Give yourself plenty of time to read the first article (do not read the primary source until after this analysis is done).
Analyze the secondary source article using the questions listed below (drawn from the Campus Library at UW Bothell and Cascadia College).  Do NOT complete in short answer – this is an essay.  It will work best if you view each major grouping as a paragraph, therefore ending with a 5 paragraph paper.
Before you turn in the assignment, work your way through what you have written, highlighting and commenting to show where you answered each of the questions listed below.  This exercise will allow you to double check your work, and prevent you from writing a summary instead of an analysis.  A complete analysis will have 17 comments that I can see.  You will find the New Comment prompt under the Review tab at the top of your paper. Here is a video to describe how it is done.  https://support.office.com/en-us/article/video-insert-and-review-comments-in-word-5d50bf36-a069-41d5-b805-ceacd0762cdc (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

Introduction 
What is the article title?
Who are the authors?
Thesis/position/argument/question – What is the primary argument made by the author/s?
2.  Context

Why is the argument significant?
When was the article written?
Which journal/source published it?
Who is the intended audience?
3.  Evidence

What evidence does the author offer in support of the position put forth? (Identify all pieces of evidence you find.)
How convincing is the evidence?
Are the ethical considerations adequately explored and assessed?
Have you read/heard anything on the subject that confirms or challenges the subject from a scientific point of view?
4.  Counter arguments

What arguments are made in opposition to the authors views (within the article or that come to you as you read, you do not need to look for outside sources)?
Are these arguments persuasively refuted?
5.  Effectiveness

What are the strengths of the article?
Is it difficult to read and understand the article? If so, why? If not, why not?
Are you able to follow the moves of the article from thesis to evidence?  In other words, was the article logically organized so that it flowed easily from topic to topic?
Does all of the material seem relevant to the points made?