Method 1: Be an active reader.
1, read through the article to get the gist. When reading an article for the first time, you should directly try to understand the whole argument that the author wants to express. Pay attention to the author's paper.
2. Read it through for the second time and mark it as you read it. Sometimes marking with a red pen helps to stand out. Ask yourself the following questions during the second reading: What are the author's papers and arguments?
What is the purpose of the author's argument to prove?
Who is the author's target audience? Is this paper effectively conveyed to the target readers?
Is the author's argument sufficiently reliable?
Is there a loophole in the author's argument?
Did the author misinterpret the argument or add personal prejudice?
Did the author get a summary view?
3. Make a legend for your mark, and use a special symbol to distinguish the puzzling, important or inconsistent parts of the text. For example, you can underline important paragraphs, circle controversial places and mark inconsistencies with asterisks.
Making a legend with a specified symbol allows you to quickly mark an article. Although it takes some time to know your own symbols, they will quickly take root in your mind, making it easier for you to read an article than not to have a legend.
4. Take notes during the second or third reading. In addition to marking symbols, it is also helpful to take notes when reading with associations. For example, you realize that an author's point of view can be overturned by a scientific research institution you have seen before, taking notes in the blank, on a separate piece of paper, or on the computer. Don't be stupid enough to think that when you start writing comments, you will still remember these initial ideas.
Take some time to write down your opinions and thoughts while reading. When you really want to put your ideas into the analysis report, you will be happy to do so.
5, put forward a general point of view. The article has been read two or three times to evaluate the author's overall argument. Record your initial reaction to these contents.
6. List resources where arguments can be found. Recall the literature you have read or recorded to see if it can be used to evaluate this article.
Method 2: Collect arguments
1, think about whether the author's central meaning is logical. Verify the author's hypothesis and compare it with other similar examples. Even if the author has done some research and mentioned the names of relevant experts, it is necessary to analyze whether the information conveyed is practical and the application examples in practice.
2. Review the author's introduction and conclusion to ensure that they are consistent with the content of the argument.
3. Find out whether there is any prejudice expressed in the name of the author. If the author benefits from the conclusions expressed in the article, then some preferences may have been revealed. Preference includes contradictory arguments, unreasonable arguments so that the conclusion seems to deviate from reality, and the author's own immature views in the article. There is absolutely no problem with views with sufficient theoretical basis, but views without theoretical support need to be viewed critically.
Prejudice may also come from a certain tendency. It should be noted that prejudice may be related to race, descent, gender, class or politics.
4. Think about the author's analysis of other academic articles. If the author questions another scholar's research, look at the literature and see if you agree with the analysis mentioned in the article. Usually, readers have different understandings of other people's views. Pay attention to the difference between your understanding and the author's understanding.
Pay attention to the opinions of other scholars. If many scholars from different fields hold the same view on an article, then this view should be paid more attention to, not a view without much approval.
5. Pay attention to whether the author cites unreliable arguments. Did the author quote an irrelevant article fifty years ago, which is irrelevant in this field? If the author quotes unreliable literature, it will greatly reduce the credibility of the article.
6. Read this article carefully. The content of the article may be the most important point in writing a review, but don't ignore the format or literary skills that the author may use. Pay attention to the obscure words used by the author and the tone of the whole article. This is especially important for non-academic articles, such as literary articles. These aspects of an article can reflect many deep-seated problems of the argument. For example, an article written in a fierce or overly enthusiastic tone may ignore or resist contradictory arguments in the analysis.
Look up more dictionaries and find out the meanings of some new words. The interpretation of a word can completely change the meaning of a sentence, especially when a word has multiple interpretations. Considering why the author chooses one particular word instead of another may reflect some meanings about the argument.
7. Consider the research methods in scientific articles. If you comment on scientific theory in an article, you must evaluate the research methods included in the experiment. Ask yourself these questions: Did the author fully explain the methods used?
Are there any major flaws in the design of this study?
Is the sample size reasonable?
Is there a control group for comparison?
Are all the statistical calculations correct?
Can other researchers repeat this experiment?
Is the experiment meaningful in its specific research field?
8. Dig deep. Use existing knowledge, accepted opinions and any research results you can collect to support or oppose the author's article. Provide empirical evidence to support your point of view. Although there can't be too many arguments, if too much information is collected, the arguments will be repeated and problems will arise. Make sure that each document can provide a unique reference for the article.
In addition, don't let the collected information dilute your views and arguments.
9. Please remember that you don't need to completely agree or completely deny this review article. In fact, the most interesting thing about this kind of literary criticism is that it not only disagrees with the author's point of view, but also uses other arguments to base on or improve the author's point of view. If you completely agree with the author's point of view, you must put forward other arguments or enrich the author's point of view on this basis.
You can put forward contradictory arguments for an argument, but make sure that this particular point is correct.
Method 3: Design the structure of the article.
1. First, write a brief introduction and list your arguments. The introduction should not exceed two paragraphs and set out the basic framework of the commentary. Starting with the analysis of the most obvious advantages and disadvantages of the articles to be evaluated, this paper explores the reasons. Confirmation includes the name of the author, the title of the article, the periodical of the article, the date of publication, and the introduction of the main points and arguments of the article.
There is no need to list the arguments of your point of view in the introduction. This argument will appear in the main paragraph.
In the introduction, boldly expound your own views and immediately explain the purpose of writing. Bypassing the argument and not fully accepting it will weaken your credibility in the argument.
2. List the arguments in the main paragraph of the comment. Each major paragraph needs to contain a new point of view or expand your argument in one direction. Every major paragraph begins with a major sentence, which summarizes the main content of this paragraph. Don't think that the whole paragraph should be condensed into one main sentence. This is only used to transition to a new and all different viewpoint.
Using a turning sentence as the end of each main paragraph can imply the content of the next paragraph, although it does not need to be explicitly pointed out. For example, it can be written that although Jane Doe pointed out that the number of obese children in the United States is increasing significantly, the obesity rate in some cities in the United States is decreasing. The next paragraph can list the above-mentioned examples of cities with abnormal phenomena.
3. Enrich your argument at the end of the commentary. No matter how substantial your argument is, there is usually at least one dramatic way to make a review, or to further deepen your argument and put forward possible influences. Leave the reader with a final and unforgettable argument.
4. Express your opinions in a logical and objective tone. Avoid writing in an overly enthusiastic or offensive or irritating tone, because doing so will make many readers stay away. Put your enthusiasm into rigorous scientific research and express your views effectively.
5. Summarize your argument and put forward the possible influence, so as to end your review article. It is very important to review your main points about the original text, and you also need to tell the readers the significance of your comments in this regard. What is the wide application of this research field? Or is your commentary trying to point out another scholar's mistake?
Try to use firm and confident sentences at the conclusion, leaving a long impression on readers, which shows the importance of your work.
Warning to avoid sparing no effort to summarize the original text. It is much better to write a short comment than to write a boring summary to make up for it.
Avoid formatted comments, such as "I like it" and "poorly written". Instead, focus on the content of the original text.
Tip Unless otherwise specified in the writing specification, write a summary article in the third person and present tense. Read the format requirements before writing every time.
Check and read it at least twice before giving it to a professor, boss or publisher.
Write with a clear attitude and confidence.