Answer a few of these questions, enough to fill 1 whole page :
How clear is the author(s)’s main argument?
• Is the author(s)’s use of evidence adequate and appropriate for their argument?
• Which the ideas in the piece generalizable to other contexts? Which are not? What’s at stake
in questions about generalizability of the piece?
• Where else (beyond the empirics presented in the piece) do the theories and ideas the
author(s) show up in the world?
• What unspoken assumptions appear in the reading?
• What are the stakes in the reading(s), and for whom?
• Is there anything from the reading that requires additional clarification?
• Does the piece address particular analytical blind spots in the literature and/or does it create
any analytical blind spots that future scholars will have to address?