How to write an article review
An article review involves an objective critique of contents and layout of a specific article. It can be drawn from journal, magazines newspapers etc. For purposes of identification, a review essay contains a heading which elucidate details of the original article. The introduction of the review should provide a brief highlight of the whole article. Subsequent paragraph should elucidate the significance of the article to the reader by outlining its purpose. In this case, the reviewer should validate the contents of the article with the existing literature and give an account on the reference it has quoted to examine whether it commensurate with the reference source. A comparison is made with other articles which have addressed the same subject to establish the similarities and differences. The content message is further scrutinized to outline how the writer have addressed the subject of discussion and it is determined if there is efforts to provide a solution by giving a break through.
The next part examines the influence the article has on readers and other writers concerning the subject of discussion, in this regard, it is determined whether it has changed the minds of other scholars to take up the ideas given by the writer, or if it has invited negative criticism. Additionally the part gives an account of the authenticity and originality of the article. In that connection, it is revealed whether the ideas are just duplicate of an already existing work or if they reflect originality or if the writer has improved on other work.
The part that follows contains personal evaluation on how the writer has applied his writing skills. In this case the first evaluation is the use of good grammar and appropriate spelling. In this case, it is established how the writer has used appropriate words to depict a certain meaning. This depends on the ability of the writer to compose his contents devoid of ambiguity and grave spelling mistakes. Further, the flow of sentences determines whether the reader will understand the message that the article is delivering to the targeted audience. The readability speed and flow of characters will be influenced by how well the sentences are organized. In this case, the reviewer ought to give his opinion on the Flow of sentences and the grammar accurateness to establish the flow and readability of the article. Further, sharpness of the writer is evaluated on how he either introduced cleaver wits and commendable bits in his writing. In this regard, the use of good combination of vocabularies is assessed and an account is given on the same.
In the final bit of review, the evaluation done is on the credibility of the article and the completeness of the information given. If for instance there is missing information according to the reviewer, he should just point out and give relevant information citing the source to justify that you have the authority to depict that the information was not included. If some of the information is misinterpreted, then it is advisable to give the correct meaning. This will help to rate the accurateness of the content given in the article; however the review should be devoid subjective opinions. Finally, the reviewer points out the value the article has added on his life. It should be noted that, a review that does not include an appreciation in the final stages is deemed as subjective hence it is a must you show that the article have substantive value.
Article Review and Article Critique mainly involve reading and understanding an article and consequently interpreting and critiquing it. Article review mainly involving highlighting and discussing on the main points of the article without giving any personal opinion or critiquing where the writer went wrong or right. A review mainly discusses the point raised in the article. On the other hand, article critique involves reading and understanding the article and then highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the article. In this case, the writer will discuss areas where the writer went wrong and give personal opinion on what could have been written.
