Each summary and critique must be a minimum of 2.0 pages in length, 1.5- spaced, #12 font, and be mechanically and grammatically sound. • Each paper will include a brief summary of the paper (1 or 2 paragraphs is fine), and the balance of the paper will be a critique of the article. • Include a full citation of the article at the end of the paper. No particular style for the citation required. Make sure you include authors, title, year published, sources, and pagination.
Suggest choosing 3 or 4 items from the methods, results, and/or discussion section to critique to yield about 1.5 pages of critique. • Be very specific and detailed in each item that you critique. For example, if you include “the paper was well written… ,” that is too general. Or, “I liked the graphs … .” That is too general. • A good critique statement would be more like, “The sample size for each test group was only 5. A larger sample size might have resulted in disproving the null hypothesis that there is no difference between the number of infectious parasites in the treatment groups exposed to 10 mg/L versus 100 mg/L of pesticide.”
—
Each summary and critique must be at least 2.0 pages long, 1.5-spaced, in #12 font, and mechanically and grammatically correct. • Each paper will include a brief synopsis of the paper (1 or 2 paragraphs is appropriate), followed by a critique of the piece. • At the end of the work, include a complete citation to the article. There is no requirement for citation style. Make sure to include the authors’ names, titles, year of publication, sources, and pagination.
Choose three or four items to critique from the methodology, results, and/or discussion sections to create around 1.5 pages of critique. • Be very explicit and comprehensive in your criticism of each item. For instance, if you include “the article was well-written,”
