my dear lecturer

Oh look! such a comprehensive guide to writing a good critique paper.

by my dear lecturer.


Some guidelines for conducting an effective critique are:

  1. Identify the aims of the research,
  2. Identify the theory base of the article/research,
    1. Is it appropriate?
    2. Is it comprehensive?
    3. Is it logical?
    4. Have prior research articles been interpreted accurately? (This requires reading the original articles.)
    5. Were critical variables or concepts operationally defined?
    6. Are these definitions different from that used in the regular literature?

i. If so, does the researcher identify why the difference in definition?

  1. What is the methodology being used?
    1. Has the researcher clearly identified the reasons/arguments for using the chosen approach?
    2. Is it the most appropriate for the research in question?
    3. What might be the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen approach?
    4. Did the researcher provide valid reasons for sample selection?
  2. What was the chosen method of data collection?
    1. Was the data collection method the most appropriate?
    2. What are its strengths and weaknesses?
    3. How might it impact on results?
  3. How was the analysis conducted?
    1. Was it appropriate?
    2. Were there any alternatives?
    3. How might the method of analysis influence the results and conclusions?
    4. Were any mistakes identified?
    5. Were the statistical techniques appropriate?
  4. How well were the results presented?
    1. Were there any errors in tables?
    2. Were the tables clear and easily understood?
  5. How was the discussion undertaken?
    1. Were the conclusions relevant?
    2. Were they accurate?
    3. Did they make sense?
    4. Did they add to knowledge in the area?
    5. Did they raise further research questions?
    6. Were any mistakes or misinterpretations made?
    7. Were alternative conclusions discussed.
    8. Were there any oversights?
  6. How was the article written?
    1. Was it clear and understandable?
    2. Did it use jargon?
    3. Was it written for an ‘informed’ readership?

No comments:

Post a Comment


kontradikcion Design by Insight © 2009