（900words ）The Article Review Assignment

EvaluativeParagraphpattern.docx

Home >English homework help >Article writing homework help >（900words ）The Article Review Assignment

Task #5: Evaluative Paragraph Worksheet

The purpose of this task is to write one evaluative paragraph for your article review by following the general paragraph pattern.

Assertion

State what the paragraph will discuss/prove with the main THESIS key word (overall evaluation) and an ASSERTION key word (criteria + evaluation of criteria) from the roadmap.

e.g. The article is ineffective because of the complex writing style through which the author writes the article

Explanation

(one sentence)

Explain the evaluation of the criteria (assertion key word) in more detail.

e.g. More specifically(=In more detail), the author chooses to use a series of jargons that do not have a significant bearing on the overall main argument.

Evidence 1

More general evidence below; make sure to introduce with accurate context to the criteria (i.e. organization/evidence/style) and use some “quotation” to prove close reading of the article.

e.g. For instance, when the author describes the scene of a child being separated from her mother in order to be taken to her workplace, the author states, “The mise-en-scene of this scene is heartbreaking.” (Smith, 2017, p.00)

Discussion 1

Explain how the evidence proves the evaluation in your own words. Remember to use specific evaluative language/ focus on proving the evaluations of the criteria, and how the author was successful/unsuccessful in using the criteria.

e.g. Clearly, the author is using the phrase “mise-en-scene” in order to describe the heartbreaking scene of the separation between the mother and the child, but the words do not bring any new meaning or introduce any new idea into the argument. The phrase “mise-en-scene” is used to describe a particular scene from a film, thereby not being appropriate for this type of article (citation). The writing style of the article takes away from the description of the scene.

Evidence 2

Use another quote or direct reference to the book/article. Make sure to introduce with accurate context to the criteria. Use some “quotation” to prove close reading of the article.

e.g. In addition, Moreover, Not only this) + (The article also states/reports/highlights)

Discussion 2

Explain the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the evidence as it is related to the chosen criteria and its evaluation. Use specific evaluative language to justify your evaluation.

e.g. Clearly (=For this reason, With this in mind), This suggests/reveals/means/highlights that,

Connection sentence

Using the thesis key word (overall evaluation) and the assertion key word (criteria + evaluation of the criteria) (same key words from the assertion), summarize how the paragraph proved the assertion/thesis

e.g. Therefore(=Thus/Hence),

Sample：

Though the article is effective in presenting a new way of viewing Christ-figure films, its disjointed organization confuses its premises. More specifically, Walsh’s decision to list various films as examples of Christ-figure films with multiple possibilities of interpretation at the beginning of his article is unhelpful in bringing out his main argument. For instance, near his introduction, Walsh describes the attempts of some to classify film The Matrix as a Christ-figure film and claims, “…that interpretation will miss elements that reading Neo as bodhisattva, Platonic philosopher, or Alice in Wonderland might better illumine” (Walsh, 2013, p. 80). With this in mind, other possibilities of what Neo may represent in the film – “bodhisattva, Platonic philosopher, or Alice in Wonderland” – may lead the readers to misinterpret Walsh’s main argument, instead drawing their focus onto other religious perspectives of this particular film. The fact that Walsh has this particular example in the beginning of the article may further compound confusion on the readers as they may not be entirely clear on why a discussion of this specific film may lead towards his thesis. In addition, Walsh, at times, makes broad claims about the term Christ-figure itself without elaborating on them. Towards the end of his first section on why it is not helpful to simply label characters as Christ-figures, Walsh explains, “…claims about Christ figures soon become rather trite; they lack enlightenment, interest, and heuristic potential for the analysis of particular films” (Walsh, 2013, p. 82). Clearly, his assertion that the labelling of Christ figures is “trite” is something that needs to be elaborated on further at this point. Instead, the point is simply mentioned and the paragraph ends at that point, and in the next paragraph, Walsh begins to expound reasons why one must still continue to analyze certain filmic characters from a theological perspective. Such a decision to make grand statements as this one takes away from the main argument that is presented in the next section of the article. Therefore, even though the article is effective, its disjointed organization muddles the main argument and confuses the readers at certain points of the article.