NOTES ON CRITICAL ANALYSIS ESSAY ASSIGNMENT
A step-by-step guide with hints...

FIRST, find something to read and review that has something to do with the themes and issues of the course (NOT something assigned as class reading). This might be an article from a popular magazine, a technical journal (in any of a range of disciplines), a book (ONE of these reviews, at least, should address a book or something of 'book-substance'), whatever. If they're short, you might choose a couple of closely related pieces that you could compare (but the comparison has to make sense!). It might be something published in non-print media – web-site, something viewed on TV, etc. – but these will require some care and thought to address with the same sort of critical rigor (see below).  You might begin with:
    - the list of miscellaneous articles and other references I've compiled (here) (BUT note that this is hardly thorough, and it doesn't include books);
    - your own search using Crossett data-bases or on-line search-engines (google, scholar.google.com); talk with me about search strategies if you're having trouble;

    - Crossett book catalogue

   - a reference in something else you've read, including class readings.
There are too many possible sources to enumerate here, but there are plenty accessible through Crossett's data-bases or on the shelves or on line.  Examples of appropriate journals would range from fairly technical, 'high-end' stuff like Environment, Ambio, Worldwatch, Issues in Science and Technology, and so on; more popular sources including appropriate materials would include things like National Geographic, N.Y. Times Magazine, Atlantic.
    Inappropriate sources would be anything a) not substantial enough to support this sort of essay (A WARNING: TED talks, by themselves, are generally in this category), b) where you can't identify the writer or at least an organizational source, or c) where you can't make a clear connection with the questions and issues of this class.  On that last point; be particularly careful about work that's simply a current advocacy or position paper, unless you can build an appropriate context around it.  If you're not sure, ask!

NEXT, Read it.  Start soon enough that, if it turns out to be unsatisfactory, you can go back to first step!  Take notes as you read.  Keep track of the author's arguments and your questions.  It's pretty easy to tell, as I read your resulting essays, whether you've done this!

THIRD, write an essay that offers a critical perspective and analysis. “Critical analysis” can mean a range of things, but it must be more than simply a summary or synopsis of the reading -- not just a 'book report'.  You SHOULD, always, make sure you do give a concise and clear synopsis of the author's questions/purposes (as you assess them) and style of argument. Beyond that, you might, depending on the nature of the reading and your questions and reactions (see previous step!) , address:

    - context is important; what's the background against which author is writing?  To whom is this addressed? Why is it an interesting topic to you?   
    - plausibility or cogency of author's arguments and claims (does the logic work? Is it clearly laid out?);
    - the assumptions underlying authors' arguments and whether these are clearly acknowledged and reasonable/supported;
    - always good to offer some interpretation of author's agendas and purposes (can be deeply related to  the previous!); if there's advocacy, who would benefit?

    - how author's approach (and your reading of author's intents) affected your reaction;
    - how author's style (writing, rhetorical form, use of graphics, citation or quotation, etc.) affects reader (by intent or not);

    - where would a reader appropriately want to go from here? Implications, open questions, next steps, etc...;
    - how your own preconceptions and agendas shaped your response to the reading (any good critique involves self-analysis!);
    - and, finally, you might wish to offer some general evaluation ('it was a worthwhile article...') -- but note that this is not essential, and less important than previous possibilities; if you do a good job, you can appropriately leave your reader to decide whether the object of your analysis is worth reading!

Any professional or technical journal, as well as literary journals, newspapers, etc. will offer sections including book reviews and reviews of other work.  You can use these as models to some extent.

FOURTH, re-read and revise your essay for clarity, organization, writing, etc.  If you don't plan to allow time for this, you're doing yourself a substantial disservice.  It'll likely be obvious; I can't say, absolutely, that all good writing has undergone revision by the writer -- but exceptions are certainly rare.

FINALLY, make sure you've:
    a) included, somewhere in your essay, a full reference or citation to whatever you've reviewed.  A reader of your review should have no difficulty finding whatever it is you’re reviewing from your citation.  Use any standard format.  Author, title, and date of publication are always essential. beyond that:
       - if the work was published in a journal, magazine, book, whatever, make sure you give that info clearly.  Include journal/magazine name, volume or issue number, pages.  For book chapter's include book publisher and editor as well as the chapter's author (if different), pages.  It is NOT necessary to give URL (web address) and download date for this sort of information even if you used web to get it; the criterion here is whether there's a definitive publication somewhere...
       - if the work is primarily web-based, it is essential to give a FULL URL, as well as all of the rest as possible (sometimes it's hard to determine who the writer is for such materials; that's a big red flag!), and the date of your access to the site (or some other indication of an archival location of exactly what you're reviewing).
       - you can use a 'doi' (digital object identifier) code for many things to reduce the clutter...