writing an article review

writing an article review

Writing an Effective Article Review

1. Introduction

Instructions on how to write a review conclude with a comparison of a review and a published paper. The article describes a review by equating it to a reverse-engineered paper. It describes a review as taking the article and breaking it down into something similar to a template. This template is the sequence of words, but the idea is to have the words form another article. This shows the depth in which a review must delve into the article compared to a casual reading. Finally, the article provides a perspective of what the review would accomplish for a student by using an example from an undergraduate materials course.

“Writing an effective article review” explains the process of writing and publishing reviews for scientific publications. It begins by presenting a brief overview of the steps in writing a review, those being introduction, summary, critique, and conclusion. The article describes the essential steps to produce a scholarly review. These include evaluating the broad scope of the article, evaluating the article’s organization and logical flow of ideas, and identifying the article’s thesis. The article then delves into a detailed analysis of what the review must do. This comes in the form of different questions that the review must answer while it is evaluating the article. A critical aspect of the review is to provide an answer to each question with evidence found from the article. This would ensure that the review is well supported and effective.

2. Summary of the Article

This section should consist of a brief summary of the article under consideration. Here, you should delve into the author’s main points and arguments. Attempt to understand the essence of the original article. What was its purpose? Whom did it affect? In what way? Next, attempt to find the thesis of the article. This should be included throughout the article, or at the very least located at a clear point in the article. At this point, you should have a firm understanding of the article and should be able to draw upon his main points in a brief, condensed manner. At this juncture, you can make opinions about whether the article was clear, thorough, and relevant. It is important to remain neutral and not impart any own opinions or beliefs about what you understood about the article. The following is a sample to be used as “Article Summary Template”: In the article titled “Effective Literacy Instruction for Adolescents,” the National Reading Research Center builds a strongly supported case regarding the inadequacy of adolescent literacy levels and the evident gap between the current instruction methods and the competency levels requisite for success in modern-day society. Utilizing data and findings published from recent studies, the highest standards for supporting literacy instruction are advocated. As a means to illustrate and support this perspective, an analysis of the existing two contrasting worlds generated by differing literacy proficiency levels serves to solidify the NRRC position. Future directions and implications for instruction in developmental classes seek to increase the literacy rates of struggling adolescent readers in order to fully integrate them into mainstream classes. The article concludes by taking a stance by offering direction for policy and practice, and then ultimately determining that effecting change in literacy instruction for adolescents will require a concerted effort and a shift in paradigm in the education community.

3. Analysis and Evaluation

1. Application Strength: The author went into many specifics on how to write an effective article review. Whether you are critiquing a quantitative, qualitative, or mixed-method study, the information below will assist you in identifying each component of the article review specific to your study. This article is a step-by-step approach to critiquing qualitative research to help nurses demystify the process and decode the terminology. When making medical decisions, it is important for the decision to be based on research whether that research is a case study, a review of existing medical records, or a report of a specific practice or procedure, the information must be interpreted. Each of these research methods has a specific method of interpreting results, and the review of that specific method is what this article explains. At each step in the process of understanding the article, the critique should ask if this portion of the article is comprehensive enough so that in the future they could use the information as a reference on how to do it. The article discusses the process of creating an abstract including the importance of identifying a clear and concise summary of the article as it is stated that a well-written abstract will also help a reader decide whether or not to select the article for full reading.

4. Critique and Recommendations

Next, the comments on the later findings have given a lot of new information. Based on the methods to the findings, there are a lot of new information that were found from the data collected by the student. All informations are given have shown that a very detail of the students’ effort to complete the assignment. All problems and constraints that have been found are very helpful to students that will do the same assignment in the future and it can indirectly become a reference. Then a comment to the conclusion is a reminder to the student so that they did not repeat the same mistake in the future.

In generally, the critique of this article review can be categorized in a good side. It is based on the use of an analytic language. Reviewer also bring out the good comments or praise before and while giving the detail of the weakness of the article. Critique in every aspects of the article is been supported with a suitable evidence. This is shown when the critique changes to the findings. All comments have been direct to point based on the evidence. Then, it is easy for readers to understand the information delivered.

This section of the article review expresses the reviewer’s comments on the article with the later findings. Critique can be positive as well as negative. The reviewer’s comments have to be analytic so that it can point out directly to the weakness of the article. Critique which is given should be supported by the comments as well as suitable evidence and those comments will appear in the later findings. Then, there are some recommendations from the reviewer to improve the quality of the article.

5. Conclusion

The overall aim of this assignment is to show that you are capable of engaging with the published literature on a particular topic. You should be able to give a clear and objective account of the article (this may be in the form of a summary) and assess the value and relevance of the article to the topic area. In an age where the market is flooded with articles, it is essential to acquire knowledge of critiquing methodology to be able to discern valid literature from mediocre writings or research that is outdated. Writing an article review, just as the title suggests, is quite self-explanatory. It gives an account of your understanding of the article. According to the University of Toronto, a review is both a summary and an evaluation of another writer’s article. This skill is a valuable one which can be implemented in one’s academic or professional life. This assignment also aims to improve your understanding of the subject matter of the article. It is essential that you have an understanding of the concepts and issues presented so that you can make a valid judgment whether the article is relevant. Should this not be the case, it is suggested you read around the subject area. Engaging in extra reading will not only improve your understanding of the concepts but also expose you to other literature in the area, giving you better judgment to discern article relevance and quality.