First, a book review is not a book report. A book report simply summarizes the contents of a book, while a book review is a qualitative assessment of the book, its thesis and its success in making its point(s). In your review you will not only briefly report on the contents, but you will also assess the book's strengths and weaknesses. It is true that the author of a book is (usually) a professional historian, and you may think you are unqualified write a book review. But a book review is your assessment of the book, its contents and its purpose, written from your own point of view. Did the book speak to you? Did it fulfill its promise? Is it useful to an upper division history student?

In writing your review, it is not enough to indicate whether or not you liked the book. You must also explain why you liked or disliked it. If you think it is interesting, you must relate why you feel that way. If you dislike the book, you need to explain the reasons for your judgement. Was the book unconvincing because the author failed to support sufficient evidence to support the thesis? Or, perhaps, did you disagree with the book's underlying assumptions?

In order to form these types of judgements, you need to read critically and analytically. As a critical reader, you are not passive. Reading should be a constant interaction between the reader and the writer. You should always ask questions of the book and then try to find the answers within the work itself.

Place your name in the upper right-hand corner of the first page.

The very first lines of the book review should list the author, title, place published, publisher and date of publication. Something like this:

Firstname M. Lastname. Title. (City: Publisher, date)

I. You should begin with a brief summary of the book that also relates the author's main point or thesis. This is a one-paragraph introduction to your review.

II. You should then provide one or two paragraphs of information about the author. What is the author's viewpoint? What can you discover about the author's background that might shed light on the author's thesis or upon the author's bias and point of view? What is the author's purpose in writing the book? If you don't understand the author's purpose in writing the book, you surely will have trouble understanding the book itself.

III. You may now provide a brief (one to two paragraph) abstract of the book's content. This is NOT the heart of your review. Rather, it is background material for the next section, your analysis of the book's thesis.

IV. The heart of your review is a three to four paragraph analysis of the book's thesis or argument. What evidence does the author present to support his thesis? Is the evidence presented clearly and logically? Do the author's main points follow in a logical sequence, and does the author provide adequate evidence to support the points? Is the author convincing and persuasive in presenting and arguing for thes thesis? You might want to compare the content and arguments of this book with other materials you have read.

V. Finally, in one to two paragraphs of conclusions and recommendations, provide a summary evaluation of the book. Was the thesis clear? Was the evidence strong? Were the conclusions drawn from that evidence sound and persuasive? Do you agree or disagree with the author's assumptions and conclusions? Was the book helpful or useful to your understanding of Roman history? Would you recommend the book to a classmate? Would you keep the book on the reading list?

Format: 1. Three to five pages, double-spaced, with no more than one-inch margins and a font no greater than 12 points. 2. Indicate page numbers in parentheses when you refer to a specific idea. 3. Direct quotations of more than three lines do not require quotation marks; instead, they should be indented and single spaced. However, use quotations sparingly to support a point; do not try to make up your entire paper with quotations. 4. Do not hand in a rough draft. Take pride in your writing, and proofread your paper for spelling and grammar. When naming a book either as a choice or in the review itself, the bibliographic format stipulated above must be used. Your grade will be lowered if you do not follow the format.

Deadlines: Book review choices must be e-mailed to dhood@csulb.edu by 6:30 p.m.on the dates indicated. Book Reviews must be physically handed-in (not e-mailed) at the beginning of class on the dates indicated above. The Turnitin.com class number is 2294596; I’ll give you the Turnitin.com password in class. Further instructions will be sent by e-mail.The only acceptable excuse for lateness is a physician's written medical excuse informing me that you were too ill to come to class on the date the paper was due.

The History Department now requires majors to move through a series of courses that begins with History 301, is followed by 302, and culminates in a Senior Seminar (499) that matches one of the areas of concentration selected for the major. History 499 must be taken in the last semester of work, or after 18 units of upper-division work have been completed in the major. Those 18 units must include at least six units, that is, two courses, in the concentration of the 499 being taken. Students in 499 are required to assemble a portfolio that reflects their work in upper-division history courses. This portfolio is designed to enable students to show development in the major, and their mastery of key analytical, mechanical, and presentation skills. As a part of the process, history majors (or prospective majors) should save all work from upper-division history courses for potential inclusion in this portfolio. For portfolio guidelines, see http://www.csulb.edu/colleges/cla/departments/history/docs/portfolioguidelines.doc. For questions and/or advising about the portfolio, contact Professor Sharlene Sayegh Canada at ssayeghc@csulb.edu, or telephone 562.985.5428.