Journal Article Review Guidelines
The purpose of this writing exercise is for you to learn to seek out information
and to write an evaluative review of a journal article in furtherance of the development of
your research paper.
The article should be from a refereed (peer-reviewed) journal, (i.e. Utopian
Studies, Nineteenth Century Literature, etc.) even if that material is found online. The
article you choose must be related to a text that we’ve read/discussed thus far in the
course (Utopia, The Time Machine, Looking Backward, Vachel Lindsay (The Village
Improvement Parade, “The Voice of the Man Impatient With Visions and Utopias, etc.)
You must have your article approved by me before you review it. This will be
done via a Discussion Board on Canvas. (I will start a thread for this purpose.) Post the
citation of your article, in MLA format. Post a link to where you found the article, too—
either a permalink from the Maryville Library or a link to the online journal where it was
found. You must choose an article and post it for approval by 11:59 p.m. on
Monday, 9/30. I will approve the article via Canvas.
Your written review will be approximately 3-5 double-spaced typed pages. It should
be uploaded to Canvas by 11:59 p.m. on 10/7.
The article you are reviewing should be at least 10-15 pages in length. Articles in
refereed journals are sometimes 20 pages or longer. Do not avoid long articles simply
because they are long. You will do yourself a disservice if you deliberately look only for
short articles, because that attitude fosters intellectual mediocrity. It is understood that
these page guidelines are somewhat arbitrary. It may take a great deal of intellectual
effort to read and understand a brief document. However, it is important to your
development as professionals to give yourself time to begin to master the challenging
technical material in your area of interest.
It is important for you to learn how to write about another author's work. That is
different from writing down what the author wrote. Your article review should not read
as though you are the author of the article or material. You are the reviewer of the article,
and your paper should read as a review. When you proofread your review, if it reads as
though you are the author of the article or material, your style of writing is not
appropriate. The reader should clearly understand the difference between the author's
contribution and your presentation and interpretation of that contribution. Under no
circumstance should you copy material from an article and represent it as your own work.
If you need to quote briefly from an article to make a point (and you will), be sure to put
the quotation in quotation marks, and give the page number of the quote.
Here are several guidelines to help you compose your journal article review.
1
Review Guidelines
1. Give the citation of the article in MLA format at the top of your paper. This will
serve as your title. Read your article thoroughly at least twice, highlighting key
sections or ideas. Look up any confusing terminology. Find out some basic facts
about the article’s author—are they an expert in this field? Where do they
teach/research? Have they published a book on the subject?
2. Write an introductory paragraph that tells the reader that you intend to review a
scholarly article in your essay. Tell the reader the reason why you selected the
particular article to review. (This may involve some exploratory remarks about
what appeals to you about the primary text being dealt with; your plans for your
final research paper; your interest in a particular critical lens; etc.) Many students
still leave this out, so make sure that you do this to prepare the reader for what is
to follow in your paper. “It was the first one I found” is not a valid reason for
selecting an article to review.
3. Make an effort to cover the following points. You may require more than one
paragraph to cover them.
o State the overall purpose of the paper. What is the author’s thesis?
o What new ideas or information were communicated in the article?
o Why was it important to publish these ideas? (The “so what” factor)
o Who is the author’s intended audience? (Someone unfamiliar with the
texts at hand? An expert in the field? A colleague? A student?)
4. The section about research methodology is critical to your review. These
questions are meant to hone your critical thinking skills.
o What methods did the author use to reach conclusions? (i.e. close reading,
historical context, comparison, etc.)
o Which critical lens(es) did the author employ in his/her analysis? What
evidence do you have that supports your observation?
o What was the author’s primary text(s)?
o What kinds of secondary texts did the author use? To what end?
o Which fellow critics does the author agree with? (“friends”)
o Disagree with? (“enemies”)
2
5. Give your impressions of the usefulness of the article. Give reasons for your
opinions. Write about your opinions of the strengths and weaknesses of the
article.
o In your opinion, what were the strengths and weaknesses of the article? Be
sure to think about your impressions and the reasons for them. “She used
too many big words” is not a valid criticism of an academic article.
o Are the conclusions valid? Do you agree with the conclusions? Why or
why not?
o How might you see yourself using this article to support an argument of
your own? Or, if you don’t agree, how would you argue against this
article’s claims?
6. Write a conclusion paragraph that briefly tells the reader what you wrote about in
your essay and your overall findings. A conclusion paragraph provides
intellectual closure for the reader. Some students still leave this out. Don't leave it
out. There is some redundancy in a conclusion paragraph, but it still is essential to
provide closure in a skillfully written essay.
7. Carefully proofread your work before submitting it. Spelling errors, run-on
sentences, broken English, punctuation errors, misused words, and other mistakes
will result in point deductions.
Other Considerations
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Use double spacing.
Use 12 point Times New Roman.
Indent your paragraphs.
Left justify the text.
Use page numbers.
Provide a standard heading.
Grading Rubric
Here are the criteria I will be using to grade your journal article review. It is worth 100
points.
Length/Formatting: 10 points
Content (inclusion of all elements listed above, deadlines met): 50 points
3
Thoughtful and Thorough Support of Personal Opinion of Article’s Value: 30 points
Spelling/Grammar/Syntax: 10 points
4