This kind of writing goes BEYOND summarizing. The purpose isn’t to summarize or to prepare a report. Instead, the purpose is to evaluate the author’s argument.
It can seem intimating to “criticize” a book or article; after all, they may be written by professors, policymakers, or experts. However, part of this exercise is to explore the fact that even though these authors are highly qualified, they are still advancing an argument and providing evidence – their aim is to persuade you that their argument is true, not to just present facts. Once you recognize that these authors are making arguments, you can analyze whether or not you find their argument compelling.
What might you analyze and respond to? What are the potential points of criticism? Or how and why is the author’s work important?
The following are some guiding questions to help your thinking:
1. Questions about the author’s main points and purpose for writing: Are the author’s arguments valid and important? Why? Are you persuaded by the author’s evidence and discussion? Why or why not? Is the author biased? If so, what are the possible effects of the bias? Has the author made a particularly important contribution to our understanding of the topic? If so, what is it, how did the author do it, and why is it important?
2. Definitional questions: Are all the concepts in the text clear? Does the author define a concept vaguely? Has the author failed to be convincing? Can the author’s discussion be extended to another context or related issue, and if so, what is that other context or issue? How does the author’s work help us think about the other context or issue?
3. Evidence questions: Does the author’s evidence support his/her argument? Does the author have enough specific evidence to prove the more general point? Does the author underemphasize or ignore evidence that is contrary to his/her argument? Is the evidence credible? Can you identify a bias in the evidence?
4. Implication/Policy relevance questions: What are the implications of the author’s principal argument? Are those implications positive or negative? How has the author dealt with this issue? What possible actions or policies need to be implemented?
Remember that you will need to support your claims. Provide evidence from the text to support your discussion.
Structuring a Critical Analysis Paper
I. Introduction
A. Introduce the topic of the reading.
B. Give the title of the piece your analyzing and the full name of its author.
C. State your overall evaluation of the piece.
D. Provide any relevant background information to help your readers understand the topic and argument.
II. Second Paragraph
A. Give a brief summary of the source text.
B. It may be that you are summarizing the entire text OR you may be summarizing only the portion that is directly related to your evaluation.
III. Evaluation Paragraphs: Use the following criteria to evaluate the essay ?:
1. Does the author use accurate, factual, compelling evidence ?;
2. Does the author have clear definitions or concepts;
3. Are there any hidden assumptions or biases?
4. Does the author use clear logic and organization?
5. Remember to quote relevant sentences from the essay. Introduce the quote, cite it with an in-text citation, and follow up the quote with your evaluation.
6. Comment on what the writer gets right or wrong.
7. Discuss why the text is valuable or not, or whether you recommend it and why.
IV. Conclusion
A. Remind your readers of the importance of the topic and the main points of your evaluation and response.
B. Reflect on how you have proven your thesis.
C. Point out the importance of your argument.
D. Note potential avenues for additional research or analysis or make a prediction or a sugg
