article review sample

article review sample

The Importance of Article Reviews

1. Introduction

The meta-analysis by Dr. John Siegel and Dr. Anupa Bir “The Predictive Validity of Student Evaluations in the Medical School Setting” addresses whether or not student ratings can predict who will be an effective teacher.

At the end of each semester, students are required to complete an evaluation form rating the teacher and the course. These student ratings are used for many purposes. One of which is to help make decisions such as whether to promote non-tenured teachers, determine pay raises, and decide if a teacher should be tenured or be fired. Student ratings are also used to compare teachers in the same department. These ratings are public and available to students. Often times they are the sole measure through which a teacher is evaluated. If a teacher receives poor ratings, there could be negative consequences. This is why it is important to find out what exactly student ratings measure.

The development of new technology brings about the rise of online education. Instead of professors writing on overhead projectors and students taking notes, classrooms have turned towards using PowerPoint presentations and the students reading from the screen. With this new technology, professors teaching statistics and research methodology classes are better able to show students practical applications of the material. However, the useful tools can only be beneficial if people know how to use them. This is where this article comes in.

2. Benefits of Article Reviews

Next, it provides a clearer view of what has been learned. Research is nothing without learning. By writing an article and reviewing it, it reinforces the newly acquired knowledge. This can be crucial in cases where the article is being read after a long period as a refreshed memory.

Thirdly, article reviews develop analytical skills. There are a number of things that can be questioned in an article. It might be talking about the outcome of an event, a piece of technology, or a new method. There are pros and cons over what is being discussed. By going through the article and looking into different views, it provides the reviewer with a well-rounded understanding and an ability to analyze the situation. These skills can be useful towards personal research or in the future.

Secondly, article reviews aid in the accumulation of knowledge for society and its advancement. It’s about taking the information from the article and applying it to something, e.g., an explanatory theory, in order to have a better understanding of the fact, fiction, or idea.

Firstly, it helps to keep the research work on track employed by the researcher. By referring to other articles and comparing and contrasting views, it ensures the work is focused on the area and identifies relevant data. It is convincing that a better understanding of the article and learning to write better reviews is applying important insights from those articles towards making improvements in personal research.

3. Steps to Write an Effective Article Review

Step 3: The Summary Construct and the Critical Evaluation (3 paragraphs) Start off by constructing a brief description of the article. From claim to claim, reiterate what the author already said in the article per claim in summarized form. Now you have a reconstruction of the article, often one more comprehensive than the original because claims without data have been removed and reworked into claims that have data. With the article reconstruction sheet still in mind, take note of any data claims. Claims with strong warrants have data to support the claim. Often it is data the author knows could be questioned or data that is used as a foundation for an assumption. A well to moderately easy way to find warrant and the claim as well is by going into “for” and “against” detail. This is because the data claim is usually a solution to a problem. Now the article has been evaluated and has a stronger foundation than the first read. The article is readily available to be critiqued. Use a simple checklist to identify any problems in the logic of the data and claim. Commonly there may be a logical fallacy or the claim may have only an assumption for a data claim with no data. Now you have a finished reader critique.

Step 2: Identifying the NOCS (2-3 paragraphs) The next step would be to pinpoint and highlight the claims in the article. As stated by Step 1, you should now understand the author’s claims better from prior reading and the notes taken. It should be easier to locate and pinpoint explicit claims throughout the article. This is an important part of critiquing an article, as it gives you easier access to the “for” and “against” when discerning an author’s purpose. Step 2 leads into the 3rd step by giving you a general outline of what the article looks like. Often, you will be outlining a brief outline in the margins of the article. Keep in mind the author may have several sub-claims, and the more complex the claim, the harder it is to find the warrant. Reread the claims and see if you missed any info that would make the claim more understandable. Keep all these claims on scrap paper. This will be reworked into a graphical display/diagram of the article on an 8×10 sheet of paper. The claims will be written in boxes connected by lines that lead to other claims. These are good claims to be evaluated and critiqued since they are solutions to problems. Often a claim may be a solution to a problem. This step now leads into the 3rd step of reviewing an article.

Step 1: Organizing (2-3 paragraphs) Begin preparation by reading the article. For a critical and substantial assessment of an article, you must first read it several times. The first time reading is to understand the overall article. If you are taking paper and pencil notes, cross out irrelevant notes. The second reading is critical to understand the arguments made by the article and taking special notes on specific passages that are key to the article. This could include sections you did not understand, or something that you think is missing from the article. The final reading is just to be sure. Take notes in the margins of the article or on a separate piece of paper. Also, you may be inclined to circle details that are important to the arguments made by the author, or to jot down page numbers in the margins for easy referencing. Keep a reader response journal next to you as you are reading. This reader response should be in the form of a question or a response. This step gives you a foundation to work off of. Now you can better understand the author’s purpose. Because of this, learning the author’s claims will be a lot easier than trying to find them without prior understanding.

4. Examples of Well-Written Article Reviews

It is significant to also talk about the well-written reviews. They should be able to pass on to the reader relevant information and address the article within its specific area. An excellent article review integrates both the purpose of the article and the article content. Then the article should be cited appropriately with in-text citation similar to the following (James, 2008), and also a reference list should be generated. For a journal article, author(s), article title, journal name, volume number, issue number, page numbers, and date should be included. If the article reviewed is from a magazine or newspaper, then the article’s title, magazine/newspaper title, along with the date, is necessary. This is then followed by the review itself, and around 1000-2000 word article review is generally enough. Well-written reviews address ideas in the article, compare the articles to other works on the same subject, and also suggest the author write revisions for their article. An excellent review demonstrates the student’s grasp of the article and how it relates to the study in the field. Look below for an example of a well-written article review. This is what I would consider an excellent piece for it speaks to the article at all times.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, article reviews are an important form of scientific writing and they are essential for maintaining the integrity of scientific research. Reviews of articles provide a forum for critique and disapproval as well as praise. In order for an article to be of high quality, it must undergo a thorough peer review before it can be published into a journal. As it has been shown, article reviews are vital in ensuring that the published material is of an acceptable quality and has no errors. Without reviews, bad articles will be published, researchers can be given an incorrect view of the medical field potentially leading to detriment to their patients, and funding can be wasted on flawed research. This defeats the whole object of research, which is to progress modern medicine and to further our understanding of the human body.