Scholarly Article Identification 1

Your assignment is to complete a critique of an introduction of a peer-reviewed journal article. This handout will give you a few guidelines to follow.

What kind of a journal article is it?

An empirical/research article or a review of literature? Some of the guidelines offered here will apply to critiques of all kinds of articles, but each type of article may provoke questions that are especially pertinent to that type.

Initial information:

• Name(s) of the author(s)
• Title of article

• Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page numbers

Basic informational summary:

• Statement of the problem or issue discussed
• The author’s purpose, approach or methods, hypothesis, and major conclusions.

Title:

• Is the title of the article accurate and clear? Explain
• What are key terms in the title to help the reader recognize the topic of the article?

Abstract

An abstract is a concise summary of the article. It briefly offers a sentence or two for each of the major sections of a research study (introduction, literature review, data collection/methodology, findings/results, discussion)

• Is the abstract specific, representative of the article, and in the correct form?

Introduction

The introduction section lays out pertinent information to establish a context for the study. It should include direct connection to resources as evidence of the relevance and importance of the topic under study.

• Is the purpose of the article made clear in the introduction? Explain
• What is the purpose of the study?

• Is the significance of the study described? Explain
• Are there any key terms included/defined for the reader? Why?
• Are the research question(s) present and explicitly stated? Explain
• Is the research question(s) consistent with the study’s philosophical basis? Explain

Literature Review

The literature review serves as an overview of the most relevant scholars of the topic of the study. It should include direct connection to the topic of the study and include evidence of previous scholarship in the field.

• Did the review include current research (studies published within the last three to five years)?
• Did the review rely mainly on primary source articles? Explain.
• Was the review merely a summary of existing work, or did it critically appraise key studies?
• Did the review identify important trends or gaps in the literature? Explain

Methodology

The methodology section serves as the official stated process of the study. It should clearly explain the steps that the researcher used to conduct the research.

• Did the author state what type of methodology was used, and why? Explain.
• Who were the participants for the study? Be specific.

• Were there any issues that occurred throughout the data collection process, for the researcher? Explain.
• Are the study design and methods appropriate for the purposes of the study? Support
• Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable a reader to duplicate them? Explain.

Findings/Results

This section serves as the official statement of what was found through the study.

• What did the researcher find (list all findings/results)? Explain completely
• Did the findings/results directly connect to the researcher question(s)? Explain
• Did the researcher answer the research question(s) clearly support by the data? Explain

Discussion

This section serves as a dialogue between the literature and the researcher’s findings/results.

• Does the researcher discuss the findings/results in light of previous scholarship from the literature review? Explain
• Are there any similarities or differences mentioned by the researcher between the data and the previous scholarship? Be specific.

Limitations/Further Investigation

This section indicates the limitations of the study.

• What limitations does the researcher admit affected the study? Explain
• Do you think the limitations compromised the integrity of the study? Why/why not?
• Do the data raise any new questions that need further investigation? Explain