How to Format a Reading Critique This is a guide to formatting your paper for my class. Above you will see what the header should look like. Your name and class with section number, single spaced, is all you need. Make sure you use your section number. Do not add extra spaces. The text of this paper is double spaced, as yours should be. As I indicate in the syllabus you should use Ti-mes New Rom-an, 12 point type. Please don't use other fonts. The title should tell me what the paper is ("Reading Critique: Chapter 2", "Reading Critique: Haviland", etc..). While all of this seems trivial, it is not. Many professors, grants, job applications simply throw out those people who cannot follow basic instructions. This example is formatted just like your paper should be. In that way, it is both explaining and modeling what should be done. You will notice paragraphs are indented. You will also note extra returns are not used between paragraphs; i.e. adding an extra line. You should follow that format for paragraphs. You should also avoid paragraphs under 3 - 4 sente-nces. Expand ideas if you need to. Your paper should be a minimum of tw-o pages. A page and a half is not 2. Longer is rarely a problem, but shorter is. A few other comments are needed. Please use a professional tone in a college paper. This is not a text to your boyfriend or girlfriend. Thing such as "lol", "or like...WHATEVER", do not belong. Nor does a highly personal commentary not related to an analysis of the work. Starting your paper with "I didn't like this article" is a bad idea. In part you should avoid this because it's poor writing, but also because it doesn't matter. The world is not organized around your

amusement. Academic articles and texts are not designed to entertain you. They are there to inform you. Smart and successful people are not limited by what they find amusing. The heart of your paper should be an analysis of the author's ideas. This is a critical engagement with the main ideas and evidence of what you have read. You are not simply restating what they said, nor are you offering an opinion. You are addressing the strength of their ideas, arguments, and evidence. You are analyzing the proposition of the author. If you agree or disagree with the author, you must use facts to explain why. What is the author arguing for or against? How did they construct their argument? Did they support their argument? What kind of evidence do they use? Are their holes in their logic or reasoning? Is the language biased? Did they explain why other ideas or explanations are wrong? What do they want you to understand? It is a novel approach to these ideas? These are just some of the questions that a quality critique could analyze. You can ask anything, so long as its an analysis of the ideas and evidence the author has put forward. In other words, this is about critical thinking. Do not spend the majority of your paper restating or explain the paper. As mentioned, this would be summary. You will, of course, need to mention what parts of the text you are discussing, but you can assume the reader (me) has also read these. So, focus on your analysis and critique. You need to prove read. (Did you catch the error in that last sentence? Neither would spell check.) Students rely on spell check, witch wont ketch wards spilled rite, butt knot yews wright. If you are not a great writer, have someone else read it for you. There is a writing lab here on campus. Please use it if you need to. Failure to follow these guidelines will result in a decreased grade.

the importance of anthropology