This paper presents a critique of an article that explores the internationalisation of the curriculum. First, to facilitate critical reflection, the main Western paradigms of positivism, interpretivism, critical theory and postmodernism are described and the differences between them emphasised. The article focused on in this paper can be situated largely within an interpretivist paradigm. Big-tent markers, which are employed to evaluate qualitative research, are then critically implemented to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of this article and offer relevant suggestions regarding ways in which it can be improved.