Order Description
Article Critiques (20%) The article critiques, each 1,000 words, are examinations of research articles using a different qualitative method on your thesis topic. It is
also expected that you will reference module texts or other qualitative methods sources in evaluating each article. You will need to conduct a literature survey in
order to identify the articles you will chose for this assignment. Select from the following types of qualitative method:
1. interviews
2. life history
3. narrative analysis
4. observations (of interaction or material culture)
5. focus group
6. case study
7. journaling
8. document analysis
9. photographic or other visual artefacts
These may be used in a variety of approaches: social, psychological, cultural (anthropological), political, historical, and ethical (philosophical), such as symbolic &
social interactionism, micro-politics, ethnography, humanistic cognitive psychology, hermeneutics, phenomenology. You may also wish to consider using a comparative
study using any one of the above.
For each article critique you will need to use the following criteria. These are based on the assessment criteria used by (serious) peer reviewed conferences, journals
and book publishers, and will be used in RM3 in designing your proposal, and later on the thesis.
1. Purpose and objectives of the study? Are these clearly identified and discussed?
2. Theoretical framework? Is there a clear identification and discussion of the theories, models or other conceptual frameworks used in the study, along with
identification of the main underlying theorist and/or theoretical discussion in the field promoting or recommending this type of research? Is there a rationale
provided?
3. Situation the study within the research already conducted in the field? What other major studies have been done? Are there no other studies or very few indicating
that there is a gap in the field which this study is designed to address? How may this one be different?
4. Research Approach? Does the article give a justification for the type of research study? Qualitative, hermeneutic, phenomenological, interactional, etc.?
5. Is the methodology clearly and fully reported? This should include a discussion of the site and participant selection, the methods used for data collection or
information collection (with a discussion of the design of the instruments and inclusion in the appendices), ethical consideration, limitations, and any other
significant conduct issues?
6. Presentation and analysis of results? Is it clearly connected to the theoretical framework (e.g., if it is a colonization critique from E. Said, does the analysis
and discussion of results clearly refer back to the theoretical framework?)? Are the importance of the results discussed in terms of their contribution to the field?
Further research?
I would suggest that you use a separate paragraph for each of these, except in the case of the research approach and methodology that in some cases may be integrated
into one paragraph. Please note that you may draw from these critiques in writing the final paper – however, you will need to integrate and synthesis the material into
the final paper, not just drop it in to the text. This may require some shortening of the passages, adding transitions and comparative remarks with other material,
etc.
Additional General Guidelines for Article Reviews
1. Please pay attention to all academic compositional requirements: a good review, like any good piece of writing, must be well organized and lucidly written.
2. The principal concern is to write a critical appreciation of the arguments of the articles you are reviewing. What do they argue? How are they argued and how well?
Are arguments supported in the texts and do you agree with them? Do the articles succeed in doing what they claim to do? Do they accurately represent sources used?
3. A second concern, of almost equal importance, is to place the articles in context. One of the following, or a combination thereof, will usually be the sort of
context you are looking for:
a. Their location within the traditions of writing in the field (e.g. which schools of thought/approaches do they belong to?).
b. The state of the current debate in the areas/issues that the articles address
c. The topicality of the articles’ subjects in current affairs.
d. The parts of project management experience addressed by the articles.
e. How do the articles relate to one another?
The purpose of doing this is to bring out their significance. Why should one be interested in the articles you are reviewing (e.g. because they represent a major
advance in our understanding of particular problems; address issues of great topicality; provide insights into aspects of project management we all know and should
think more deeply about)?
4. In addition, there are other elements that may appear in some combination in most article reviews. They include:
a. Comments and criticisms on the styles of writing and presentation (academic styles).
b. Focused analyses of critical or interesting parts of the articles (stages in the argument, revealing anecdotes) which allow you to comment in depth on the articles’
contents.
c. Make connections with other related works and among the articles selected.
d. Evaluate research approaches and techniques of investigation used (methodologies).
5. A close reading and understanding of the articles must be evident in the review. You are not expected to do any extra research, however, if there are other works
that have been particularly helpful in developing an understanding or critique of the articles, you may append a short bibliography at the end. The course readings and
discussion in the general subject area should be sufficient to give you a good idea of the overall context of the articles and provide adequate material to evaluate
its significance.
6. Writing an article review proceeds much more effectively if the articles are read some time in advance so that their arguments and subject-matter grows on one. It
also helps to discuss them with others, helping to make clearer to you what the articles are about, what their significance may be, and what you think of them.
7. Final note: a review is not a summary of the articles, but an evaluation of them.
In summary, key considerations for assessing the article critiques include amongst others:
1. Purpose and objectives of the study?
2. Theoretical framework?
3. Situating the study within the research already conducted in the field? Research Approach?
4. Is the methodology clearly and fully reported?
5. Presentation and analysis of results?
PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂