My book reviews all follow a set format, both to avoid plagiarism and to ensure that critical thinking does indeed take place. Each are divided into four paragraphs. In the first paragraph, the student must identify the thesis of the book. Why is the author writing? What is the message he/she is attempting to convey? Why does it matter? The second paragraph contains a summary of the book. What do its chapters contain? How is it organized? What historical evidence does the author use to support his/her argument? If the first paragraph made sure that the student had identified the argument and "got it," the second paragraph is the inducement to read each chapter, not just the introduction and conclusion. It is with the third and fourth paragraphs, however, that the book review really becomes interesting. In the third paragraph, the student must analyze the strengths and weaknesses of the book. Where is the author's argument compelling? Where does it fall short? What is particularly persuasive? What is missing? Finally, in the fourth paragraph, the student is required to place the book into the context of the course. How does the book fit with the lectures and discussions? What does it add to our understanding of the historical topic at hand? How does it compare to the other books we have read?
