Applied Ethics Academic Article Review

The Applied Ethics Academic Article Review
The “Content Guide” describes the specific details for the paper.
PLEASE APPLY EACH BULLET POINT TO THE PAPER
You CANNOT review any of the articles which are reviewed in the attached PDF example.
You also CANNOT review any of the articles reviewed in the attached PDF example. The example PDF paper is to help you understand the paper.

Assignment Rationale
For this assignment, you will read, analyze, and critique an academic research article written about applied ethics, which is a work of contemporary philosophy (objective 1).

In the summary component of the paper, you will discuss how a contemporary philosopher applies those same concepts and principles to address moral concerns (objectives 2, 3, 4, and 5).

In the critical analysis component of the paper, you will discuss how someone might reasonably disagree with what they say (objective 7), as well as how someone might apply what they say to various aspects of life (objective 6).
Assignment Prompt
This is a 1000-to-1250-word paper (approximately 4-5 pages) that must half summarize (approximately 500 words) and must half critically analyze (approximately 500 words) a recent academic article (published in 2018 or later) of your choice on applied ethics. This review of an academic article will be written as a professor might write a critical review of an academic book. The word length is important, because 1000 words is the length of a standard academic book review.

It must be exactly eight paragraphs, in the same order and with the same content as specified in the guidelines. It should be written “like an English paper” in terms of the quality of the writing itself and “like a philosophy paper” in terms of the precision of its ethical content, such as how appropriately it defines and uses philosophical terminology.
The paper must be written about a single academic article published in 2018 or later, on a topic applied ethics, no questions asked. Applied ethics refers to the application of the ethical theories to moral issues: the “ethics of” a given topic (for example, the “ethics of” zoos), a given topic’s “ethics” (for example, “zoo ethics”), or specific applications of ethics (for example, ethics of keeping elephants in zoos).

Style Guide
Formatting
The review should be written as a continuous narrative: There are no separate sections.
Please observe standard writing conventions of 2-3 paragraphs per page, double-spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman, 1” margins.
Language
The review should be written in academic style.
The article should be written in the historical present tense (that is, we know the author “wrote” the article in the past, but you’re presenting it as if the author “writes” now).
The author is doing the action, not “the article.”
Since you are reviewing an ethics paper, you must incorporate technical philosophical words where appropriate, taking into consideration that different authors may understand those same terms differently and defining those words accordingly.
References and Citations
Do not use any outside sources in the review, other than the article under review. Cite page numbers only if you quote the article directly, e.g. (p. 29). Cite section numbers, e.g. (sec. 3), if no pages are available or when you reference the sections of the article in the first paragraph.
Quotes should be used sparingly, if at all. Citations are needed for direct quotes or to point out specific information to the reader. Citations for section numbers are required in the first paragraph.
Content
Remember, the point of the review is to explain why the article is worth reading to someone who has not yet read the article – but who may be interested in doing so!
Better reviews will critique the limitations and strengths of an article in terms of clear examples, rather than generalizations. Limit your discussion to two points of limitation and two points of strength.
A good measure of success is whether someone who has not read the article can answer basic questions about it: How is it structured? Who wrote it? What is it about? What makes it unique and worth reading? What might make it not worth reading? If someone cannot answer these questions after reading your review, you must rewrite and revise the review
Content Guide
Academic Articles
The review must be written about an academic research article.
An article is academic if it is published in an academic journal. An academic journal publishes peer-reviewed articles written by scholars and professionals. Journals dedicated to publishing the work of only undergraduate or graduate students are not true academic journals, and articles published in them are not suitable for the review.
An article is a research article if it defends a thesis. Some academic journals also publish book reviews and opinion-editorials. These are not suitable for this assignment.
Scientific articles written according to the scientific method typically do not make moral points, making most of them unsuitable for this assignment, but there are exceptions.
Title
The citation of the academic article under review also functions as the title of the paper. This is a citation style that is often used in ethics papers written by professors.
The citation is created using a hanging indent.
Everything, including your name line, is bolded
DOI stands for Digital Object Identifier. This functions as the article’s unique serial number. You must use the direct link to the DOI. If no DOI is available, you will need to link to the article’s digital “home” on the journal’s website. Do not use links to library databases.
Title Format
Author Last Name First Initial (year in parentheses) Title of article in all lowercase. Title of Journal in Uppercase volume number of the journal:page range of article. DOI link
Reviewed by Your First Name and Last Name, undergraduate at Blinn College (or Texas A&M)
Title Example
White TI (2017) Dolphins, captivity, and SeaWorld: the misuse of science. Business and Society Review 122:119–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/basr.12112
Reviewed by Steve Dezort, instructor at Blinn College

Paragraph 1: Structure and Scope
The first three sentences need to
1) Indicate the issue that the paper is addressing
2) Indicate the author’s research question, in the form of a statement (E.g., “In this article, Steve Dezort seeks to answer . . .”)
3) Indicate the author’s answer to the research question, the thesis (E.g., “He argues that . . .”).
The remainder of the paragraph should describe article’s structure, organization, and sections, referencing those sections in parentheses. For example, “Section 1” of the article would be referenced as (sec. 1).
The content should be specific, not what the author is doing, but what the author is questioning, describing, explaining, arguing, etc.
All the sections must be accounted for in parentheses. Subsections should not be referenced.
Refer to the author by both their first and last names at first mention, and by last name only at subsequent mentions.
Do not reference the title of the article or the titles of the author. For example, do not refer to the author as Doctor (Dr.), Professor (Prof.), or Mister (Mr.).
Paragraph 2: People, Perspective, and Point
Describe the perspective from which the author writes the article by mentioning the author’s discipline, and the author’s research specialization within that discipline. For example, the author’s discipline might be philosophy, and their specialization within that discipline might be business ethics.
You will have to do an “academic background check” to find out the author’s discipline and area of specialization. This “academic background check” will typically lead to a university’s website. You should not reference this as an outside source. It is not plagiarism.
You should use the same pronouns that the author uses in their self-description.
The author’s place of employment, job title, and degrees are irrelevant and should not be mentioned.
Describe the contribution that the author is seeking to make to their research specialization. This is what the author claims they are seeking to contribute.
Paragraphs 3 and 4: Thesis and Argument
These paragraphs elaborate on the first 3 sentences of paragraph 1 and therefore must match that content.
Describe the author’s argument in the article.
Summarize their main point (thesis) and sketch their arguments in support of that main point.
Paragraphs 5 and 6: Points of Limitation
Limit each paragraph to only 1 point of limitation. Examples include:
Evaluate the breadth, depth, scope, and limitations of the article.
Discuss what the author covers and what the author leaves out.
Evaluate whether the author’s claimed contribution is indeed what they make
Evaluate how convincing the author’s arguments are.
Including an example or two would be helpful to the reader.
Use language such as “Someone might be interested to know more about …” or “One aspect of the issue that readers would like to know more about is …”
Paragraphs 7 and 8: Points of Usefulness
Limit each paragraph to only 1 point of strength. Examples include:
Evaluate the strengths of the article.
Discuss the interesting insights the author offers.
Comment on the ways the article is useful and who might find the article useful. Specifically discuss how someone might apply what they say to various aspects of life.
Including an example or two would be helpful to the reader
Paragraph 8 is not a conclusion. The conclusion is the last sentence, so end on a positive note with a sentence on why the article is worth reading and recommended for reading.

Last Completed Projects