The purpose of this assignment is to get you thinking critically about what you read.

Article - Credit Crisis: An Islamic Perspective. By Abbas Mirakhor and Alaa Alaabed

An article review is a summary of an academic article. So, why write a review? The answer is basically "to inform and to evaluate".

Choose an article f rom the I ist and describe what the article is about. Give a descri pti on of the issue(s) that are being examined in the article, an explanation of the theory and methods used, an explanation and an assessment of the concl usi ons that are being offered.

Further, the article review should cover enough information so that a person who has not read the article wi I I get an understanding of what the article covers.

We will be looking for three things when we grade.

1. Bibliographic information:
- You can either make this the subtitle of your assignment or you can incorporate this information into the first sentence or two of the review. There is a no need for a separate works cited page.
- For journal articles (either in this format as a subtitle or include all of this information worked into a sentence): Last name, First name. (Year) "Title of Article" Title of. our Vohune (Number): page spread. (e.g. 3-15).
- For chapters in a collection (either in this fonnat as a subtitle or include all of this information worked into a sentence): Last name., First name. (Year) "Title of Chapter" in Title of Book ed. First name Last Name. City of Publication: page spread.

2., A *BRIEF* summary of the chapter/article:
- You should summarize the main points the author discusses.
- As far as possible, make it clear what the author's central amment is.
- This summary is only to give the necessary background for the analysis you will give, not the main thrust of your review. You will be able to include more detailed information in the course of actually critiquing the article, Your summary shouldn't take up more than a half page or so.

3. A detailed analysis of the article/chapter:
- This is the most important part of the review and where most of the marks will be allocated. Spend the most time here.
- You need to show not only that you have read the article/chapter but that you have thought critically about its content_
- When assessing the author's argument, you might think about the following questions: a is the argument made clearly? does the author hide behind fancy rhetoric or does she lay out the argumentative steps in a way that is easy to understand?
o does the author use appropriate evidence to support his/her argument? o does the author argue logically? are there steps missing in the chain of argumentation?
o does the author support his/her opinions with clear explanations/appeals to evidence or is the reader expected to simply agree with him/her?
0 does the author's view align with what you know about this topic/text?
o what is the intended audience for the article, is the article pitched too high? too low?

m does the author give sufficient background for his/her argument, for example, contextualizing what s/he says in relation to other scholarship on the subject?
o is the article/chapter convincing? if so, why? if not, why not?
- is the author's position conventional? boring/safe? provocative? controversial?
if controversial, does the author extend the conversation on this topic in a
constructive way or does silie go too far?
- if you disagree with the author in any way, what changes would you propose?
how would you improve on either the style or content of the chapter/article?
- is this article/chapter useful for people studying this topic? why? how?
- Obviously you won't have time to do ALL of this. Use these questions as a guide to the kinds of things that you should be discussing and not as a list of questions that must be answered.

Author credentials
It may be helpful to you in writing the review to summarise the credentials of the author.

It is sometimes easier to use just the surname of the author, with no title.
"Smith has been recognised as the foremost authority on the history of economic development..."

Structure of a Critical Review
Critical reviews usually have a similar structure. Headings are usually optional and can be helpful for the reader.

Introduction

The length of an introduction is usually one paragraph for a journal article review and two or three paragraphs for a longer book review. I ncl ude a few openi ng sentences that announce the author(s) and the title, and briefly explain the topic of the text. Present the aim of the text and summarise the main finding or key argument. Concl ude the introduction with a brief statement of your evaluation of the text. This can be a positive or negative evaluation or, as is usually the case, a mixed response.

Summary
Present a summary of the key points along with a limited number of examples. You can also briefly explain the author's purpose/intentions throughout the text and you may briefly describe how the text is organised. The summary should only make up about a thi rd of the critical review.

Critique
The critique should be a balanced discussion and evaluation of the strengths, weakness and notable features of the text. Remember to base your discussion on specific criteria Good reviews also include other sources to support your evaluation (remember to reference).

You can choose how to sequence your critique. Here are some examples to get you started:
- Most important to least important conclusions you make about the text.
- If your critique is more positive than negative, then present the negative points first and the positive last.
- If your critique is more negative than positive, then present the positive points first and the negative last.
- If there are both strengths and weakness for each criterion you use, you need to decide overall what your judgement is For example, you may want to comment on a key idea in the text and have both positive and negative comments. You could begin by stating what is good about the idea and then concede and explain how it is limited in someway. Whilethis example shows a mixed evaluation, overall you are probably being more negative than positive.

- In long reviews, you can address each criteria you choose in a paragraph, including both negative and positive points. For very short critical reviews (one page or less) where your comments wi I I be briefer, i ncl ude a paragraph of positive aspects and another of negative.

- You can also include recommendations for how the text can be improved in terms of ideas, research approach; theories or frameworks used can also be included in the critique section.

Conclusion

This is usually a very short paragraph.
- Restate your overall opinion of the text.
- Briefly present recommendations
- If necessary some further qualification or explanation of your judgement can be included. This can help your critique sound fair and reasonable.

References
If you have used other sources in you review you should also include a list of references at the end of the review.