CRITIQUE

PAPER
 CRITIQUE
•Is a formal analysis and
evaluation of a text,
production, or performance
-- either one's own(a self-
critique) or someone else's.
Critiques differ from
reviews in that critiques
offer more depth to
their analysis.
 WHAT IS A CRITIQUE?
•A critique is a paper
that gives a critical
assessment of a book
or article.
•A critique is a systematic
analysis of a piece of
literature that discusses its
validity and evaluates its
worth.
•Its main purpose is not
informational, but
analytic and
persuasive.
•In analyzing the content and
context within which the
book(or article) was written,
the writer of the critique
argues whether it is worth
reading or not.
 PARTS OF A CRITIQUE PAPER
1. Introduction- Begin your
paper by describing the
journal article and the
authors you are critiquing.
Provide the main
hypothesis or thesis of the
paper and explain why
you think the
information is relevant.
2. Thesis Statement- The
final part of your
introduction should
include your thesis
statement.
Your thesis should
briefly sum up the
main points of your
critique.
3. Article summary-
Provide a brief summary
of the article, outlining
the main points, results
and discussion.
Be careful not to
get too bogged
down by your
summary.
Remember, this section of
your paper should
highlight the main points
of the article you are
critiquing.
Don’t feel obliged to
summarize each
little detail of the
main paper.
Focus instead on
giving the reader an
overall idea of the
content of the article.
4. Your Analysis- In this
section, you should
provide your critique
of the article.
Describe any problems
you had with the
authors premise,
methods, or conclusions.
Your critique might focus on
problems with the authors
argument, presentation or on
information, and alternatives
that have been overlooked.
Organized your paper
carefully and be careful
not to jump around from
one argument to the
next.
Argue one
point at a time.
Doing this will ensure
that your paper flow’s
well and is easy to
read.
5. Conclusion- Your critique
paper should end with a
overview of the articles
argument, your conclusions
and your reactions.
 Introduction
•Start your critique with
giving sentences the
following information:
Author’s name
Book/Article title and
source
Author’s thesis statement
• The article entitled “Accountability Amidst
Administrators: The Value Systems Existing Within the
Public Domain”, by Martin Law focuses on addressing
how value systems and accountability interact with the
different decisions that are made by different public
administrators. The problem that was being addressed is
related to the reality whether different public
administrators are accountability free for any decisions
made, including the various influences which may have
an influence on other decisions.
 Summary
•Summarize the author’s
purpose and main
points/evidence cited that
are used for back up.
• It is fairly clear as explained from the paper’s abstract that this issue is not simple. As a matter of
fact, the paper turns out to be confusing, especially when it comes to reading the first two
paragraphs. In those couple of paragraphs, it was explained by the author that explicit reference
on ethics systems have made it far easier to hold different individuals as accountable for the
actions the show. However, there is a conflict in a way that the moment the moral values of an
individual turns out to be different from the policies of accountability, the story becomes
difference. What make accountability even more complex is the personal motive of the
administrator, as well as the inability of an individual to potentially perceive any possible
consequences due to the decisions they acted upon.
• Aside from the standard guidelines on ethics, as well as individual morals, is the presence of social
context. Such context lay their standards down, differentiating bad and good behavior. This social
environment can definitely help a particular individual in determining a right decision from one
that is considered bad, while complicating the entire accountability idea at the same time. The
thought that public administrators are part of may tend to complicate such accountability even
further, providing another type of outlet to blame, especially if the public views a particular
decision as something that is immoral. Also, the author acknowledges that there is a tendency to
blame even the highest hierarchy level, or perhaps an official that is elected because of a decision
that is questionable.
 Conclusion
• Wrap up by:
 Stating whether you agree with the
author
 Back up your decisions by stating
your reasons
• Give a general opinion of the work
• With such a very complex issue at hand, the author only summarizes
the research by concluding that there are several times in which a
public administrator needs to violate even their personal moral
codes just because there are no explicit universal moral rules,
allowing a specific civil servant in order to meet a certain standard
of integrity. While such public administrators may be able to hide
from organizational procedures and laws, this cannot be used as an
alibi to possibly ignore accountability. There are also different ways
in which different individuals may act according to the so-called
moral standards. While all of these are explained as part of a theory,
it was still admitted by the author that there is no possible a way to
conclude about an accountability agreement as seen on a level that
is tangible.
 Writing a critique
• A good review should
provide critical
commentary on the
quality of the book
•It contains :
1. The thesis and major argument
2.The organization and style
3.The author’s values and
assumption
•The review should pay
more attention to
evaluating the strengths
and weaknesses of the
book
•It should ultimately
answer the question :
“Is this a good book/story
that would be worth
reading?”
Guide for writing a critique
•What does the book
cover?
•Who is the author and
what is his biases?
•What are the
major points that
the author makes
in the book?
•Do you think that these
ideas are correct? Do
you accept them? Why
or why not?
•Do the author’s ideas
agree with your
experience and
knowledge?
•Are there special features
about this book which
interest or disturb you, such
as unusual information or
new ways of looking at an
issue.
•If you have read other
books on the same
general topic, how this
book differ from that of
others?
 THANK
YOUUUUUUUU