Criteria - Book Review

Criteria - Book Review - COM546 (2009 Winter)

Preparing The Review

Draft – Revise – Refine: These are classic steps in writing any document. The instructor is willing to review document drafts so long as they are submitted at least a week prior to the due date. The earlier, the better, for all concerned!

There are reference materials on writing papers available at the Library, and I have reference materials in my personal library that may be borrowed for a week. I have prepared a guide to writing book reviews which is available online: http://kegill.wordpress.com/resources/writing-book-reviews/

The University has some helpful resources:

Student Athletes writing center documents: http://depts.washington.edu/saas/academics/writingcenter/
UW Writing Centers: http://faculty.washington.edu/jwholmes/uwwrite.html

There are also some helpful resources online:

How to Search the Invisible Web: http://tinyurl.com/dpqdy
Purcue's Online Writing Center:

Creating a Thesis Statement: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/545/01

Developing an Outline: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/544/01
Writing a Research Paper: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/workshops/hypertext/ResearchW/

The Seven Deadly Sins of Bad Writing: http://www.hamilton.edu/academics/resource/wc/sins/
The Writing Process: http://www.hamilton.edu/writing/style/process.html

Criteria for Evaluating Book Reviews
(adapted from McKeachie’s Teaching Tips, 11^th edition, 177)

Content
1. Introduction
  1. Do you (the reviewer) state the purpose, problem, or question considered by the book?
  2. How do you (the reviewer) convince the reader that the review is worth reading?
2. Body
  1. Is there evidence that you (the reviewer) read and analyzed the book? Are your assumptions logical and spelled-out?
  2. Presentation of evidence
    1. Do you deal adequately with contradictory evidence?
    2. Do you provide multiple sources for your evidence+?
    3. Is your evidence relevant to the purpose stated in 1a?
    4. Are your arguments plausible?
  3. Background information
    1. Did you provide enough information to familiarize the reader of the review with the book/topic?
    2. Did you avoid unimportant background material?
  4. Is your review easy to follow and well organized?
  5. Do you (the reviewer) deal with the thesis set up in the introduction (1a)?
3. Conclusion
  1. Do you (the reviewer) summarize the findings adequately?
  2. Is your conclusion directly related to the questions asked in the introduction?
Connections to Class
1. Evidence that the class materials have been read and understood (citations, references)
2. Application of lecture materials or assigned readings to the review (citations, references)
Form
1. Spelling
2. Grammar
3. Appropriate use of words
4. Paragraph form: Are ideas presented in coherent order?
5. Citations: Are borrowed ideas and statements given credit? Is the form of citation understandable and concise?

POINTS	Book Review – Evaluation
50	Exceptional work. Student employs a creative and comprehensive exploration of the book and its societal impacts; offers cogent arguments and well thought out explanations supported by evidence; synthesizes material; explains “why” as well as “how” and “what.” Very clear. Any citations have no significant errors. Organization: Organization enhances the paper; the introduction invites the reader to begin. The paper is well-focused and has an interesting thesis; there is a smooth transition among all elements (sentences, paragraphs, ideas). The conclusion goes beyond restating the obvious. The writing style is engaging, and the paper has no significant grammatical or spelling errors.
40	Good work. Student exploration of the book and societal impacts is average; arguments and explanations are average with some evidence; moderate synthesis of material; explains “how” or “what” but “why” is not convincing. Any citations have minor errors. Organization: This review has a useful introduction and a focused thesis. Its unified and coherent paragraphs support the thesis; transitions are smooth. The conclusion is competent. The writing style is clear and the paper has no significant grammatical or spelling errors.
30	Below average work. Student exploration of the book and societal impacts is below average; arguments and explanations are unconvincing and unsupported by evidence; little synthesis of material; explains “how” or “what” but not “why.” Any citations have major errors, and are mostly popular in nature. Organization: Overall organization in inconsistent. This paper has a general introduction and vague thesis; has incoherent paragraphs that bear little relevance to the thesis. It is missing transitions; choppy. The conclusion is inadequate. The writing style is unclear, and the paper has significant grammatical or spelling errors.
20	Poor work. Student exploration of the book and societal impacts is below average; arguments and explanations are unconvincing; no synthesis of material, merely summaries. No overall coherence. Citations have major errors and are either mostly popular in nature or non-existent. Organization: The paper lacks coherence. It has no introduction or thesis, no transitions, no clear introduction-middle-conclusion. The writing style is unreadable, and the paper has significant grammatical or spelling errors.
0	Assignment not turned in.