You have already read the Goldstein essay and the Rosin essay, and you have completed a summary of one of those essays. Now you will take that summary and incorporate it into a critical analysis of the essay.
A critical analysis should be much more rigorous than merely saying that you liked or did not like the essay. A critical analysis is not about how you feel about an essay but instead is about what you think about the essay. In a critical analysis, you make a judgment about the essay by looking carefully at what the author says; how and how well the points are made, supported, and illustrated; and your position in relation to the author’s ideas and implications.
The final version of the paper must include these 5 elements in this order:
1 — an introduction with a strong thesis statement that reflects the position you will take in relation to the essay. Review “Introductions, Thesis Statements, and Conclusions” and “Introduction and Conclusion Strategies” found in Module Two Lecture Notes.
2 — a fair, concise, and complete summary of the essay author’s ideas. (What are the main points the writer is making? What is the argument he or she is making in the article?) You have already completed this in Module 2, and I have or will soon comment on it.
3 — an evaluation of how the author makes her argument. In this second part of your critical analysis, you will evaluate how the writer makes his argument. You will move here from what the writer’s argument is (your summary) to asking and analyzing how the writer constructs his argument.
In ancient Greece, Aristotle taught that the ability to persuade an audience depends on how well a writer appeals to a reader logically, emotionally, and ethically (through the writer’s credibility). First, what logical elements does he use to try to convince you to agree with her? Does she use logical argument? Rational reasoning? Expert opinions or sources? Statistics? Second, what emotional elements does he use to try to persuade you? Emotional arguments? Does he use examples or personal stories? Speculation? Fear tactics? Last, how credible are the writer and the argument the writer makes? Are there gaps or holes in the argument? Has information been left out or skewed in some way? Is blatantly biased language used? Does the writer have an obvious or hidden agenda? What is the writer’s background and how does that qualify him to write about this subject?
Be very specific here. Don’t just tell your readers what your analysis is. Show your readers what you are talking about by quoting, summarizing, or paraphrasing from the text. The strongest papers will use quotation more than summary or paraphrase to highlight specific points about the essay. Be sure to use quotation sandwiches and to include MLA in-text citations with each source use. See the Lecture Documents in Module Three for help with this: “How to Incorporate Quotations into Your Writing.” Pay special attention to the discussion there about the three parts of quotation sandwiches.
4 — a response to the argument the author is making. Your response should include points of both agreement and disagreement with the author’s ideas. Discuss why you agree or disagree. Be specific. Use examples and quotations (in quotation sandwiches) from the text to illustrate. Don’t just tell us; Show us.
5 — a strong conclusion. See the discussion about writing a strong conclusion in Module Two Lecture Notes, “Introductions, Thesis Statements, and Conclusions” and in “Introduction and Conclusion Strategies.”
Final papers must include MLA in-text citations with each source use, as well as a correct Works Cited page. You can find directions for how to do this In Module Three Lecture Documents “Documentation.”
