research publication critiques
DUE: September 12
Read at least two articles in the 1998 UNCA Journal of Undergraduate Research. Critique one of them. This critique must be typed and include the sections listed below. Title each section.
1) article information: title, author, etc.
2) abstract (Is there one? Does it describe the article?)
3) title (Does the paper have an appropriate and well composed title?)
4) introduction (Does it adequately introduce the paper? Does the author include appropriate background (theoretical foundation) for the research?)
5) methodology (Is the author clear about how the research was conducted?)
6) organization (Is paper organized? Do the writer=s points Aflow@ in a logical manner? Are the sections appropriate?)
7) if applicable: diagrams, figures, tables (Are they understandable? If the paper does not have illustrations, should it have? Where?)
8) conclusions (Can you see the point of the paper?)
9) summary/ending (Does the author provide an understandable summary near the end of the paper?)
10) any other comments about the paper
Use the list from PART A to report your critique of a research article published in a "professional" journal in your discipline.
Write a summary of what you learned from doing these critiques. Be specific. What have you learned you should and should not do in the research papers you write?