Reviewing Commentaries

(Compiled by Donovan Wishon, November 2004)

Here are some quick points on reviewing commentaries.  Reviewing commentaries is less formal than writing an actual commentary.  Therefore, there is no specific format you must follow.  Often a “laundry list” form or bullets are sufficient.  Try to indicate to where in the commentary a particular suggestion is referring.  For example, give a page and paragraph number.  Also, keep in mind that you are trying to help the author of the commentary improve their work, so don’t be a jerk.  Here are some of the things you want to look for:

1. Is the thesis or main point of the target article clearly articulated in the introduction of the commentary?

2. Is the assessment claim of the commentary clearly articulated in the introduction?

3. Are the target article’s central arguments clearly and accurately distilled in the commentary without evaluation?

4. Are the arguments evaluating the target article, i.e. the arguments supporting the assessment claim of the commentary, clear and compelling (are there problems with the reasoning or with the premises)?

5. Is the commentary missing any necessary arguments from the target article or for supporting the assessment claim of the commentary?

6. Is there irrelevant information about the target article or unnecessary arguments for the assessment claim?

7. In general, is the commentary clear?

8. Are there any organizational or grammatical problems in the commentary?  Is the commentary divided into appropriate sections?

9. Are the commentary’s sources cited correctly?

Of course, these are just suggestions.  Feel free to help the author however you see fit.  Your review doesn’t need to be more than a page or two.