Critique Assignment from Population Health Sciences
Professor Rebecca Meyerson - SMPH
Below is another exemplary high-stakes, discipline-specific writing assignment, this one from Professor Rebecca Meyerson in the School of Medicine and Public Health. To download a PDF of the writing assignment, click here. The assignment here has been condensed for length.
Alongside the assignment sheet, we offer a few notes on what makes this high-stakes writing assignment successful.
| Assignment Language | Commentary |
Guidelines for Critiques70 Points Possible (50 Points for Part 1, and 20 Points for Part 2) Purpose:The purpose of this assignment is to help you practice the skills to support your success in the profession as a health services researcher:
|
Purpose and Learning Goals The professor starts with the Learning Goals of the assignment. This gives students into how their writing will be evaluated. By telling students what they should focus on, the professor saves time and energy when evaluating student writing.
|
The Assignment:The organizer of a conference would like your opinion to help her decide whether this paper should be presented as a poster, a podium, or a keynote presentation, or should be rejected from the conference entirely. Having decided that the topic is of interest, the organizer would like your recommendation for where to place the paper purely based on the strength of the evidence presented in the study. Your first task, in Part A, is to assess the strengths and limitations of the paper to support the recommendation you provide to the conference organizer in Part B to i.e., whether this paper should be presented as a poster, a podium, or a keynote presentation, or should be rejected from the conference. In addition to providing the conference organizer with your reasoned recommendation about the paper submission, Part B should also include your recommendations to the author regarding specific steps to take to further improve the study. Format: The paper should be no more than 7 pages in length (6 pages for part A, and 1 page for part B) and conform to the following format: double-spaced; 1-inch margins all around; and a font size of at least 11. Late papers will not be accepted except in the case of extenuating circumstances and instructor approval. Note on citations and bibliography: Due to space limitations in journals, it is often not possible to include all relevant information in an article. In evaluating a study, you should incorporate relevant information from other articles produced by the same study if they are specifically cited as references for that purposes. Include citations and a bibliography in your critique as warranted. A bibliography (if any) does not count toward the page limit. |
Audience The instructor identifies an audience (organizer of a conference) that is different from the instructor. This audience is one that students might encounter in their future careers as health service researchers. It allows them to practice writing in a discipline-specific, real-world context. Discipline-specific writing guidance Students may be unfamiliar with discipline-specific writing. In this example, the instructor provides a note on citations and bibliography so students can practice writing according to disciplinary conventions.
|
Part A: Point-By-Point CritiqueYour first task is to conduct a thorough assessment and critique of the article in order to characterize the quality of the evidence. This assessment will be the basis of your recommendation for the conference organizer, i.e., whether this paper should be presented as a poster, a podium, or a keynote presentation, or should be rejected from the conference. The critique should include the following information: 1. Relevance of the Research Summarize the relevance of this research to the field. Do the authors explain the importance of their research agenda? Do they adequately review the current state of knowledge and identify the relevant gaps and problems in the literature? End with a summative statement about whether the authors present a convincing argument for the relevance of their research. 2. Objectives or Research Questions Restate the research questions or objectives. Are the questions to be answered or objectives to be met by the research clearly delineated? Do the authors indicate the significance of these research questions to the advancement of the field? Are their questions formulated in response to the problem and without reference to the methods? End with a summative statement about whether the formulation of the research questions is adequate. 3. Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses Briefly describe the theoretical framework for this research and the hypotheses to be tested. Do the authors relate their problem to this framework and clearly state the hypotheses or develop the model to be tested? Recall that expectations are essentially hypotheses (e.g., “we expected that…”). Were the relationships among variables explicated? End with a summative statement about whether the authors adequately frame the problem and address hypotheses. 4. Limitations List the major limitations the authors identify. Are the consequences for the study conclusions discussed? Do the authors miss any major limitations? End with a summative statement about whether the authors adequately address the study limitations. 5. Implications and Conclusions Re-state the authors’ conclusions. Are these conclusions consistent with the findings and the limitations of the study? Are the conclusions responsive to the research questions? Do the authors discuss the implications of the study findings and explore potential further research? End with a summative statement about whether the conclusions are justified. |
Genre Conventions The assignment itself is very discipline-specific. It is meant to mimic writing done by health services researchers at disciplinary conferences. The instructor has students write according to disciplinary standards so they can imitate their field’s communication expectations. List of Style/Content Expectations The instructor walks students step-by-step through the sections of their critique. Especially for students who may be unfamiliar with a particular genre or discipline-specific writing expectations, these instructions can help avoid confusion or miscommunication.
|
