In the documents
Journal Article Review – Application of Evidence Based Practices to the Classroom
I want to do this! What's This?
1. Read the entire article. Many journal articles can be quite complex and use complicated wording and statistics. You may need to read the article a few times before you get a full grasp of it.
2. Write a citation for the journal article at the top of the review. The citation should follow the American Psychological Association's style--consult the APA-style manual or the link under Resources for citation information. You will need the title of the article, the journal where the article is published, the volume and issue number, publication date, author's name and page numbers for the article.
3. Write a summary of the article. This should be, at a minimum, two to three paragraphs and should include an overview of the topic, the purpose for the article, how research was conducted, the results and other pertinent information from the article.
4. Discuss the meaning or implication of the results of the study that the article is about. This should be one to two paragraphs. This is where you offer your opinion on the article. Discuss any areas of concern (if applicable) and how the information in this article could applied to working with students in general or special education settings.
5. Write one paragraph discussing how the author could expand on the results, what the information means in the big picture, what future research should focus on or how future research could move the topic forward. Discuss how knowledge in the area could be expanded.
6. Cite any direct quotes or paraphrases from the article. Use the author's name, the year of publication and the page number (for quotes) in the in-text citation.
Scoring Rubric:
|
Journal Article Review Rubric (100 points/review) |
|||
|
Criteria |
Beginning |
Developed |
Accomplished |
|
Citation - Author/ Publication |
Initial citation and in-text citations are missing or are not consistent with APA Style of Referencing 0-1 pts |
APA Style of referencing is applied at beginning of review, but in-text citations are not consistent with APA throughout the paper 2-3 pts. |
APA Style of referencing consistently applied throughout the document. 4-5 pts. |
|
Summary of Article |
Summary is less than 2 paragraphs and does not include topic overview, author purpose, research summary and results. 0-1 pts. |
Summary is less than 2 paragraphs or does not include all of the components (overview, purpose, research summary and results). 2-3 pts. |
Summary is 2 paragraphs and includes all components (overview, purpose, research summary and results). 4-5 pts. |
|
Implications for Future Research |
Does not clearly present how the author could expand on the results, what the information means in the big picture, what future research should focus on to expand on the topic. 0-1 pts. |
Presents a cursory description of implications that includes 1 or 2 of the components (author expansion, big picture, and future research). 2-3 pts. |
Clearly presents a summary of the implications of the research that includes all of the components (author expansion, big picture, and future research). 4-5 pts. |
|
Organization
|
Sequencing appears to lack logic and purposeful direction. 0-1 pts. |
The writer makes a lot of generalizations with few specifics. Transitions are weak. 2-3 pts. |
The writer stays focused and shares important information about the topic; transitions clearly lead the reader through the paper. 4-5 pts. |
|
Writing Quality
|
The reviewer ‘s choice of words, redundancy, and the use of jargon and slang makes the reading difficult. The reviewer makes errors in punctuation throughout review. Tense changes from active to passive, present ot past, throughout the paper. 0-1 pts. |
Accurate, academic wording aides in the readability of the review. Few errors in punctuation throughout the review. Article review uses passive (past tense) voice inconsistently. 2-3 pts. |
Live active verbs and precise words are used in conveying reviewer’s opinions. Words/phrases create a vivid picture of opinion. The reviewer is thorough in the use of correct punctuation throughout the review. The review describes author(s)’ opinion(s) in the past tense consistently 4-5 pts. |