How to write a review on the essay

The review, which is translated from Latin literally as” consideration”, in the modern scientific world is a kind of review of a competent person about the research work, article, monograph and other similar works. Such feedback should include elements of analysis, analysis and evaluation of the work performed.
There are several types of reviews:
* literary-critical or journalistic article;
* review-reflection;
* review-abstract.
It is to the latter type is the review attached to the abstract. It reveals the content of the work in the most concise form, carries out its internal and external analysis and, on the basis of all this, gives an assessment and practical recommendations. Review of the abstract is characterized by a small volume, usually not exceeding the size of one page of printed text.
Principles of writing a review
The main meaning of the review is to Express their own views on the study. Thus, the written review helps to reveal the attitude of the reviewer to the work described by him, but not just setting out value judgments, but on the basis of the produced comprehensive analysis involving a wide range of arguments.
Of course, to write an adequate review, the reviewer must have a number of necessary professional and personal qualities – theoretical and professional training, scientific objectivity, a high degree of familiarity with the problems of the research topic, personal impartiality and disinterest, the ability to analyze, structure and write their own thoughts.
When writing a review, it is important to remember that the purpose of the review is not in the study of the work and not in the debate with it, but in the professional analysis and evaluation of the work done. Therefore, a personal difference in the views of the reviewer with the author of the abstract can not serve as a reason for low evaluation.
General rules of writing and approximate plan of the review of the abstract
Reviewing is not subject to strict mandatory standards, but this does not mean that there are no laws and General rules for writing a review. First, the process of writing a scientific review is always based on a range of issues and problems that the reviewer should note and highlight. Secondly, there are some requirements for the design and internal content of the review text. For example, in the review the only acceptable scientific style of writing. The text should be coherent, consistent and have an internal logic of its presentation.
The content requirements can be formulated in the form of a list, such as the following:
1. General description of the abstract, which includes the personal data of the author, the scientific discipline in which the study was conducted, and the year of writing.
2. A concise retelling not exceeding two or three sentences in volume.
3. A detailed analysis of the text. The analysis is subject to both informative part of the abstract and the quality of its design.
4. Conclusions based on the analysis of the work.
5. Practical recommendations for the author on improving the quality of work and correcting its shortcomings. There are also recommendations for the protection Commission, if necessary.
All comments or complaints to the reviewer must be accompanied by objective arguments and provide links to the appropriate places in the text.
It is highly desirable that the review also reflects the personal point of view of the reviewer not only on the weaknesses but also on the strengths of the abstract.
In order not to get lost in the work and not to get lost in the assessments, as well as consistently and structurally Express their thoughts, the reviewer can use the following list of priority, key subjects of analysis and evaluation.
So, in accordance with its objectives, the review should touch on the following:
1. relevance of the topic of the abstract research;
2. compliance of the declared topic of the abstract and the text of its main part;
3. the depth of the topic and logical reasoning;
4. the overall structure of the work;
5. use in the study of known scientific data and evidence of involvement of the scientific authority;
6. the formatting of the summary;
7. General competence and erudition of the author of the study, as well as his literacy and proficiency in professional terminology.
Writing a review of your own essay
Often, students of universities and other educational institutions are given the task to write a review for their own essay. First, it serves as a practical exercise to develop the skills of objective scientific assessment and review, and secondly, it helps the teacher to more deeply control the degree of assimilation of student learning material.
If you need to write a review of your own abstract, some part of the analysis may be omitted, as well as the evaluation component of the review. In this case, the main purpose of the review will be the presentation of the abstract, rather than its comprehensive internal study. However, the student is given an additional opportunity to argue and defend their own point of view.
Conclusion
In conclusion, it should be noted that sometimes educational institutions may differ in their own specific requirements for writing reviews. Therefore, before reviewing, it is necessary to verify the compliance of the above principles with the requirements of the educational institution.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *