User:CorrinBaker/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Academic English

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
(Briefly explain why you chose it, why it matters, and what your preliminary impression of it was.)

I chose this article due to my major, English, and minor, Educational Studies. It matters because Academic English is present across the world and is responsible for the development of critical reading and writing skills. My preliminary impression was that the article was incredibly short and seemed to be lacking depth or further information. I felt that it just scratched the surface of the discipline.

Lead Section
The lead section, only two sentences long, concisely and clearly introduced the subject. It does provide a content section which introduces the topics discussed in the article, but does not introduce these topics elsewhere in the lead. The lead mentions and equivalent course study in Australia and links to the Wikipedia article about it, but the program is not mentioned again in the article.

Content
The content is relevant to the topic and has been updated recently, on February 5, 2021. However, the content sections are limited and short in length. The section on "Scores" does little to aid in the understanding of Academic English, and the final portion of its paragraph is about elective-like courses rather than scores. The section isn't clearly defined in its content due to this, and would likely benefit from having the portion on learning English as a secondary language omitted to focus on the elective system of Academic English. None of the article discusses issues of equity, although there is substantial research on how inequity lends itself to illiteracy which prevents success in Academic English.

Tone and Balance
The article maintains a neutral tone, even in the section on "Disputation" regarding English Pedagogy. No claims demonstrate bias, although attention is given only to the writing aspect of English while the other three aspects named receive no further explanation. There is a larger focus on English as a second language or English for foreign learners, yet even then there is not much detail provided to explain the topic. There is no attempt to persuade the reader to feel a certain way regarding Academic English.

Sources and References
All facts are properly cited, either with a hyperlink in the parenthesis or a footnote which leads to the source material. The sources are not thorough enough to reflect the most accurate and up to date research available; the most current citation is from 2013. The sources should be updated to reflect any updates on the original material, or should perhaps be changed to more current and accurate materials. Of the cited authors, all were male and lack the diversity present in this academic discipline. All links work, yet the sources still need updating and diversity.

Organization and Writing Quality
The article is concise, clear, and easy to read. There are no grammatical or spelling errors. It is not well-organized, as reflected by my earlier comments on the lack of focus in the "Scores" section.

Images and Media
There are no images or media present, although I'm not sure if including such materials would benefit the understanding of the subject.

Talk Page Discussion
There is only one post on the page, made by a single user who shared their intention to updated the page with details on the edits they sought to make. The post was made February 18 2017, and the proposed edits have not been reflected on the page. The article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: WikiProject Education, WikiProject Languages, WikiProject Linguistics / Applied Linguistics, WikiProject Writing. Compared to my classes on the subject, this article fails to introduce or explain adequately the many aspects within the study.

Overall Impressions
The article feels unfinished. It lacks enough relevant information, backed my current references, and does not discuss the few topics included with enough detail. It has strengths in its tone and balance, but this balance is a reflection of having few topics to balance at all. I would say this article is underdeveloped and would benefit from some more attention.