Paper details:

GUIDELINES FOR CRITICAL BOOK REVIEWS:
Book reviews are to be done using Microsoft Word and submitted in the Dropbox on the homepage for the course. It is incumbent upon students to check the feedback in the Dropbox and see me in a timely manner if requested to do so once papers have been graded (usually within one week of the submission date).
One course objective is to challenge you to integrate outside readings into the appropriate historical context. Furthermore, you must also endeavor to exercise your own critical reasoning skills in a confrontation with a work relating to the period of history which you are studying. In order to accomplish these goals, you must complete a 5-6 page typed paper (250 words per page, Times New Roman 12 point font, double spaced, one inch margins) on a book which you have chosen from the suggested reading list, from the “For Further Reading” sections following each chapter in the text, or in consultation with me. Some of these works were written during the period under study while others are written about those periods. Some are histories, some philosophical treatises, novels, plays, biographies etc. What type of book you have chosen will have an impact on the paper you write – so be aware of these issues in your reading and writing.
In your paper you should form a general theme or thesis regarding your book. What is the author’s premise, his/her thesis – in other words, why did they write the book in the first place? How does this relate to the period you are studying? You should give a general summary of the book and its theme and give specific examples to illustrate that theme. Then, you need to show how your book connects to or informs the history under study.
These are not research papers – you don’t need any sources other than the text, lectures and the book you read.
Your paper should include the following:
I. Citation. At the top of the first page of your review, give a full citation for the
book read. For example:
Thomson, David. World History From 1914 to 1968. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1969.
II. Introduction (providing a framework and focus for the rest of your paper. No more than 1 page). Introductions should clarify any complex concepts/definitions involved in your topic and present a clear thesis for your paper involving the theme(s) of your book. You should also provide a clear transition to your more in-depth analysis/criticisms of the book. It should establish your thesis and objectives in the paper; thus, it should not be a thoughtless formality but rather the framework for the more detailed analysis in the main body of your paper. You might also find it useful to mention the author, date or historical setting for the book in the introduction. This data might be used in composing your transition from your introduction to your more detailed analysis of the book.
5 Boshears Rev. 1/10
III. Main Body of the paper consists of critical analysis of the work to find and present the ideas, values, attitudes and assumptions which are relevant to the contemporary context of the work; and the development of connections between these ideas and the themes which you have already set up in the introduction.
IV. Summary/conclusion. Summarize and reiteration – tell me what you said. You might find it useful to begin in the main body of the paper, write to the end, compose the summary and then write the introduction last – it will make for a stronger opening in most cases if you do it that way.
Further Suggestions:
1. Avoid writing an exclusively narrative, descriptive paper. Most of your paper should consist of your analysis and criticism (both positive and negative) of the ideas in your book and the connection of those to the context of the history under study.
2. Avoid merely paraphrasing what the book says. Strive to conceptualize and analyze rather than describe.
3. USE YOUR OWN WORDS AND IDEAS. Avoid lengthy quotations from your book. Don’t quote or paraphrase the textbook. Compose in your own words what you find to be relevant in terms of the thesis stated in your introduction. History is a literary genre; therefore, to write correctly and effectively is important. Your papers should be well organized, clear, concise, and use correct grammar and syntax.
4. Avoid awkward, vague, and meaningless statements. Select your words carefully and make sure they convey the meaning you want. PROOFREAD your paper when it is finished and correct typos and misspellings. Above all, get involved in your paper, try to be persuasive, and maintain the interest of your reader.
5. A note about the audience of the paper: do not assume that I am the intended audience. If you do, you are likely to leave out information which you know because you might assume that I know it. Assume an intelligent reader who knows absolutely nothing about your topic.
6. Remember, the details cannot speak for themselves. You must speak for them by showing how they are connected to your thesis or the point you are trying to make about your thesis.
7. Write your own papers to the best of your ability. Do not have someone else write it for you — that is cheating. Do not copy someone else’s ideas or written work — that is a form of cheating called plagiarism. You are expected to use your own writing, thinking, and rhetorical skills, and to improve these as a result of your writing experience in this class. Your ideas, thoughts, critiques are important – that is what I want to have the pleasure of reading. Tell me how YOU feel about your book, tell me why, and write it well! 8. Further assistance and suggestions can be found at The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill at http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/book-reviews/
9. If you want to include citations from the book you are reviewing, use quotation marks for the citations and insert page number on which the citation appears in parentheses immediately afterwards.
6 Boshears Rev. 1/10
10. If you choose to cite works other than the book you are reviewing, you should use the appropriate conventions of historical scholarship for footnotes and include a bibliography. A useful guide in this respect is Mary Lynn Rampolla, A Pocket Guide to Writing in History, 3rd ed. (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001). This book is available in Kolwyck Library ( D13.R295 2010).
11. Before you begin writing your book review, you should take a look at some examples of good reviews. I suggest you look at The Historian, the Journal of Modern History, the American Historical Review, or the European Review of History shelved in the Kolwyck Library or at http://library.chattanoogastate.edu/journalfinder/. Reviews are always published at the back of the journal. History majors or graduate students in History wrote many of the reviews you will read there. You are expected to follow the general format of the reviews. You are not expected to meet their level of sophistication.
12. Books of historical scholarship are not novels or works of fiction. They are described as “non-fiction” and are interpretations of events and phenomena in the past. Historians “argue” their case. They make claims and assertions about the past, but most historians do not claim to be able to “prove” what happened in the past. You should therefore avoid the words “prove” and “proof.” You should also avoid referring to actors in the past as “we.” “We” are actors in our own time, but we could not act before we were born. Once you have properly identified actors in the past, the appropriate pronoun to use is “they.”

Paper details:

GUIDELINES FOR CRITICAL BOOK REVIEWS:
Book reviews are to be done using Microsoft Word and submitted in the Dropbox on the homepage for the course. It is incumbent upon students to check the feedback in the Dropbox and see me in a timely manner if requested to do so once papers have been graded (usually within one week of the submission date).
One course objective is to challenge you to integrate outside readings into the appropriate historical context. Furthermore, you must also endeavor to exercise your own critical reasoning skills in a confrontation with a work relating to the period of history which you are studying. In order to accomplish these goals, you must complete a 5-6 page typed paper (250 words per page, Times New Roman 12 point font, double spaced, one inch margins) on a book which you have chosen from the suggested reading list, from the “For Further Reading” sections following each chapter in the text, or in consultation with me. Some of these works were written during the period under study while others are written about those periods. Some are histories, some philosophical treatises, novels, plays, biographies etc. What type of book you have chosen will have an impact on the paper you write – so be aware of these issues in your reading and writing.
In your paper you should form a general theme or thesis regarding your book. What is the author’s premise, his/her thesis – in other words, why did they write the book in the first place? How does this relate to the period you are studying? You should give a general summary of the book and its theme and give specific examples to illustrate that theme. Then, you need to show how your book connects to or informs the history under study.
These are not research papers – you don’t need any sources other than the text, lectures and the book you read.
Your paper should include the following:
I. Citation. At the top of the first page of your review, give a full citation for the
book read. For example:
Thomson, David. World History From 1914 to 1968. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1969.
II. Introduction (providing a framework and focus for the rest of your paper. No more than 1 page). Introductions should clarify any complex concepts/definitions involved in your topic and present a clear thesis for your paper involving the theme(s) of your book. You should also provide a clear transition to your more in-depth analysis/criticisms of the book. It should establish your thesis and objectives in the paper; thus, it should not be a thoughtless formality but rather the framework for the more detailed analysis in the main body of your paper. You might also find it useful to mention the author, date or historical setting for the book in the introduction. This data might be used in composing your transition from your introduction to your more detailed analysis of the book.
5 Boshears Rev. 1/10
III. Main Body of the paper consists of critical analysis of the work to find and present the ideas, values, attitudes and assumptions which are relevant to the contemporary context of the work; and the development of connections between these ideas and the themes which you have already set up in the introduction.
IV. Summary/conclusion. Summarize and reiteration – tell me what you said. You might find it useful to begin in the main body of the paper, write to the end, compose the summary and then write the introduction last – it will make for a stronger opening in most cases if you do it that way.
Further Suggestions:
1. Avoid writing an exclusively narrative, descriptive paper. Most of your paper should consist of your analysis and criticism (both positive and negative) of the ideas in your book and the connection of those to the context of the history under study.
2. Avoid merely paraphrasing what the book says. Strive to conceptualize and analyze rather than describe.
3. USE YOUR OWN WORDS AND IDEAS. Avoid lengthy quotations from your book. Don’t quote or paraphrase the textbook. Compose in your own words what you find to be relevant in terms of the thesis stated in your introduction. History is a literary genre; therefore, to write correctly and effectively is important. Your papers should be well organized, clear, concise, and use correct grammar and syntax.
4. Avoid awkward, vague, and meaningless statements. Select your words carefully and make sure they convey the meaning you want. PROOFREAD your paper when it is finished and correct typos and misspellings. Above all, get involved in your paper, try to be persuasive, and maintain the interest of your reader.
5. A note about the audience of the paper: do not assume that I am the intended audience. If you do, you are likely to leave out information which you know because you might assume that I know it. Assume an intelligent reader who knows absolutely nothing about your topic.
6. Remember, the details cannot speak for themselves. You must speak for them by showing how they are connected to your thesis or the point you are trying to make about your thesis.
7. Write your own papers to the best of your ability. Do not have someone else write it for you — that is cheating. Do not copy someone else’s ideas or written work — that is a form of cheating called plagiarism. You are expected to use your own writing, thinking, and rhetorical skills, and to improve these as a result of your writing experience in this class. Your ideas, thoughts, critiques are important – that is what I want to have the pleasure of reading. Tell me how YOU feel about your book, tell me why, and write it well! 8. Further assistance and suggestions can be found at The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill at http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/book-reviews/
9. If you want to include citations from the book you are reviewing, use quotation marks for the citations and insert page number on which the citation appears in parentheses immediately afterwards.
6 Boshears Rev. 1/10
10. If you choose to cite works other than the book you are reviewing, you should use the appropriate conventions of historical scholarship for footnotes and include a bibliography. A useful guide in this respect is Mary Lynn Rampolla, A Pocket Guide to Writing in History, 3rd ed. (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2001). This book is available in Kolwyck Library ( D13.R295 2010).
11. Before you begin writing your book review, you should take a look at some examples of good reviews. I suggest you look at The Historian, the Journal of Modern History, the American Historical Review, or the European Review of History shelved in the Kolwyck Library or at http://library.chattanoogastate.edu/journalfinder/. Reviews are always published at the back of the journal. History majors or graduate students in History wrote many of the reviews you will read there. You are expected to follow the general format of the reviews. You are not expected to meet their level of sophistication.
12. Books of historical scholarship are not novels or works of fiction. They are described as “non-fiction” and are interpretations of events and phenomena in the past. Historians “argue” their case. They make claims and assertions about the past, but most historians do not claim to be able to “prove” what happened in the past. You should therefore avoid the words “prove” and “proof.” You should also avoid referring to actors in the past as “we.” “We” are actors in our own time, but we could not act before we were born. Once you have properly identified actors in the past, the appropriate pronoun to use is “they.”