The challenge of superdiversity for the identity of the social work profession: Experiences of social workers in De Sloep in Ghent, Belgium

Please make sure you see the article critique sample i have attached for reference and follow the outline format attached as well.

Rubricfor Article Critique:

This review shouldallow students to demonstrate a critical appreciation of the key argumentspresented in their chosen review article. Issues such as how well the article presents its research evidence, howwell the article argues its case, does the article succeed in doing what theyclaim to do, do they accurately represent the sources they use. In addition,there are other elements that may appear in some combination in most articlereviews.  These include:

a. Comments andcriticisms on the styles of writing and presentation (academic styles).

b. Focusedanalyses of critical or interesting parts of the articles (stages in theargument, revealing anecdotes) which allow you to comment in depth on thearticles’ contents.

c. Makeconnections with other related works and among the articles selected.

Final note: areview is not a summary of the article(s), but an evaluation of the articlescontent.

For your articlecritique you will need to use the following criteria:

1.     Purpose and objectives of the study? Are theseclearly identified and discussed?

2.     Theoretical framework?  Is there a clear identification anddiscussion of the theories, models or other conceptual frameworks used in thestudy, along with identification of the main underlying theorist and/ortheoretical discussion in the field promoting or recommending this type of research?  Is there a rationale provided? Situating thestudy within the research already conducted in the field?  What other major studies have been done?  Are there no other studies or very fewindicating that there is a gap in the field which this study is designed toaddress?  How may this one be different?

3.     Research Approach? Does the article give a justification for the type of researchstudy?  Qualitative, hermeneutic,phenomenological, interactional, etc.? Is the methodology clearly and fullyreported?  This should include adiscussion of the site and participant selection, the methods used for datacollection or information collection, ethical consideration, limitations, andany other significant conduct issues?

4.     Presentation and analysis of results?  Is it clearly connected to the theoreticalframework (e.g., does the analysis and discussion of results clearly refer backto the theoretical framework?)? Is the importance of the results discussed interms of their contribution to the field? Further research?

5.     How the conclusion is drawn does the conclusionreflects on the theoretical and empirical findings? Are the referencesappropriate and current?

Markallocation

Reviewingthe purpose, questions, rationale of the study 20%

Evaluatingthe concepts, theories, literature explored 20%

Judgingthe research approach, method, data collection, analysis 20%

Reviewingthe analysis of the results and discussion, interpretation of the results 20%

Evaluatingthe conclusion drawn by the study 20%