Article Review on “An Indentured Servant Identifies as Both man and Woman”

History/WGS 213: Women in American History, Fall 2020
Short Reviews Assignment, may be turned in on Fridays during Weeks 3, 5, 7, 9, 11
Critical thinking is essential to a liberal arts education. Critical reading is one element of
critical thinking, and it means the ability to read and evaluate a written text. In history, one
way that we practice this skill is by writing book reviews. In other disciplines or professions,
it may consist of reviewing a new proposal, or the newest research in your field. Whatever
your field, chances are you will be asked to use your critical reading and writing skills. This
assignment will help you develop those skills.
We want to give you the skills and the confidence to discuss the findings and methods of
other historians, since that kind of conversation is essential to the discipline of history. You
will review
The requirements for the review are:
• Minimum 500 words
• Double-spaced, typed, one-inch margins
• Citations in Chicago style (ie FOOTNOTES!) for all references to the text.
• All reviews due by midnight to Canvas on the due date.
Grading:
To earn an A in the class: 2 reviews, one of which exceeds expectations
To earn a B in the class: 2 reviews that meet expectations
To earn a C in the class: 1 review that meets expectations
This is NOT a book report. Do not simply summarize the author’s main points. Instead, I
want to see you engaging with the text and thinking about its strengths and weaknesses. A
brief description of a good review follows, but I strongly urge you to read the handout at:
http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/book-reviews/ for an excellent discussion of how to
write a critical review.
A review should include the following components:
o Quick introduction of the article/author/topic
o Brief summary of the article, outlining the topics covered/organization/sources
used/etc.
o A thesis – YOUR assessment of the article and its strengths/weaknesses.
o A critical response – see below
o Brief conclusion (a sentence or two)
What should a review do? Here are some quick tips:
o A review is not a report. It is a critique.
o A brief summary is appropriate, but in this short a review, it should be only a few
sentences.
o The bulk of the review should be a critique – what does the article do well? What
kind of evidence does the author use? Does s/he do so effectively? Why or why not?
Does the argument work? Why or why not? How is this helpful to our understanding
of the topic?
o Introduce the book/chapter title, author and content without going into great detail.
o Be sure to include the chapter’s main thesis, as well as the topic, and critique that
thesis (is it supported? Why or why not? What counterargument might you offer?)
o Your thesis ties your critique together and explains what the chapter’s
strengths/weaknesses are.
o Draw on examples from the text to support your praise and critique (ie…Newman’s
discussion of xxx…is an example of her ability to…. OR Newman’s failure to fully
explore yyyy…calls into question…etc.)
o Discusses the kind of evidence the author uses and how well she deploys it
See the sample review paper posted on Canvas for a model.
Rubric:
Criteria Exceeds
Expectations
Meets Expectations Needs Revision
Introduction and
thesis
Introduction is
particularly wellwritten and
developed. Reads
smoothly and
thesis points to
strengths and
weaknesses of the
article.
Introduction includes the
name, author, and title
of the article. Also
explains the scope of the
article
(where/when/who/what).
Includes a thesis
statement that reflects
your assessment of the
article.
Introduction lacks
one or more
elements
necessary to meet
expectations.
Critique Criteria is
thoughtful and
well-developed.
Author points to
specific strengths
and weaknesses of
the article
Some attempt at a
critique that makes
specific points about the
article.
More description
than critique.
Reads like a report
on the article than
a critique. (ie
summary, not
analysis)
Organization Thesis flows clearly
through the review
and is linked by
topic sentences
that also reflect
the main ideas of
each paragraph.
Review is easy to
follow.
Review is well-organized
and easy to follow. Most,
if not all, paragraphs
begin with topic
sentences. Each
paragraph focuses on
just one topic.
May lack
paragraph
structure, or
paragraphs are too
long or too short.
May be stream of
consciousness or
otherwise not
organized.
Analysis and
Evidence
Article has strong
thesis that is
Some evidence used to
support points, but they
Very few specific
examples. Or
supported by
specific examples
from the text.
Examples are
explained and
linked to thesis.
may not all be equally
well explained.
examples but no
analysis.
Writing Paper is
exceptionally wellwritten and easy to
read. Written in
formal, but
accessible style.
Uses a variety of
verbiage and
sentence styles.
Paper is generally wellwritten, but may contain
a few minor grammar
errors or typos.
Significant writing
issues interfere
with the author’s
ability to convey
meaning. Many
fragments, runons, etc.
Requirements:
length and
citations.
Meets length
requirements and
citations are
correct.
At least 500 words, not
counting footnotes. All
citations are Chicagostyle footnotes. May be
minor citation style
errors.
Missing a
significant number
of citations, or
paper is fewer than
500 words.