Article Annotation: Critique of Published Qualitative and Quantitative Research

I need to fix the highlighted notes !!! as I specifically instructed and explained everything previously the writer dont want to fix it and not helping !!!!!!

– Cite all the information

– Be accurate and back up the data

– Use the supplementary file for evidence

Dr. Avraam Papastathopoulos
Page 1 of 4
ARTICLE ANNOTATION GUIDELINES
The following guidelines will help students to understand and annotate the article critically.
Students should use these guidelines in order to present the key issues of the article and
complete the written assignment.
Article Information
Title:
Write the title of the article here. Titles will tell you a lot about the content
of the article: the geographical focus, period, subject, and, sometimes,
something about the author’s approach or interpretation (which may be
indicated by a play on words or a question mark). You can also use this
space to comment on what the title leads you to expect from the article.
Author(s): Note the authors of the paper. If you know who he or she is, then make a
note of that, too. What is the author’s discipline?
Source: Where was this article published? Note the original source of the article.
The publication it appeared in can lend or deny the material credibility.
Analysis Information
Examine the article as a whole. Try to determine something about the purpose, audience, and
content of the paper before you start reading. Look for clues in the title and/or subtitle, the
acknowledgements (if any), the first foot/end note, and the author’s biographical note (sometimes
with the article, sometimes compiled separately).
Purpose:
(0.5 points)
Why do you think the author wrote this paper? Does it seem to be refuting
someone else’s interpretation of some event or phenomenon? Is it offering
new information? You’ll usually find clues to the answer to these questions
in the first few paragraphs. That’s where authors usually try to show why
their paper is useful and worth reading.
Audience:
(0.5 points)
Who is this paper written for? Experts? The general public? Knowing who
the authors are addressing can help you decide how to approach the article.
If the authors are addressing an expert audience, then the style will likely
be more academic. There may be fewer explanations or somewhat less
background information. If the audience is a broader one, then there may be
more detail but less detailed explanations.
Subject:
(0.5 points)
What does it seem the article is about? Look at the first couple of
paragraphs; they should give you some hints. Again, refer to the title. Some
Dr. Avraam Papastathopoulos
Page 2 of 4
disciplines include an abstract that precedes the text. This will give you an
uncritical summary of the paper’s subject/content.
Sources:
(0.5 points)
Where is the author getting her or his basic information? Is it mostly from
other books or articles? Is it based on interview, archival or survey data?
Knowing where the author got the information will tell you whether the
author is looking at something new, taking a new look at something old, or
talking about something new.
Primary Details
Start reading. If the article has a labeled introduction, you should find the author’s statement of
purpose, or thesis statement, before the end of that section. You should also be able to tell what
evidence the author is going to use to support the position she or he has taken. The author may
also explain the limits on the article, the length of time, the geographic location, the extent of the
information that’s going to be used, the theories that are going to be applied. You should also be
able to tell what the author’s point of view is.
Thesis:
(0.5 points)
Write out the thesis statement as you find it in the article. It is sometimes
only one sentence; sometimes two or three. Sometimes the sentences are
separated from each other. An author might be obvious about it: “This paper
will argue. . .” or subtle, giving only a statement of his or her interpretation
followed by some indication of the evidence that will support that position.
Evidence:
(0.5 points)
Note here what evidence the author claims will be used to support her/his
argument. This question may well have been answered in the first step, by
checking the notes. Use this stop to expand your grasp of the evidence.
Limits:
(0.5 points)
Writers of articles rarely tackle big topics. There isn’t enough room to write
a history of the world or discuss big issues. Articles generally focus on a
particular event, change, person, phenomenon, or idea. It may be further
limited by a narrow geographic focus, a limited period, or being restricted
to a particular group of people. Note what limits the author places on the
article.
Point of View:
(0.5 points)
This is sometimes easy to detect; sometimes you have to feel it out by
looking at what things are described positively and what are described
negatively. Note what you learn about the author’s point of view.
Dr. Avraam Papastathopoulos
Page 3 of 4
Presentation and Argumentation
Keep reading but watch what the author is doing. This step requires that you read the article to
gain an understanding of how the author presents the evidence and makes it fit into the argument.
At this stage of the exercise, you should also take the time to look up any unfamiliar words or
concepts. Also, watch how the author switches from first explaining how the evidence supports
the argument and then to the summary. The last few paragraphs of the article should tidy up the
discussion, show how it all fits together neatly, where more research is needed, or how this article
has advanced knowledge, that is, the implications of the article.
Concepts/Words:
(0.5 points)
Use this space to note the words or concepts you had to look up. Did
the author coin his/her own terms, or use common terms in unusual
ways?
Use of Evidence:
(0.5 points)
How well did the author rely on his/her evidence? Was everything
mentioned at the outset referred to in the article? Was quoted material
used to illustrate or substantiate points? You may not have much to
say for this section, or you might notice that materials listed in the
bibliography or reference were not used in the paper.
Conclusion:
(0.5 points)
You can either write out the author’s conclusions (though they’re often
a paragraph or so long), or you can summarize where the author went
with the paper. You may refer to the thesis statement to help you phrase
your summary.
Implications:
(0.5 points)
This is where you might note what the points the author has made
might mean in a larger context. What might government officials make
of this paper? Who might find it useful? Would anyone change the way
they work, or approach an issue if they read this article? What
difference has it made for you? You might also consider why your
instructor has asked you to read this article. What new course-related
information did it contain? Was the article assigned because it
illustrated ideas or concepts covered in the course? Perhaps the author
advanced thinking in the discipline. What do you think?
Source: A Guide to Reading and Analyzing Academic Articles Amanda Graham at Yukon
College, Canada
Evaluation
Now that you’ve finished reading, consider your personal reaction to it: not only “did I like it?,”
“it was hard to read,” or “it was boring/interesting.” This, along with the work in the other steps,
is the basis for a critical evaluation of the article. Even if you don’t know anything about the topic,
you can make some judgements about the article and how well the author made her or his case.
Evaluation is a bit harder. “Evaluating” means comparing one thing to some kind of standard, that
is, other articles in the same discipline or journal as the one you’ve read. If you are not familiar
Dr. Avraam Papastathopoulos
Page 4 of 4
with those other articles, it can be hard to evaluate well. However, you can do a fairly good job of
it by considering the conventions of other, similar articles. Does this one fit the pattern? Does it
have quality, that is, does it make up to the academic standards of writing, presentation,
organization, source citation, and such?
Personal Reaction:
(1 point)
This is where you note your personal reaction to the paper. Your
comments might be one or two words, or might be longer. Remember,
too, that these notes will allow you to quickly review the article later
on. You might do well to write your future self fairly detailed notes.
Strength of Case:
(1 point)
Did the author persuade you that the point/argument she/he was
making was true, or at least convincing? Did you feel, at any time, that
the author was just hoping you’d agree? Use this space to note how
convincing you thought the article was.
Evaluation:
(1 point)
Use this space to note how good this article was compared to other
articles, either in the discipline/area, or in the same journal. It is helpful
to write pages numbers of relevant passages in the article.
Quality:
(1 point)
Use this space to record your sense of the quality of the paper. In most
published articles, the quality will be quite high. Many people
contribute to helping an author revise and refine a paper and what you
see published is rarely what the author originally wrote. There may be
some technical problems, like spelling mistakes or formatting problems
that you might note.