An article is a kind of adjective which is always used with and gives some information about a noun. .
Your lecturer seems to have set you a different question, the classic question for an assignment, viz: How does a reader go about preparing a critical review of a research paper? I suggest that you edit your question and its expansion to make sense if you want someone to help you with your assignment!
By the way, your lecturer will not let you cut-shake-and-paste from Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_%28grammar%29
Your lecturer seems to have set you a different question, the classic question for an assignment, viz: How does a reader go about preparing a critical review of a research paper? I suggest that you edit your question and its expansion to make sense if you want someone to help you with your assignment!
By the way, your lecturer will not let you cut-shake-and-paste from Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_%28grammar%29
Marcello, are you talking about the critical analysis of a research paper? your question is confusing
To criticize a journal article, I have to read it at least 2 times. In the 3rd reading, I write with a pencil what I judge as mistakes in both the science & the language. If there is ambiguous statement or abbreviation, then I put a question mark next to it. I go to references in case there are topics unknown for me. I check the reference given by the author to ensure that they are correct & relevant. This is what I did when I was asked to review articles sent for publication in our university's science journal.
Dear Marcelo,
What is your question? To evaluate a paper as a reviewer or as a target reader should/want (to) do it?
Assuming the question is "how to provide critique on a journal article?", following are my approach for sharing:
1) Based on the article's title, try to picture in my mind what is the scope & boundary of the research / study
2) I will read through the abstract and evaluate the abstract is matching the article's title
3) I will go to middle section to search for conceptual framework / research model with hypotheses if any
4) Go through introduction section to scan for problem statement, research objective(s) and research question(s)
5) Go through the conclusion section to evaluate what are the summarized findings, knowledge contribution, limitations & future research. After above #2 - #5, I should have a grasp on the research scope & boundary
6) Then I will take a look on the journal's marking criteria so that I know what to focus on to provide feedback & how to score according to sections e.g. general comment, abstract, introduction, adequacy of literature review, methodology, results, discussion, bibliography / references, how well the paper integrated with current research, overall presentation styles etc. Different journals might have different marking criteria.
5) I will read through the article in details, may need more than 1 round to cover literature review, methodology, results, findings and discussions. I will also pen down my questions and comments when reading through the articles. I will also do my own checking to verify the remarks, concepts and references cited are correct. After completing the article reading, I will check those questions I'd posed have been answered satisfactorily.
6) Fill up the reviewer comment file and email back to journal editor.
Dear Marcelo,
Please have a look at the following articles.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science
- Sociology