UFV ASC Article Review & Critique
Article Review
& Critique
Available online at: https://ufv.ca/asc/student-resources/
What is an article review or critique?
An article review or critique is a specialized form of writing in which the reviewer engages
with a scholarly source — usually a journal article or academic book — by reporting its
main ideas, claims, positions, or findings, and the reasoning which supports these ideas and
by critiquing its contribution to knowledge in the discipline in which it is published. Thus,
scholarly review or critique consists of summarizing and evaluating an academic source
that is of interest to academic audiences.
How are academic or scholarly critiques different from other reviews I have read?
You may have written book or movie reviews or critiques or read such reviews in newspapers
and magazines in the past. The academic or scholarly review is likely different, however, from
these types of reviews in terms of its audiences and goals. Most book and movie reviews
published in magazines or newspapers assume a general reader or moviegoer. They advise
the general audience to either buy a certain book or see a particular movie. They offer an
opinion which may be based on expert knowledge or not and which may be supported with
reasoned proof or not. These reviews are not generally written to advance understanding in
an area of research, but to offer a persuasive opinion.
The scholarly critique or review, on the other hand, usually offers an actively engaged
response to a scholarly writer’s ideas, which represents more than simply an opinion, and the
informed engagement that the reviewer offers is always supported by thoughtful reasoning
and proof. Hence, writing an article review is a way for university students to display their
knowledge of a scholarly topic; to engage with ideas, theories, research and information in
their disciplines or programmes; to rethink and extend ideas in their field of study; and to
show how their analytical response to an article is worthy of consideration. Critique signals
the reviewer’s contribution to existing scholarly knowledge, and critiques are an important
way for novice scholars to do authentic academic work.
What are the roles of critiques in an academic context?
Academic readers, like your instructor, don’t just want to know if you enjoyed an academic
article or disliked it. Rather, academic readers, much like you, highly value reviews of articles
and books because they do the important work of pointing out the useful contributions that
an article or book makes to an area of research. Reviews can also steer the academic reader
away from a source that does a limited job of contributing to the ongoing conversations and
store of knowledge of researchers and scholars on valued research topics. When you write a
critique or review, when you critique the scholarly work of others, you signal your active
participation in these important conversations since the basis of participation in scholarly
604-854-4573 or (Chilliwack CEP) 604-504-7441 ext. 2432
UFV ASC Article Review & Critique
conversations is the analysis and extension of existing ideas and findings.
Can’t I just say I liked the article or not? A word on the meaning of critique in an
academic context.
The term “critique” sounds, well, critical, and it sounds negatively critical, too, as if the only
response to a writer’s work might be negative judgement and condemnation. And since one
of the goals of review is to offer an evaluative judgement of the source, sometimes reviewers
sound negative, too. However, the term “critique” has a rich meaning in a scholarly setting
since it signals a productive range of analytical positions that are possible when engaging
with the ideas of others. When we set out to critique or review in an academic context, our
goal is to make a contribution to existing knowledge on a topic of scholarly interest; to make
that contribution, we need to do much more than say whether we liked the article or not. We
need to make our own thoughtful contributions to the article’s analysis, and we need to
support or offer proof for our thinking in any of following ways:
By reporting the type of analysis the writer performs (anecdotal, quantitative,
qualitative, case study) and assessing how this type of analysis supports the writer’s
reasoning and claims
By examining whether the writer’s analysis adequately supports the writer’s findings
By suggesting new information, methods of analysis, or theoretical approaches that
might make a contribution to the writer’s reasoning
By comparing the writer’s reasoning with another expert’s approach to the topic
By discussing how the same topic is examined in another discipline or from another
perspective
By pointing out conclusions or causes or effects of the writer’s reasoning that he or she
has not addressed or anticipated
By examining the article for signs of coherent connections between ideas and, if
appropriate, by showing how the lack of connections between ideas leaves the writer’s
conclusions or findings unsupported
By suggesting how to shore up the writer’s claims with further study, information, data
or analysis
By discussing what remains to be examined on the topic
By extending the writer’s attempts to make coherent connections between ideas with
your own reasoning
By showing your agreement with the writer’s lines of reasoning and claims and
explaining why they are a good fit with your own knowledge and experience
By supporting aspects of the writer’s claims and analysis and withdrawing your
support in relation to other ideas, revealing how, in places, the writer does not offer
convincing proof or analysis of claims or findings
By considering interpretations of data and information the writer has not by imagining
alternative claims, positions, and theories in relation to findings
By bringing new analytical terms to an analysis of the topic that the writer has not
considered
By suggesting new processes of reasoning or methodology by which the writer might
arrive at new, productive conclusions or thinking
Clearly, scholarly engagement and evaluation take many forms. And we can see by this list
604-854-4573 or (Chilliwack CEP) 604-504-7441 ext. 2432
UFV ASC Article Review & Critique
of possibilities that critique involves expressing a position of analytical engagement with
another writer’s ideas. Your job as a critique writer in an academic context is to show your
understanding of an article’s ideas and to develop a thoughtful response to those ideas.
Who am I to critique experts?
Sometimes, as a student writer of the article critique, you might ask yourself “Who am I to
critique this writing, written as it is by a professional in the field. Who wants to know what
I think about it? What can I say about it; I am just learning about this topic. Moreover, I am
learning about this topic by reading just such an article as this one. I am not even sure I
completely understand this article.” What follow are some steps towards writing the article
review, and ways to think of yourself as a writer with something to say to others in your
field of interest. (Remember that different disciplines have slightly different approaches to
the review task, so always check with your instructor regarding the exact requirements of
your assignment.)
Getting Started
Read the article carefully to discover its main topic. What is the big term or
concept that would be familiar to those in this field and that organises this material?
Words and phrases like “masculinity,” “physical work capacity,” “metaknowledge,” and
“acute and chronic exercise” are examples of such terms which act as organizing concepts for
the article. Make notes about what you find to be the main topic. There may be a few such
key terms; pay close attention to the writer’s definition of these terms if they are offered.
Knowing the key terms helps you summarize for your reader the gist or main ideas of the
article. You can use these main terms to organize your article review since they will
represent the topic around which the writer’s research and conclusions are organized.
RE-READ THE ARTICLE (maybe several times) to determine (and write down!)
the argument(s) it makes or engages with, regarding the big terms. Articles in
academic disciplines represent an ongoing conversation about topics that matter in the
field. Articles represent a kind of “knowledge building.” People publish articles as a way of
showing their research to others in their field. Others in the field read these articles and
either accept the findings as ways to see important information or dispute/disprove the
research on the basis of their own supported claim(s). “The presence of pets in a care facility
tends to increase lifespan and quality of life” is an example of a claim. Support for the
argument might be in the form of statistics or anecdotes. In your review, tell your reader
how the article supports its claims, explain the support it offers, and examine how thorough
or effective this support is.
Ask yourself about what else you know about the topic. What have you heard about
it, read about it, and in particular what might you have discussed about it in class. Have
you heard the same point made this way, or have you heard a different view of this point?
Does the article you are reviewing mention other articles, other work in the field? Does it
agree or disagree with such work? Does your article build on this other knowledge in the
604-854-4573 or (Chilliwack CEP) 604-504-7441 ext. 2432
UFV ASC Article Review & Critique
field or does it make distinctions between its findings and those you have seen in other
articles? This is how you can begin to take a critical approach to the article you are
reviewing. You can say how similar or different it is from other views you have seen on the
topic. You can say how well it makes its main point, how much of a contribution to
knowledge on this topic it makes. Does it present enough support, enough evidence for the
claim it makes? Does it make a big new claim, or does it work on supporting, finding
evidence for, a familiar claim? Is its evidence recent or not very recent? Tell your reader
what the article’s claim looks like to you from the point of view of these questions.
Writing critiques is about beginning to notice what topics are important in your field, what
kinds of claims are being made about these topics and how what you notice fits with what
else you know in the field about the topic.
Critiques generally follow this structure, but variations do exist, so always ask your
instructors about their preference:
introduce the name of the article/book and name of author(s)
summarize the article/book’s main claim, goals, methods, and findings
show how the article/book supports its claims
indicate the main position or claim that your review will make in response to the
article
develop your critique in relation to aspects of the article/book, offering thoughtful, well
supported proof for your claim(s)
conclude by pointing to the scholarly value (worthy or limited) of the article, suggesting
particular audiences who might benefit from the work and proposing further directions
that research might take in relation to the article’s topic
The Academic Success Centre has online and tutoring resources available to help you
with writing in a variety of disciplines, understanding and producing MLA, APA, and
Chicago styles of citing sources, and documenting your academic work. Check our
website for links and more information.
604-854-4573 or (Chilliwack CEP) 604-504-7441 ext. 2432
