This is not necessarily an outline as such, but rather elements to keep in mind (and possibly include) in the writing of your review. It is up to you as reviewer to decide which of these elements (or other elements not mentioned here) are relevant for your review. Though the majority of this guide is my own, I have incorporated a few elements and examples from Lawrence Behrens and Leonard J. Rosen, Reading and Writing Across the Curriculum (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1982).

1. Form: At the beginning, give your title for the review, and also give complete information about the book: author, title, place of publication, publisher, date, number of pages. Use this form:

Marvin E. Lusts. How to Be Great: Getting Ahead in a Humble Way. New York: Deficient Press, 1997. xvii, 234 pp.

2. Introduction

a. Brief explanation of the relevance or importance of this book for this class

b. Questions of introduction: background; date of writing; genre; for whom the book is intended; what we know about the author; the historical context in which the author wrote: the "school" represented by this author or work (i.e., identifiable groups of persons with whom the author works and agrees). It is the reviewer's responsibility to judge which of these components can be known and which are helpful and/or necessary for understanding the book.

c. The purpose of this book; what the author is trying to accomplish

d. Brief identification of the scope of the book (how much the author is trying to cover)

a. Overview of the book and a description of its contents. (Book reviews vary as to purpose. Most book review editors want a short, succinct "overview" of the contents rather than a (longer) summary of the book. In some cases the purpose of the review is to present content unknown to the audience of the review. In the latter case, a (longer) summary of the book's contents may be appropriate. But in any case, the overview/summary of the book's contents should never amount to more than half of the length of the review.)

b. Description of the author's

i. method
ii. assumptions
iii. main thesis or theses
c. The structure of the book

d. Note-worthy statements, wordings, quotations from the book

a. Of the author's method

b. Of the thesis

i. How and why the author selects the data he or she selects; the validity of those judgments evaluated
ii. Whether the evidence selected supports the conclusions drawn (why/why not): Where is it flawed by over-generalization, faulty reasoning, false assumptions, etc.?
iii. Other evidence or questions that may have strengthened the book
c. What others have said about this work (check indices of book reviews in the library)

a. What this book does well and why

b. What this book does not do well and why not

c. The overall significance of this work: Is it a valuable piece, a useful piece with some minor problems, a brave attempt gone wrong, a waste of the trees sacrificed to print the book?