A critical analysis paper asks the writer to make an argument about a particular book, essay, movie, etc

Get perfect grades by consistently using www.college-experts.com. Place your order and get a quality paper today. Take advantage of our current 20% discount by using the coupon code GET20

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

Assignment 3:
Writing Critical Analysis Papers

A critical analysis paper asks the writer to make an argument about a particular book, essay, movie,
etc. The goal is two fold: one, identify and explain the argument that the author is making, and two,
provide your own argument about that argument. One of the key directions of these assignments is often
to avoid/minimize summary – you are not writing a book report, but evaluating the author’s argument.

Potential points of criticism

Sometimes it can seem intimidating to “criticize” a book or article; after all, they are professors and
experienced policymakers. However, part of this exercise is to expose the fact that even though these
authors are highly qualified, they are still advancing an argument and providing evidence–their aim is to
persuade you that their argument is true, not to just present facts. Once you recognize that these authors
are making arguments, you can analyze whether or not you find their argument compelling. Following are
some possible questions you could ask to evaluate arguments:

  • Theoretical questions – How does the author understand the situation? What is his/her
    theoretical background? How would this influence their view of the situation?
    o IftheauthorisaclearproponentofWestern,liberalformsofdemocracy,howwillthisinfluence
    his/her study of authoritarian states?
  • Definitional questions– Are all the concepts in the text clear?Does theauthordefineaconcept
    vaguely to allow it to travel across different situations? If a concept can relate two seemingly
    different situations, is the concept meaningful?
    o CanwereallycomparetheexistingcommunistgovernmentinChinatothecommunistgovernment
    in the former Soviet Union?
  • Evidence questions:

o Does the author’s evidence support their argument? Do they have enough specific

evidence to prove the more general point?
Does the revolutionary government in Venezuela reflect a more general trend to the left in

all of Latin America?
o Does the author underemphasize or ignore evidence that is contrary to their argument?

Is an argument compelling if it ignores an obvious exception – Can we really say that
democracies are inherently peaceful given the 2003 Iraq invasion?

o Is the evidence credible? Can you identify a bias in the evidence?
Was the study done by a political action committee, and environmental NGO, or a non-

partisan research group? How might a group affiliation or funding influence the outcome
of research?

  • Implication/Policy relevance questions – What are the implications of this argument? Are
    those implications positive or negative? How has the author dealt with this issue?
    o IfWesternmodesofthinkingaretheonlyefficientpathforeconomicdevelopment,whatdoesthis
    mean with societies that have different cultures and values?
  • Other approaches:

o Is the author’s argument consistent throughout the book? Or, does the conclusion seem to

offer a different argument than he/she presented in the introduction?
o Does the author’s background have important implications for their argument?
o Do the specific language choices of the author betray a certain ideology or bias, or frame

the argument in a certain way?
Adopted from J.L. Beyer, “Critically Analyzing an Academic Article or Book”

Structuring a Critical Analysis Paper

Most critical analysis papers begin with a short summary of the work and then dive in to the
argument. Since most of these paper assignments are short, it is important to be concise in all parts of your
analysis. Writing an outline (and following it) is crucial to remain focused on your argument and avoid
summary or irrelevant description. Following is a sample outline for a critical analysis paper:



IV .

a. Identifytheworkbeingcriticized

  1. Present thesis – argument about the work
  2. Preview your argument – what are the steps you will take to prove your argument

Short summary of the work
a. Does not need to be comprehensive – present only what the reader needs to know to

understand your argument
Your argument

a. Yourargumentwilllikelyinvolveanumberofsub-arguments–mini-thesesyouproveto
prove your larger argument true. For example, if your thesis was that the author’s
presumption that the world will soon face a “clash of civilizations” is flawed because he
inadequately specifies his key concept, civilizations, you might prove this by:

i. Notingcompetingdefinitionsofcivilizations
ii. Identifying how his examples do not meet the example of civilizations

iii. Arguethatcivilizationissobroadandnon-specificthatitisnotuseful
b. This should be the bulk of the paper – Your professor wants to read your argument

about the work, not a summary.

a. Reflectonhowyouhaveprovenyourargument.
b. Pointouttheimportanceofyourargument(beyonditbeingarequirementforpassingthe

class ☺)
c. Note potential avenues for additional research or analysis

Final Reminders

  • Even though you are potentially only referring to one source, you still need to cite your
    information, using either parenthetical citation or footnotes/endnotes.
  • Double check the assignment to make sure you have covered all the points that your professor has

Political Science
PS 4464


Do you need help with this or a different assignment? We offer CONFIDENTIAL, ORIGINAL (Turnitin/LopesWrite/SafeAssign checks), and PRIVATE services using latest (within 5 years) peer-reviewed articles. Kindly click on ORDER NOW to receive an A++ paper from our masters- and PhD writers.

Get a 15% discount on your order using the following coupon code SAVE15

Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper