English 12 2016: 03 - Article Analysis

03 - Article Analysis

Article Analysis Overview
NOTE: The article you choose to analyze must contain a point of view. That means that the writer had a point of view about the topic. Can you identify what his or her point of view is? Are they for or against something? What is their opinion on this topic? Are they trying to persuade you to their opinion? If you're confused, see your teacher before you even waste your time trying to find an article. This is an analysis, not a review like the other two assignments!
The topic must be "meaty" enough for other writers to have written about it because under the "Evaluation" section below, you must compare your chosen article to at least two others on the same topic by different writers. A local or national issue such as Gay Marriage rights or a referendum to build a new sports stadium, or Low Income Housing going up in a wealthy suburb or any article about which someone has a distinct opinion would work well.
For this assignment, choose a news or magazine article that contains a specific opinion or point of view about a topic. Such articles are found in political, science, or social change articles. Entertainment news or local crime stories are NOT good candidates for an in-depth analysis. Sports MIGHT work IF the writer has an opinion about a rule or policy or scandal about a controversy. Remember, if there is no point of view, choose another story.
Read the following detailed directions and use the information in the tables to write your in-depth review. Make sure to answer all parts of the requirements. There is a table at the bottom of the page that you can copy/paste into your submission.
Primary Details
Start reading. If the article has a labeled introduction, you should find the author's statement of purpose, or thesis statement, before the end of that section. You should also be able to tell what evidence the author is going to use to support the position she or he has taken. The author may also explain the limits on the article, the length of time, the geographic location, the extent of the information that's going to be used, the theories that are going to be applied. You should also be able to tell what the author's point of view is.
Thesis:
Write out the thesis statement as you find it in the article. It is sometimes only one sentence; sometimes two or three. Sometimes the sentences are separated from each other. An author might be obvious about it: "This paper will argue. . ." or subtle, giving only a statement of his or her interpretation followed by some indication of the evidence that will support that position.
Evidence:
Note here what evidence the author claims will be used to support her/his argument. This question may well have been answered in the first step, by checking the notes. Use this step to expand your grasp of the evidence.
Limits:
Writers of articles rarely tackle big topics. There isn't enough room to write a history of the world or discuss big issues. Articles generally focus on a particular event, change, person, phenomenon, or idea. It may be further limited by a narrow geographic focus, a limited period, or being restricted to a particular group of people. Note what limits the author places on the article.
Point of View:
This is sometimes easy to detect; sometimes you have to feel it out by looking at what things are described positively and what are described negatively. Note what you learn about the author's point of view.

Evaluation
Now that you've finished reading, consider your personal reaction to it: not only "did I like it?," "it was hard to read," or "it was boring/interesting." This, along with the work in the other steps, is the basis for a critical evaluation of the article. Even if you don't know anything about the topic, you can make some judgments about the article and how well the author made her or his case. Evaluation is a bit harder. "Evaluating" means comparing one thing to some kind of standard, that is, other articles in the same discipline or journal as the one you've read. If you are not familiar with those other articles, it can be hard to evaluate well. However, you can do a fairly good job of it by considering the conventions of other, similar articles. Does this one fit the pattern? Does it have quality, that is, does it make up to the academic standards of writing, presentation, organization, source citation, and such?
Personal Reaction:
3-4 sentences
This is where you note your personal reaction to the paper. Your comments might be one or two words, or might be longer. Remember, too, that these notes will allow you to quickly review the article later on. You might do well to write your future self fairly detailed notes.
Strength of Case:
Did the author persuade you that the point/argument she/he was making was true, or at least convincing?
Did you feel, at any time, that the author was just hoping you'd agree?
Use this space to note how convincing you thought the article was.
Evaluation:

Use this space to note how good this article was compared to other articles you have read. This means you must read at least two other articles that have a point of view, or opinion, about the same topic. It is helpful to write pages numbers of relevant passages in the article.
Use examples from the other articles in your comparison.

Presentation and Argumentation
Keep reading but watch what the author is doing. This step requires that you read the article to gain an understanding of how the author presents the evidence and makes it fit into the argument. At this stage of the exercise, you should also take the time to look up any unfamiliar words or concepts. Also, watch how the author switches from first explaining how the evidence supports the argument and then to the summary. The last few paragraphs of the article should tidy up the discussion, show how it all fits together neatly, where more research is needed, or how this article has advanced knowledge, that is, the implications of the article.
Concepts/ Words:
Use this space to note the words or concepts you had to look up. Did the author coin his/her own terms, or use common terms in unusual ways? (cite 2 examples)
Use of Evidence:
How well did the author rely on his/her evidence?
Was everything mentioned at the outset referred to in the article?
Was quoted material used to illustrate or substantiate points?
Conclusion:

You can summarize where the author went with the paper. You may refer to the thesis statement to help you phrase your summary.
Implications:
What might government officials make of this paper?
Who might find it useful?
Would anyone change the way they work, or approach an issue if they read this article?
What difference has it made for you?
You might also consider why your instructor has asked you to read this article. What new course-related information did it contain?
Was the article assigned because it illustrated ideas or concepts covered in the course?
Perhaps the author advanced thinking in the discipline. What do you think?

Purpose:
Examine the article as a whole. Look for clues in the title and/or subtitle, the acknowledgements (if any), the first foot/end note, and the author's biographical note (sometimes with the article, sometimes compiled separately).
Why do you think the author wrote this paper? Explain.
Does it seem to be refuting someone else's interpretation of some event or phenomenon? Who, what?
Is it offering new information? Why?
[You'll usually find clues to the answer to these questions in the first few paragraphs. That's where authors usually try to show why their paper is useful and worth reading.]
Audience:
Who is this paper written for? Experts? The general public? Why?
[Knowing who the authors are addressing can help you decide how to approach the article. If the authors are addressing an expert audience, then the style will likely be more academic. There may be fewer explanations or somewhat less background information. If the audience is a broader one, then there may be more detail but less detailed explanations.]
Subject:
What does it seem the article is about? (3 sentences)
[Look at the first couple of paragraphs; they should give you some hints. Again, refer to the title. Some disciplines include an abstract that precedes the text. This will give you an uncritical summary of the paper's subject/content.]
Sources:
Where is the author getting her or his basic information? List.
Is it mostly from other books or articles? Why?
Is it based on interview, archival or survey data? How know?
[Knowing where the author got the information will tell you whether the author is looking at something new, taking a new look at something old, or talking about something new.]

Copy/Paste into your submission if this will help:
Article Analysis
Primary Details
Thesis:

Evidence:

Limits:

Point of View:

Evaluation
Personal Reaction:

Strength of Case:

Evaluation:

Presentation and Argumentation
Concepts/Words:

Use of Evidence:

Conclusion:

Implications:

Purpose:

Audience:

Subject:

Sources:

Thesis:	Write out the thesis statement as you find it in the article. It is sometimes only one sentence; sometimes two or three. Sometimes the sentences are separated from each other. An author might be obvious about it: "This paper will argue. . ." or subtle, giving only a statement of his or her interpretation followed by some indication of the evidence that will support that position.
Evidence:	Note here what evidence the author claims will be used to support her/his argument. This question may well have been answered in the first step, by checking the notes. Use this step to expand your grasp of the evidence.
Limits:	Writers of articles rarely tackle big topics. There isn't enough room to write a history of the world or discuss big issues. Articles generally focus on a particular event, change, person, phenomenon, or idea. It may be further limited by a narrow geographic focus, a limited period, or being restricted to a particular group of people. Note what limits the author places on the article.
Point of View:	This is sometimes easy to detect; sometimes you have to feel it out by looking at what things are described positively and what are described negatively. Note what you learn about the author's point of view.

Concepts/ Words:	Use this space to note the words or concepts you had to look up. Did the author coin his/her own terms, or use common terms in unusual ways? (cite 2 examples)
Use of Evidence:	How well did the author rely on his/her evidence? Was everything mentioned at the outset referred to in the article? Was quoted material used to illustrate or substantiate points?
Conclusion:	You can summarize where the author went with the paper. You may refer to the thesis statement to help you phrase your summary.
Implications:	What might government officials make of this paper? Who might find it useful? Would anyone change the way they work, or approach an issue if they read this article? What difference has it made for you? You might also consider why your instructor has asked you to read this article. What new course-related information did it contain? Was the article assigned because it illustrated ideas or concepts covered in the course? Perhaps the author advanced thinking in the discipline. What do you think?

Purpose:	Examine the article as a whole. Look for clues in the title and/or subtitle, the acknowledgements (if any), the first foot/end note, and the author's biographical note (sometimes with the article, sometimes compiled separately). Why do you think the author wrote this paper? Explain. Does it seem to be refuting someone else's interpretation of some event or phenomenon? Who, what? Is it offering new information? Why? [You'll usually find clues to the answer to these questions in the first few paragraphs. That's where authors usually try to show why their paper is useful and worth reading.]
Audience:	Who is this paper written for? Experts? The general public? Why? [Knowing who the authors are addressing can help you decide how to approach the article. If the authors are addressing an expert audience, then the style will likely be more academic. There may be fewer explanations or somewhat less background information. If the audience is a broader one, then there may be more detail but less detailed explanations.]
Subject:	What does it seem the article is about? (3 sentences) [Look at the first couple of paragraphs; they should give you some hints. Again, refer to the title. Some disciplines include an abstract that precedes the text. This will give you an uncritical summary of the paper's subject/content.]
Sources:	Where is the author getting her or his basic information? List. Is it mostly from other books or articles? Why? Is it based on interview, archival or survey data? How know? [Knowing where the author got the information will tell you whether the author is looking at something new, taking a new look at something old, or talking about something new.]