Discuss a peer-reviewed, full length article from an academic or trade journal

In this section, identify the major conventions found in the peer-reviewed article you have selected (you should also briefly state the title and author of the article, as well as the date it was published and name of the journal it appears in). What major sections are present and how are they identified and ordered? What sections are the most extensively written? What stylistic features are apparent (are there images, charts, mathematical formulas, and/or tables)? Does the article include additional sections or features (such as an abstract, acknowledgement, author bio, or epigraph)? What language is the article using (is it dense/difficult to read? Does it contain “lexis” specific to your discourse community? Or is it fairly narrative/comprehensible)? What citation styles are used? How extensive is the bibliography (does your author’s work rely heavily on older work/experiments? How much does he/she describe older work within the body of the article)?
Analysis
In this section, analyze how these major conventions indicate the ways this genre supports the goals or demonstrates the values of the discourse community. What do you think the different (or lack of) sections, order of sections, or size of sections indicate about the discourse communities? What do the different stylistic features of the texts begin to indicate about the values, goals, or agenda of the discourse community? How do additional features of the article add to the writing, and why might they be included? What does the writing style or lexis indicate about the inclusivity of the discourse community? What does the bibliographic content – the citation style and/or reliance on older work – say about how this discourse community thinks about audience?
Critique
In this section, using what you have learned, offer a “critique” of the genre of the scholarly article and/or how your specific discourse community uses this genre. Consider James Gee’s article, “Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics.” What kind of “valuing” is emphasized in the genre’s patterns (i.e. how the sections are organized)? What content in each section is considered important (versus what is ignored)? Do the assumptions that the genre reflects emphasize a certain way of doing things (i.e., if we don’t understand/appreciate a certain stylistic feature, does this mark us as a “pretender”)? Who is represented in this genre, and who is excluded (i.e. who is marked as a “non-member” by not understanding certain vocabulary)? What does the audience have to know or believe to understand or appreciate this genre (i.e. does the reliance on older work necessitate the reader master a “secondary discourse”)? Overall, in what ways does your genre succeed the most? In what ways does it fail? How might you make it better?
Minimum Requirements:
· 4-5 pages (double spaced, standard, 12-point font, 1-inch margins)
· Discuss a peer-reviewed, full length article from an academic or trade journal
· Identify, analyze, and critique of article as described in the assignment prompt