Oh look! such a comprehensive guide to writing a good critique paper.
by my dear lecturer.
WEEKS AFTER THE ASSIGNMENT WAS DUE.
Some guidelines for conducting an effective critique are:
- Identify the aims of the research,
- Identify the theory base of the article/research,
- Is it appropriate?
- Is it comprehensive?
- Is it logical?
- Have prior research articles been interpreted accurately? (This requires reading the original articles.)
- Were critical variables or concepts operationally defined?
- Are these definitions different from that used in the regular literature?
i. If so, does the researcher identify why the difference in definition?
- What is the methodology being used?
- Has the researcher clearly identified the reasons/arguments for using the chosen approach?
- Is it the most appropriate for the research in question?
- What might be the strengths and weaknesses of the chosen approach?
- Did the researcher provide valid reasons for sample selection?
- What was the chosen method of data collection?
- Was the data collection method the most appropriate?
- What are its strengths and weaknesses?
- How might it impact on results?
- How was the analysis conducted?
- Was it appropriate?
- Were there any alternatives?
- How might the method of analysis influence the results and conclusions?
- Were any mistakes identified?
- Were the statistical techniques appropriate?
- How well were the results presented?
- Were there any errors in tables?
- Were the tables clear and easily understood?
- How was the discussion undertaken?
- Were the conclusions relevant?
- Were they accurate?
- Did they make sense?
- Did they add to knowledge in the area?
- Did they raise further research questions?
- Were any mistakes or misinterpretations made?
- Were alternative conclusions discussed.
- Were there any oversights?
- How was the article written?
- Was it clear and understandable?
- Did it use jargon?
- Was it written for an ‘informed’ readership?
No comments:
Post a Comment