Guideline for an Article Review

- Find 1-2 academic or scholarly research articles related to your course or profession with
significant impact to the environment.
- These article/s should demonstrate how the theories and concepts from the previous lessons
were applied in various contexts.

Outline for the Paper:

I. Introduction

• Brief overview of the environmental concepts governed by the paper.

E
• State the purpose of your paper and what you aim to achieve by examining the
applications of these concepts.

• State the chosen article’s main objective and findings.

O
II. Literature Review

• Summarize each article/s you selected. This should include the research
question/problem, main findings/arguments, methodology, and conclusion of the
.C
study.

III. Application Analysis

• Analyze the strengths, weaknesses, and its relevance to the field or future practice.

• Give your own insights and suggestions for improvement.

2
IV. Conclusion

• Summarize your key findings and insights from the literature review and application
EL

analysis.

• Reflect on the significance of these findings and any implications for future study.

V. References
• List all the articles and any additional sources in APA format.
G

Formatting.Requirements¿

• Use standard font (Times New Roman) and size 12.

• Double-space your text, 1” margin all sides
• Include page numbers
• Use A4 size bond paper
Rubric for Article Review

This rubric is designed to evaluate the quality and effectiveness of an article review. It assesses
various aspects such as comprehension, critical analysis, writing quality, and adherence to
assignment guidelines. Each criterion is scored on a 4-point scale, where 4 is excellent, 3 is good, 2
is satisfactory, and 1 is needs improvement.

Category Excellent (5) Good (4) Satisfactory (3) Needs Improvement (1) Score
Demonstrates a thorough Shows a solid Demonstrates basic
Lacks understanding of the
understanding of the understanding of the understanding of the
1. Comprehension of article, with significant

E
article, effectively article, with most key article, but some key /4
the Article misinterpretations or
summarizing key points points accurately points or arguments are
omissions.
and arguments. summarized. unclear or missing.
Review is very well-
Review is mostly clear and Review is somewhat
organized, clear, and
2. Clarity and well-organized, with minor disorganized or unclear, Review is poorly organized
logical, with smooth /4
Coherence lapses in clarity or requiring effort to follow and difficult to follow.

O
transitions between
organization. the main points.
sections and ideas.
Provides a thoughtful,
Provides little or no critical
balanced, and thorough Provides a good analysis, Provides a basic analysis,
analysis. Lacks depth and
analysis of the article, identifying strengths and focusing mostly on
3. Critical Analysis understanding of the /4
including strengths, weaknesses, but with less surface-level points, with
article’s strengths and
weaknesses, and .C depth or balance. limited critique or depth.
weaknesses.
contributions.
The summary is concise, The summary is
The summary is either
comprehensive, and The summary is clear and incomplete or somewhat
incomplete or inaccurate,
4. Summary of the accurately reflects the mostly accurate, but may unclear, missing
omitting key details or /4
Article main points, methodology, miss a few minor details or significant points or
misrepresenting the
and conclusions of the omit less central points. critical aspects of the
article's main points.
article. article.
Writing is clear, concise,
2
Writing is mostly clear and
and free of grammar, Writing contains several Writing is difficult to follow
free of errors, though a few
spelling, and punctuation grammar, punctuation, or due to frequent grammar,
5. Writing Quality minor grammar or /4
errors. Sentences are well- spelling errors that detract spelling, or punctuation
punctuation mistakes are
structured, and vocabulary from clarity and readability. errors.
present.
is appropriate.
EL

Demonstrates deep Demonstrates good Demonstrates limited

engagement with the engagement with the engagement with the Shows little engagement
6. Engagement with article, offering original article, offering some article, mostly with the article, providing a
/4
the Article insights, ideas, and original insights or summarizing without summary with no deeper
questions for further questions for further offering much insight or analysis or insight.
exploration. discussion. original thought.
Fully adheres to all Somewhat adheres to Does not follow
Mostly adheres to
7. Adherence to assignment guidelines, guidelines but deviates in assignment guidelines,
assignment guidelines,
Assignment including length, format, major ways, such as including format, citation /4
with only minor deviations
Guidelines and citation style (APA missing citations or style, or length
G

in format or style.
format). incorrect formatting. requirements.
Excellent use of evidence Uses limited evidence
Good use of evidence from
from the article to support from the article, with few Does not effectively use
the article to support
analysis and claims. examples or quotes, or evidence from the article,
8. Use of Evidence analysis, but may lack /4
Quotes and examples are evidence is not well- or evidence is missing or
sufficient examples or
integrated smoothly into integrated into the irrelevant to the analysis.
integration.
the review. analysis.
Provides a clear, Provides a solid
Conclusion is present but
thoughtful conclusion that conclusion that Conclusion is missing or
lacks depth or clarity, and
9. Conclusion effectively summarizes the summarizes the review weak, offering little to no /4
does not fully address the
review and gives a final and offers a reasonable evaluation of the article.
evaluation of the article.
evaluation of the article. evaluation of the article.