A Sequence for Academic Writing
Chapter 2
In a critique you are responsible for answering two
questions. What are the two questions that should
focus your response?
 When critiquing informational writing, what criteria
do you use to judge the success of the text?
 When critiquing persuasive writing, what criteria do
you use to judge the success of the text?
 The book contains a format for a critique. Explain
this format.

▪
Requires the abilities to both summarize and
evaluate a presentation and a willingness to
become involved in order to answer these
evaluative questions:
 What is the author’s purpose in
writing?
 Does he/she succeed in this purpose?
 To what extent do you agree or
disagree with the author?
▪
▪
All critical reading begins with summary.
Summary will help you clearly understand
the reading and help you identify the
author’s purpose: inform, persuade, or
entertain?
Identifying the purpose (inform,
persuade, entertain) will help you
evaluative the efficacy of her/his
presentation.
▪ Informational texts provide definitions,
describe or report on historical
background.
▪ Evaluating informative writing requires
you to assess the:
 Accuracy of Information
 Significance of Information
 Fair Interpretation of Information
▪ Evaluating persuasive writing requires
you to assess the following:
▪ Clearly defined terms: the audience
and author should agree on the
definitions of terms which frame the
argument (eg. "family values")
▪ Fair use of Information
▪ Logical Argumentation
You will need to evaluate the logic of the
argument. Logical arguments should be
governed by the principles of logic. This
means that you will need to identify and
expose instances of false logic. Instances of
false logic will impact the credibility and
validity of sources.

Emotionally Loaded Terms: Using
Emotionally charged words, words with
positive or negative connotations, to sway
the reader.
 Family values
 Abuse

Ad Hominem Argument: The writer objects
opposing views by attacking the person who
holds them.
 Name-calling

Faulty Cause and Effect: The fact the one
event precedes another in time does not
mean that the first event caused the second
event.
 Fish die in a lake—the cause is likely
attributed to multiple factors.

Either/Or Reasoning: An unwillingness to
recognize the complexity of an issue (this or
that).
 Restricting the range of possible solutions
by offering only one or two courses of
action, then rejecting one of these
possibilities.

Hasty Generalization: Conclusions drawn
from too little evidence or underrepresented
evidence.
 To argue that scientists ought to abandon
the human genome project because a
recent editorial argued against it is an
example of hasty generalization.

False Analogy: Comparisons made without
any parallel.
 Quarantine people with AIDS because
quarantine has been effective in stopping
the spread of small pox.
 The comparison between the two is not
valid because of the differences in ways
the diseases are spread.

Non Sequiter: Latin for “it does not follow.” A
conclusion that does not logically follow from
a premise.
 Since minorities have made such great
stride, we no longer need affirmative
action programs.
 The premise is arguable and because
strides have been made does not mean
that AA programs are not necessary.

Oversimplification: Be alert for writers who
offer easy solutions to complicated
problems.
 Buy American!
 Economic problems are complex, and the
economic problems cannot be solved with
a slogan or simple solution.
▪ Authors write not only to inform and
persuade but also to entertain.
▪ A book, play, or poem.
Evaluating Writing to Entertain


Questions to ask:
 Did you care for the portrayal of a
character?
 Did that character seem to
sentimentalized, for example, or
heroic?
 Where the situations believable?
▪ To what extent do you agree or
disagree with the author?
▪ Identify Points of Agreement or
Disagreement
▪ Explore the Reasons for Agreement
and Disagreement
 A critique is a formalized, critical reading
of a passage
 A systematic evaluation in order to
deepen your reader’s understanding.
▪ Introduction
▪ Introduce the passage, the author,
and the main point (s).
▪ Provide background material
▪ Summary
▪ Summarize the author’s main points
▪ The author’s purpose in writing
▪ Analysis of the presentation
▪ Is the information accurate?
▪ Is the information significant?
▪ Has the author defined terms clearly?
▪ Has the author used and interpreted
information fairly?
▪ Has the author argued logically?
▪ Your response to the presentation
▪ Which views do you agree or disagree?
Why?
▪ Conclusion
▪ The overall conclusions of the validity of
the piece.