What is critiquing?

Critiquing shares a root with the word “criticize”. Most of us tend to think of
criticism as being negative or mean, but in the
academic sense, doing a critique is not the least bit
negative. Rather, it’s a constructive way to better
explore and understand the material we are working with. The word means “to
evaluate”.
Through our critique, we do a deep evaluation of a text. A critique is a genre of academic writing that
briefly summarizes and critically a work or concept. When we critique a text, we interrogate it. When we
critique, our own opinions and ideas become part of our textual analysis. We question the text, we argue
with it, and we examine into it for deeper meanings.

Writing a critique helps us to develop a knowledge of the work’s subject area, an

understanding of the work’s purpose, intended audience, development of argument,
structure of evidence or creative style; and, a recognition of the strengths and
weaknesses of the work. Always remember that a critical evaluation does not simply
highlight negative impressions. It should deconstruct the work and identify both
strengths and weaknesses. It should examine the work and evaluate its success, in
light of its purpose.
Approaches in Critiquing Academic Texts
A thorough analysis of the text is important to write a good paper. Remember the
judgment you make about a work will reflect your own values, biases, and experience;
however, you must respect the author's words and intentions as presented in the
work. Do not analyze a work in terms of what you would like to see; analyze it in terms
of what you actually observe. Remember to clearly separate your assumptions from
the author's assumptions.
The following are the approaches in critiquing academic works:
Formalism. It is a critical approach in which the text under discussion is considered
primarily in the meaning and the implications of the words. In practice, the critics
have been very responsible to the meaning and themes of the work in question, rather
than adopting a linguistic approach.
Below are the guide questions when critiquing a text using formalism approach:
• How are the various parts of the work interconnected?
• How is the work structured? What techniques, styles, media were used in the work?
Are they effective in portraying the purpose?
• How does the author's choice of point of view affect the reader's understanding and
feelings about the text?
• Does the work enhance understanding of key ideas? Does the work engage (or fail to
engage) with key concepts or other works in its discipline?
• What types of evidence or persuasion are used? Has evidence been interpreted fairly?
• What lesson does the author want me (the reader) to learn about life?

Feminism. This approach is concerned with the ways in which the text reinforces or
undermines the economic, political, social, and psychological oppression of women.
This looks at how aspects of our culture are inherently patriarchal (male dominated)
and aims to expose misogyny in writing about women, which can take explicit and
implicit.
forms. Feminist criticism is also concerned with less obvious forms of marginalization
and its ultimate goal is to change the world by promoting gender equality.
In critiquing a text using feminism approach, the following guide questions are
considered:
• How is the life of women portrayed in the work?

• Is the form and content of the work influenced by the writer’s gender?
• Does the work challenge or affirm traditional views of women?
• What does the work say about women's creativity?
• What does the work reveal about the actions of patriarchy?
• How do the images of women in the work reflect patriarchal social forces that have
impeded women’s efforts to achieve full equality with men?
• What marital expectations are imposed in the work? What effect do these
expectations have?
• What role does the work play in terms of women's history and tradition?
How to Write a Critique
Before you start writing, it is important to have a thorough understanding of the work
that will be critiqued. Here are the tips:
1. Study the work under discussion.
2. Take notes on key parts of the work.
3. Develop an understanding of the main argument or purpose being expressed in the
work.
4. Consider how the work relates to a broader issue or context.

There are a variety of ways to structure a critique. Like an essay, a critique uses an
academic writing style and has a clear structure, that is, an introduction, body and
conclusion.

Typically, the introduction is short (less than 10% of the critique length) and you
should describe the main argument or purpose of the work in here. Explain the
context in which the work was created. This could include the social or political
context, the place of the work in a creative or academic tradition, or the relationship
between the work and the creator’s life experience. Briefly summarize the main points
and objectively describe how the author portrays these by using techniques, styles,
media, characters or symbols.
Then, the body of the critique should give a systematic and detailed assessment of the
different elements of the work, evaluating how well the author was able to achieve the
purpose through these. For instance, you would assess the text structure and
characterization; an assessment of a painting would look at composition, brush
strokes, color and light; a critique of a research project would look at subject selection,
design of the experiment, analysis of data and conclusions. Thus, the body should
include a summary of the work and a detailed evaluation. It should present the gauge
of usefulness or impact of the work in a particular field.
The last part is the conclusion. This is usually a very brief paragraph, which includes
a statement indicating the overall evaluation of the work; a summary of the key
reasons, identified during the critical evaluation, why this evaluation was formed; or,
recommendations for improvement on the work.
 Let’s take a look at the campaign poster below and understand how the work is evaluated using
formalism and feminism approaches.

Sample Critique Formalism Feminism Approach

Approach
The anti-smoking campaign poster is The anti – smoking campaign poster
designed to appeal to the smokers to quit concerns with the harmful effects of
from smoking. The poster works against smoking. This is designed to create an
the allure of cigarettes and upsets the association between the smoking behavior
routine presence in popular smoking and its ultimate consequences.
culture. In the poster, the man portrays the role of
This poster uses negative images the smoker and a woman’s image is used
concerning bad effects of the cigarette. It to portray the effects of cigarette use. The
sends messages that using tobacco may idea of using of woman’s image as
harm other people. It emphasizes that suggests that women are more prone to
second- hand smoke harms non-smokers the effect of cigarette use than men. Thus,
due to person who use tobacco. On the in this element, the poster contradicts to
other element of the poster, this uses what is really the culture of smoking in
sophisticated graphic design techniques to the society. As the study shown, about 35
encourage the viewer to stop smoking. The percent of men in developed countries
entire image of the woman metaphorically smoke (Mackay and Eriksen, 2002). For
illustrates the need to "break the habit" of women, the pattern is reversed, about 9
smoking, a common mantra in smoking percent in developed countries smoke. The
cessation campaigns. While the tagline beauty of the woman countenance attracts
compliments to the woman’s image, it also audience specially men. This really
strikes a strong message why is there a supports the idea of marketing which
need to quit from smoking. women images are used to attract men
Reflecting the style and polish of this clients.
campaign, this poster is significant Indeed, this campaign poster does not
because it provides a graphic illustration only effectively deliver the message, but it
for the behavioral change it advocates. also shows the attributable role of women
The poster calls for control of nicotine in the society as a driving force to
addiction, offering a liberating and motivate smokers from quitting cigarette
implicitly empowering outcome. use.
Your critique should be written in academic style and logically presented. Order your
ideas into paragraphs. Start with the broad impressions first and then move into the
details of the technical elements. For shorter critiques, you may discuss the strengths
of the works, and then the weaknesses. In longer critiques, you may wish to discuss
the positive and negative of each key question in individual paragraphs.
To support your critique, provide evidence from the work itself, such as a quote or example, and you
should also cite evidence from related sources. Explain how this evidence supports your evaluation of
the work.

CRITIQUE WRITING
  A critique of an article is the objective analysis of a literary or scientific piece,
with emphasis on whether or not the author supported the main points with
reasonable and applicable arguments based on facts. It's easy to get caught up
it. A good critique demonstrates your impressions of the article, while providing
ample evidence to back up your impressions. As the critic, take time to read
carefully and thoughtfully, prepare your arguments and evidence, and write
clearly and cogently.

 In writing a critique, it necessitates some in simply summarizing the points of

an article without truly analyzing and challenging active reading which
constitutes the following: read through the article once to get the main idea;
mark up the text as you read through it again; create a legend for your
markings; take some longer notes during subsequent readings; and develop a
preliminary concept for your critique.

 A critique is a genre of academic writing that briefly summarizes and critically

evaluates a work or concept. Critiques can be used to carefully analyze a variety
of works such as: Creative works – novels, exhibits, film, images, and academic
texts.

Guidelines in Writing the Three-body Paragraphs

1. Organize your critical evaluations. These should form the bulk of your critique
and should be a minimum of three paragraphs. You can choose to organize your
critique differently depending on how you want to approach your critique. However,
you should devote a paragraph to each main topic, using the rest of the steps in this
section to develop each paragraph's discussion.
• • If you have three clear points about your work, you can organize each
paragraph by point. For example, if you are analyzing a painting, you might critique
the painter’s use of color, light, and composition, devoting a paragraph to each topic.
• • If you have more than three points about your work, you can organize each
paragraph thematically. For example, if you are critiquing a movie and want to talk
about its treatment of women, its screenwriting, its pacing, its use of color and
framing, and its acting, you might think about the broader categories that these points
fall into, such as “production” (pacing, color and framing, screenwriting), “social
commentary” (treatment of women), and “performance” (acting).
• • Alternatively, you could organize your critique by “strengths” and
“weaknesses.” The aim of a critique is not merely to criticize, but to point out what the
creator or author has done well and what s/he has not.

2. Discuss the techniques or styles used in the work. This is particularly important
when evaluating creative works, such as literature, art, and music. Offer your
evaluation of how effectively the creator uses the techniques or stylistic choices she/he
has made to promote her/his purpose.
• • For example, if you are critiquing a song, you could consider how the beat or
tone of the music supports or detracts from the lyrics.
• • For a research article or a media item, you may want to consider questions
such as how the data was gathered in an experiment, or what method a journalist
used to discover information.
3. Explain what types of evidence or argument are used. This may be more useful
in a critique of a media item or research article. Consider how the author of the work
uses other sources, their own evidence, and logic in their arguments.
• • Does the author use primary sources (e.g., historical documents, interviews,
etc.)? Secondary sources? Quantitative data? Qualitative data? Are these sources
appropriate for the argument?
• • Has evidence been presented fairly, without distortion or selectivity?
• • Does the argument proceed logically from the evidence used?

4. Determine what the work adds to the understanding of its topic. There are a
couple of ways to approach this. Your goal in this section should be an assessment of
the overall usefulness of the work.
• • If the work is a creative work, consider whether it presents its ideas in an
original or interesting way. You can also consider whether it engages with key
concepts or ideas in popular culture or society.
• • If the work is a research article, you can consider whether the work enhances
your understanding of a particular theory or idea in its discipline. Research articles
often include a section on “further research” where they discuss the contributions
their research has made and what future contributions they hope to make.

5. Use examples for each point. Back up your assertions with evidence from your
text or work that support your claim about each point. For example, if you were
critiquing a novel and found the writing dull, you might provide a particularly boring
quotation as evidence, and then explain why the writing did not appeal to you.
Writing the Conclusion Paragraph and References
1. State your overall assessment of the work. This should be a statement about the
overall success of the work. Did it accomplish the creator’s goal or purpose? If so, how
did it achieve this success? If not, what went wrong?
2. Summarize your key reasons for this assessment. While you should have already
presented evidence for your claims in the body paragraphs, you should provide a short
restatement of your key reasons here. This could be as simple as one sentence that
says something like “Because of the researcher’s attention to detail, careful
methodology, and clear description of the results, this article provides a useful
overview of topic X.”
3. Recommend any areas for improvement, if appropriate. Your assignment or
prompt will usually say if recommendations are appropriate for the critique. This
element seems to be more common when critiquing a research article or media item,
but it could also apply to critiques of creative works as well.
4. Provide a list of references. How you present these will depend on your instructor’s preferences and
the style (MLA, APA, Chicago, etc.) that is appropriate to your discipline. However, you format this list,
you should always include all the sources you used in your critique.

Critiquing Strategies
Writing the Introductory Paragraph:
1. Give the fundamental data about the work. The primary section is first
experience with the work, and you should give the fundamental data about it in this
passage. This data will incorporate the creator's or maker's name(s), the title of the
work, and the date of its creation.
• • For a work of fiction or a distributed work of news-casting or exploration, this
data is typically accessible in the distribution itself, for example, on the copyright page
for a novel.
• • For a film, you may wish to allude to a source, for example, IMDb to get the
data you need. In case you're investigating an acclaimed work of art, a reference book
of craftsmanship would be a decent spot to discover data on the maker, the title, and
significant dates (date of creation, date of presentation, and so on.).

2. Give a setting to the work. The kind of setting you give will differ dependent on
what sort of work you're assessing. You should expect to give the peruser some
comprehension of what gives the maker or creator may have been reacting to, however
you don't have to give a thorough history. Simply give your peruser enough data.
• For model, in case you're surveying an exploration article in technical disciplines, a
speedy review of its place in the scholastic conversation could be valuable (e.g.,
"Educator X's work on natural product flies is important for a long examination
custom on Blah.")
• If you are assessing a painting, giving some short data on where it was first shown,
for whom it was painted, and so forth., would be helpful.
• If you are evaluating a novel, it could be acceptable to discuss what class or artistic
convention the novel is composed inside (e.g., dream, High Modernism, sentiment).
You may likewise need to incorporate insights regarding the creator's history that
appear to be especially pertinent to your scrutinize.
• For a media thing, for example, a news story, think about the social and additionally
political setting of the news source the thing originated from (e.g., Fox News, BBC, and
so forth.) and of the issue it is managing (e.g., migration, instruction, amusement).
3. Sum up the maker's objective or reason in making the work. This component
ought to consider what the proposal or motivation behind the work is. In some cases,
this might be obviously expressed, for example, in an examination article. For different
writings or inventive works, you may need to define what you accept to be the maker's
objective or reason yourself.
• The writers of exploration articles will frequently state obviously in the theoretical and in the prologue
to their work what they are examining, regularly with sentences that state something like this: "In this
article we give another system to breaking down X and contend that it is better than past techniques as a
result of reason An and reason B.

• For inventive works, you might not have an explanation from the creator or maker
about their motivation, however you can frequently deduce one from the setting the
work involves. For instance, in the event that you were looking at the film The Shining,
you may contend that the producer Stanley's Kubrick will likely point out the helpless
treatment of Native Americans on account of the solid Native American topics present
in the film. You could then present the reasons why you believe that in the remainder
of the paper.
4. Sum up the central matters of the work. Depict, quickly, how the central matters
are made. For instance, you may discuss a work's utilization of characters or imagery
to portray its point about society, or you could discuss the exploration questions and
theories in a diary article.
• For model, on the off chance that you were expounding on The Shining, you could
sum up the primary concerns thusly: "Stanley Kubrick utilizes solid imagery, for
example, the position of the film's inn on an Indian cemetery, the naming of the inn
"Disregard," and the steady nearness of Native American fine art and portrayal, to
point out watchers' America's treatment of Native Americans ever."
5. Present your underlying evaluation. This will fill in as your proposition
explanation and should make a case about the work's overall adequacy and additional
handiness. Is your assessment going to be essentially certain, negative, or blended?
• For an examination article, you will likely need to concentrate your proposition on
whether the exploration and conversation upheld the writers' cases. You may likewise
wish to study the exploration technique, if there are clear blemishes present.
• For imaginative works, consider what you accept the creator or maker's objective was
in making the work, and afterward present your appraisal of whether they
accomplished that objective.
Social occasion Evidence:
1. Question whether the essayist's general message is sensible. Test the theory
and contrast it with other comparative models.
• Even if a creator has done research and cited regarded specialists, investigate the
message for its reasonableness and certifiable application.
• Examine the creator's acquaintance and end with ensure they coordinate as
persuading and reciprocal components.
2. Quest the article for any inclinations, regardless of whether deliberate or
unexpected. In the event that the writer has anything to pick up from the ends
exhibited in the article, it's conceivable that some predisposition has been illustrated.
• Bias incorporates disregarding opposite proof, misusing proof to cause ends to seem
not quite the same as they are, and granting one's own, unwarranted feelings on a
book. All around sourced assessments are consummately OK, however those without
scholarly help have the right to be met with an incredulous eye.
• Bias can likewise originate from a position of partiality. Note any inclinations
identified with race, nationality, sexual orientation, class, or governmental issues.
3. Think about the creator's translations of different writings. The writer makes a
case about another's work, perused the first work and check whether you concur with
the examination given in the article. Complete the understanding is clearly redundant
or even likely; yet consider whether the creator's translation is solid.
• Note any irregularities between your understanding of a book and the writer's
translation of a book. Such clash may prove to be fruitful when it comes time to
compose your audit.
• See what different researchers need to state. In the event that few researchers from
assorted foundations have a similar supposition about a content, that assessment
ought to be given more weight than a contention with little help.
4. Notice if the creator refers to deceitful proof. Does the creator refer to an
immaterial book from fifty years prior that no longer holds weight in the current
order? If the author cites unreliable sources, is greatly diminishes the credibility of the
article.
5. Don't totally overlook expressive components. The substance of the article is
likely the most significant angle for your abstract investigates, yet don't disregard the
formal and additionally scholarly methods that the writer may utilize. Focus on dark
word decisions and the writer's tone all through the article. This is especially useful for
non-logical articles managing parts of writing, for instance.
• These parts of an article can uncover further issues in the bigger contention. For
instance, an article written in a warmed, overeager tone may be overlooking or
declining to draw in with opposing proof in its examination.
• Always look into the meanings of new words. A word's definition can totally change
the significance of a sentence, particularly if a specific word has a few definitions.
Question why a creator picked one specific word rather than another, and it may
uncover something about their contention.
• These parts of an article can uncover further issues in the bigger contention. For
instance, an article written in a warmed, exuberant tone may be overlooking or
declining to draw in with opposing proof in its investigation.
• Always look into the meanings of new words. A word's definition can totally change
the significance of a sentence, particularly if a specific word has a few definitions.
Question why a creator picked one specific word rather than another, and it may
uncover something about their contention. unwarranted feelings on a book. All around
sourced assessments are consummately OK, however those without scholarly help
have the right to be met with an incredulous eye.
• Bias can likewise originate from a position of partiality. Note any inclinations
identified with race, nationality, sexual orientation, class, or governmental issues.
3. Think about the creator's translations of different writings. The writer makes a
case about another's work, perused the first work and check whether you concur with
the examination given in the article. Complete the understanding is clearly redundant
or even likely; yet consider whether the creator's translation is solid.
• Note any irregularities between your understanding of a book and the writer's
translation of a book. Such clash may prove to be fruitful when it comes time to
compose your audit.
• See what different researchers need to state. In the event that few researchers from
assorted foundations have a similar supposition about a content, that assessment
ought to be given more weight than a contention with little help.
4. Notice if the creator refers to deceitful proof. Does the creator refer to an
immaterial book from fifty years prior that no longer holds weight in the current
order? If the author cites unreliable sources, is greatly diminishes the credibility of the
article.
5. Don't totally overlook expressive components. The substance of the article is
likely the most significant angle for your abstract investigates, yet don't disregard the
formal and additionally scholarly methods that the writer may utilize. Focus on dark
word decisions and the writer's tone all through the article. This is especially useful for
non-logical articles managing parts of writing, for instance.
• These parts of an article can uncover further issues in the bigger contention. For
instance, an article written in a warmed, overeager tone may be overlooking or
declining to draw in with opposing proof in its examination.
• Always look into the meanings of new words. A word's definition can totally change
the significance of a sentence, particularly if a specific word has a few definitions.
Question why a creator picked one specific word rather than another, and it may
uncover something about their contention.
• These parts of an article can uncover further issues in the bigger contention. For
instance, an article written in a warmed, exuberant tone may be overlooking or
declining to draw in with opposing proof in its investigation.
• Always look into the meanings of new words. A word's definition can totally change the significance of
a sentence, particularly if a specific word has a few definitions. Question why a creator picked one
specific word rather than another, and it may uncover something about their contention.
6. Question research techniques in logical articles. If critiquing an article
containing a scientific theory, be sure to evaluate the research methods behind the
experiment. Ask yourself inquiries, for example, these:
• Does the creator detail the strategies completely?
• Is the examination planned without significant blemishes?
• Is there an issue with the example size?
• Was a benchmark group made for correlation?
• Are all of the statistical calculations, correct?
• Would another gathering have the option to copy the test being referred to?
• Is the test noteworthy for that specific field of study?
7. Burrow profound. Utilize your current information, taught assessments, and any
exploration you can assemble to either uphold or differ with the writer's article. Give
exact contentions to help your position.
• While there is nothing of the sort as an excessive amount of good proof, over-
sourcing can likewise be an issue if your contentions become dull. Ensure each source
gives something remarkable to your investigate.
• Additionally, don't permit your utilization of sources to swarm out your own
assessments and contentions.
8. Recall that a study doesn't need to be altogether certain or negative. An
author scholarly evaluates and never differs with the creator; rather, they expand
upon or confuse the creator's thought with extra proof.
• If you do concur completely with the creator, in this way, try to expand upon the
contention either by giving extra proof or entangling the creator's thought.
• You can give conflicting proof to a contention while as yet keeping up that a specific
perspective is the right one.
• Don't "relax" on the creator because of misinformed sympathy; yet neither should
you be unnecessarily negative trying to demonstrate your basic bona fides. Powerfully
express your solid purposes of understanding and difference.
Formatting Your Critique
1. Begin with an introduction that outlines your argument. The introduction should be no more
than two paragraphs long and should lay out the basic framework for your critique. Start off by
noting where the article in question fails or succeeds most dramatically and why.

• Be sure to include the name of the author, article title, the journal or
publication the article appeared in, the publication date, and a statement about the
focus and/or thesis of the article in your introductory paragraph(s).
• The introduction is not the place to provide evidence for your opinions. Your
evidence will go in the body paragraphs of your critique.
• Be bold in your introductory assertions and make your purpose clear right off
the bat. Skirting around or not fully committing to an argument lessens your
credibility.
• Begin each body paragraph with a topic sentence that summarizes the content
of the paragraph to come. Don't feel like you have to condense the entire paragraph
into the topic sentence, however. This is purely a place to transition into a new or
somehow different idea.
• End each body paragraph with a transitional sentence that hints at, though
does not explicitly state, the content of the paragraph coming next. For example, you
might write, "While John Doe shows that the number of cases of childhood obesity is
rising at a remarkable rate in the U.S., there are instances of dropping obesity rates in
some American cities." Your next paragraph would then provide specific examples of
these anomalous cities that you just claimed exist.
• You might, for instance, utilize a counterargument, in which you anticipate a
critique of your critique and reaffirm your position. Use phrases like “Admittedly,” “It
is true that,” or “One might object here” to identify the counterargument. Then,
answer these possible counters and turn back to your strengthened argument with
“but,” “yet,” or “nevertheless.”
• While writing “This piece of garbage is an insult to historians everywhere”
might garner attention, “This article falls short of the standards for scholarship in this
area of historical study” is more likely to be taken seriously by readers.
• Are there broad implications for the field of study being assessed, or does your
critique simply attempt to debunk the messy work of another scholar?
• Do your best to make a lasting mark on the reader in the conclusion by using
assertive language to demonstrate the importance of your work: “Challenging

2. Provide evidence for your argument in the body paragraphs of your critique.
Each body paragraph should detail a new idea or further expand your argument in a
new direction.
3. Complicate your argument near the end of the critique. No matter how solid
your argument is, there is always at least one dramatic way in which you can provide
a final twist or take your argument one step further and suggest possible implications.
Do this in the final body paragraph before your conclusion to leave the reader with a
final, memorable argument.
4. Present your arguments in a well-reasoned, objective tone. Avoid writing in an
overzealous or obnoxiously passionate tone, as doing so can be a turn-off to many
readers. Let your passion shine through in your ability to do thorough research and
articulate yourself effectively.
5. Conclude your critique by summarizing your argument and suggesting
potential implications. It is important to provide a recap of your main points
throughout the article, but you also need to tell the reader what your critique means
for the discipline at large.

• Are there broad implications for the field of study being assessed, or does your
critique simply attempt to debunk the messy work of another scholar?
• Do your best to make a lasting mark on the reader in the conclusion by using
assertive language to demonstrate the importance of your work: “Challenging

the claims of such a distinguished scholar is no easy or enjoyable task, but it is

a task we all must agree to do for our generation and those to follow.”