An Introduction to Critical Analysis

Purpose and Context

A short introduction to the thinker. This might include a brief summary of the context in which the author is writing, and-thus-what motivated his thinking. It might also include why the issues were thought to be important. Try to identify clearly the question-or questions-the work is trying to answer; what’s the aim, the author’s intent? What are the major historical and conceptual issues stressed? What are the major points the author is making? 

This could lead into the analysis (or model) the author provides. Explain how the author is/are trying to answer the question: what techniques, analytical tools, quantitative tools are used? What’s the theory underlying the article? What presuppositions seem to lie behind the work? What (if any) empirical work, what evidence, does the author provide?

You might also wish to include any presuppositions that seem to lie behind the work, as well as policy implications following from the analysis. It may also be useful to highlight, to emphasize, the parts of the work that the author seems to think should receive special attention by its intended audience. It might also be useful to emphasize the major conclusions or points the author raises, and how it might extend, improve, or criticize its predecessors. 

I’d also like you to include your response to the work: what did you learn? Did the work reinforce (or challenge) something you already knew (were there any surprises-anything new here)? Did the author convince you? What thought did it trigger: where did it lead you? What would you like to know more about-or what (if anything) did the author not talk about that you thought might have been talked about? And how might the work be relevant to our course? Any links to other works we’re reading?
The first page should contain your name; then the author, title, source, and date of the work; then the essay itself. You should also include a bibliography of the works you used to write your paper, as well as using footnotes the way we talked about in class (author, page number).

Standard margins, 10 or 12 point font. I like Times New Roman best, but use whatever you prefer and/or are used to using. And yes: spelling and grammar matter and will be part of the evaluation process.

A: Requires mastery and imaginative deployment of the material, with evidence of original thinking-but originality is worthless unless grounded in understanding and descriptive control of the course materials. Does all things well, and most things exceptionally well, with a clear, well-developed thesis? Shows substantial depth, fullness, and complexity of thought, a sophisticated writing style (sentence structure and variety, smooth transitions, superior control of diction). Ideas are supported by persuasive reasoning and well-chosen examples. Shows critical understanding and powerful analysis or application of relevant examples and is wholly relevant to the issues being addressed. Is clearly organized into paragraphs with topic sentences, and has very few, if any, minor errors in grammar, usage, spelling, or mechanics. Has appropriate documentation. Integrates detail into a coherent whole and guides the reader to a clear and well-reasoned conclusion, thus making the reader want to keep turning the page. 

B: Competent descriptive control of the material, tolerant of a few errors or confusions. Does all things well, but few, if any, exceptionally well. Has good thesis addressing the topic completely, with some depth and complexity of thought. Effective style, sensible reasoning, supporting details. Shows good understanding of relevant facts and issues. Details are integrated into a reasonably coherent whole, but not at the level of an A essay. Does show originality in thinking and breadth in reading, but not quite at the level of the A essay. Has an effective writing style (sentence variety, smooth transitions, control of diction, and the like), has few errors in grammar, usage, spelling, or mechanics; and has appropriate documentation. 

C: Shaky control or more than a few significant errors or confusions. Shows occasional signs of promise, but also has some problems in style or content and does not address the essay topic deeply enough. Simplistic thesis showing limited knowledge of the topic, with some-but not extensive-knowledge of the relevant readings. Shows a satisfactory grasp of relevant facts and issues. Does not completely develop the topic; has ineffective organization, some-but not much-originality, imagination, or insight; and has weaknesses in organization, grammar, and mechanics. There is merit here, an attempt to create a coherent whole, but it makes the reader work too hard. 

D: No clear thesis for the topic; demonstrates minimal knowledge of the topic and relevant readings. Is poorly organized, with paragraphs lacking unity, organization, and/or topic sentences. Has limited documentation, but has many errors in grammar, usage, spelling, or mechanics. Content and/or level of engagement with the assignment are problematic.