How to write a review, feedback on a scientific article, diploma, dissertation, textbook? This question is asked at least once, probably by everyone involved in education. After all, even a university student sometimes has to do this work himself. At first glance, writing a review or review seems to be an incomprehensible and difficult task. In fact, in order for a review or review of a diploma to be completed at a high level, you need to know certain requirements and follow a clear structure for presenting scientific thought. We will consider these subtleties below.
The first thing the author needs to remember: a review of a diploma or a review of a scientific article is not a detailed retelling and not your personal sympathy or antipathy to the topic and presentation. These are, first of all, the logically sound opinions of a person who is an expert in a particular field.
When wondering how to write a review, it is worth, first of all,clearly understand the meaning of this word. A review is a special text - an analysis of a specific source, designed for a certain circle of readers. The main purpose of this message is to inform and evaluate the level of the analyzed source. Displaying a general idea of the reviewed text, the author should highlight the positive points and provide reasonable criticisms.
What aspects, key points will be brought to the judgment of a specialist - this is his individual vision. There is no single right way here. It all depends on the competence and scientific interests of the reviewer.
The review technology can be conditionally divided into the following stages:
- define the subject of the reviewed material;
- to find out what is the degree of relevance of the proposed scientific research;
- analyze the architectonics and semantic content of the text;
- be sure to pay attention to such an important point as the analysis of scientific novelty, clearly express your opinion regarding the originality of the work;
- note how the theoretical concepts are combined and how much they correspond to the results of empirical calculations, thereby logically substantiate the level of practical significance;
- list the strengths and weaknesses of the work (the reviewer should indicate what exactly the author managed to cope with the task, and what else may require additional elaboration, note ambiguous interpretations of scientific results, any debatable points);
- very short andobjectively formulate an opinion about the work and give an overall assessment;
- formulate conclusions, here you can add information about the author or describe to whom the work is addressed and may be interesting.
Following these steps consistently and observing the structure of the review will serve as a quality writing, and this algorithm of actions can be safely used when preparing reviews for a scientific work of any genre.
Before writing a review, you should also familiarize yourself with the main stylistic features of the presentation of scientific thought. The text itself should be clear and precise, easy to understand and not contain lexical phrases inherent in artistic or colloquial speech.
If the reviewer wants to support his impression with some comparative characteristics, epithets, phraseological units, etc., then this is categorically inappropriate, since it is necessary to write a review only in a scientific style. Even the brightest positive or, conversely, a sharply negative impression of the work should be tried to convey without using the expressive means of the literary word.
