it is difficult to find examples within the text of a positive educational impact as such". The writer describes Kiang's (2004) claim and the examples which he uses to try to support it. The writer then comments that the examples do not seem balanced and may not be enough to support the claims fully. This is a better example of writing which expresses criticality.

A critique (or critical review) is not to be mistaken for a literature review. A “critical review”, or “critique”, is a complete type of text (or genre), discussing one particular article or book in detail. In some instances, you may be asked to write a critique of two or three articles (e.g. a comparative critical review). In contrast, a “literature review”, which also needs to be “critical”, is a part of a larger type of text, such as a chapter of your dissertation. Most importantly: read your article/book as many times as possible, as this will make the critical review much easier.

Read and take notes

To improve your reading confidence and efficiency, visit our pages on reading. After you are familiar with the text, make notes on some of the following questions.

Choose the questions which seem suitable:

• What kind of article is it (for example does it present data or does it present purely theoretical arguments)?
• What is the main area under discussion?
• What are the main findings?
• What are the stated limitations?
• Where does the author's data and evidence come from? Are they appropriate/sufficient?
• What are the main issues raised by the author?
• What questions are raised?
• How well are these questions addressed?
• What are the major points/interpretations made by the author in terms of the issues raised?
• Is the text balanced? Is it fair/biased?
• Does the author contradict herself?
• How does all this relate to other literature on this topic?
• How does all this relate to your own experience, ideas and views?
• What else has this author written? Do these build/complement this text?
• (Optional) Has anyone else reviewed this article? What did they say? Do I agree with them?

Organise your writing

You first need to summarise the text that you have read. One reason to summarise the text is that the reader may not have read the text. 

In your summary, you will:

• Focus on points within the article that you think are interesting.
• Summarise the author(s) main ideas or argument.
• Explain how these ideas/argument have been constructed. For example, is the author basing her arguments on data that they have collected? Are the main ideas/argument purely theoretical?

In your summary you might answer the following questions:

• Why is this topic important?
• Where can this text be located? For example, does it address policy studies?
• What other prominent authors also write about this?

Evaluation is the most important part in a critical review. Use the literature to support your views. You may also use your knowledge of conducting research, and your own experience. Evaluation can be explicit or implicit.

Explicit evaluation

Explicit evaluation involves stating directly (explicitly) how you intend to evaluate the text, e.g. "I will review this article by focusing on the following questions. First, I will examine the extent to which the authors contribute to current thought on Second Language Acquisition (SLA) pedagogy. After that, I will analyse whether the authors' propositions are feasible within overseas SLA classrooms."

Implicit evaluation

Implicit evaluation is less direct. The following section on Linguistic features of writing a critical review contains language that evaluates the text. A difficult part of the evaluation of a published text (and a professional author) is how to do this as a student. There is nothing wrong with making your position as a student explicit and incorporating it into your evaluation. Examples of how you might do this can be found in the section on Linguistic features of writing a critical review. You need to remember to locate and analyse the author's argument when you are writing your critical review. For example, you need to locate the authors' view of classroom pedagogy as presented in the book/article and not present a critique of views of classroom pedagogy in general.

Linguistic features of a critical review

The following examples come from published critical reviews. Some of them have been adapted for student use.

• This article/book is divided into two/three parts. First...
• While the title might suggest...
• The tone appears to be...
• [Title] is the first/second volume in the series [Title], edited by... The books/articles in this series address...
• The second/third claim is based on...
• The author challenges the notion that...
• The author tries to find a more middle ground/make more modest claims...
• The article/book begins with a short historical overview of...
• Numerous authors have recently suggested that... (see [Author, Year]; [Author, Year]). [Author] would also be one such author. With his/her argument that...
• To refer to [Title] as a... is not to say that it is...
• This book/article is aimed at... This intended readership...
• The author's book/article examines the... To do this, the author first...
• The author develops/suggests a theoretical/pedagogical model to…
• This book/article positions itself firmly within the field of...
• The author in a series of subtle arguments, indicates that he/she...
• The argument is therefore...
• The author asks "..."
• With a purely critical/postmodern take on...
• [Topic], as the author points out, can be viewed as...
• In this recent contribution to the field of... this British author...
• As a leading author in the field of...
• This book/article nicely contributes to the field of... and complements other work by this author...
• The second/third part of... provides/questions/asks the reader...
• [Title] is intended to encourage students/researchers to...
• The approach taken by the author provides the opportunity to examine... in a qualitative/quantitative research framework that nicely complements...
• The author notes/claims that state support/a focus on pedagogy/the adoption of...remains vital if...
• According to [Author, Year] teaching towards examinations is not as effective as it is in other areas of the curriculum. This is because, as [Author, Year] claims that examinations have undue status within the curriculum.
• According to [Author, Year]… is not as effective in some areas of the curriculum/syllabus as others. Therefore, the author believes that this is a reason for some schools…
• This argument is not entirely convincing, as...furthermore it commodifies/rationalises the...
• Over the last five/10 years the view of... has increasingly been viewed as “complicated” (see [Author, Year]; [Author, Year]).
• However, through trying to integrate... with... the author...
• There are difficulties with such a position.
• Inevitably, several crucial questions are left unanswered/glossed over by this insightful/timely/interesting/stimulating book/article. Why should...
• It might have been more relevant for the author to have written this book/article as...
• This article/book is not without disappointment from those who would view... as...
• This chosen framework enlightens/clouds...
• This analysis intends to be... but falls a little short as...
• The authors rightly conclude that if...
• A detailed, well-written and rigorous account of...
• As a Korean student I feel that this article/book very clearly illustrates...
• The beginning of... provides an informative overview of...
• The tables/figures do little to help/greatly help the reader...
• The reaction by scholars who take a... approach might not be so favourable (e.g. Author, Year).
• This explanation has a few weaknesses that other researchers have pointed out (see [Author, Year]; [Author, Year]). The first is...
• On the other hand, the author wisely suggests/proposes that... By combining these two dimensions...
• The author's brief introduction to... may leave the intended reader confused as it fails to properly...
• Despite my inability to... I was greatly interested in...
• Even where this reader/I disagree(s), the author's effort to...
• The author thus combines... with... to argue... which seems quite improbable for a number of reasons. First...
• Perhaps this aversion to... would explain the author's reluctance to...
• As a second language student from ... I find it slightly ironic that such an Anglo-centric view is...
• The reader is rewarded with...
• Less convincing is the broad-sweeping generalisation that...
• There is no denying the author's subject knowledge nor his/her...
• The author's prose is dense and littered with unnecessary jargon...
• The author's critique of...might seem harsh but is well supported within the literature (see [Author, Year]; [Author, Year]; [Author, Year]). Aligning herself with the author, [Author, Year] states that...
• As it stands, the central focus of [Title] is well/poorly supported by its empirical findings...
• Given the hesitation to generalise to... the limitation of... does not seem problematic...
• For instance, the term... is never properly defined and the reader is left to guess as to whether...
• Furthermore, to label... as... inadvertently misguides...
• In addition, this research proves to be timely/especially significant to... as recent government policy/proposals has/have been enacted to...
• On this well-researched/documented basis the author emphasises/proposes that...
• Nonetheless, other research/scholarship/data tend to counter/contradict this possible trend/assumption... (see [Author, Year]; [Author, Year]).
• Without entering into details of the..., it should be stated that [Title] should be read by... others will see little value in...
• As experimental conditions were not used in the study the word “significant” misleads the reader.
• The article/book becomes repetitious in its assertion that...
• The thread of the author's argument becomes lost in an overuse of empirical data...
• Almost every argument presented in the final section is largely derivative, providing little to say about...
• She/he does not seem to take into consideration; however, that there are fundamental differences in the conditions of…
• As [Author, Year] points out, however, it seems to be necessary to look at…
• This suggests that having low… does not necessarily indicate that… is ineffective.
• Therefore, the suggestion made by [Author, Year]… is difficult to support.
• When considering all the data presented… it is not clear that the low scores of some students, indeed, reflect…
• Overall, this article/book is an analytical look at... which within the field of... is often overlooked.
• Despite its problems, [Title] offers valuable theoretical insights/interesting examples/a contribution to pedagogy and a starting point for students/researchers of... with an interest in...
• This detailed and rigorously argued...
• This first/second volume/book/article by... with an interest in... is highly informative...

An important note

We recommend that you do not search for other university guidelines on critical reviews. This is because the expectations may be different at other institutions. Ask your tutor for more guidance or examples if you have further questions.

How to Write Critical Reviews

When you are asked to write a critical review of a book or article, you will need to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. In other words, you will be examining another person’s thoughts on a topic from your point of view.

Your stand must go beyond your “gut reaction” to the work and be based on your knowledge (readings, lecture, experience) of the topic as well as on factors such as criteria stated in your assignment or discussed by you and your instructor.

Make your stand clear at the beginning of your review, in your evaluations of specific parts, and in your concluding commentary.

Remember that your goal should be to make a few key points about the book or article, not to discuss everything the author writes.

Understanding the Assignment

To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work–deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole.

Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain points and prevent you from merely summarizing what the author says. Assuming the role of an analytical reader will also help you to determine whether or not the author fulfills the stated purpose of the book or article and enhances your understanding or knowledge of a particular topic.

Be sure to read your assignment thoroughly before you read the article or book. Your instructor may have included specific guidelines for you to follow. Keeping these guidelines in mind as you read the article or book can really help you write your paper!

Also, note where the work connects with what you’ve studied in the course. You can make the most efficient use of your reading and notetaking time if you are an active reader; that is, keep relevant questions in mind and jot down page numbers as well as your responses to ideas that appear to be significant as you read.

Please note: The length of your introduction and overview, the number of points you choose to review, and the length of your conclusion should be proportionate to the page limit stated in your assignment and should reflect the complexity of the material being reviewed as well as the expectations of your reader.

Write the introduction

Below are a few guidelines to help you write the introduction to your critical review.

Introduce your review appropriately

Begin your review with an introduction appropriate to your assignment.

If your assignment asks you to review only one book and not to use outside sources, your introduction will focus on identifying the author, the title, the main topic or issue presented in the book, and the author’s purpose in writing the book.

If your assignment asks you to review the book as it relates to issues or themes discussed in the course, or to review two or more books on the same topic, your introduction must also encompass those expectations.

Explain relationships

For example, before you can review two books on a topic, you must explain to your reader in your introduction how they are related to one another.

Within this shared context (or under this “umbrella”) you can then review comparable aspects of both books, pointing out where the authors agree and differ.

In other words, the more complicated your assignment is, the more your introduction must accomplish.

Finally, the introduction to a book review is always the place for you to establish your position as the reviewer (your thesis about the author’s thesis).

As you write, consider the following questions:

• Is the book a memoir, a treatise, a collection of facts, an extended argument, etc.? Is the article a documentary, a write-up of primary research, a position paper, etc.?
• Who is the author? What does the preface or foreword tell you about the author’s purpose, background, and credentials? What is the author’s approach to the topic (as a journalist? a historian? a researcher?)?
• What is the main topic or problem addressed? How does the work relate to a discipline, to a profession, to a particular audience, or to other works on the topic?
• What is your critical evaluation of the work (your thesis)? Why have you taken that position? What criteria are you basing your position on?

Provide an overview

In your introduction, you will also want to provide an overview. An overview supplies your reader with certain general information not appropriate for including in the introduction but necessary to understanding the body of the review.

Generally, an overview describes your book’s division into chapters, sections, or points of discussion. An overview may also include background information about the topic, about your stand, or about the criteria you will use for evaluation.

The overview and the introduction work together to provide a comprehensive beginning for (a “springboard” into) your review.

• What are the author’s basic premises? What issues are raised, or what themes emerge? What situation (i.e., racism on college campuses) provides a basis for the author’s assertions?
• How informed is my reader? What background information is relevant to the entire book and should be placed here rather than in a body paragraph?

Write the body

The body is the center of your paper, where you draw out your main arguments. Below are some guidelines to help you write it.

Organize using a logical plan

Organize the body of your review according to a logical plan. Here are two options:

• First, summarize, in a series of paragraphs, those major points from the book that you plan to discuss; incorporating each major point into a topic sentence for a paragraph is an effective organizational strategy. Second, discuss and evaluate these points in a following group of paragraphs. (There are two dangers lurking in this pattern–you may allot too many paragraphs to summary and too few to evaluation, or you may re-summarize too many points from the book in your evaluation section.)
• Alternatively, you can summarize and evaluate the major points you have chosen from the book in a point-by-point schema. That means you will discuss and evaluate point one within the same paragraph (or in several if the point is significant and warrants extended discussion) before you summarize and evaluate point two, point three, etc., moving in a logical sequence from point to point to point. Here again, it is effective to use the topic sentence of each paragraph to identify the point from the book that you plan to summarize or evaluate.

Questions to keep in mind as you write

With either organizational pattern, consider the following questions:

• What are the author’s most important points? How do these relate to one another? (Make relationships clear by using transitions: “In contrast,” an equally strong argument,” “moreover,” “a final conclusion,” etc.).
• What types of evidence or information does the author present to support his or her points? Is this evidence convincing, controversial, factual, one-sided, etc.? (Consider the use of primary historical material, case studies, narratives, recent scientific findings, statistics.)
• Where does the author do a good job of conveying factual material as well as personal perspective? Where does the author fail to do so? If solutions to a problem are offered, are they believable, misguided, or promising?
• Which parts of the work (particular arguments, descriptions, chapters, etc.) are most effective and which parts are least effective? Why?
• Where (if at all) does the author convey personal prejudice, support illogical relationships, or present evidence out of its appropriate context?

Keep your opinions distinct and cite your sources

Remember, as you discuss the author’s major points, be sure to distinguish consistently between the author’s opinions and your own.

Keep the summary portions of your discussion concise, remembering that your task as a reviewer is to re-see the author’s work, not to re-tell it.

And, importantly, if you refer to ideas from other books and articles or from lecture and course materials, always document your sources, or else you might wander into the realm of plagiarism.

Include only that material which has relevance for your review and use direct quotations sparingly. The Writing Center has other handouts to help you paraphrase text and introduce quotations.

Write the conclusion

You will want to use the conclusion to state your overall critical evaluation.

You have already discussed the major points the author makes, examined how the author supports arguments, and evaluated the quality or effectiveness of specific aspects of the book or article.

Now you must make an evaluation of the work as a whole, determining such things as whether or not the author achieves the stated or implied purpose and if the work makes a significant contribution to an existing body of knowledge.

Consider the following questions:

• Is the work appropriately subjective or objective according to the author’s purpose?
• How well does the work maintain its stated or implied focus? Does the author present extraneous material? Does the author exclude or ignore relevant information?
• How well has the author achieved the overall purpose of the book or article? What contribution does the work make to an existing body of knowledge or to a specific group of readers? Can you justify the use of this work in a particular course?
• What is the most important final comment you wish to make about the book or article? Do you have any suggestions for the direction of future research in the area? What has reading this work done for you or demonstrated to you?

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

• Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
• Guided brainstorming exercises
• Get more help with your essay
• Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

Writing Critiques

Writing a critique involves more than pointing out mistakes. It involves conducting a systematic analysis of a scholarly article or book and then writing a fair and reasonable description of its strengths and weaknesses. Several scholarly journals have published guides for critiquing other people’s work in their academic area. Search for a  “manuscript reviewer guide” in your own discipline to guide your analysis of the content. Use this handout as an orientation to the audience and purpose of different types of critiques and to the linguistic strategies appropriate to all of them.

Types of critique

Article or book review assignment in an academic class.

Text: Article or book that has already been published Audience: Professors Purpose:

• to demonstrate your skills for close reading and analysis
• to show that you understand key concepts in your field
• to learn how to review a manuscript for your future professional work

Published book review

Text: Book that has already been published Audience: Disciplinary colleagues Purpose:

• to describe the book’s contents
• to summarize the book’s strengths and weaknesses
• to provide a reliable recommendation to read (or not read) the book

Manuscript review

Text: Manuscript that has been submitted but has not been published yet Audience: Journal editor and manuscript authors Purpose:

• to provide the editor with an evaluation of the manuscript
• to recommend to the editor that the article be published, revised, or rejected
• to provide the authors with constructive feedback and reasonable suggestions for revision

Language strategies for critiquing

For each type of critique, it’s important to state your praise, criticism, and suggestions politely, but with the appropriate level of strength. The following language structures should help you achieve this challenging task.

Offering Praise and Criticism

A strategy called “hedging” will help you express praise or criticism with varying levels of strength. It will also help you express varying levels of certainty in your own assertions. Grammatical structures used for hedging include:

Modal verbs Using modal verbs (could, can, may, might, etc.) allows you to soften an absolute statement. Compare:

This text is inappropriate for graduate students who are new to the field. This text may be inappropriate for graduate students who are new to the field.

Qualifying adjectives and adverbs Using qualifying adjectives and adverbs (possible, likely, possibly, somewhat, etc.) allows you to introduce a level of probability into your comments. Compare:

Readers will find the theoretical model difficult to understand. Some readers will find the theoretical model difficult to understand. Some readers will probably find the theoretical model somewhat difficult to understand completely.

Note: You can see from the last example that too many qualifiers makes the idea sound undesirably weak.

Tentative verbs Using tentative verbs (seems, indicates, suggests, etc.) also allows you to soften an absolute statement. Compare:

This omission shows that the authors are not aware of the current literature. This omission indicates that the authors are not aware of the current literature. This omission seems to suggest that the authors are not aware of the current literature.

Offering suggestions

Whether you are critiquing a published or unpublished text, you are expected to point out problems and suggest solutions. If you are critiquing an unpublished manuscript, the author can use your suggestions to revise. Your suggestions have the potential to become real actions. If you are critiquing a published text, the author cannot revise, so your suggestions are purely hypothetical. These two situations require slightly different grammar.

Unpublished manuscripts: “would be X if they did Y” Reviewers commonly point out weakness by pointing toward improvement. For instance, if the problem is “unclear methodology,” reviewers may write that “the methodology would be more clear if …” plus a suggestion. If the author can use the suggestions to revise, the grammar is “X would be better if the authors did Y” (would be + simple past suggestion).

The tables would be clearer if the authors highlighted the key results. The discussion would be more persuasive if the authors accounted for the discrepancies in the data.

Published manuscripts: “would have been X if they had done Y” If the authors cannot revise based on your suggestions, use the past unreal conditional form “X would have been better if the authors had done Y” (would have been + past perfect suggestion).

The tables would have been clearer if the authors had highlighted key results. The discussion would have been more persuasive if the authors had accounted for discrepancies in the data.

Note: For more information on conditional structures, see our Conditionals handout .

Make a Gift

Essay Papers Writing Online

How to craft an effective critique essay – a step-by-step guide to capturing readers’ attention, providing insightful analysis, and offering constructive feedback.

Evaluating someone else’s writing can be a challenging task, but with the right tools and approach, you can become a skillful critic in no time. Whether you’re analyzing a piece of literature, an article, or a research paper, a critique essay allows you to delve into the elements that make up a strong written work.

By honing your critical thinking skills, you’ll be able to identify the strengths and weaknesses of a piece and provide insightful feedback. Through this process, you’ll not only improve your own writing abilities but also enhance your understanding and appreciation of the written word.

In this comprehensive article, we will equip you with the essential techniques and strategies needed to write an effective critique essay. From analyzing the structure and organization of a piece to evaluating the author’s arguments and evidence, you’ll learn how to assess a work’s strengths and weaknesses with precision and clarity.

What is a Critique Essay and Why is it Important?

A critique essay is a type of academic writing that involves analyzing and evaluating a piece of work, such as a book, film, artwork, or research paper. Unlike a simple summary or review, a critique essay goes beyond providing a surface-level examination of the work and delves into an in-depth analysis of its strengths, weaknesses, and overall value.

But why is writing a critique essay important? Well, there are several reasons. Firstly, it allows you to develop critical thinking skills by carefully examining and assessing the merits of a work. This type of analysis helps you become more discerning and thoughtful in your judgments, which is a valuable skill in many aspects of life.

In addition, writing a critique essay encourages you to become an active participant in the intellectual discourse surrounding a particular topic or field. By engaging with a work and providing your own analysis, you are contributing to the ongoing conversation and expanding the collective understanding of the subject matter.

Furthermore, a critique essay can serve as a useful tool for the creator of the work being critiqued. Constructive criticism can provide valuable insights and suggestions for improvement, helping the creator gain a fresh perspective and refine their skills.

Ultimately, the importance of writing a critique essay lies in its ability to foster critical thinking, contribute to intellectual discourse, and provide constructive feedback. Whether you are a student honing your analytical skills or a professional offering insights in your field, learning how to effectively critique a work is a valuable and essential skill.

Choosing a Topic for Your Critique Essay

When it comes to writing a critique essay, the first and most important step is choosing a topic that is both interesting and suitable for critique. The topic you choose will determine the direction and focus of your essay, as well as the arguments and evidence you will present. It is crucial to select a topic that you are passionate about and have a strong opinion on, as this will make the writing process more enjoyable and engaging.

When considering potential topics for your critique essay, it can be helpful to brainstorm a list of subjects that you have recently encountered in your studies, personal life, or current events. This can include books, movies, artworks, scientific studies, political speeches, or social issues. Reflect on your experiences and think about which topics have sparked your interest or elicited an emotional response.

Once you have a list of potential topics, narrow it down to one that you feel confident in critiquing. Consider the availability of resources and research materials related to the topic, as well as the relevance and significance of the subject matter. It is important to choose a topic that is not too broad or too narrow, but one that allows for a thorough analysis and evaluation.

Furthermore, when selecting a topic for your critique essay, consider the potential audience and the purpose of your writing. Are you writing for a specific academic or professional audience, or for a general readership? Is your goal to persuade, inform, or entertain? Understanding your audience and purpose will help you choose a topic that is relevant, engaging, and appropriate for your intended readers.

In conclusion, the process of choosing a topic for your critique essay requires careful consideration and reflection. By selecting a topic that you are passionate about, narrowing down your options, and considering the audience and purpose of your writing, you can ensure that your critique essay is engaging, informative, and well-structured.

Effective Methods for Analyzing and Evaluating the Work

When it comes to critiquing a piece of work, it is important to employ effective methods for analyzing and evaluating the work. These methods allow you to objectively assess the strengths and weaknesses of the work while providing constructive feedback.

One method for analyzing the work is to carefully examine the overall structure and organization. This involves evaluating the flow of ideas and the logical progression of the work. Pay attention to how well the work introduces and supports its main argument or thesis statement. Look for any inconsistencies or gaps in the logic and assess the effectiveness of the transitions between ideas.

Additionally, it is important to assess the use of evidence and examples in the work. Look for both quantitative and qualitative evidence that supports the main argument. Evaluate the credibility and relevance of the sources cited and determine if they strengthen the overall argument. Consider the quality of the examples provided and how well they illustrate the key points of the work.

Another critical aspect to evaluate in the work is the clarity and effectiveness of the writing style. Assess the use of language, considering factors such as clarity, conciseness, and precision. Look for any instances of wordiness or ambiguity and consider how well the writer communicates their ideas. Pay attention to the use of tone and voice and evaluate if they are appropriate for the intended audience.

Furthermore, it is essential to consider the originality and creativity of the work. Analyze whether the ideas presented are innovative and unique, or if they rely heavily on existing research and ideas. Evaluate the extent to which the writer brings a fresh perspective or contributes new insights to the topic. Consider the level of critical thinking and depth of analysis demonstrated in the work.

Finally, it is crucial to provide constructive feedback when evaluating the work. Identify specific strengths and weaknesses and provide evidence to support your analysis. Offer suggestions for improvement and recommend areas where the writer can further develop their ideas or arguments. Remember to maintain a balance between positive and negative feedback to help the writer grow and improve their work.

• Analyze the overall structure and organization of the work
• Assess the use of evidence and examples
• Evaluate the clarity and effectiveness of the writing style
• Analyze the originality and creativity of the ideas presented
• Provide constructive feedback and suggestions for improvement

By utilizing these effective methods for analyzing and evaluating the work, you will be able to provide a comprehensive critique that offers valuable insights and helps the writer enhance their work.

Tips for Writing a Strong and Persuasive Critique Essay

When crafting a critique essay, it is essential to adopt a strong and persuasive writing style to effectively convey your thoughts and opinions. By employing certain techniques and considerations, you can enhance the impact of your critique and make it more persuasive. This section will provide valuable tips to help you write a compelling critique essay.

First and foremost, clarity and conciseness are key. Make sure your critique is written in a clear and straightforward manner, avoiding any unnecessary jargon or complex language. This will ensure that your ideas are easily understood by your readers, allowing them to fully grasp your perspective.

Additionally, providing evidence and examples is crucial to strengthen your critique. Back up your opinions with credible sources, such as research studies, statistical data, or expert opinions. This will make your arguments more persuasive and lend credibility to your critique.

It is also important to offer a balanced perspective in your critique. While expressing your own views, be sure to acknowledge and address counterarguments or differing opinions. This will demonstrate your ability to consider multiple perspectives and make your critique more comprehensive and well-rounded.

Using persuasive language and rhetorical devices can significantly enhance the impact of your critique. Employ techniques such as persuasive appeals (ethos, logos, pathos), rhetorical questions, metaphors, and analogies to captivate your readers and engage them on an emotional and intellectual level.

Structuring your critique in a logical and organized manner is another essential aspect. Break down your critique into distinct sections, such as introduction, body paragraphs discussing various aspects of the subject, and a conclusion summarizing your main points and reinforcing your overall perspective. This will make your critique more coherent and reader-friendly.

Consider your target audience when writing your critique. Tailor your language, tone, and style to resonate with your intended readers. Adapt your arguments and examples to align with their interests, values, and beliefs. This will make your critique more relatable and persuasive to your specific audience.

Lastly, support your arguments with credible sources. Incorporating research findings, expert opinions, or firsthand experiences will strengthen the validity of your critique and provide additional weight to your arguments. This will make your critique more persuasive and enhance its overall impact.

By following these tips, you can ensure that your critique essay is not only strong but also persuasive. By employing clear and concise language, providing evidence and examples, offering a balanced perspective, using persuasive language and rhetorical devices, structuring effectively, considering your target audience, and supporting your arguments with credible sources, you can craft a compelling critique essay that effectively conveys your thoughts and opinions.

Related Post

How to master the art of writing expository essays and captivate your audience, convenient and reliable source to purchase college essays online, step-by-step guide to crafting a powerful literary analysis essay, unlock success with a comprehensive business research paper example guide, unlock your writing potential with writers college – transform your passion into profession, “unlocking the secrets of academic success – navigating the world of research papers in college”, master the art of sociological expression – elevate your writing skills in sociology.

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Happiness Hub Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• Happiness Hub
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• English Grammar
• Writing Paragraphs

How to Write a Critique in Five Paragraphs

Last Updated: January 20, 2024 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Diane Stubbs . Diane Stubbs is a Secondary English Teacher with over 22 years of experience teaching all high school grade levels and AP courses. She specializes in secondary education, classroom management, and educational technology. Diane earned a Bachelor of Arts in English from the University of Delaware and a Master of Education from Wesley College. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 978,632 times.

A critique is usually written in response to a creative work, such as a novel, a film, poetry, or a painting. However, critiques are also sometimes assigned for research articles and media items, such as news articles or features. A critique is slightly different than a traditional 5-paragraph theme, as it is usually focused on the overall effectiveness and usefulness of the work it is critiquing, rather than making a strictly analytical argument about it. Organizing your critique into 5 paragraphs can help you structure your thoughts.

Laying the Groundwork

• Does the creator clearly state her/his main point or goal? If not, why do you think that is?
• Who do you think is the creator’s intended audience? This can be crucial to determining the success of a work; for example, a movie intended for young children might work well for its intended audience but not for adult viewers.
• What reactions do you have when reading or viewing this work? Does it provoke emotional responses? Do you feel confused?
• What questions does the work make you think of? Does it suggest other avenues of exploration or observation to you?

• For example, if you're critiquing a research article about a new treatment for the flu, a little research about other flu treatments currently available could be helpful to you when situating the work in context.
• As another example, if you're writing about a movie, you might want to briefly discuss the director's other films, or other important movies in this particular genre (indie, action, drama, etc.).
• Your school or university library is usually a good place to start when conducting research, as their databases provide verified, expert sources. Google Scholar can also be a good source for research.

Writing the Introductory Paragraph

• For a work of fiction or a published work of journalism or research, this information is usually available in the publication itself, such as on the copyright page for a novel.
• For a film, you may wish to refer to a source such as IMDb to get the information you need. If you're critiquing a famous artwork, an encyclopedia of art would be a good place to find information on the creator, the title, and important dates (date of creation, date of exhibition, etc.).

• For example, if you’re assessing a research article in the sciences, a quick overview of its place in the academic discussion could be useful (e.g., “Professor X’s work on fruit flies is part of a long research tradition on Blah Blah Blah.”)
• If you are evaluating a painting, giving some brief information on where it was first displayed, for whom it was painted, etc., would be useful.
• If you are assessing a novel, it could be good to talk about what genre or literary tradition the novel is written within (e.g., fantasy, High Modernism, romance). You may also want to include details about the author’s biography that seem particularly relevant to your critique.
• For a media item, such as a news article, consider the social and/or political context of the media outlet the item came from (e.g., Fox News, BBC, etc.) and of the issue it is dealing with (e.g., immigration, education, entertainment).

• The authors of research articles will often state very clearly in the abstract and in the introduction to their work what they are investigating, often with sentences that say something like this: "In this article we provide a new framework for analyzing X and argue that it is superior to previous methods because of reason A and reason B."
• For creative works, you may not have an explicit statement from the author or creator about their purpose, but you can often infer one from the context the work occupies. For example, if you were examining the movie The Shining, you might argue that the filmmaker Stanley Kubrick's goal is to call attention to the poor treatment of Native Americans because of the strong Native American themes present in the movie. You could then present the reasons why you think that in the rest of the essay.

• For example, if you were writing about The Shining, you could summarize the main points this way: "Stanley Kubrick uses strong symbolism, such as the placement of the movie's hotel on an Indian burial ground, the naming of the hotel "Overlook," and the constant presence of Native American artwork and representation, to call viewers' attention to America's treatment of Native Americans in history."

• For a research article, you will probably want to focus your thesis on whether the research and discussion supported the authors' claims. You may also wish to critique the research methodology, if there are obvious flaws present.
• For creative works, consider what you believe the author or creator's goal was in making the work, and then present your assessment of whether or not they achieved that goal.

Writing the 3 Body Paragraphs

• If you have three clear points about your work, you can organize each paragraph by point. For example, if you are analyzing a painting, you might critique the painter’s use of color, light, and composition, devoting a paragraph to each topic.
• If you have more than three points about your work, you can organize each paragraph thematically. For example, if you are critiquing a movie and want to talk about its treatment of women, its screenwriting, its pacing, its use of color and framing, and its acting, you might think about the broader categories that these points fall into, such as “production” (pacing, color and framing, screenwriting), “social commentary” (treatment of women), and “performance” (acting).
• Alternatively, you could organize your critique by “strengths” and “weaknesses.” The aim of a critique is not merely to criticize, but to point out what the creator or author has done well and what s/he has not.

• For example, if you are critiquing a song, you could consider how the beat or tone of the music supports or detracts from the lyrics.
• For a research article or a media item, you may want to consider questions such as how the data was gathered in an experiment, or what method a journalist used to discover information.

• Does the author use primary sources (e.g., historical documents, interviews, etc.)? Secondary sources? Quantitative data? Qualitative data? Are these sources appropriate for the argument?
• Has evidence been presented fairly, without distortion or selectivity?
• Does the argument proceed logically from the evidence used?

• If the work is a creative work, consider whether it presents its ideas in an original or interesting way. You can also consider whether it engages with key concepts or ideas in popular culture or society.
• If the work is a research article, you can consider whether the work enhances your understanding of a particular theory or idea in its discipline. Research articles often include a section on “further research” where they discuss the contributions their research has made and what future contributions they hope to make.

Writing the Conclusion Paragraph and References

Sample Critiques

Community Q&A

• Before you begin writing, take notes while you are watching or reading the subject of your critique. Keep to mind certain aspects such as how it made you feel. What was your first impression? With deeper examination, what is your overall opinion? How did you come to this opinion? Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0
• While the 5-paragraph form can work very well to help you organize your ideas, some instructors do not allow this type of essay. Be sure that you understand the assignment. If you’re not sure whether a 5-paragraph format is acceptable to your teacher, ask! Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

• Avoid using first and second person pronouns such as, “you”, “your”, “I”, “my”, or “mine.” State your opinion objectively for a more credible approach. Thanks Helpful 39 Not Helpful 14

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/career-development/how-to-write-a-critique
• ↑ https://writingcenter.uagc.edu/writing-article-critique
• ↑ https://www.citewrite.qut.edu.au/write/writing-well/critique.html
• ↑ http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/book-review
• ↑ https://www.hunter.cuny.edu/rwc/handouts/the-writing-process-1/invention/Writing-a-Critique
• ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/esl/resources/writing-critiques/

About This Article

To write a 5-paragraph critique, provide the basic information about the work you're critiquing in the first paragraph, including the author, when it was published, and what its key themes are. Then, conclude this paragraph with a statement of your opinion of the work. Next, identify 3 central positive or negative issues in the work and write a paragraph about each one. For example, you could focus on the color, light, and composition of a painting. In the final paragraph, state your overall assessment of the work, and give reasons to back it up. For tips on how to take notes on the piece your critiquing, read on! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Lura Norton

Feb 7, 2017

Did this article help you?

Ahmed Misry

Sep 30, 2017

Celia Seecharan

Feb 11, 2017

Sep 23, 2017

Lusady Taylor

Jul 28, 2016

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

• Undergraduate Programs
• Majors & Minors
• Academic Catalog & Courses
• Goshen Core
• Global Education
• Adult & Continuing Studies
• Nursing (RN to BSN)
• Business Management (BS)
• Communication (BS)
• Social Work (BS)
• Transition to Interpreting
• Graduate Programs
• Business Administration (MBA)
• Environmental Education (MA)
• Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT)
• Nursing (MSN, FNP Track)
• Master of Social Work (MSW)
• Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP)
• Graduate Certificates
• Online Programs
• English Learners License
• Transition to Teaching
• Costs & Financial Aid
• Scholarships
• Net Price Calculator
• International Students
• Transfer Students
• Admitted Students
• Committed Students
• Financial Aid
• Student Life
• Health & Safety
• Dining Services
• Clubs & Activities
• Spiritual Life
• Student Success
• Academic Success Center
• Accessibility Services
• Orientation
• Mission, Vision & Values
• Quick Facts
• Leadership & Governance
• Faith Identity
• Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
• Sustainability
• Community Engagement
• Where We Are
• Map & Directions
• City of Goshen
• Virtual Visit
• Alumni Directory
• Transcripts
• The Bulletin
• Homecoming Weekend
• Parents of Prospective Students
• Parents of Current Students
• Current Students
• Registrar's Office
• Accounting Office
• Faculty & Staff
• Human Resources
• Department Forms
• Quick Links
• Event Calendar
• News & Events
• Events Calendar
• Latest News
• GC in the News
• Social Media Directory
• Alumni Magazine
• Photo Albums
• Current Blogs
• President's
• Ecuador SST
• Tanzania SST
• Music Center
• E-Subscribe
• Live Streams
• Cross Country
• Track and Field
• GoLeafs.net
• Live Stream
• Online Store
• Rec-Fitness Center
• Intramurals

Essay Critique Guidelines

Whenever you read an essay, use the following questions to guide your response.

First, keep in mind that, although you may not be a writing expert, you are THE reader of this essay and your response is a valid one . I have found that almost every reader, regardless of experience, can identify the primary strength and weakness in an essay, although their method of describing those issues may be different. The author will welcome your response and your ability to explain your reaction in a new way. Although the author is not required to, and really shouldn’t, respond to everything you say, he or she will take your comments seriously and consider how the essays has enlightened or confused you. Therefore, comment freely, although respectfully. Keep in mind that it is better to begin by noting the strengths of the essay before pointing out the areas that need improvement. I would always include a personal response to questions like the following: What about the essay most connects with your experience? Moves you? Provokes you? Entertains you?

So that is how to respond. So how do you critique? For every essay, regardless of the mode, consider the broad categories of content, organization, style, and correctness.

• Content : Consider the topic (its appropriateness and interest for the assignment as well as a clear focus suitable to essay length) and the way the topic is developed (clarity sufficiency of its argument, its scope, subcategories, amount and type of examples, anecdotes, evidence, etc.).
• Organization : Consider how the essay is introduced and concluded (especially looking for a “frame” to the essay, where the intro and conclusion refer to the same idea), whether the thesis is located in the most helpful place (direct or implied), how the essay is structured, whether the order or extent of development is successful, as well as how individual paragraphs are organized (clear topic sentences, appropriate and concrete evidence, logical organization of evidence).
• Style : Style can refer to the overall style of an essay: whether the tone is appropriate (humorous, serious, reflective, satirical, etc.), whether you use sufficient and appropriate variety (factual, analytical, evaluative, reflective), whether you use sufficient creativity. Style can also refer to the style of individual sentences: whether you use a variety of sentences styles and lengths, whether sentences are worded clearly, and whether word choice is interesting and appropriate.

Rolling around in the bottom of the drawer, Tim found the missing earring. [certainly the earring was rolling, not Tim!]

You could also easily tell that the following sentence actually contains two sentences that need punctuation between them:

The new manager instituted several new procedures some were impractical. [You need to add punctuation (period) after “procedures” and capitalize “some.”]

Further Directions for Specific Assignments

Below are more detailed questions to consider when responding to individual types of essays. First, make sure that you have reviewed the description of the essay mode in the Essay Assignment Guidelines. Use at least one or two of these when responding to an essay. Do not simply answer yes or no; offer specific evidence from the text and elaborate on the reasons behind your answer.

Personal Essay Critique:

• Does the writer have a clear but understated purpose to the essay?
• Does it avoid being overly moralistic or heavy-handed?
• Does the essay contain suspense or tension that is resolved in some way?
• Do you have any suggestions for organizing the essay, such as focusing in on one event rather than many, providing more background, turning explanation into action, etc.?
• Does the essay make good use of concrete description, anecdote, and dialogue?
• Does the essay help you to feel the emotions rather than just describe the emotions of the author?
• Does the essay reveal a significant aspect of the writer’s personality?
• Does the writer seem authentic?
• Is this a passionate piece? Is it creative?

Critical Review Critique

• Does a direct thesis convey both the subject and the reviewer’s value judgment?
• Does the review provide a summary or description to help you experience the film, music, event, etc.? Note places where the author provides too much or too little detail.
• Does the essay clearly identify relevant criteria for evaluation? Are they appropriate, believable, and consistent?
• Are any important features of the reviewed subject omitted?
• Logos (logic, content) : Does the essay provide sufficient, relevant, and interesting details and examples to adequately inform and entertain?
• Ethos (author) : Does the author’s judgment seem sound and convincing?
• Pathos (emotional appeals) : Does the author responsibly and effectively utilize emotional appeals to the audience?
• Does the author include adequate reference to the opposition and respond to that opposition appropriately?

Information Essay Critique : The questions posed about an informative essay will vary, depending on the purpose and strategy of the essay. The SMGW suggests evaluating for the following issues:

• Is topic clearly explained and sufficiently focused?
• Does the content fit the audience?
• Is it organized effectively?
• Are definitions clear?
• Are other strategies (classification, comparison/contrast, analysis) used effectively?
• Are sources used sufficiently, effectively, and appropriately?

You might also assess the following criteria:

• Does the author utilize vivid detail, interesting examples, and lively language?
• Does the essay avoid emphasizing judgment over explanation?
• Does the essay have a clear focus or implied thesis?

Comparison/Contrast Essay Critique

• Is the purpose for a comparison or contrast evident and convincing?
• Does the essay identify significant and parallel characteristics for comparison?
• Does the author adequately explain, analyze, or reflect on the comparison or contrast?
• Does the author provide appropriate transitions words to indicate comparison and contrast?
• Is the treatment of each side of the comparison or contrast in balance?
• Does the essay provide sufficient, relevant, and interesting details?

Feature Article Critique

• Does this article interest you? Do you think it will interest the intended audience? Can you suggest ways to increase interest?
• Can you tell what the “angle” or implied thesis is? Does the author avoid editorial judgment on the subject while still keeping the purpose clear?
• Has the writer done sufficient research? What questions have gone unasked or unanswered? Whose point of view or what information would add further to the completeness of the feature?
• Is the subject presented vividly with sensory images, graphic detail, and figurative language? Do you have suggestions of details or images to include?
• Does the writer use an appropriate mixture of anecdote, quotation, description, and explanation? Would more or less of one of these improve the essay?
• Are the beginning and ending paragraphs interesting and appropriate for the specific audience? Consider the need for a “lead sentence” if intended for a newspaper.

Documented Argument Critique

• Is the thesis clear, argumentative, and effective? Why or why not?
• Are the topic and thesis are reasonable for the assignment, audience, and context of the essay?
• Does the author define his or her terms and provide sufficient background information? What ideas or terms are undefined or inadequately explained?
• Is the thesis supported by clear reasons? Are the reasons clearly worded and supported sufficiently?
• Do the reasons fit logically together and are they placed in the right order?
• Does the author adequately address the opposition? What is another opposing argument he/she should or could have addressed?
• Has the author done adequate research?
• Are the works cited adequately introduced and explained before citing from them?
• Does the paper contain an appropriate blend of well-placed quotations within a context of the author’s own words and paraphrases from other sources?
• Is the writer clearly in charge, naturally introducing and interacting with sources rather than merely reporting on them?
• Do you find the argument convincing? What might you add or omit?

Business Writing Critique

• Does the memo begin with the most important information?
• Does the memo build rapport by involving the reader in opening paragraph?
• Does the memo provide sufficient, relevant, and interesting details? Is it focused and brief?
• Does the memo focus each paragraph on one idea?
• Is the memo informed, accurate, demonstrating the author’s grasp of the situation?
• Is the final paragraph calling for a specific action? Is it brief? Does it build good will?
• Is the memo form correct, with concise subject line, initialed name, correct spacing?
• Is the information arranged (indentations and numbering) in a way that makes it easy to skim and still get central information?

Cover letter

• Does the first paragraph identify who the author is, briefly state why he/she is writing, and refer to how he/she found out about the job?
• Does the second paragraph highlight specific strengths, special abilities, or features of the résumé to be noted?
• Does the third paragraph make a specific request of the reader or address what action is to be taken?
• Does the letter provide sufficient, relevant, and interesting details to make the request convincing?
• Is the letter brief and focused? What elements could be eliminated?
• Does the writer achieve his or her purpose? Does it make you want to consider the résumé more carefully?
• Is the tone of the letter courteous without being too formal, relaxed without being too familiar?
• Is the letter’s form appropriate (heading, spacing, greeting, salutation)? Is the letter addressed to a specific person rather than a general “Dear Madam/Sir”?
• Does the résumé contain the necessary features for the position (name/address, position desired, education, work experience, achievements, relevant personal information, references)?
• Does the résumé contain only essential, relevant information for the position required?
• Does the résumé emphasize the applicant’s strengths?
• Does the résumé emphasize what is unique about this person’s experience? Does it demonstrate a common interest or ability (leadership, teaching experience, dedication, creativity, etc.)?
• What additional information might you like to have about this applicant?
• If you were leading an interview based on this résumé, what are two questions you might ask?
• Does the résumé look neat (appropriate spacing, clear headings, good quality paper)?
• Is the résumé easy to read?
• Is the information presented as concisely as possible?
• Are the elements of each section of the résumé presented in a parallel format and style (begin w/ active verbs, put date in consistent place, use of parallelism for elements, consistent underlining or italics)?

Writing with Evidence: An Overview

Learning objectives.

This resource is designed to support you to:  

• Recognise why evidence is used in academic writing. 
• Develop your understanding about methods for writing with evidence. 
• Build skills about how to develop paraphrases and integrate them effectively in academic writing. 

Academic Literature

"Almost all writing and speaking at university relies on using ideas and information found in the literature. Hence, there are rules about how to bring the literature into your own work. When these rules are used well, a student clearly shows his or her intelligence and knowledge of the literature. If they are not followed, a student’s work will be seen as weak, and will receive a lower mark" (Turner et al., 2012, p. 97).

Literature in this context includes various types of information and sources ( evidence ), including peer-reviewed journal articles, books, videos, reports, statistics, websites, and many more. 

It is strongly recommended that you follow course-specific guidance regarding what is considered to be appropriate sources you can use in your assessments.

• What are credible sources? (UniSC) This resource will teach you the skills required to identify credible sources of informarion.

Using evidence in your writing

The four ways to use evidence in your writing are quoting, summarising, paraphrasing and synthesising. A summary of these methods is shown in Table 1 below. Out of these methods, to paraphrase and synthesise demonstrate the highest level of critical thought.

For the following sections in this guide, we will use the excerpt below from Rogerson and McCarthy (2017, p. 2) to identify different ways of using evidence from literature in your academic writing.

“Academic writing is largely reliant on the skill of paraphrasing to demonstrate that the author can capture the essence of what they have read, they understand what they have read, and can use the appropriately acknowledged evidence in support of their responses (Fillenbaum, 1970; Keck, 2006, 2014; Shi, 2012). In higher education, a student’s attempts at paraphrasing can provide “insight into how well students read as well as write” (Hirvela & Du, 2013, p. 88). While there appears to be an underlying assumption that students and researchers understand and accept that there is a standard convention about how to paraphrase and appropriately use and acknowledge source texts (Shi, 2012), there can be inconsistencies between underlying assumptions in how paraphrases are identified, described and assessed (Keck, 2006). Poorer forms of paraphrasing tend to use a simplistic approach where some words are simply replaced with synonyms found through functionality available in word processing software or online dictionaries. This is a form of superficial paraphrasing or ‘close paraphrasing’ (Keck, 2010) or ‘patchwriting’ (Howard, 1995). The question as to “the exact degree to which text must be modified to be classified as correctly paraphrased” (Roig, 2001, p. 309) is somewhat vague, although Keck (2006) outlined a Taxonomy of Paraphrase Types where paraphrases are classified in four categories ranging from near copy to substantial revision based on the number of unique links or strings of words.” (Rogerson & McCarthy, 2017, p. 2) .

Quoting is when you use ideas or perspectives from a source of information to support your interpretation of the topic by repeating the exact words of the original author. Some of the main purposes and benefits of using a quote in your academic writing are that it:

• Supports your position.
• Emphasises a point that you are making.
• Highlights unique phrases.
• Comments on the quote.

Including a quote in your academic writing demonstrates your ability to make connections between your topic and original literature, and it protects you against plagiarism. You should avoid using too many quotes in your academic writing because it may indicate that you have not fully understood the material. A general rule to follow is that quotes should not exceed 10% of your word count. 

It is strongly recommended that you follow course-specific guidance regarding the use and frequency of quotes in your assessment.

If you are going to use a quote in your writing, it is important to put your quote into context, and not just have a direct quote as the full sentence in your writing. Examples of how to contextualise your quote from the Rogerson and McCarthy (2017, p. 2) excerpt, according to American Pyschological Association (APA7) and Harvard referencing styles, are shown below:

Please refer to the  Referencing Guides and Academic Integrity  webpage and the specific guide(s) relevant to your discipline to find out more about how to appropriately cite quotations.

Summarising is when you explain an idea in a short and concise way. You can do this by identifying and reporting on the main points of a paragraph or an article in your own words.  Some of the main purposes and benefits of summarising are that it:

• Shows that you understand and can interpret an entire theory or framework.
• Demonstrates your ability to make connections between your topic and the original literature.
• Adds credibility to the ideas and arguments in your writing.

An example of a summary of a topic from the Rogerson and McCarthy (2017, p. 2) excerpt, according to APA7 and Harvard referencing styles, is shown below:

Paraphrasing is when you use ideas or perspectives from one source of information to support your interpretation of the topic. Paraphrasing involves using your own words to re-write the idea instead of the original author's exact words while retaining the original meaning. Some of the main purposes and benefits of paraphrasing are that it:

• Demonstrates your ability to understand and interpret an original text.
• Demonstrates your ability to make connections between your topic and original literature.
• Adds credibility to the arguments and claims made in your writing.
• Ensures that your writing is cohesive.
• Improves readability by maintaining a more consistent writing style.
• Demonstrates academic integrity.

An example of a paraphrase from the Rogerson and McCarthy (2017, p. 2) excerpt, according to APA7 and Harvard referencing styles, is shown below:

Please refer to Referencing Guides and Academic Integrity and the specific guide(s) relevant to your discipline to find out more about how to appropriately cite paraphrases.

To synthesise is to combine multiple sources with the same ideas or perspectives to support your interpretation of the topic. Synthesising involves using your own words to re-write the idea instead of the original authors’ exact words, while retaining the original meaning. Some of the main purposes and benefits of synthesising are that it:

• Demonstrates that you have read widely on the topic.
• Demonstrates your ability to understand and interpret the original text.
• Demonstrates your ability to connect ideas between literature.

An example of synthesis from the Rogerson and McCarthy (2017, p. 2) excerpt, according to APA7 and Harvard referencing styles, is shown below:

Additional resources

• Writing With Evidence (PDF 2.464 MB) Check out these workshop slides presented by the Student Success team to learn more about writing with evidence, including worked examples.
• APA Style (American Pyschological Association, 2024) APA Style is the place to go if you are referencing and formatting in APA7 style.
• Academic Phrasebank (The University of Manchester, 2024) Get some ideas for high quality sentence starters from the Academic Phrasebank.

Access Student Services

• Services and Support (UniSC) UniSC offers a range of services for students, including help with academic skills, careers and employability advice, library support, and accessibility and wellbeing services. Visit Services and Support on the Student Portal to find out more.

Your Input Matters: Shape the Future of Academic Skills Support!

• Writing with Evidence (UniSC) Help us help you! Share your thoughts on the Writing with Evidence Guide and shape the resources that will support your academic success. It will take less than 5 minutes to complete this feedback form.

Rogerson, A. M., & McCarthy, G. (2017). Using Internet based paraphrasing tools: Original work, patchwriting or facilitated plagiarism?.  International Journal for Educational Integrity, 13 , 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40979-016-0013-y

Turner, K., Krenus, B., Ireland, L., & Pointon, L. (2012). Essential academic skills (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

• Updated: Oct 11, 2024 3:59 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu.au/write-with-evidence

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use forestresearch.gov.uk, remember your settings and improve our services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

• Publications
• Climate Change Hub
• Forestry and tree health
• National Forest Inventory
• Seed storage database
• Tree species database
• DNA fingerprinting
• DNA species identification
• Habitat network analysis
• Land use and ecosystem research
• Pest management
• Pesticide efficacy testing
• Plant, tree, soil and water testing
• Social and economic research
• Tree health diagnostic and advisory
• Urban trees services
• Core research programmes
• Annual reports and corporate plans
• Knowledge exchange and impact
• The Holt Laboratory
• Partnerships
• Procurement
• Why Forest Research?
• How to Apply
• Current Opportunities

Rapid Review of Evidence on Biodiversity in Great Britain’s Commercial Forests

Published today (Thursday, 10 October), the Forest Research Rapid Review of Evidence on Biodiversity in Great Britain’s Commercial Forests is a review of evidence on biodiversity in many of the most commonly encountered commercial high forest types in Great Britain.

Nadia Barsoum, Senior Biodiversity Scientist at Forest Research explains: “Forests where trees can attain their full-canopy heights and reach mature stages of development are known as high forests. In Great Britain, a significant proportion of these forests are managed in a commercial capacity for timber and wood-based products and comprise conifer, broadleaf or conifer-broadleaf mixtures. The review is needed to understand the contribution of these forest types to biodiversity and to identify gaps in understanding.”

The first part of the publication uses expert knowledge of the habitat requirements of over 400 woodland specialist species to predict whether commercial high forest has the potential to offer suitable habitat for at least one stage of the species’ lifecycle. The second part of the publication is a summary of published research (from 1970-2020) reporting on biodiversity in commercial forests in Great Britain.

The review concludes there may only be enough research evidence to answer specific research questions about biodiversity in commercial high forests for certain broad taxonomic groups (i.e. birds, ground vegetation, carabid beetles). It also predicts, based on the findings related to habitat requirements and expert knowledge, that commercial forests can potentially accommodate many specialist woodland mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles, some woodland specialist fungi and vascular plants, but few specialist invertebrates, lichens and bryophytes.

In addition, the review highlights gaps in evidence and provides some recommendations for future research areas to focus on and methodological approaches that might be used to fill those gaps.

The Rapid Review of Evidence on Biodiversity in Great Britain’s Commercial Forests review was conducted by Forest Research and funded by the Forestry Commission.

Read the Rapid Review of Evidence on Biodiversity in Great Britain’s Commercial Forests in full .

News details

• Forest Research

Recent News

The Rapid Review of Evidence on Biodiversity in Great Britain’s Commercial Forests is a review of evidence on biodiversity in many of the most commonly encountered commercial high forest types in Great Britain.

New biosecurity resource available on Forest Research Climate Change Hub

Top tips on how to develop a biosecurity action plan are now available from the Forest Research Climate Change Hub *, providing landowners and managers with the latest information on how to prevent the introduction and spread of harmful pests and pathogens.

Forest Research seeks tree-growing champions to take part in follow-up survey into community tree nurseries

Forest Research runs follow-up survey to discover more about community tree nurseries.

Cookies on forestresearch.gov.uk

Cookies are files saved on your phone, tablet or computer when you visit a website.

We use cookies to store information about how you use the dwi.gov.uk website, such as the pages you visit.

Find out more about cookies on forestresearch.gov.uk

Cookie settings

We use 3 types of cookie. You can choose which cookies you're happy for us to use.

Strictly necessary cookies

These essential cookies do things like remember your progress through a form. They always need to be on.

Cookies that measure website use

We use Google Analytics to measure how you use the website so we can improve it based on user needs.  Google Analytics sets cookies that store anonymised information about: how you got to the site the pages you visit on forestresearch.gov.uk and how long you spend on each page what you click on while you're visiting the site

Cookies that help with our communications and marketing

Some forestresearch.gov.uk pages may contain content from other sites, like YouTube or Flickr, which may set their own cookies. These sites are sometimes called ‘third party’ services. This tells us how many people are seeing the content and whether it’s useful.

Cookies on GOV.UK

We use some essential cookies to make this website work.

We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.

We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.

You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

International evidence review on in-work progression

This report presents findings from an international evidence review commissioned by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to investigate policies and approaches to in-work progression in high-income countries other than the UK.

Executive summary

International evidence review on in-work progression.

Ref: ISBN 978-1-78659-726-7, RR 1074

PDF , 1.11 MB , 104 pages

This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.

The objective of this study was to present available evidence on how other countries have approached the issue of in-work progression to generate learning that might be transferable to the UK.

Updates to this page

Sign up for emails or print this page, related content, is this page useful.

• Yes this page is useful
• No this page is not useful

Help us improve GOV.UK

Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.

To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• How to write a literary analysis essay | A step-by-step guide

How to Write a Literary Analysis Essay | A Step-by-Step Guide

Published on January 30, 2020 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on August 14, 2023.

Literary analysis means closely studying a text, interpreting its meanings, and exploring why the author made certain choices. It can be applied to novels, short stories, plays, poems, or any other form of literary writing.

A literary analysis essay is not a rhetorical analysis , nor is it just a summary of the plot or a book review. Instead, it is a type of argumentative essay where you need to analyze elements such as the language, perspective, and structure of the text, and explain how the author uses literary devices to create effects and convey ideas.

Before beginning a literary analysis essay, it’s essential to carefully read the text and c ome up with a thesis statement to keep your essay focused. As you write, follow the standard structure of an academic essay :

• An introduction that tells the reader what your essay will focus on.
• A main body, divided into paragraphs , that builds an argument using evidence from the text.
• A conclusion that clearly states the main point that you have shown with your analysis.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Step 1: reading the text and identifying literary devices, step 2: coming up with a thesis, step 3: writing a title and introduction, step 4: writing the body of the essay, step 5: writing a conclusion, other interesting articles.

The first step is to carefully read the text(s) and take initial notes. As you read, pay attention to the things that are most intriguing, surprising, or even confusing in the writing—these are things you can dig into in your analysis.

Your goal in literary analysis is not simply to explain the events described in the text, but to analyze the writing itself and discuss how the text works on a deeper level. Primarily, you’re looking out for literary devices —textual elements that writers use to convey meaning and create effects. If you’re comparing and contrasting multiple texts, you can also look for connections between different texts.

To get started with your analysis, there are several key areas that you can focus on. As you analyze each aspect of the text, try to think about how they all relate to each other. You can use highlights or notes to keep track of important passages and quotes.

Language choices

Consider what style of language the author uses. Are the sentences short and simple or more complex and poetic?

What word choices stand out as interesting or unusual? Are words used figuratively to mean something other than their literal definition? Figurative language includes things like metaphor (e.g. “her eyes were oceans”) and simile (e.g. “her eyes were like oceans”).

Also keep an eye out for imagery in the text—recurring images that create a certain atmosphere or symbolize something important. Remember that language is used in literary texts to say more than it means on the surface.

Narrative voice

Ask yourself:

• Who is telling the story?
• How are they telling it?

Is it a first-person narrator (“I”) who is personally involved in the story, or a third-person narrator who tells us about the characters from a distance?

Consider the narrator’s perspective . Is the narrator omniscient (where they know everything about all the characters and events), or do they only have partial knowledge? Are they an unreliable narrator who we are not supposed to take at face value? Authors often hint that their narrator might be giving us a distorted or dishonest version of events.

The tone of the text is also worth considering. Is the story intended to be comic, tragic, or something else? Are usually serious topics treated as funny, or vice versa ? Is the story realistic or fantastical (or somewhere in between)?

Consider how the text is structured, and how the structure relates to the story being told.

• Novels are often divided into chapters and parts.
• Poems are divided into lines, stanzas, and sometime cantos.
• Plays are divided into scenes and acts.

Think about why the author chose to divide the different parts of the text in the way they did.

There are also less formal structural elements to take into account. Does the story unfold in chronological order, or does it jump back and forth in time? Does it begin in medias res —in the middle of the action? Does the plot advance towards a clearly defined climax?

With poetry, consider how the rhyme and meter shape your understanding of the text and your impression of the tone. Try reading the poem aloud to get a sense of this.

In a play, you might consider how relationships between characters are built up through different scenes, and how the setting relates to the action. Watch out for  dramatic irony , where the audience knows some detail that the characters don’t, creating a double meaning in their words, thoughts, or actions.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Your thesis in a literary analysis essay is the point you want to make about the text. It’s the core argument that gives your essay direction and prevents it from just being a collection of random observations about a text.

If you’re given a prompt for your essay, your thesis must answer or relate to the prompt. For example:

Essay question example

Is Franz Kafka’s “Before the Law” a religious parable?

Your thesis statement should be an answer to this question—not a simple yes or no, but a statement of why this is or isn’t the case:

Thesis statement example

Franz Kafka’s “Before the Law” is not a religious parable, but a story about bureaucratic alienation.

Sometimes you’ll be given freedom to choose your own topic; in this case, you’ll have to come up with an original thesis. Consider what stood out to you in the text; ask yourself questions about the elements that interested you, and consider how you might answer them.

Your thesis should be something arguable—that is, something that you think is true about the text, but which is not a simple matter of fact. It must be complex enough to develop through evidence and arguments across the course of your essay.

Say you’re analyzing the novel Frankenstein . You could start by asking yourself:

Your initial answer might be a surface-level description:

The character Frankenstein is portrayed negatively in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein .

However, this statement is too simple to be an interesting thesis. After reading the text and analyzing its narrative voice and structure, you can develop the answer into a more nuanced and arguable thesis statement:

Mary Shelley uses shifting narrative perspectives to portray Frankenstein in an increasingly negative light as the novel goes on. While he initially appears to be a naive but sympathetic idealist, after the creature’s narrative Frankenstein begins to resemble—even in his own telling—the thoughtlessly cruel figure the creature represents him as.

Remember that you can revise your thesis statement throughout the writing process , so it doesn’t need to be perfectly formulated at this stage. The aim is to keep you focused as you analyze the text.

Finding textual evidence

To support your thesis statement, your essay will build an argument using textual evidence —specific parts of the text that demonstrate your point. This evidence is quoted and analyzed throughout your essay to explain your argument to the reader.

It can be useful to comb through the text in search of relevant quotations before you start writing. You might not end up using everything you find, and you may have to return to the text for more evidence as you write, but collecting textual evidence from the beginning will help you to structure your arguments and assess whether they’re convincing.

To start your literary analysis paper, you’ll need two things: a good title, and an introduction.

Your title should clearly indicate what your analysis will focus on. It usually contains the name of the author and text(s) you’re analyzing. Keep it as concise and engaging as possible.

A common approach to the title is to use a relevant quote from the text, followed by a colon and then the rest of your title.

If you struggle to come up with a good title at first, don’t worry—this will be easier once you’ve begun writing the essay and have a better sense of your arguments.

“Fearful symmetry” : The violence of creation in William Blake’s “The Tyger”

The introduction

The essay introduction provides a quick overview of where your argument is going. It should include your thesis statement and a summary of the essay’s structure.

A typical structure for an introduction is to begin with a general statement about the text and author, using this to lead into your thesis statement. You might refer to a commonly held idea about the text and show how your thesis will contradict it, or zoom in on a particular device you intend to focus on.

Then you can end with a brief indication of what’s coming up in the main body of the essay. This is called signposting. It will be more elaborate in longer essays, but in a short five-paragraph essay structure, it shouldn’t be more than one sentence.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is often read as a crude cautionary tale about the dangers of scientific advancement unrestrained by ethical considerations. In this reading, protagonist Victor Frankenstein is a stable representation of the callous ambition of modern science throughout the novel. This essay, however, argues that far from providing a stable image of the character, Shelley uses shifting narrative perspectives to portray Frankenstein in an increasingly negative light as the novel goes on. While he initially appears to be a naive but sympathetic idealist, after the creature’s narrative Frankenstein begins to resemble—even in his own telling—the thoughtlessly cruel figure the creature represents him as. This essay begins by exploring the positive portrayal of Frankenstein in the first volume, then moves on to the creature’s perception of him, and finally discusses the third volume’s narrative shift toward viewing Frankenstein as the creature views him.

Some students prefer to write the introduction later in the process, and it’s not a bad idea. After all, you’ll have a clearer idea of the overall shape of your arguments once you’ve begun writing them!

If you do write the introduction first, you should still return to it later to make sure it lines up with what you ended up writing, and edit as necessary.

The body of your essay is everything between the introduction and conclusion. It contains your arguments and the textual evidence that supports them.

Paragraph structure

A typical structure for a high school literary analysis essay consists of five paragraphs : the three paragraphs of the body, plus the introduction and conclusion.

Each paragraph in the main body should focus on one topic. In the five-paragraph model, try to divide your argument into three main areas of analysis, all linked to your thesis. Don’t try to include everything you can think of to say about the text—only analysis that drives your argument.

In longer essays, the same principle applies on a broader scale. For example, you might have two or three sections in your main body, each with multiple paragraphs. Within these sections, you still want to begin new paragraphs at logical moments—a turn in the argument or the introduction of a new idea.

Robert’s first encounter with Gil-Martin suggests something of his sinister power. Robert feels “a sort of invisible power that drew me towards him.” He identifies the moment of their meeting as “the beginning of a series of adventures which has puzzled myself, and will puzzle the world when I am no more in it” (p. 89). Gil-Martin’s “invisible power” seems to be at work even at this distance from the moment described; before continuing the story, Robert feels compelled to anticipate at length what readers will make of his narrative after his approaching death. With this interjection, Hogg emphasizes the fatal influence Gil-Martin exercises from his first appearance.

Topic sentences

To keep your points focused, it’s important to use a topic sentence at the beginning of each paragraph.

A good topic sentence allows a reader to see at a glance what the paragraph is about. It can introduce a new line of argument and connect or contrast it with the previous paragraph. Transition words like “however” or “moreover” are useful for creating smooth transitions:

… The story’s focus, therefore, is not upon the divine revelation that may be waiting beyond the door, but upon the mundane process of aging undergone by the man as he waits.

Nevertheless, the “radiance” that appears to stream from the door is typically treated as religious symbolism.

This topic sentence signals that the paragraph will address the question of religious symbolism, while the linking word “nevertheless” points out a contrast with the previous paragraph’s conclusion.

Using textual evidence

A key part of literary analysis is backing up your arguments with relevant evidence from the text. This involves introducing quotes from the text and explaining their significance to your point.

It’s important to contextualize quotes and explain why you’re using them; they should be properly introduced and analyzed, not treated as self-explanatory:

It isn’t always necessary to use a quote. Quoting is useful when you’re discussing the author’s language, but sometimes you’ll have to refer to plot points or structural elements that can’t be captured in a short quote.

In these cases, it’s more appropriate to paraphrase or summarize parts of the text—that is, to describe the relevant part in your own words:

The conclusion of your analysis shouldn’t introduce any new quotations or arguments. Instead, it’s about wrapping up the essay. Here, you summarize your key points and try to emphasize their significance to the reader.

A good way to approach this is to briefly summarize your key arguments, and then stress the conclusion they’ve led you to, highlighting the new perspective your thesis provides on the text as a whole:

If you want to know more about AI tools , college essays , or fallacies make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples or go directly to our tools!

• Ad hominem fallacy
• Post hoc fallacy
• Appeal to authority fallacy
• False cause fallacy
• Sunk cost fallacy

College essays

• Choosing Essay Topic
• Write a College Essay
• Write a Diversity Essay
• College Essay Format & Structure
• Comparing and Contrasting in an Essay

 (AI) Tools

• Grammar Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Text Summarizer
• AI Detector
• Plagiarism Checker
• Citation Generator

By tracing the depiction of Frankenstein through the novel’s three volumes, I have demonstrated how the narrative structure shifts our perception of the character. While the Frankenstein of the first volume is depicted as having innocent intentions, the second and third volumes—first in the creature’s accusatory voice, and then in his own voice—increasingly undermine him, causing him to appear alternately ridiculous and vindictive. Far from the one-dimensional villain he is often taken to be, the character of Frankenstein is compelling because of the dynamic narrative frame in which he is placed. In this frame, Frankenstein’s narrative self-presentation responds to the images of him we see from others’ perspectives. This conclusion sheds new light on the novel, foregrounding Shelley’s unique layering of narrative perspectives and its importance for the depiction of character.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, August 14). How to Write a Literary Analysis Essay | A Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved October 11, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/academic-essay/literary-analysis/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, how to write a thesis statement | 4 steps & examples, academic paragraph structure | step-by-step guide & examples, how to write a narrative essay | example & tips, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Watch CBS News

Scott Peterson's defense team can review decades-old evidence, judge rules

By Madisen Keavy

October 8, 2024 / 11:29 PM PDT / CBS Sacramento

REDWOOD CITY -- Another twist in Scott Peterson's ongoing fight to prove his innocence: a judge granted access to decades-old evidence. This development comes nearly two decades after he was convicted for the 2002 murder of his pregnant wife, Laci, and their unborn son, Conner. 

San Mateo County Super Court Judge Elizabeth Hill ruled that Peterson's defense team could review previously undisclosed materials that could support their claims of trial irregularities and potential evidence mishandling. This access includes DNA evidence and other forensic materials that Peterson's team, the Los Angeles Innocence Project, believes will support their case for his new trial. 

Peterson was sentenced to death for the 2002 killings. However, in 2021, his sentence was reduced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. The following year, a request for a new trial based on claims of juror misconduct was denied.

He has long maintained his innocence. 

Peterson's team requested access to 600 pieces of evidence from agencies that included the Modesto Police Department, the Stanislaus County Sheriff's Office and the Modesto Fire Department. Of those hundreds of requests, the court only granted access to around three dozen requests. 

Some of the evidence requested were audio and video recordings and transcripts of interviews conducted by the Modesto Police Department related to a burglary at a home near the Petersons, around the same time Laci disappeared. 

Peterson's family and attorneys have argued Laci could have been killed in a botched burglary, but investigators who worked the case cleared the suspects and confirmed their alibis. The burglary occurred at the Medina home on the same street, but investigators say it happened two days after Laci disappeared. 

Related to this theory, Peterson's team was granted access to video and audio recordings, handwritten notes taken by Modesto Police officers, and interviews documenting whether the Medina family were shown jewelry collected during searches. They will also be able to review photos taken of evidence found as part of this investigation.

"There is a reasonable basis for concluding that such interviews occurred and that reports of those interviews exist," the judge wrote in court documents. 

Another theory presented to the court by Peterson's team is that a burned-out orange van found less than a mile from the Petersons' home, around the same time as Laci's disappearance, could have been linked to her death. They requested a list of evidence related to this fire investigation and reference a former Modesto Fire Investigator's claims that the fire was not properly investigated at the time. 

Much of this request was not granted access, but Peterson's team will be able to review a complete color copy of the crime lab file, including all bench notes, diagrams, DNA reports, and all documents regarding the testing of the items collected. 

With this access, the judge noted: "The court does not view the orange van evidence as casting doubt on Peterson's guilt, because no witness or forensic evidence obtained ever established that Laci Peterson was in the orange van. However, it is apparent based on the cross-referencing of the investigation of the two cases that the orange van was 'part of the investigation of the offenses charged.' "

Judge Hill ruled on DNA testing in July that a piece of duct tape found on Laci's pants during her autopsy could be tested but the results would be sealed. According to court filings, the results have been filed with the court in August, but are sealed. 

These discovery rights granted by the judge are done so under the California code that a defendant convicted of serious or violent felonies and sentenced to 15 years or more in jail may have access to materials to which they would've been entitled at the time of the trial. 

• San Mateo County
• Scott Peterson
• Modesto News

Madisen reports weekdays on CBS13.

Featured Local Savings

More from cbs news.

Dozens of dogs seized, man arrested in Nevada City animal cruelty investigation

Sutter County Museum temporarily closes due to short staffing, grant deadlines

Manteca to have 20 red light cameras installed across city

Nevada County school district's internet down due to cyber incident

• ABC7 New York 24/7 Eyewitness News Stream Watch Now
• THE LOOP | NYC Weather and Traffic Cams Watch Now

Judge rules Scott Peterson's defense team can review some old evidence in murder case

LOS ANGELES -- A judge has granted Scott Peterson's legal team access to some of the evidence in the murder case against him.

This access includes DNA evidence and other forensic materials. The judge has denied much of the original case evidence his defense team claims they should have access to based on California law.

The law allows discovery rights to a defendant who is convicted of a serious crime and sentenced to 15 or more years in prison.

Lawyers with the Los Angeles Innocence Project are seeking to get Peterson a new trial, citing trial irregularities and potential evidence mishandling.

Peterson was convicted of killing his wife, Laci, and their unborn son in 2004. He has long maintained his innocence.

What evidence can Peterson's defense team access?

The judge is allowing Peterson's defense team to access digital copies of all 911 calls reporting the van fire near the Peterson home around the time of Laci's disappearance.

Peterson's team has argued that the van fire may have been connected to suspects who took her. But they lost most of their ability, in previous hearings, to have the evidence tested.

They can access color copies of the crime lab reports about what evidence was collected from the van including mattress cuttings. They can access documents related to fingerprints and palm prints in the van. They can see color copies of Modesto Fire Department investigator Bryan Spitulski's investigation file. They can see color copies of all photos and scene diagrams from the van fire and inside the van.

They can also see Modesto Police training manuals from the time of the murder and reports that police received involving a witness who saw someone who looked like Laci.

Many of the requests deal with the robbery across the street from the Peterson house and most of those requests are denied. However, they are being granted access to audio and video recordings police did with neighbors about the burglary and some handwritten notes made by police.

ABC News contributed to this report.

Related Topics

• SCOTT PETERSON

Top Stories

Enough fentanyl to kill every person on LI seized: prosecutors

• 2 minutes ago

Broadway dancer missing in South Carolina

Sleepy Hollow tourism boom stops traffic dead in its tracks

• 6 minutes ago

Woman wanted for stealing money from boy, punching mother in the Bronx

Pedestrian struck, killed by hit-and-run driver in New Jersey

• 2 hours ago

Interim NYC police commissioner expected to step down, sources say

• 15 minutes ago

Obama tells Black men it's 'not acceptable' to sit out election

LI animal rescue pairs displaced animals with veterans