The name of the author
Instructions
Review the Overview of Research on ACO Performance and select one research study.
Submit an article critique of your selection.
Article Critique Instructions
Formatting Article Critique
Length: Your paper should be three-to-four (3–4) double-spaced pages.
Format your article critique by starting with the following:
The name of the author
The title of the article
The title of the journal, volume number, date, month, and page numbers in APA format
Brief statement of the issue or problem the article addresses
Brief statement of the purpose, hypothesis, and methods
Major conclusions
Compose Your Critique
After the opening summary, compose your critique. For this course, your critique needs to address the 1) technical components of the article and 2) your analysis and opinion of the article.
The technical components must include your assessment of:
The accuracy of the title
The specificity and accuracy of the abstract
The clarity of the purpose
The relevance and clarity of the literature review
Absence or error in facts or interpretation (This last item requires you to look at some of the author’s cited references when they seem to be in error or misused.)
Your analysis and opinion are the bulk of this critique and must address:
The relevancy of the topic and why it is important (or not)
Are the author’s assumptions stated clearly and located helpfully on the article?
Does the methodology seem appropriate for the issue and hypotheses? Could the work be replicated based on the description?
Is the data presented clearly, and is it error free? You do not need to do in-depth calculations, but evaluate the integrity in tables and charts; you may catch surprising errors.
Does the author provide a balanced focus on the most important and relevant ideas or weaken the article by over- or under-emphasizing certain ideas?
Does the author write clearly? Are there ambiguous statements that should have been clarified or more fully supported with evidence?
Does the author seem biased or have clear evidence of objectivity?
Are there gaps in the author’s work and conclusions that you believe warrant follow up?
School of Health Sciences: Article Critique Rubric
Article Critique – 100 PointsCriteriaExceeds ExpectationsMeets ExpectationsNeeds ImprovementInadequateTotal PointsIntroductory Summary:
The name of the author
The title of the article
The title of the journal with required detail
Brief statement of the issue/problem
Brief statement of the purpose, hypothesis, methods
Major conclusions
All elements incorporated fully and accurately and submitted on time
50 pointsFive to six elements incorporated fully and accurately
44 pointsThree to four elements incorporated but with multiple errors
39 pointsOne to two elements incorporated fully and accurately
34 points50 pointsTechnical AssessmentIncluded all five elements and accurately assessed each
20 pointsIncluded four elements and accurately assessed each
17 pointsIncluded four to five elements but did not accurately assess all
15 pointsIncluded two to four elements with limited accuracy
13 points20 pointsAnalytic AssessmentRobust analysis using course concepts and materials accurately
20 pointsPartial analysis using course concepts and materials accurately
17 pointsMinimal analysis with limited accurate use of course concepts and materials
15 pointsSuperficial analysis with limited integration of course concepts and materials
13 points20 pointsGrammar, Spelling, and FormattingWithout grammar, spelling, or formatting errors
10 pointsOne to two grammar, spelling, or formatting errors
8 pointsThree to four grammar, spelling, or formatting errors
7 pointsFive or more grammar, spelling, or formatting errors
6 points10 pointsTotal points100
