EAPP Journal article guidelines/notes

4 to 7 pages; at least 10 refs

Writing a journal article critique

- Teaches you to evaluate materials

- In order to know what kind of paper it is

- Use the strengths and avoid the weaknesses

Critique: to be objective, evaluate, provide insights and feedbacks that will both help you and the
writer

Outline

1. Read the introduction -> “what do you understand”

2. Read the methods section

3. Read the results

4. Read the discussion section

5. Prepare an outline of your thoughts on the article

Different parts of a critique

0. Abstract – short summary of the article, why was the study conducted

- To help the readers decide if they will use the data or not

1. Introduction – gives a background of the topic; literature review

- Is the hypothesis clearly stated?

- Is necessary background information or previous researches described?

- Take note of the other info or questions you may have

2. Methods – How was the study conduced

- Is the procedure very clearly stated? Or explained?

- Who were the participants

- What instruments were used to gather data? -> surveys etc

- What variables are the researches measuring -> controlled, experiment, etc
 3. Results – releases the data collected

- Are tables and graphs clearly labeled?

- Are the results clearly stated and understandable?

- Do researchers provide enough statistical info?

- Did the researches collect all of the data needed to measure?

4. Discussion – how do the researchers interpret the results of the study

- Did the results support the thesis?

- Do the conclusions drawn by the researchers seem reasonable?

- Are the suggestions for practical implications or recommendations for further research?

- Offers the students opportunity to take a position (take a side BUT not subjective or
emotional (should be scholarly and academic) and explain why you agree or disagree)

- Point out problems

- Suggest an alternative solution

5. Personal reaction *

- In normal j. critiques, there is no personal reaction

- What did you learn from reading the article?

- What further questions did you generate?

- Third pov (this paper, this critique, this review)

Other guides

Introduction (+ T.S.)

- Begin by describing the journal and the authors

- Provide main hypothesis or thesis of the paper

- Explain why you think the information is relevant

- Thesis

+ final part

+ is the main idea oi the critique

 + what I think of the article (good, problematice, etc.)

+ ex. Although the article of the author has a lot of statistics, it tends to mislead…

Article summary

- Main points, methods, results, discussion

- Around 3 paragraphs

Analysis

- “mangbilak”

- What problem did you see w the author’s (premise, methods, conclusion)

- It also can be what good points are seen

- Problems w the author’s argument or presentation

- On informational alternatives that have been overlooked

Conclusion

- Overview of the article’s arguments

- Your conclusions

- Reaction

Reflection

- Another paragraph or 2

- Your experience in writing this critique

- Problems, insights, learning

- Necessary but will not be graded