critical review of an essay

How to Write Critical Reviews

When you are asked to write a critical review of a book or article, you will need to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. In other words, you will be examining another person’s thoughts on a topic from your point of view.

Your stand must go beyond your “gut reaction” to the work and be based on your knowledge (readings, lecture, experience) of the topic as well as on factors such as criteria stated in your assignment or discussed by you and your instructor.

Make your stand clear at the beginning of your review, in your evaluations of specific parts, and in your concluding commentary.

Remember that your goal should be to make a few key points about the book or article, not to discuss everything the author writes.

Understanding the Assignment

To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work–deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole.

Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain points and prevent you from merely summarizing what the author says. Assuming the role of an analytical reader will also help you to determine whether or not the author fulfills the stated purpose of the book or article and enhances your understanding or knowledge of a particular topic.

Be sure to read your assignment thoroughly before you read the article or book. Your instructor may have included specific guidelines for you to follow. Keeping these guidelines in mind as you read the article or book can really help you write your paper!

Also, note where the work connects with what you’ve studied in the course. You can make the most efficient use of your reading and notetaking time if you are an active reader; that is, keep relevant questions in mind and jot down page numbers as well as your responses to ideas that appear to be significant as you read.

Please note: The length of your introduction and overview, the number of points you choose to review, and the length of your conclusion should be proportionate to the page limit stated in your assignment and should reflect the complexity of the material being reviewed as well as the expectations of your reader.

Write the introduction

Below are a few guidelines to help you write the introduction to your critical review.

Introduce your review appropriately

Begin your review with an introduction appropriate to your assignment.

If your assignment asks you to review only one book and not to use outside sources, your introduction will focus on identifying the author, the title, the main topic or issue presented in the book, and the author’s purpose in writing the book.

If your assignment asks you to review the book as it relates to issues or themes discussed in the course, or to review two or more books on the same topic, your introduction must also encompass those expectations.

Explain relationships

For example, before you can review two books on a topic, you must explain to your reader in your introduction how they are related to one another.

Within this shared context (or under this “umbrella”) you can then review comparable aspects of both books, pointing out where the authors agree and differ.

In other words, the more complicated your assignment is, the more your introduction must accomplish.

Finally, the introduction to a book review is always the place for you to establish your position as the reviewer (your thesis about the author’s thesis).

As you write, consider the following questions:

• Is the book a memoir, a treatise, a collection of facts, an extended argument, etc.? Is the article a documentary, a write-up of primary research, a position paper, etc.?
• Who is the author? What does the preface or foreword tell you about the author’s purpose, background, and credentials? What is the author’s approach to the topic (as a journalist? a historian? a researcher?)?
• What is the main topic or problem addressed? How does the work relate to a discipline, to a profession, to a particular audience, or to other works on the topic?
• What is your critical evaluation of the work (your thesis)? Why have you taken that position? What criteria are you basing your position on?

Provide an overview

In your introduction, you will also want to provide an overview. An overview supplies your reader with certain general information not appropriate for including in the introduction but necessary to understanding the body of the review.

Generally, an overview describes your book’s division into chapters, sections, or points of discussion. An overview may also include background information about the topic, about your stand, or about the criteria you will use for evaluation.

The overview and the introduction work together to provide a comprehensive beginning for (a “springboard” into) your review.

• What are the author’s basic premises? What issues are raised, or what themes emerge? What situation (i.e., racism on college campuses) provides a basis for the author’s assertions?
• How informed is my reader? What background information is relevant to the entire book and should be placed here rather than in a body paragraph?

Write the body

The body is the center of your paper, where you draw out your main arguments. Below are some guidelines to help you write it.

Organize using a logical plan

Organize the body of your review according to a logical plan. Here are two options:

• First, summarize, in a series of paragraphs, those major points from the book that you plan to discuss; incorporating each major point into a topic sentence for a paragraph is an effective organizational strategy. Second, discuss and evaluate these points in a following group of paragraphs. (There are two dangers lurking in this pattern–you may allot too many paragraphs to summary and too few to evaluation, or you may re-summarize too many points from the book in your evaluation section.)
• Alternatively, you can summarize and evaluate the major points you have chosen from the book in a point-by-point schema. That means you will discuss and evaluate point one within the same paragraph (or in several if the point is significant and warrants extended discussion) before you summarize and evaluate point two, point three, etc., moving in a logical sequence from point to point to point. Here again, it is effective to use the topic sentence of each paragraph to identify the point from the book that you plan to summarize or evaluate.

Questions to keep in mind as you write

With either organizational pattern, consider the following questions:

• What are the author’s most important points? How do these relate to one another? (Make relationships clear by using transitions: “In contrast,” an equally strong argument,” “moreover,” “a final conclusion,” etc.).
• What types of evidence or information does the author present to support his or her points? Is this evidence convincing, controversial, factual, one-sided, etc.? (Consider the use of primary historical material, case studies, narratives, recent scientific findings, statistics.)
• Where does the author do a good job of conveying factual material as well as personal perspective? Where does the author fail to do so? If solutions to a problem are offered, are they believable, misguided, or promising?
• Which parts of the work (particular arguments, descriptions, chapters, etc.) are most effective and which parts are least effective? Why?
• Where (if at all) does the author convey personal prejudice, support illogical relationships, or present evidence out of its appropriate context?

Keep your opinions distinct and cite your sources

Remember, as you discuss the author’s major points, be sure to distinguish consistently between the author’s opinions and your own.

Keep the summary portions of your discussion concise, remembering that your task as a reviewer is to re-see the author’s work, not to re-tell it.

And, importantly, if you refer to ideas from other books and articles or from lecture and course materials, always document your sources, or else you might wander into the realm of plagiarism.

Include only that material which has relevance for your review and use direct quotations sparingly. The Writing Center has other handouts to help you paraphrase text and introduce quotations.

Write the conclusion

You will want to use the conclusion to state your overall critical evaluation.

You have already discussed the major points the author makes, examined how the author supports arguments, and evaluated the quality or effectiveness of specific aspects of the book or article.

Now you must make an evaluation of the work as a whole, determining such things as whether or not the author achieves the stated or implied purpose and if the work makes a significant contribution to an existing body of knowledge.

Consider the following questions:

• Is the work appropriately subjective or objective according to the author’s purpose?
• How well does the work maintain its stated or implied focus? Does the author present extraneous material? Does the author exclude or ignore relevant information?
• How well has the author achieved the overall purpose of the book or article? What contribution does the work make to an existing body of knowledge or to a specific group of readers? Can you justify the use of this work in a particular course?
• What is the most important final comment you wish to make about the book or article? Do you have any suggestions for the direction of future research in the area? What has reading this work done for you or demonstrated to you?

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

• Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
• Guided brainstorming exercises
• Get more help with your essay
• Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

• Jump to menu
• Student Home
• Accept your offer
• How to enrol
• Student ID card
• Set up your IT
• Orientation Week
• Fees & payment
• Academic calendar
• Special consideration
• Transcripts
• The Nucleus: Student Hub
• Referencing
• Essay writing
• Learning abroad & exchange
• Professional development & UNSW Advantage
• Employability
• Financial assistance
• International students
• Equitable learning
• Postgraduate research
• Health Service
• Events & activities
• Emergencies
• Volunteering
• Clubs and societies
• Accommodation
• Health services
• Sport and gym
• Arc student organisation
• Security on campus
• Maps of campus
• Careers portal
• Change password

Writing a Critical Review

The advice below is a general guide only. We strongly recommend that you also follow your assignment instructions and seek clarification from your lecturer/tutor if needed.

Purpose of a critical review

The critical review is a writing task that asks you to summarise and evaluate a text. The critical review can be of a book, a chapter, or a journal article. Writing the critical review usually requires you to read the selected text in detail and to read other related texts so you can present a fair and reasonable evaluation of the selected text. 

What is meant by critical?

At university, to be critical does not mean to criticise in a negative manner. Rather, it requires you to question the information and opinions in a text and present your evaluation or judgement of the text. To do this well, you should attempt to understand the topic from different perspectives (i.e. read related texts), and in relation to the theories, approaches and frameworks in your course.

What is meant by evaluation or judgement?

This is where you decide the strengths and weaknesses of a text. This is usually based on specific criteria. Evaluating requires an understanding of not just the content of the text, but also an understanding of a text’s purpose, the intended audience, and why it is structured the way it is.

What is meant by analysis?

Analysis requires separating the content and concepts of a text into their main components and then understanding how these interrelate, connect and possibly influence each other.

  Next: Structure of a critical review

Essay and assignment writing guide.

• Essay writing basics
• Essay and assignment planning
• Answering assignment questions
• Editing checklist
• Structure of a critical review
• General criteria for evaluating
• Sample extracts
• Annotated bibliography
• Reflective writing
• ^ More support

Study Hacks Workshops | All the hacks you need! 28 May – 25 Jul 2024

How to write a critical review

Our guide on what it means to think critically when assessing a piece of writing for a student assignment or a workplace project.

When an academic assignment asks you to “critically review” or include a “critical analysis” of the work of other people, it generally means that you’ll need to “think critically”. This means analysing and assessing the work in terms of what the author was trying to achieve, the approach they took, how they conducted the research, and whether the outcomes were valid and acceptable. 

A critical review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of an item’s ideas and content. It provides description, analysis and interpretation that assess the item’s value. It’s an exercise that can be carried out on many different types of writing, but is most often carried out on a report, a book or a journal article. 

Thousands of publications relevant to HR appear every year, via established journals, websites, management consultancy reports and universities all over the world. With so much information becoming available, many of which offer new ideas, new HR theories and approaches, it’s important that HR practitioners can evaluate whether what they read is valid, sound and unbiased. We can’t take everything we read at face value, and it’s an important skill, and a very important activity to conduct, if you’re going to base corporate change and your proposals to management on information from published sources. 

On this page

Selecting an item to review, the critical review process, writing the critical review, useful contacts and books, view our other study guides.

For study purposes, it's likely that you'll be asked to carry out a critical review of one or more journal articles. You may be directed to a specific journal article, or asked to select one based on your own research on a particular topic, or on a topic of your choice.  

If you're given options to make a choice, you're more likely to achieve the required outcome if you use well-known academic journals. These might be found in a library, on HR websites such as HR Focus, or via any online journal hosting service, such as EBSCO which is provided free to CIPD members.  

An article will only be useful for a critical review assignment if the author has stated what the question was, how the research was done and the outcomes or conclusions based on the facts and evidence listed.  

What is a journal?  

A journal (sometimes also called a “ periodical ” ) is a publication produced on a regular continuing basis – it may be weekly, monthly, quarterly (every three months) or annually.  

The titles of journals (for example The Journal of Occupational Psychology ) indicate the main topic focus of the articles contained in it.  

As they are published regularly, journals usually have volume and issue numbers, and sometimes months, to identify them.  

A volume usually covers a specific year – so, for example, volume 45 may be all the issues published in 2013.  

A n issue number refers to a specific instalment of the journal within that volume – they are often numbered issue or number 1, 2, 3, etc.  

A s well as, or instead of, a volume and issue number, some journals use the month of publication. This information is often crucial in finding specific articles.  

There are two main types of journal :  

Academic journal (also called scholarly journals) – T hese often contain research articles written by subject experts; they contain academic commentary and critical evaluation of issues by experts. The articles will be written in an academic style and they may be “ refereed ” or “ peer-reviewed ” – that is they articles are assessed, often by members of an editorial board who are experts in the field, before they are accepted for publication. Articles from this type of journal are usually suitable for a critical review exercise. The International Journal of Human Resource Management and Harvard Business Review are examples.  

Trade or professional journals – T hese usually contain news articles and comment on current issues. The articles often contain practical information and are written in everyday language. They also often have a “ jobs ” section and news of people in that profession. They are likely to be written by journalists rather than academics and don't usually have such rigorous publishing criteria. These articles may not be so suitable for a critical review exercise. People Management is an example.  

Take time to:  

Think about what content are you expecting, based on the title?  

Read the abstract for a summary of the author's arguments.  

Study the list of references to determine what research contributed to the author's arguments. Are the references recent? Do they represent important work in the field by accredited authors?  

Find out more about the author to learn what authority they have to write about the subject. Have they published other works which have been peer-assessed by other experts?  

Read the article carefully, but straight-through the first time to form an impression. You may find it useful to note down your initial reactions and questions. Then re-read it, either right-through or in sections, taking notes of the key ideas. Use these questions as a framework.  

Who was the article written for?  

Why has the author written the article? To survey and summarise research on a topic? Or to present an argument that builds on past research? Or to disagree with another writer’s stated argument?  

Does the author define important terms?  

Is the information in the article fact or opinion? Facts can be verified, while opinions arise from perceptions and interpretation.  

Is the article well-structured? Is it organised logically and easy to follow?  

Is the information well-researched, or is it largely unsupported?  

What are the author’s central arguments or conclusions? Are they supported by evidence and analysis?  

If the article reports on an experiment or study, does the author clearly outline methodology and the expected result?  

Is the article lacking any information or arguments that you expected to find?  

For more on effective reading and note-taking, see our guide on studying effectively.  

A key part of a critical review is assessing the author's “argument”. In this context, the argument is the line of reasoning or the approach or point of view of the author. It may be the author is defending a particular idea. They may be trying to make a case for something, perhaps a new idea, in which case there would then need to be evidence, examples and a clear set of conclusions coming from the research, or investigation done. To be academically acceptable, any outcomes stated should not be just the author's ideas alone, they must be backed up with valid, appropriate evidence.  

Questions to ask yourself about the item you're reviewing are:  

Is there a logical progression through the argument?  

Do you feel the argument is strong enough?  

Is there enough valid evidence?  

Does the author make any assumptions and, if so, are they reasonable?  

Are any surveys valid – for example, is the sample size representative and large enough for any conclusions to be valid?  

Would the findings and conclusions apply to other organisations, or are they too specific? Why?  

Do you think the author was biased? Why? For example, it can be useful to think about who funded the research and whether could that have influenced the findings.  

It's important to remember that you don't need to agree with the author's views – this would form part of your critical thinking.  

A key skill when thinking critically is to be objective in what you are reading or thinking through. Look at both sides of the argument, think of some tests you could do to establish if the ideas are sound. You might apply them to your own organisation for instance.  

The output from critical thinking in a professional context is usually a report – a critical review of the item(s) chosen for a given purpose (for example, as student assignment or, in a work setting, to a project team).  

The steps are to:  

Select your area for review, and the reason for choosing it.  

Identify the different information sources reviewed, naming type, when accessed, and through which online database or source.  

Explain why you chose these source(s) to review (unless they were given to you).  

Highlight and comment on the different research approaches and methods used by the author(s).  

Comment on the argument and conclusions, drawing where necessary on your wider research.  

If required, make recommendations to named stakeholders for sustaining or improving practice, based on the findings in your sources.

Open University – critical reading techniques  

Open University – critically processing what you read  

Palgrave Study Skills – critical thinking  

CAMERON, S. (2009) The business student's handbook: skills for study and employment . 5th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education.  

COTTRELL, S. (2013) The study skills handbook . 4th ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.  

COTTRELL, S. (2011) Critical thinking skills . 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.  

HORN. R. (2009) The business skills handbook . London: CIPD.  

NORTHEDGE, A. (2005) The good study guide . 2nd ed. Milton Keynes: Open University.  

OPEN UNIVERSITY. (2007) Develop effective study strategies . Milton Keynes: Open University

Our guide to helping you compile bibliographies based on the Harvard system.

There are a number of key considerations when developing an approach to studying to suit you. These study tips will help ensure you study effectively.

Practical advice on the report-writing process, with key steps to improve the quality of business reports

An academic essay is a formal piece of writing which presents an argument to the reader. Learn how to write persuasive and robust academic essays.

Our online Community

A place to learn, debate and connect with other HR and L&D professionals

More on this topic

Interactive career tools, including career assessments, personal development planner, elevator pitch builder, and interview simulator.

Supporting CIPD members in successful job search

Listen to our webinar to hear how our new qualifications could give you the skills and knowledge you need to excel in the people profession.

Latest guides

What this practice is, why you should avoid it, and how to approach it if no other options are available

Practical advice for managers on tackling sexual harassment in the workplace

Practical advice on how to tackle sexual harassment in the workplace

Outlines the main legal requirements surrounding TUPE transfers, and the essential steps involved in managing them

• Memberships
• Institutional Members
• Teacher Members

Critical Review

by AEUK | May 13, 2024 | Critical thinking , Writing

Critical Review 

What is a critical review.

In very simply terms, a critical review or appraisal is an academic review of an article that offers both a summary and critical comment. Book reviews, movie reviews, critical reviews and literature reviews all perform a similar task of evaluating or appraising how well various texts and artistic productions achieve their goals of communicating with the reader, or a wider audience ( Charles Strut University, 2024. )

A critical review (sometimes called a critique, critical commentary, critical appraisal, critical analysis) is a detailed commentary on and critical evaluation of a text. To be critical does not mean to criticise in an exclusively negative manner. To be critical of a text means you question the information and opinions in the text, in an attempt to evaluate or judge its worth overall ( University of Southampton, 2024) .

A critical review is not just a summary. It is an evaluation of what an author has said about a topic. It is critical in the sense that it is a thoughtful consideration of the validity and accuracy of the author’s claims; considers the benefits and limitations of the author’s point of view; and identifies other valid points of view ( Monash University, 2024 ).

A critical review usually includes the following parts: Summary (What is the text about?), a critical analysis & evaluation (both positive and negative evaluations, e.g. What does the text contribute to the field? What are the limitations of the writer’s approach/conclusions?), and a recommendation (in light of your analysis and evaluation, how should others view this text?) ( Western Sydney University, 2024 ).

How to write a critical review video

A short video on academic writing.

Video Worksheet: click here

A critical review outline.

A critical review usually contains four parts:

• Introduction
• Summary of main ideas
• Evaluation (the critique)

Evaluation Focus Questions

This is a set of critical questions to think about when reading or listening to a text. These questions help to focus on the key areas to critique.

Evaluation Phrases

A set of evaluation phrases that can be used to signal positive and negative areas in a text.

Critical Review Download

Critical review: how to write a critical review (new 2024).

This lesson provides students with the knowledge and practice on how to write a critical review. It includes university critical review definitions, a four-part structure critical review outline, evaluation questions, evaluation phrases, a critical review essay analysis and writing practice. Example . Level: ** * ** [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

£5.50 – Add to cart Checkout Added to cart

Critical  Analysis Reading Texts

Text analysis 1: going to university, text analysis 1: going to university (updated 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘going to university’ with over 15 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .  Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

£6.50 – Add to cart Checkout Added to cart

Text analysis 2: cost-of-living crisis, text analysis 2: cost-of-living crisis (new 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘the cost-of-living crisis’ with over 18 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .  Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

Text Analysis 3:  Climate Change

Text analysis 3: climate change: the turning point (new 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘Climate Change’ with over 24 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .  Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

Text Analysis 4: Climate Change

Text analysis 4: population growth (new 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘population growth’ with over 20 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .  Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

Text Analysis 5: Data Centres

Text analysis 5: data centres (new 2024).

A great lesson for developing and practising critical thinking reading skills. It is a 400-word text on ‘data centres’ with over 26 possible problems. Students use the higher level thinking skills of analysis and evaluation to examine, question and critique the text .   Example.   Level: ** ** * [B1/B2/C1] TEACHER MEMBERSHIP / INSTITUTIONAL MEMBERSHIP

      Memberships (Teacher / Institutional)

      Full access to everything -  £100 /  £200 /   £550

  Join today * x

More Blog Articles…

Advertisement:

Write a Critical Review

Introduction, how can i improve my critical review, ask us: chat, email, visit or call.

Video: How to Integrate Critical Voice into Your Literature Review

Video: Note-taking and Writing Tips to Avoid Plagiarism

More help: Writing

• Book Writing Appointments Get help on your writing assignments.
• To introduce the source, its main ideas, key details, and its place within the field
• To present your assessment of the quality of the source

In general, the introduction of your critical review should include

• Author(s) name
• Title of the source 
• What is the author's central purpose?
• What methods or theoretical frameworks were used to accomplish this purpose?
• What topic areas, chapters, sections, or key points did the author use to structure the source?
• What were the results or findings of the study?
• How were the results or findings interpreted? How were they related to the original problem (author's view of evidence rather than objective findings)?
• Who conducted the research? What were/are their interests?
• Why did they do this research?
• Was this research pertinent only within the author’s field, or did it have broader (even global) relevance?
• On what prior research was this source-based? What gap is the author attempting to address?
• How important was the research question posed by the researcher?
• Your overall opinion of the quality of the source. Think of this like a thesis or main argument.
• Present your evaluation of the source, providing evidence from the text (or other sources) to support your assessment.

In general, the body of your critical review should include

• Is the material organized logically and with appropriate headings?
• Are there stylistic problems in logical, clarity or language?
• Were the author(s) able to answer the question (test the hypothesis) raised
• What was the objective of the study?
• Does all the information lead coherently to the purpose of the study?
• Are the methods valid for studying the problem or gap?
• Could the study be duplicated from the information provided?
• Is the experimental design logical and reliable?
• How are the data organized? Is it logical and interpretable?
• Do the results reveal what the researcher intended?
• Do the authors present a logical interpretation of the results?
• Have the limitations of the research been addressed?
• Does the study consider other key studies in the field or other research possibilities or directions?
• How was the significance of the work described?
• Follow the structure of the journal article (e.g. Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion) - highlighting the strengths and weaknesses in each section
• Present the weaknesses of the article, and then the strengths of the article (or vice versa).
• Group your ideas according to different research themes presented in the source
• Group the strengths and weaknesses of the article into the following areas: originality, reliability, validity, relevance, and presentation

Purpose: 

• To summarize the strengths and weaknesses of the article as a whole
• To assert the article’s practical and theoretical significance

In general, the conclusion of your critical review should include

• A restatement of your overall opinion
• A summary of the key strengths and weaknesses of the research that support your overall opinion of the source
• Did the research reported in this source result in the formation of new questions, theories or hypotheses by the authors or other researchers?
• Have other researchers subsequently supported or refuted the observations or interpretations of these authors?
• Did the research provide new factual information, a new understanding of a phenomenon in the field, a new research technique?
• Did the research produce any practical applications? 
• What are the social, political, technological, or medical implications of this research?
• How do you evaluate the significance of the research? 
• Find out what style guide you are required to follow (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago) and follow the guidelines to create a reference list (may be called a bibliography or works cited).
• Be sure to include citations in the text when you refer to the source itself or external sources. 
• Check out our Cite Your Sources Guide for more information. 
• Read assignment instructions carefully and refer to them throughout the writing process.
• Make an outline of your main sections before you write.
• If your professor does not assign a topic or source, you must choose one yourself. Select a source that interests you and is written clearly so you can understand it.
• << Previous: Start Here
• Last Updated: Apr 25, 2024 1:53 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uoguelph.ca/CriticalReview

Suggest an edit to this guide

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

• Queen's University Library
• Research Guides

Introduction to Research: Humanities and Social Sciences

• Critical Reviews
• Choosing Your Research Topic
• Finding Background Information
• Choosing Relevant Keywords
• Connecting Keywords
• Citation Searching
• Articles (General)
• Scholarly Articles
• Films & Videos
• Scholarly vs. Popular Sources
• Scholarly vs. Non-Scholarly Periodicals
• Web Resources
• Annotated Bibliography
• Reflective Writing
• Citing Sources
• Off Campus?

Writing Critical Reviews

What is a Critical Review of a Journal Article?

A critical review of a journal article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of an article's ideas and content. It provides description, analysis and interpretation that allow readers to assess the article's value.

Before You Read the Article

• What does the title lead you to expect about the article?
• Study any sub-headings to understand how the author organized the content.
• Read the abstract for a summary of the author's arguments.
• Study the list of references to determine what research contributed to the author's arguments. Are the references recent? Do they represent important work in the field?
• If possible, read about the author to learn what authority he or she has to write about the subject.
• Consult Web of Science to see if other writers have cited the author's work. (Please see 'How to use E-Indexes'.) Has the author made an important contribution to the field of study?

Reading the Article: Points to Consider

Read the article carefully. Record your impressions and note sections suitable for quoting.

• Who is the intended audience?
• What is the author's purpose? To survey and summarize research on a topic? To present an argument that builds on past research? To refute another writer's argument?
• Does the author define important terms?
• Is the information in the article fact or opinion? (Facts can be verified, while opinions arise from interpretations of facts.) Does the information seem well-researched or is it unsupported?
• What are the author's central arguments or conclusions? Are they clearly stated? Are they supported by evidence and analysis?
• If the article reports on an experiment or study, does the author clearly outline methodology and the expected result?
• Is the article lacking information or argumentation that you expected to find?
• Is the article organized logically and easy to follow?
• Does the writer's style suit the intended audience? Is the style stilted or unnecessarily complicated?
• Is the author's language objective or charged with emotion and bias?
• If illustrations or charts are used, are they effective in presenting information?

Prepare an Outline

Read over your notes. Choose a statement that expresses the central purpose or thesis of your review. When thinking of a thesis, consider the author's intentions and whether or not you think those intentions were successfully realized. Eliminate all notes that do not relate to your thesis. Organize your remaining points into separate groups such as points about structure, style, or argument. Devise a logical sequence for presenting these ideas. Remember that all of your ideas must support your central thesis.

Write the First Draft

The review should begin with a complete citation of the article. For example:

Platt, Kevin M.F. "History and Despotism, or: Hayden White vs. Ivan the Terrible  and Peter the Great." Rethinking History 3:3 (1999) : 247-269.

NOTE: Use the same bibliographic citation format as you would for any bibliography, works cited or reference list. It will follow a standard documentation style such as MLA or APA.

Be sure to ask your instructor which citation style to use. For frequently used style guides consult Queen's University Library's Citing Sources guide.

The first paragraph may contain:

• a statement of your thesis
• the author's purpose in writing the article
• comments on how the article relates to other work on the same subject
• information about the author's reputation or authority in the field

The body of the review should:

• state your arguments in support of your thesis
• follow the logical development of ideas that you mapped out in your outline
• include quotations from the article which illustrate your main ideas

The concluding paragraph may:

• summarize your review
• restate your thesis

Revise the First Draft

Ideally, you should leave your first draft for a day or two before revising. This allows you to gain a more objective perspective on your ideas. Check for the following when revising:

• grammar and punctuation errors
• organization, logical development and solid support of your thesis
• errors in quotations or in references

You may make major revisions in the organization or content of your review during the revision process. Revising can even lead to a radical change in your central thesis.

NOTE: Prepared by University of Toronto Mississauga Library, Hazel McCallion Academic Learning Centre.

• << Previous: Writing Resources
• Next: Annotated Bibliography >>

Additional Resources

Writing a Critical Review (Allyson Skene, The Writing Centre, U of Toronto at Scarborough)

The Book Review or Article Critique (Margaret Procter, Writing Support, University of Toronto)

Critical Reviews of Journal Articles (Herbert Coutts, University of Alberta)

Writing a Critical Review (The Writing Centre, Queen's University)

• Last Updated: Jun 17, 2024 10:52 AM
• Subjects: Multidisciplinary

IOE - Faculty of Education and Society

Resources for academic reading and writing

Open and self-access resources from the IOE Academic Writing Centre to help you improve your academic reading and writing.

This is a collection of free, open, self-access resources for students. These guides help you understand what an assignment asks you to do. They clarify what reading and writing critically means in an academic context. Here you can also find guidance on how to reference and avoid plagiarism. The section on argument, voice and structure is useful to express and support your ideas. Advice is also available on how to review and edit your text, and how to respond to feedback.

Understanding assessment requirements

Academic reading: Reading critically

Academic writing: Writing critically

Referencing and avoiding plagiarism

Argument, voice, structure

Reviewing, editing and responding to feedback

How to Write a Critical Review of an Article

Need to write a critical review but unsure of where to start? Don’t worry, it’s normal to feel stuck when writing a critical review.

So, how should you approach a critical review? Well, you need to consider the strengths and weaknesses of the article. But, more than this, you need to draw links between this article and other relevant papers. This is important if you want a first-class grade!

Critical reviews are difficult, but they can help you improve your research and selection skills. That said, let’s explore how to write a critical review of an article.

How to be ‘critical’

First and foremost, be clear on what it means to be ‘critical’. If you’ve read our guide on how to critically discuss , you’ll know that being critical isn’t just about being negative.

Being critical means weighing up the strengths and weaknesses of a particular piece of work and considering its implications and applications from various perspectives.

That said, in order to ‘be critical’ you must:

• Fully immerse yourself in the work(s) you are critiquing.
• Keep an open, balanced mind.

Why critically review an article?

Understanding why your tutor has set this piece of work can help you to feel more motivated to finish it. So, why would your tutor ask you to critically review an article?

Well, being able to critically appraise others’ work is considered essential to thrive as a student. This is especially true if you want to progress to master’s or PhD level study.

Writing a critical review can help you to become a more discerning researcher, because it teaches you how to appraise other people’s work.

If you can become good at critically appraising one paper, you can become good at appraising a bunch of papers. So, this means that when writing subsequent essays, you can accurately discern which research papers are worth including in your essays, and which are not.

Not to mention, an assignment like this also introduces you to the practice of peer-review; another practice that is central to UK academia.

What should I include?

The expectation of what a critical review should include will vary between subjects. As a rough guide, it should include the following:

A brief overview of the content

Generally, you should assume that your reader has not read the article, so you will need to include a brief description of its content. Remember to be brief in order to leave enough space for critique.

It’s up to you whether you write a short paragraph at the beginning of your review summarising the article, or whether you describe and critique the paper as you go along. The latter strategy can be more impressive, but it is more difficult to do.

Acknowledge (and critique) the author’s rationale

Ask yourself, why did the author(s) write this article? What problem or issue were they trying to solve? Ultimately, your review should say whether you agree that there was a problem to be solved, and whether you think this article has addressed this problem effectively.

So, for example, let’s say you need to review an article that tested whether putting stricter quotas on fishing can tackle the overfishing crisis.

First, ask yourself, is there enough evidence to confirm that we are facing an overfishing crisis? Use your response to this question to determine how ‘important’ you see this article to be.  Moreover, ask yourself, were the authors right to focus on stricter quotas as a potential solution, or could/should they have focused on something else?

Remember, you are not just critiquing the paper itself but the decisions (or rationale) that led the authors to formulate this type of paper in the first place.

Strengths and weaknesses of the methodology

Most critical reviews should discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the methodology, since the choice of methodology relates to issues like reliability and validity.

When critiquing the methodology, ask yourself why you think the author(s) chose this approach. For example, if they chose to conduct qualitative interviews rather than administer a quantitative questionnaire, why do you think they did this?

Tip: Most journal articles have a section at the end where the authors discuss the limitations of their paper (including the methodology), so this can give you some hints if you’re struggling to find any weaknesses with the methodology.

Research methods is a broad area of study, so we strongly recommend you take out a research methods textbook from your university library; this will introduce you to the basics of different research methods which will help you to critique the article confidently.

Applications and future directions

Remember we said that a critical review shouldn’t only be negative? Indeed, you should generally say positive things about the article, too.

One way to do this is to consider alternative applications of the author’s theory or argument. So, let’s say that the paper found that caffeine helps improve people’s memory. You might wonder whether caffeine could be an effective treatment for memory disorders and recommend this as a potential avenue for future research.

Remember, one of the aims of a critical review is to ‘fit it in’ to the wider literature. This will show off your ability to draw links between theories, concepts, and disciplines.

Language and tone

Depending on the type of article you are reviewing, you might also want to comment on the language skills of the authors.

Have they presented their ideas coherently? Is the argument easy to follow? If you had written the article, would you have approached it differently? Under this remit, you might also consider the quality of presentation.

Questions to ask yourself when critiquing an article

As mentioned, your tutor might have some quite unique requirements for what to include in your review. But, generally speaking, these are some good questions to get you started:

• Is this article convincing?
• What part of this article is most/least convincing to me?
• Does this article solve a problem?
• Does this article oversimplify (or exaggerate) a problem?
• How would I summarise this article in one sentence? (write it down)
• Does this article support or refute previous research?
• Did the author(s) formulate a specific hypothesis? If so, what was it?
• Were the findings largely in-line with the author(s) predictions or were they surprising?
• If another researcher replicated this study, are they likely to find similar results? (e.g., if this study was done in a different country, or using a different medium, what influence might this have on the results?)
• When was this article written? Is it still relevant?
• What have other commentators said about this article?
• Does this article feel biased or balanced?

Should I reference other papers?

Your tutor will be able to tell you whether your critical review should include other references.

However it is a good idea to include additional references because this shows you can ‘fit’ this article into the ‘bigger picture’ and draw links between different theorists’ ideas.

Moreover, when making an evaluative statement about a particular weakness within the paper, including a citation can help you to appear more authoritative.

For example, let’s say you write ‘The authors only included 12 participants so the sample size was very small; this means the findings cannot be generalised’ (Smith, 2010).

By including a reference to Smith (2010), you are showing that you have read up about sampling and the effects of using a small sample size. This demonstrates that you have thought carefully about various aspects of the article and done your own research to critique it confidently.

Tips for getting started

As with all academic papers, getting started is often the hardest part. That said, here are some tips to help you kickstart your critical review:

• Fully immerse yourself in the article – try to read the paper through at least three times so you fully understand it. If you’re finding it hard to focus, see if you can find an audio version of the article. If you can’t find an official audio version, copy-and-paste the content into Word, click the ‘Review’ tab and then click ‘Read Aloud’.
• Tell someone else about the article – This is a great way of testing your comprehension of the article and can help to increase your motivation for finishing the assignment.
• Check out the reference list – The reference list of the article can be useful for finding relevant sources for contextualising the article, e.g., some of these references will likely refer to the opposing side of the debate (you need to engage with these too).
• Make notes – Make notes as you go, and you will find it much easier to write up your critical review later.

How to Write a Critical Essay

Hill Street Studios / Getty Images

• An Introduction to Punctuation

Olivia Valdes was the Associate Editorial Director for ThoughtCo. She worked with Dotdash Meredith from 2017 to 2021.

• B.A., American Studies, Yale University

A critical essay is a form of academic writing that analyzes, interprets, and/or evaluates a text. In a critical essay, an author makes a claim about how particular ideas or themes are conveyed in a text, then supports that claim with evidence from primary and/or secondary sources.

In casual conversation, we often associate the word "critical" with a negative perspective. However, in the context of a critical essay, the word "critical" simply means discerning and analytical. Critical essays analyze and evaluate the meaning and significance of a text, rather than making a judgment about its content or quality.

What Makes an Essay "Critical"? 

Imagine you've just watched the movie "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory." If you were chatting with friends in the movie theater lobby, you might say something like, "Charlie was so lucky to find a Golden Ticket. That ticket changed his life." A friend might reply, "Yeah, but Willy Wonka shouldn't have let those raucous kids into his chocolate factory in the first place. They caused a big mess."

These comments make for an enjoyable conversation, but they do not belong in a critical essay. Why? Because they respond to (and pass judgment on) the raw content of the movie, rather than analyzing its themes or how the director conveyed those themes.

On the other hand, a critical essay about "Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory" might take the following topic as its thesis: "In 'Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory,' director Mel Stuart intertwines money and morality through his depiction of children: the angelic appearance of Charlie Bucket, a good-hearted boy of modest means, is sharply contrasted against the physically grotesque portrayal of the wealthy, and thus immoral, children."

This thesis includes a claim about the themes of the film, what the director seems to be saying about those themes, and what techniques the director employs in order to communicate his message. In addition, this thesis is both supportable  and  disputable using evidence from the film itself, which means it's a strong central argument for a critical essay .

Characteristics of a Critical Essay

Critical essays are written across many academic disciplines and can have wide-ranging textual subjects: films, novels, poetry, video games, visual art, and more. However, despite their diverse subject matter, all critical essays share the following characteristics.

• Central claim . All critical essays contain a central claim about the text. This argument is typically expressed at the beginning of the essay in a thesis statement , then supported with evidence in each body paragraph. Some critical essays bolster their argument even further by including potential counterarguments, then using evidence to dispute them.
• Evidence . The central claim of a critical essay must be supported by evidence. In many critical essays, most of the evidence comes in the form of textual support: particular details from the text (dialogue, descriptions, word choice, structure, imagery, et cetera) that bolster the argument. Critical essays may also include evidence from secondary sources, often scholarly works that support or strengthen the main argument.
• Conclusion . After making a claim and supporting it with evidence, critical essays offer a succinct conclusion. The conclusion summarizes the trajectory of the essay's argument and emphasizes the essays' most important insights.

Tips for Writing a Critical Essay

Writing a critical essay requires rigorous analysis and a meticulous argument-building process. If you're struggling with a critical essay assignment, these tips will help you get started.

• Practice active reading strategies . These strategies for staying focused and retaining information will help you identify specific details in the text that will serve as evidence for your main argument. Active reading is an essential skill, especially if you're writing a critical essay for a literature class.
• Read example essays . If you're unfamiliar with critical essays as a form, writing one is going to be extremely challenging. Before you dive into the writing process, read a variety of published critical essays, paying careful attention to their structure and writing style. (As always, remember that paraphrasing an author's ideas without proper attribution is a form of plagiarism .)
• Resist the urge to summarize . Critical essays should consist of your own analysis and interpretation of a text, not a summary of the text in general. If you find yourself writing lengthy plot or character descriptions, pause and consider whether these summaries are in the service of your main argument or whether they are simply taking up space.
• 100 Persuasive Essay Topics
• Null Hypothesis Examples
• Higher Level Thinking: Synthesis in Bloom's Taxonomy
• What Is a Critique in Composition?
• Secondary Sources in Research
• How to Start a Book Report
• LSAT Sections: What's on the LSAT?
• An Introduction to Academic Writing
• 6 Skills Students Need to Succeed in Social Studies Classes
• Definition and Examples of Analysis in Composition
• Stylistics and Elements of Style in Literature
• What Does Argumentation Mean?
• Definition and Examples of Evaluation Essays
• SAT Sections, Sample Questions and Strategies
• How to Teach Theme
• How to Write a Good Thesis Statement

• +44 (0) 207 391 9032

Recent Posts

• What Are the Limitations of ChatGPT?
• How to Properly Write an Essay Outline Using ChatGpt
• Why Presentation Skills Are Important for Students
• Tips on How to Make an Essay Longer
• How to Structure Your Dissertation in 2024
• How to Write a Research Paper Like a Pro
• Academic Integrity vs. Academic Dishonesty: Understanding the Key Differences
• How to Use AI to Enhance Your Thesis
• Guide to Structuring Your Narrative Essay for Success
• How to Hook Your Readers with a Compelling Topic Sentence
• Academic News
• Custom Essays
• Dissertation Writing
• Essay Marking
• Essay Writing
• Essay Writing Companies
• Model Essays
• Model Exam Answers
• Oxbridge Essays Updates
• PhD Writing
• Significant Academics
• Student News
• Study Skills
• University Applications
• University Essays
• University Life
• Writing Tips

Essay question words: “critically evaluate/review”

(Last updated: 13 May 2021)

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

What does it mean to critically evaluate something or to provide a critical review? We won’t lie – these terms are complicated. But the following paragraph, and the rest of this blog post below, may help your understanding:

Typically, the word “critical” has a negative connotation. Think of words like “critique” and “criticise” and you see why. However, with essay writing, being asked to write “critically” does not necessarily mean you need to be negative. Instead, you are voicing your opinion in a logical and coherent way that is based upon evidence and evaluation.

When faced with the task to “critically evaluate” or to provide a “critical review”, it is important to remember that there is going to be some element of description. But you need to be able to build on that description to further justify your point. Let’s go through some examples.

Descriptive writing

Descriptive writing really focuses on answering the four ‘w’ questions – what, where, who, when. In descriptive writing you are going to need to focus on the following:

As you can see from the table above, all of the ‘w’ questions are really important and are essential components to writing a good essay . The purpose of these components is to let the reader get the essential information they need to understand the main idea. Yet if you stop here, you only end up with a descriptive essay, which does not meet the requirements of criticality that are requested by the professor or TA.

Critical writing

Critical writing gives you the opportunity to go beyond the descriptive, so when you critically evaluate or critically review something, you are moving toward analysis and evaluation. This type of critical writing asks you to assess the how, why, what if, so what and what next questions. As you will begin to notice, these questions require much more explanation that the ‘w’ questions (each of which you could likely answer in 10 words or less). Let’s look at some of these questions below:

Managing the descriptive and critical

Anyone who has done a lot of writing or who has seen many students’ writing will tell you that there are plenty of ways to write an essay . Yet while there are many strategies, when writing in English, there are certain expectations that the reader has when working through a paragraph or larger piece of writing. Therefore, in order to satisfy the reader that you have successfully completed a critical review or evaluation, you need to make sure that the reader gets what they are expecting.

The first step is to carefully read the article/piece of work that you are going to be critically assessing. Often, students feel like, just because something has been published in an academic journal, that it is an excellent piece of writing that cannot be questioned. But this isn’t necessarily true. The author of that article made certain decisions during the research and writing processes. It is your job to evaluate and analyse what they have done and whether the author has presented any evidence that you can draw conclusions from or make links between areas of knowledge.

In an academic journal article, there are often two places where you will be able to find the easiest opportunities to critically evaluate the work: the methodology and the discussion. In the methodology, the author has made certain decisions about how they are going to answer the research question presented. They have usually (in empirical research) identified a sample, context, and certain instruments (e.g. questionnaire, interviews, observations, etc.). Perhaps one of the easiest ways you can critically evaluate this information is to determine whether or not the sample size is big enough or whether the context applies globally or only to the region where the research took place. For example, a sample of 250 undergraduate students might seem like a lot, but if they are all from a remote area of Pakistan, their situation may not be applicable to undergraduate students who are studying in the UK. Highlighting this issue is one of the more basic forms of criticality because you are applying your own judgements to a situation.

Another area where you might be able to critically evaluate a paper is in the discussion section. It’s in this section where the author expresses their point of view and how their findings relate to other aspects of research. In some articles, you might find that the author has made claims . So if we consider the same group of 250 undergraduate students in Pakistan, the author might find that of the 250 students 225 felt that learning English was important for job security in the future. Therefore, the author might claim that students should learn English if they want to secure a good job in the future. With this argument you could evaluate whether this statement is actually true. We already know that 250 is not representative globally, but we can also assume that students in a remote area of Pakistan may not have access to the same opportunities as students in Beijing. These students may come to a different conclusion about English (potentially).

The point of a critical evaluation is to demonstrate that you can think beyond what you are being told. By taking steps to question what is being written and presented to you, you may be better able to write a critical review and to reflect on how and why the author took the position they did. No research study is perfect and it is your job to determine what could have been modified or changed to fit a different situation.

Focus on directive essay words: “to what extent…”

Focus on directive essay words: “summarise”

Focus on directive essay words: “elaborate”

• academic writing
• critical review
• to what extent
• writing a good essay
• writing tips

Writing Services

• Essay Plans
• Critical Reviews
• Literature Reviews
• Presentations
• Dissertation Title Creation
• Dissertation Proposals
• Dissertation Chapters
• PhD Proposals
• Journal Publication
• CV Writing Service
• Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

• Proofreading Service
• Editing Service
• Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

• Marking Services
• Consultation Calls
• Personal Statements
• Tutoring Services

Our Company

• Frequently Asked Questions
• Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

• Fair Use Policy
• Policy for Students in England
• Privacy Policy
• Terms & Conditions
• [email protected]
• Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

The Critical Function of Judicial Review in Sustaining Constitutional Principles

This essay about judicial review highlights its critical role in maintaining constitutional principles by allowing courts to invalidate unconstitutional laws and actions. It emphasizes the importance of judicial review in protecting individual rights, promoting accountability, and maintaining the balance of power within the government. The essay also discusses the variations in judicial review practices across different countries and the potential controversies surrounding its application. Despite these debates, the fundamental importance of judicial review in upholding the rule of law and constitutional governance is underscored.

How it works

A general judicial review maintains account in right numerous staffmen, delegates a flow, to estimate constitutional actions, hardened legislative bodies and executive. This obligatory principle for storage compartment delegations, provides, that no governmental branch no oversteps their constitutional borders, and saves individual freedoms.

Fundamentally, a general judicial review co-ordinates possibility flow to do invalid laws and actions, that disorganize a constitution governmental. This critical position for manners aplomb authority among branches combine a government. In actual unis, practice a general judicial review firmly strengthens a judicial supreme decision in Marbury v.

Madison (1803). Main justice administration Marshall John in this considerable case confirmed delegations judicial authority to interpret a constitution, provides, that neither legislative, nor executive organs no able breach their terms. This decision confirmed judicial authority so as together equal branch governmental, capable despite limitation delegations other branches.

Although implementation a general judicial review is mimiced through jurisdictions, his unselfish snatches, successive:, leans superiority initiales a constitution. In a different country, so as for example personnels and India unite, a general judicial review is well reasonable and actively used practice. In other, it, at a case, more limit or fully absent, decorates legal traditions and constitutional contexts well-assorted. In vexation from these distinctions, a concept remains an aspect constitutional administration basic.

Only from play in favour of the keys general judicial review is his role in defence individual rights. Investigates governmental actions, flow can adjure abuse authority and to provide, that constitutional civil’ laws lean. This private role criticizes in case, include above all rights, so as for example freedom word, equality to the law, and necessary process. For example, in brown v. Direction teaching (1954), U.S. A supreme court used a general judicial review, to abolish constitutional laws, that the racial division set on people schools, so leans principle equal defence constitutional in adequacy with a law.

However, a general judicial review pulls out responsibility and governmental transparency. Subordinates legislative actions and administrative despite attentive judicial examination, these contraignent legislators and dignitary to stick to constitutional stallions. This position a supervision can have potentiels abuses authority and to encourage confirmation decision more serious and deliberate. It is why, a general judicial review serves a guarantee despite governmental arbitrary actions and illegal.

However, authority general judicial no review without his criticize. Different repulse, that, it can lead despite judicial activity, where a flow is outstripped by their delegations and accept decisions, that are due to be a competense politiques a legislative branch. This trouble appears often, when laws shock flow or administrative actions from constitutional soils, sparkles discussions from possibility corresponding judicial authority. However, supporters declare, that general above all judicial review for manners constitutional integrity and defence individual rights.

After his internal importances, general judicial review too influences legal international norms. Much nations look despite constitutional canonical courts, so as for example U.S. Court or constitutional supreme German court, so as designs for a display they noticed systems. The this influential international distinguishes a seriousness general judicial review in advancement line law globally and strengthens principles justice and rights man suitable any semi.

Seriousness a general judicial review draws out he after judicial authority. She brings up co-operations between branches government, influences confirmation legislative decision and administrator, and protects freedoms person. So as like, it are elements democratic administration and line critical law. While discussions from his possibility and influence, obviously, are careful, importance general judicial review basic in an entry constitutional principles some.

In a general total review, judicial is an above all device for a salary, that governmental actions co-ordinate he with constitutional mandates. These protect individual rights, pulls out responsibility, and leans an aplomb forces in borders government. In vexation from one continue discussions from his borders, principle a general judicial review continues to frisk an in critical role escort line law and entry integrity constitutional administration.

Cite this page

The Critical Function of Judicial Review in Sustaining Constitutional Principles. (2024, Jul 21). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/the-critical-function-of-judicial-review-in-sustaining-constitutional-principles/

"The Critical Function of Judicial Review in Sustaining Constitutional Principles." PapersOwl.com , 21 Jul 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/the-critical-function-of-judicial-review-in-sustaining-constitutional-principles/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Critical Function of Judicial Review in Sustaining Constitutional Principles . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-critical-function-of-judicial-review-in-sustaining-constitutional-principles/ [Accessed: 21 Jul. 2024]

"The Critical Function of Judicial Review in Sustaining Constitutional Principles." PapersOwl.com, Jul 21, 2024. Accessed July 21, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/the-critical-function-of-judicial-review-in-sustaining-constitutional-principles/

"The Critical Function of Judicial Review in Sustaining Constitutional Principles," PapersOwl.com , 21-Jul-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-critical-function-of-judicial-review-in-sustaining-constitutional-principles/. [Accessed: 21-Jul-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). The Critical Function of Judicial Review in Sustaining Constitutional Principles . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/the-critical-function-of-judicial-review-in-sustaining-constitutional-principles/ [Accessed: 21-Jul-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers