|
Chapter 30. CRITICAL REVIEW
Introduction
Basics
Advanced
Samples
Activities
---
Activities Using
Critical Review
See also "Activities
& Groups." ---
SPECIAL ACTIVITIES
1. REVIEWING A MAGAZINE ARTICLE: In
small groups working together, either work with an article or essay given to you
by your instructor (or create the name of a made-up magazine, general or
professional). Then record (or make up) the name of its editor, its place
of publication, its circulation (how many copies sold per issue--guess, if
necessary, for now), and a sentence or two describing the average reader.
Next, record (or make up) the name of a longer, important (nonfiction) article
in it, and the author's name.
Now write a review of this real (or made up) article. Summarize it first in
a fair, balanced manner for at least fifty words. Then discuss (or make up) three kinds of opinion in
or related to the article: arguments in the article itself (list several), likely
reactions from peer professionals who will read it (list several), and interpretations the
public may give to or from this article (list several). And finally, choose three to four
criteria by which to judge this article
(e.g., quality of organization, argument, research, balance and fairness,
writing and editing, etc.--a list is in the "Basics"
section). Then write at least a sentence each of judgment using each
criterion in turn.
2. REVIEWING A CONTROVERSIAL ACTION: As a class, choose a recent controversial news event in
which one person or a group of people did something controversial. Next, either in small
groups of three or four people or as a whole class, create a critical review of this
action. Start by developing an unbiased, balanced summary. Next, list in an
unbiased, balanced way three kinds of
opinion that are involved: the opinion of the person or people who did this controversial
act or were responsible for it, the known or possible reactions of their peers, and the known or likely
interpretations given by the public or by professionals in a related field. Third,
evaluate: choose several criteria by which to judge this act (e.g., ethics, rationality,
practicality, emotional appeal, poor organization or writing, missing elements, etc.);
then apply each criteria, one by one, to the act. As you create this critical review, be
careful to keep each of the three intellectual functions--unbiased summary, opinionated
argument/interpretation, and evaluative judgment--separate.
3. REVIEWING A PERSONAL ACTION: Working alone, write a critical review of some
controversial, difficult, or questionable action of your own, past or present. First
summarize it thoroughly in an entirely factual way. Second, discuss your own
interpretations or reasons for doing it, and how others might react to it or interpret
your intentions. Third, choose several criteria (see exercise "1..." above); then judge
your own action step by step by the criteria that you have chosen. (Optional fourth step:
Read your result to the rest of the class or to a small group in class: start with
whatever background information you need to offer in order to make the review sensible to
others; then read your review in its written and/or listed form.
4. REVIEWING A PERSON: Complete exercise "2." above,
using as your subject a
person you know well. (If you are going to read your review to the class or a class group, do not
write about a person that anyone in class possibly could know, and hide the person’s
identity completely.)
---
OTHER ACTIVITIES
-
THOUGHTS ABOUT THE CHAPTER:
As an individual or a group, read the chapter and take
notes about it using one or more of the methods in "General
Study Questions."
-
ROUGH DRAFT: As an individual or a group, write
a paper as described in this chapter. Use the subtitles
shown in the "Introduction" or the "Basics" section as
subtitles of your rough draft, and write at least 50+ words in each body
section. If you are working as a group, you may, if your instructor
allows, develop a fictional and fanciful background and subject for your
rough draft.
-
GROUP MAPPING & PLANNING: Divide into
small groups of 3-4 people randomly. In each group, one person each should
volunteer to be
(i) the facilitator (the person helping everyone to do the
work),
(ii) the writer/recorder (who does the writing for the group),
(iii) the reader/announcer (who reports
the group's works to the class), and
(iv) if there is a fourth, the timekeeper, the observer taking notes about the group's way of working,
and/or the "social encourager"--someone who finds questions to encourage quieter
members of the group.
The group should then follow these steps using a
timetable given by the instructor, either in a small, close circle with the
writer using pen or laptop, or at a segment of the whiteboard with the
writer using a marker:
(A) What is the key or essence of this type of paper? Brainstorm an
interesting, fun idea (serious or silly) to write about.
(B) Then look at the "map" or blocks of how to build this type of paper,
from introduction through the body sections to the conclusion. The
instructor can either project it on a screen or draw it on the board.
Then fill in the parts with 50-100 words for each main body section, and
20-50 for the intro and conclusion (depending on the instructor's
directions).
(C) If your instructor suggests this, add a good made up illustration,
graphic, or quotation or two to each section from an "expert" and give
credit to your made-up expert. (Note: Never add made-up detail or
experts to a real paper.)
(D) Have your reader/announcer read your result to the entire class.
(E) After all groups have gone, then the "observer" in each group--or the
facilitator--should answer three brief comments on how the group process
happened: "What worked well," "What didn't," and "How could it be changed?"
-
GROUP CRITIQUE OF A
LATER DRAFT:
If your class has a paper all of you are preparing for grading, gather in a group to
critique each other's developed drafts:
(a) Simply pass the papers to each other;
your paper preferably should be checked by three other people. (Some
instructors prefer that you make several copies, distribute them to your
group members, take the copies home that you receive, and comment on them
there.)
(b) Write comments for each other.
To do so, use a a
set of grading guidelines (or "rubric"):
for example, "How are the contents,"
"How is the organization of parts," "Do paragraphs work
well," and "How well have editing errors been corrected?"
Preferably, you can use the guidelines your instructor applies when grading.
(c) For each question or requirement in your guidelines, write one or more
comments. Your comments should be substantial and specific (more like a
complete sentence, and more specific than just "Nice!" or "Needs
work"). Your comments also should be positive or helpfully
constructive: when positive, they should offer specific praise of a particular part, detail, or
method; when constructive, they should offer specific advice about what to add or do to make
the paper better.
(d) Add a final positive or constructive comment about how you think the
average reader of this paper might respond to it, and/or how the paper could
be changed or fixed for a stronger or more positive response from its
audience.
(e) After
receiving your comments from others, take them home. Review
what they have written. Remember
that your readers are not commenting on you as a person, but rather on how
easily (or poorly) they have been able to read your paper as its audience
members. Pay attention in particular to comments that may have
been repeated by more than one of your readers.
-
For a wide variety of other activities and
exercises, go to "Activities
& Groups."
---
Return to top. |
