The main article to be deconstructed and evaluated is;
A review of talent management: 'infancy or adolescence?'
You can find the instructions in a
... [Show More] word document called;
Deconstructing a literature review
Other files are to be used as Sources which are;
1. Undertaking a literature review: A step-by-step approach
2. Writing an article Critique
3. Writing a Literature Review; Writing Centre Learning Guide
An article critique has four main parts:
1. Introduction
Include an introductory paragraph that includes the following:
- The author’s name(s) and the title of the article.
- The author’s main point.
- A thesis statement that previews your analysis.
- Identify the Structure of the paper, approach to search and selection, number of
different types of sources used, and the Purpose of the paper.
2. Summary
After your introduction, discuss the following in your own words:
- The main points of the article (the Dominate Themes).
- The Key ideas emerging from the literature review’s analysis of the literature.
- The arguments presented in the article.
- The findings of the article.
3. Critique
After summarizing the article, critique the article by doing the following:
- Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article that you noted while
critically reading the article.
- Critically evaluate the Dominate Themes of the article (what are the significant
of them?).
- Critically evaluate the gaps/ problems/ corresponding research questions of the
Literature Review.
- State your informed opinions about the clarity, relevancy, and accuracy of the
article, using specific examples from the article to support your statements.
- Identify the limitations of the research (e.g. it's contribution to knowledge), and
explain how they impact your study, and propose a direction for future studies
and present alternatives.
4. Conclusion
Finally, end your article critique with a conclusion that does the following:
- Summarize the key points in the article, as well the key points from your own
analysis.
- Close with a comment about the significance of the research or a statement of
future research needed in the field.
Please note: - that we have to me more objective
- Analyzing not descripting
- Not essay style
What is an article critique?
An article critique requires you to critically read a piece of
research and identify and evaluate the strengths and
weaknesses of the article.
How is a critique different from a
summary?
A summary of a research article requires you to share the key
points of the article so your reader can get a clear picture of
what the article is about. A critique may include a brief summary,
but the main focus should be on your evaluation and analysis of
the research itself.
What steps need to be taken to write
an article critique?
Before you start writing, you will need to take some steps to get
ready for your critique:
Choose an article that meets the criteria outlined by your
instructor.
Read the article to get an understanding of the main idea.
Read the article again with a critical eye.
As you read, take note of the following:
What are the credentials of the author/s? Is the author
qualified to write about the topic?
Are the chosen research methods appropriate to answer the
research question(s)?
Are there issues related to the generalizability of the results?
Is there evidence of bias or a conflict of interest?
Is the article timely and relevant or is it outdated?
Did the author/s ground their research in theory and
previous literature?
What is included in an article
critique?
An article critique has four main parts:
1. Introduction
Include an introductory paragraph that includes the following:
The author’s name(s) and the title of the article
The author’s main point
A thesis statement that previews your analysis
2. Summary
After your introduction, discuss the following in your own words:
The main points of the article
The arguments presented in the article
The findings of the article
3. Critique
After summarizing the article, critique the article by doing the
following:
Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the article that you
noted while critically reading the article.
State your informed opinions about the clarity, relevancy,
and accuracy of the article, using specific examples from the
article to support your statements.
4. Conclusion
Finally, end your article critique with a conclusion that does the
following:
Summarize the key points in the article, as well the key
points from your own analysis.
Close with a comment about the significance of the research
or a statement of future research needed in the field.
FYI: The webpage of this article:
https://writingcenter.ashford.edu/writing-article-critique
At some point in your university study, you may be asked to review the literature on
a certain subject or in a particular area. Such a review involves comparing different
writers’ ideas or perspectives on a topic and evaluating these ideas, all in relation to
your own work. A literature review differs from an article review in that it involves
writing about several writers’ ideas, rather than evaluating a single article. It is also
different to an annotated bibliography, which is usually a series of short reflections
on individual pieces of writing.
Introduction
The literature review enables you and your reader to get an overview of a certain subject, so that it
is clear who the main writers are in the field, and which main points need to be addressed. It
should be an evaluative piece of writing, rather than just a description. This means that you need to
weigh up arguments and critique ideas, rather than just providing a list of what different writers
have said. It is up to you to decide what the reader needs to know on the topic, but you should only
include the main pieces of writing in this area; a literature review does not need to include
everything ever written on the topic. The most important thing is to show how the literature relates
to your own work.
You may be writing a literature review as part of a thesis, or as an exercise in itself. Whatever the
reason, there are many benefits to writing a literature review. It provides an opportunity to:
identify a gap in previous research
outline the main arguments in your field
show that you are familiar with the literature on your topic
indicate who the main writers are in a particular area
evaluate previous studies
position your work in relation to other writers
identify areas of controversy
support your own work by citing other authors
highlight current literature and use older sources where relevant
see what previous methodologies have been used and to avoid making the same mistakes
as previous researchers
demonstrate that you can do research
avoid plagiarism and demonstrate your referencing skills
provide a clear theoretical framework
2
demonstrate your understanding of the key ideas and concepts in your topic
define your terms, drawing on other writers’ definitions
make you more confident that your area of research is worth studying.
(adapted from Bruce 2002; Clerehan 1999; CQUniversity 2010; Leedy & Ormrod 2005; Littrell 2003;
Roberts & Taylor 2002; Study and Learning Centre, RMIT 2005; Swales & Feak 1994)
What to include
There are many types of literature that you could include in a review, but as far as possible you
should use primary sources. i.e. you should refer to original works, rather than using secondary
sources in which you read someone else’s opinion of a work. Remember that you are talking about
what other people have written about a topic, so the topic itself is your main focus, rather than
the writer. Everything should always relate clearly to your own research question.
You should explain clearly why you have chosen to review certain pieces of literature and not
others. Are the writings you have chosen the main works in this area, for example, or do they
exemplify a particular methodology which you will use in your own research project? In general,
you should only include academic sources. It can be hard to tell whether a piece of writing is
academic or not, especially if you find it on the Internet. The following checklist may help you.
Academic sources checklist
Source Yes No
Is the article peer reviewed/refereed? i.e. Have other scholars in the field
recommended that it be published? Journals and conference proceedings will
usually state whether their articles are peer reviewed.
Is there a reference list/bibliography, with matching in-text references?
Who is the author? Are they linked to a university or a research institute, or
possibly a government department (such as the Australian Bureau of
Statistics)?
Does the text look academic? An academic website will usually only have
advertisements to academic products such as books or dictionaries, rather
than to, say, holiday websites.
Is the text written in formal language?
Does the text use paragraphs and headings?
Who is the publisher? Are they academic (e.g. xxx University Press)?
If you are using a website, is there an author and a copyright date (often at the
bottom of the page)?
(based on Monash University 2011)
How to conduct the literature review
1. Select your topic (usually in conjunction with a lecturer or supervisor)
2. Put your topic into a context. What background needs to be included? Where does your
topic fit into the wider context of research in the area?
3. Search for relevant information:
Examine the keywords of your question/topic: exactly what do you need to know?
3
Identify themes in your topic
Isolate keywords for these themes together with their synonyms
Decide which types of literature best address your themes
Search for literature
- Library databases and search feature
- Google Scholar
- Lecturers’ recommendations
- Friends’ suggestions
- Bibliographies and reference lists at the end of books or articles
Identify key authors if possible (through reference lists or by seeing which articles
are cited most on Google Scholar)
4. Keep a record of all your references, using the style you will use in your final review
5. Always relate all your literature to your research question, essay or report
(The above points are based on CQUniversity 2010 and Leedy & Ormrod 2005)
How to evaluate the literature
Things to consider Yes No
Content Is the article easy to understand?
Does it use good arguments?
Is evidence given for the claims made?
Does the article make clear any limitations?
(This is a good thing for an article to do.)
Is the writing biased?
Context in discipline Is this one of the key articles in the discipline?
Does the writer agree with other writers?
Does the writer disagree with other writers?
Methodology Is the methodology appropriate for the study?
Is enough information given for another researcher to
replicate the study?
Was the sample size adequate?
Author Is this a reputable, academic author?
Does the writer refer to other literature to support
some of their claims?
Relevance Is the research recent?
Is the purpose of the research similar to your own?
Was the study conducted under similar circumstances
to your own subject?
Can you draw on the research for your own work?
(The above points are based on CQUniversity 2010)
4
How to take notes of your literature
Some writers find it helpful to make a table of all their sources, varying the headings to suit their
own work and discipline.
Example 1: Sciences/Experimental focus
Author Year Type of study Sample Design Data collection
approach
Key findings
e.g. quantitative
e.g. qualitative
(Roberts & Taylor 2002)
Example 2: Humanities/Theoretical focus
Author Year Type of work Strengths Weaknesses Relevance to own study
Journal article Range of
issues
Lack of depth Similar ideas but too wide ranging
How to organise the review
As with any piece of writing, your literature review should include an introduction and a conclusion.
After that, it is up to you how you group your literature. Remember, your focus should usually be on
the topic you are reviewing, rather than on individual writers. That means that you can group the
pieces of literature in order to make particular points, and you can refer to individual writers more
than once in the review. The choices are limitless, but here are a few ideas. You could group by:
main themes
methodology
theories
types of study
main writers in the field
chronology (i.e. development of theories over the years)
(based on Cone & Foster 1993, p. 108, and Leedy & Ormrod 2005, p. 79)
Remember to state your goals clearly in the introduction, and address them again in the
conclusion. Above all, always relate your research to the literature under discussion.
Further resources
http://emedia.rmit.edu.au/learninglab/content/literature-review-overview
http://libguides.library.cqu.edu.au/content.php?pid=9872&sid=64790
References
Bruce, C 2002, Supporting literature reviews: materials for supervisors to use with students,
viewed 29 March 2004, .
[Password access only.]
Clerehan, R 1999, Reviewing the literature, Monash University, Melbourne. Available online
www.monash.edu.au, [Password access only.]
5
Cone, JD & Foster, SL 1993, Dissertations and theses from start to finish, American Psychological
Association, Washington, DC.
CQUniversity 2010, ‘Literature review tutorial’, CQUniversity Library, viewed 4 August 2011,
.
Leedy, PD & Ormrod, JE 2005, Practical research: planning and design, 8th edn, Merrill Prentice
Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Littrell, RF (working paper) The literature review: critically analysing information sources, viewed 10
October 2003, .
Monash University 2011, ‘What are academic sources?’, Monash University Library, viewed 4
August 2011, .
Roberts, KL & Taylor, BJ 2002, Nursing research processes: an Australian perspective, Nelson,
South Melbourne.
Study and Learning Centre, RMIT 2005, ‘Literature review’, Learning lab, viewed 4 August 2011,
.
Swales, JM & Feak, CB 1994, Academic writing for graduate students, University of Michigan
Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan. [Show Less]