On Article review : Sample 1

Source
Bell, R.L. & Lederman. (2003). Understandings of the nature of science and decision making
on science and technolog !ased issues. Science Education, "ol.#$, no.3, %.3&2'$$, "ie(ed
)& *arch 200&, +BS,-host data!ase .cademic Search /remier, item0 .12&$#033
3ntroduction
4his re"ie( criticall re"ie(s the article 5Understandings of the nature of science and
decision making on science and technolog !ased issues6 ! Rand L. Bell and 1orman 7.
Lederman (hich a%%eared in the 8ournal Science +ducation. 4he re"ie( (ill firstl
summarise the article. Secondl, it (ill !riefl analse the effecti"eness of the article6s
structure, in"estigating ho( the information is set out and (hether the reader can access it
efficientl. 4hirdl, the re"ie( (ill criti9ue the article, e"aluating its authorit, accurac,
currenc, rele"ance, o!8ecti"it and sta!ilit. 4he re"ie( (ill also analse the gra%h !efore
finall 8udging the article6s accessi!ilit and credi!ilit. -"erall the article (as (ell (ritten,
clear and rele"ant.
.rticle Summar
4he %ur%ose of the article (as to in"estigate (hether kno(ledge of the nature of science
im%acted on decision'making regarding science and technolog !ased issues. 4he article also
determined the factors and reasoning used to reach decisions. 4he stud in"ol"ed 2) adult
"olunteers, selected from uni"ersit %rofessors and research scientists from across the United
States. 4he %artici%ants com%leted t(o o%en'ended 9uestionnaires and su!se9uent
inter"ie(s. 4he first 9uestionnaire and follo( u% inter"ie( (ere designed to assess
%artici%ant6s decision making. /artici%ants (ere then grou%ed according to their "ie(s on the
nature of science as gauged ! the second 9uestionnaire and follo( u% inter"ie(. 4he
grou%6s o"erall decision making (ere then %rofiled using the res%onses to the :ecision
*aking ;uestionnaires and follo( u% inter"ie(s. .fter com%arison of !oth grou% %rofiles, it
(as found that there (as little difference in the grou%s o"erall decisions, factors influencing
decisions or %rocesses used to reach decisions. /artici%ants in !oth grou%s !ased their
decisions mainl on ethics, %ersonal "alues or social<%olitical concerns. .ll considered
scientific e"idence !ut more as a %art of a multifaceted issue. 4he nature of science did not
significantl im%act on either grou%6s decision making. 4hese results contrast (ith !asic
assum%tions of current science education reform efforts and call for a re'e=amination of the
goals of nature of science instruction. >uture research directions include the relationshi%
!et(een general e%istemologies and decision'making, and the relationshi% !et(een decision
making and moral de"elo%ment.
.rticle Structure
4he article under re"ie( (as accessed "ia +BS,- host in a clear and (ell set out form. 3t
(as retrie"ed as a /:> document. 4he article (as introduced (ith an a!stract that !riefl
outlined the %ur%ose of the article, its main %oints, findings, conclusions, im%lications and
future research directions. 4he article is !roken into headings and su!headings (ith
relati"el short %aragra%hs making the information readil accessi!le. 4he 3ntroduction
%ro"ided !ackground information and the rationale !ehind the article. 4his allo(ed clear
understanding of the conte=t and im%ortance of the stud. 4he !od (as logicall organised
into scientific headings *ethod, Results, :iscussion and 3m%lications, .%%endices and
References. 4his allo(ed the reader to read the entire article or 8ust the %art of interest. 4he
article had !oth 9ualitati"e and 9uantitati"e as%ects (ith e=cer%ts from inter"ie(s and
sur"es com!ined (ith statistical data from the stud. 4he article (as summarised !ut this
occurred in the :iscussion and 3m%lications section in a long and 8um!led form making a
clear and concise understanding of the main %oints difficult. 4here (ere e=tensi"e references
cited in'te=t and set out clearl in the References section. 4he article (as a /:> document
(hich meant it could easil !e %rinted and read. 3t did not ha"e links throughout the te=t !ut
did ha"e links in the citation. 4he sentences (ere structured so that an a"erage %erson could
read most of the article ho(e"er in some sections the le"el of literature (as ad"anced. 4he
o"erall accessi!ilit of the information (as 9uite good.
.rticle ,riti9ue
.uthorit
4he authors6 credi!ilit (as esta!lished in a num!er of (as. Both authors are associated
(ith education institutions (ith Rand L. Bell !eing an academic at the ,urr School of
+ducation at Uni"ersit of ?irginia and 1orman 7. Lederman is an academic in the
:e%artment of *athematics and Science +ducation at 3llinois 3nstitute of 4echnolog. 4he
authors are also recognised in their field (ith an earl "ersion of the article !eing %resented to
the annual meeting of the 1ational .ssociation for Research in Science 4eaching in 2000.
4he authors ha"e also (ritten a num!er of other articles, some of (hich are included in the
References section. 4he article (as from the 8ournal Science +ducation, (hich is a relia!le
and %eer re"ie(ed 8ournal. 4he article (as found through +BS,-host on the .cademic
Search /remier data!ase. 4his is a highl credi!le research data!ase. 3t can !e seen that the
article has authorit.
.ccurac
4he information included in the article (as from a stud conducted in )22#. 4he information
is "erified and su%%orted (ith in'te=t referencing and an e=tensi"e list of references. 4he
editorial and re"ie(ing %rocesses that the article (as su!8ect to !oth contri!ute to the
accurac and relia!ilit of the article. 4he information in the article is therefore accurate and
relia!le.
,urrenc
4he stud the article is (ritten a!out (as conducted in )22#. 4he article (as (ritten in 200),
re"ised in earl 2002 and acce%ted for %u!lication )2 .%ril 2002. 3t (as %u!lished in *a
2003. 4he references included in the list of references range from )2@3 to 200). 4he article
is therefore current and su%%orted ! a range of studies o"er an e=tensi"e time frame.
Rele"ance
4he article is from an academic 8ournal and is therefore intended for the scientific
communit. 3t (as (ritten to inform and detail s%ecific research conducted ! the authors,
not to entertain. 4he su!8ect is co"ered (ell !ut !ecause it (as conducted in the United
States on a limited amount of high le"el academics, it is not generalisa!le. 4he article is "er
detailed (ith the to%ics !eing e=%lored in great de%th. 4he material is %resented in a logical
and organised (a. 4he article is accordingl rele"ant to the academic communit.
-!8ecti"it
4he information %resented in the article is from a research stud. 4he results are %resented in
an o!8ecti"e (a (ith all e"idence and su%%orting documentation ackno(ledged. 4he
authors clearl outline some of the limitations of the research and make reference to
alternati"e %oints of "ie(, enhancing the o!8ecti"it of the article. 4he article is !ased on fact
(ith all stringent research %rocesses and decisions clearl e=%lained. .s a result, the
information %resented in the article is o!8ecti"e.
Sta!ilit
4he article is from an academic 8ournal that is a"aila!le in !oth %rint and electronic forms. 3t
can also !e found on an esta!lished and highl credi!le academic data!ase0 +BS,-host6s
.cademic Search /remier. >or these reasons, the article is sta!le as a resource.
.nalsis of gra%h
(*.4)00# (ill hel% ou to (rite this section)
,onclusion
4his re"ie( has summarised and criticall re"ie(ed Bell and Lederman6s article
5Understandings of the nature of science and decision making on science and technolog
!ased issues6. 4he structure, accessi!ilit, content, strengths and limitations of the article
(ere analsed and criti9ued along (ith the gra%h (hich (as included. 4he authors and
8ournal are credi!le, accurate and current. 4he article6s information is accessi!le, (ell
structured, rele"ant and %resented in an o!8ecti"e (a. 4he article is also sta!le as a resource.
4he article has therefore contri!uted "alua!le information and understanding a!out ho(
kno(ledge of the nature of science influences decision'making on science and technolog
!ased issues.