ASSIGNMENT: Article Critique

Instructions

1.  Review the Overview of Research on ACO Performance and select one research study at: 

https://www.naacos.com/overview-of-research-on-aco-performance#estimates

2.  Submit an article critique of your selection.

Article Critique Instructions

Length: Your paper should be three-to-four (3–4) double-spaced pages.

Format your article critique by starting with the following:

·  The name of the author

·  The title of the article

·  The title of the journal, volume number, date, month, and page numbers in APA format

·  Brief statement of the issue or problem the article addresses

·  Brief statement of the purpose, hypothesis, and methods

·  Major conclusions

Compose Your Critique

After the opening summary, compose your critique. For this course, your critique needs to address the 1) technical components of the article and 2) your analysis and opinion of the article.

1.  The technical components must include your assessment of:

– The accuracy of the title

– The specificity and accuracy of the abstract

– The clarity of the purpose

– The relevance and clarity of the literature review 

– Absence or error in facts or interpretation (This last item requires you to look at some of the author’s cited references when they seem to be in error or misused.)

2.  Your analysis and opinion are the bulk of this critique and must address:

– The relevancy of the topic and why it is important (or not)

– Are the author’s assumptions stated clearly and located helpfully on the article?

– Does the methodology seem appropriate for the issue and hypotheses? Could the work be replicated based on the description?

– Is the data presented clearly, and is it error free? You do not need to do in-depth calculations, but evaluate the integrity in tables and charts; you may catch surprising errors.

– Does the author provide a balanced focus on the most important and relevant ideas or weaken the article by over- or under-emphasizing certain ideas?

– Does the author write clearly? Are there ambiguous statements that should have been clarified or more fully supported with evidence?

– Does the author seem biased or have clear evidence of objectivity?

– Are there gaps in the author’s work and conclusions that you believe warrant follow up?

FREE OF PLAGIARISM (TURNITIN ASSIGNMENT)