INSTRUCTIONS:
The Book Review MUST follow the format below. Section lengths ARE MANDATORY.
Substantial variation UNDER or OVER their length will be the basis for a significant penalty on the
assignment. This (admittedly) draconian, cruel-and-unusual, tortuous requirement is in order to force
you to EDIT!!! The best strategy is to write what you need to say in a section, then go back and edit it
(down!) into the required length. No cover page is required. Use Times-New Roman, 12pt font, doublespaced. Page numbers bottom, center.
A. Introduction: Introduce readers to the author. (Give those who dont know her/him
the scoop on her/him).
1. Who is the author?
2. Does the author approach the subject with any overall perspectives that influence or
condition his or her conclusions? These may be theological, experiential,
philosophical, denominational, or cultural perspectives. Do these perspectives affect
the value of the work or its applicability (in certain cultures, certain settings, etc.)
3. No more than 2 paragraphs or half a page (whichever is shorter).
B. Argument Structure: Give readers the roadmap of the book/structure of the argument.
(How does he/she put their case together?)
1. What is the thesis of the book? (state this clearly & briefly in your own words)
2. How are the chapters grouped together/related to each other?
3. How do the chapters advance the thesis?
4. DO NOT SUMMARIZE CHAPTER-BY-CHAPTER!
5. Use 1.5 pages, but no more than 2 pages.
C. Critical (Analytical) Evaluation: Talk back to the author. (How does her/his argument
work or not work well?)
1. Organize this section by issues you are addressing. Pull evidence from the whole book
for each issue.
2. Evaluate the authors success at defending the books thesis or reaching its goal.
Support your conclusion by executing your analytical strategy.
3. Choose your strategy (or combine them, addressing a total of 3-4 issues in the
Evaluation Section.). Choose Strategy 1 if the author failed to defend the thesis, or
defended an unworthy thesis. Choose Strategy 2 if the author completely succeeded
5
in defending their thesis, or didnt make any flawed arguments but could have
offered better arguments/evidence for a worthy thesis. Choose a combination of
Strategy 1 and 2 if the author was partially successful in defending or made flawed
arguments in support of a worthy thesis. This combination can also be used if the
author had some genuinely valuable insights while arguing for an unworthy thesis.
Strategy 1: Help future readers recognize the big flaws. Be sure youre not
misreading! Use ideas below that are significant & relevant to your analysis.
a) Does a key definition need to be qualified? If so, how and why?
b) Does a key concept need to be adjusted or rejected? If so, how and why?
c) If the argument is taken to its logical conclusion, is that a problem? If so, how
and why?
d) Is a conclusion right, but reached for wrong reasons? If so, how and why?
e) Was major evidence or arguments ignored? If so, what and how would that
affect your assessment of the argument?
f) Was the author inconsistent or self-contradictory in a major way?
g) Was the author asking the wrong question(s)? If so, what are the right one(s)?
h) Was there a major unstated presupposition that needs to be challenged? If so,
what, how, and what affect would better presupposition have?
Strategy 2: Help a future reader to recognize or improve on the authors strengths.
Use ideas below that are significant & relevant to your analysis.
a) Can a key definition be improved? If so, how and why?
b) Does a key concept need to be adjusted or improved? If so, how and why?
c) If the argument is taken to its logical conclusion, does that have good results
that the author didnt discuss? If so, how and why?
d) Was major evidence or arguments supporting the authors point(s) missed? If
so, what and how would that affect things?
e) Does the authors work have important implications for other subjects? If so,
what?
f) Is there significant application for the authors ideas that were not identified? If
so, what?
4. Use 2.5 pages, but no more than 3 pages. So address only the most important
issues. Be direct and clear. Do not employ prolix, effusive, wordy, extended,
statements.
E. Conclusion: Try to answer at least half of the questions if not more.
1. Summarize your analysis of the argument in no more than one paragraph (3-4
sentences).
2. Identify important questions for further research.
3. No more than 2 paragraphs.
SUBMISSION: Assignments are to be turned in in .DOCX or .PDF format through the link on
Blackboard. Graded papers will be visible on Blackboard with summary comments and verbal
comments recorded. You are expected to incorporate comments from previous assignments into future
assignments. The First Draft due date for this assignment will be at the beginning of class on
Tuesday, March 18th
. This is to be a complete, polished version of the paper. It will be the basis for the
final grade on the assignment. The professor will grade it, and any corrections will need to be
incorporated into the OPTIONAL Final Draft for a maximum 7 point (1 letter grade) increase in the
final assignment grade. The OPTIONAL Final Draft due date will be the beginning of class on
Thursday, April 1st
.
