The critiquemust first demonstrate that he/she has made a sincere attempt at understanding the content, structure, and the rhetorical dimensions of the article, such as the purpose, occasion,target audience, etc., before he/she attempts at critiquing the article. Lacking this, the critical analysis may come off sounding biased and partial; hence, losing its credibility.

Most critical writings begin with a content summary of the article that is being evaluated, followed by points of analysis, and concluded with an overall evaluation of the entire article.Forthe critical analysis assignment in this class, you are required to write a minimum of 750 words critical analysis on the article that you have previously chosen. You must present your analysisof the article by reading it in class before turning the analysis in, for a grade. You must also be able to present your views and justify your evaluation of the article in the ensuing discussion.

Required Structure for the Critical Analysis Paper:

1. Summary of the article that is being critiqued:

• Must be concise and not longer than one paragraph long.

• Must present the author’s thesis accurately

• Must demonstrate complete comprehension of the text.

• Must include some background information about the article if it’s available, such as author, title, publication, purpose, target audience, occasion, etc.

2. 3 critical points of analysis.

• Analysis points: Author’s Purpose, Claim or Thesis, Point of View, Assumptions, Organizational Strategy, Argumentation Style, Strength of Evidence/ Support, Language (Diction, WordChoice, etc.,) Warrants, Audience Appeal, Author’s Credibility, Credibility of Evidence/ Support, Validity of Argumentation/ Claims, Use of Appeal (Logic, Emotion, and Authority,) Effectiveness, etc.

• All critical analysis must evaluate the article’s thesis/ claim as one of the three analysis points. Writers may choose the two other analysis points from the list above or any other points of argument of their choice.

• Each analysis point must have its own claim.

• Each claim must be supported by textual evidence or references.

3. Evaluation of the overall impact of the article:

• Did the article have a positive impact?

• Was the article convincing?

• Were the arguments logical?

• Is there any evidence of dishonesty?

• Were there emotional pleas? Were these pleas acceptable?

• Did the author make any assumptions? Are they honest, acceptable assumptions?

• Was the author sincere or truthful in his claims?

• Did the article offer a new, meaningful way of seeing the subject or is the author merely parroting all that we already know?

• On the whole, was the article a worthy read?

1