HO W DO

YO U
HANDLE
CO N ST R UC T
I VE
 HOW DID YOU COME UP
WITH YOUR ANSWERS?

QUESTION WHAT DID YOU FEEL

AFTER THE ACTIVITY?
S WHY SHOULD WE WRITE
A CRITIQUE?
WRITING
A
MINI
CRITIQU
E
 WRITING A
CRITIQUE
(CRITICAL
A critique is a careful analysis of an argument to determine
what is said, how well the points are made, what assumptions
ANALYSIS)
underlie the argument, what issues are overlooked, and what
implications are drawn from such observations. It is a
systematic, yet personal response and evaluation of what you
read.
HOW DO WE WRITE CRITIQUES?
Before writing, it is important to have a thorough understanding
of the literary work to be evaluated. The following are the
guidelines:
• Study the work under discussion.
• Make notes on important parts of the work.
• Develop an understanding of the main argument or purpose
being expressed in the work.
• Consider how the work relates to a bigger issue or context.
• Consider asking the following questions:

·What is the nature of the piece?

·Who wrote it, why, and what are his/her qualifications?
·What is the significance of the piece?
·What are its objectives? How well are they achieved?
·What is the design or method of the piece?
·Does the design help the piece achieve its objectives?
·What is the particular appeal or lack of appeal?
·What assumptions underlie the piece? Are they offensive? Are they obvious?
·How do the assumptions and biases affect the validity of the piece?
 WHAT IS THE
TEMPLATE/
FORMAT FOR
WRITING A
CRITIQUE?

INTRODUCTIO BODY CONCLUSIO

N N
INTRODUCTI
ON:
The introduction, typically is short (less than 1% of the word length).
Remember the following:

1. Introduce the subject of your critique – the reading

under analysis. Make sure to name the work being
reviewed, as well as the date when it was created, as
well as the name of the creator.

2. Describe the main argument or purpose of the work.

3. Explain the context in which the work was created. This
can be a social or political context. Review the background
facts or issues that must be understood before the point of
the reading can be appreciated: significance, design, appeal,
and so on. You may also discuss the place of the work in a
creative or academic tradition, or the relationship between
the work and creator’s life experience.

4. Review the assumptions in the reading that must be

understood before you take a position.
5. Make an umbrella statement that can give the
reader a sign as to what your evaluation is going to
be. For instance, it may indicate whether it is
positive, negative, or a mixed evaluation. In doing
this, make your position statement clear: what is your
evaluation? On what basis are you making it, given
what you have stated in #3 and #4?
BODY – CRITICAL
EVALUATION:
6. The critical evaluation section is the part that would give a systematic
and detailed assessment of the different elements of the work, evaluating
how well the author was able to achieve the purpose through these. Take
note though, that critical evaluation does not mean that you will highlight
the negative impressions. It should deconstruct the work and identify both
strengths and weaknesses. It should examine the work and evaluate its
success, in light of its purpose. Review the author’s ideas in light of the
position you identified and elaborate on each point that relates to your
central position. These may take several paragraphs depending on the
number of points that you want to discuss.
HERE ARE SOME KEY CRITICAL
QUESTIONS TO ASK:
▪ Who is the creator? Is the work presented
objectively or
subjectively?
▪ What are the aims of the work? Were the aims
achieved?
▪ What techniques, styles, media were used in the
work? Are they
effective in portraying the purpose?
▪ What assumptions underlie the work? Do they
affect its validity?
▪ What types of evidence or persuasion are used? Has
evidence been
interpreted fairly?
▪ How is the work structured? Does it favor a particular
interpretation
or point of view? Is it effective?
▪ Does the work enhance understanding of key ideas or
theories?
Does the work engage (or fail to engage) with key
concepts or other
works in its discipline?
Note: This evaluation should be written in formal academic style and presented
logically. Group and order ideas into paragraphs. Start with overall broader
impressions first and then go into the details of the technical elements. For shorter
critiques, such as the mini critique you are going to write for this lesson, you may
discuss the strengths of the written work, and then its weaknesses. In longer
critiques, you may wish to discuss the positive and negative aspects of each key
critical question in individual paragraphs. To support the evaluation, provide
evidence from the work itself, such as a quote for example, and you should also
cite evidence from related sources. Explain how this evidence supports your
evaluation of the work.)
 CONCLUSI
ON
7. State your conclusions and
remind the reader of the
points you have made and
your reasons for making
them. This is usually a very
brief paragraph which
includes:
▪ A STATEMENT INDICATING THE
OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE
WORK;
▪ A summary of the key reasons,
identified during the critical evaluation,
why this evaluation was formed.
▪ In some circumstances,
recommendations for improvement on
the work
may be appropriate.
 I will take every constructive
criticism, make it my own,
learn from my mistake, and go
forward. The greatest threat to
freedom is the absence of
criticism.