difference of book review and critique

Critique vs. Review

What's the difference.

Critique and review are two distinct forms of evaluation, often used in the context of analyzing a piece of work or providing feedback. While both involve assessing the strengths and weaknesses of a subject, they differ in their approach and purpose. A critique typically delves deeper into the analysis, focusing on the underlying concepts, theories, and methodologies employed in the work. It aims to provide a comprehensive evaluation, highlighting both the positive aspects and areas for improvement. On the other hand, a review tends to be more concise and opinion-based, summarizing the main points and offering a subjective judgment of the work's quality. Reviews often cater to a broader audience, providing a general overview and recommendation.

Further Detail

Introduction.

When it comes to evaluating various forms of art, literature, or any creative work, two commonly used methods are critique and review. While both critique and review involve analyzing and providing feedback on a particular piece, they differ in their approach, purpose, and level of depth. In this article, we will explore the attributes of critique and review, highlighting their similarities and differences, and understanding how they contribute to the overall understanding and improvement of creative works.

Definition and Purpose

Critique and review are both forms of evaluation, but they serve different purposes. A critique is an in-depth analysis of a creative work, focusing on its strengths, weaknesses, and overall effectiveness. It aims to provide constructive feedback to the creator, helping them understand the underlying elements and potential areas for improvement. On the other hand, a review is a more general assessment of a work, often intended for a wider audience. It aims to inform and guide potential consumers or audience members, giving them an overview of the work's quality, content, and relevance.

Approach and Perspective

When it comes to the approach and perspective, critique and review also differ. A critique typically takes a more objective and analytical stance, delving into the technical aspects, thematic elements, and artistic choices of the work. It often involves a deeper understanding of the medium and its conventions, allowing the critic to provide a comprehensive analysis. On the other hand, a review tends to be more subjective, focusing on the reviewer's personal opinion and experience with the work. While it may touch upon technical aspects, it primarily aims to convey the reviewer's overall impression and whether they would recommend it to others.

Depth and Detail

One of the key distinctions between critique and review lies in the depth and detail of the analysis. A critique goes beyond surface-level observations, diving into the nuances and intricacies of the work. It explores the underlying themes, symbolism, character development, and narrative structure, among other elements. A critique often requires a deeper engagement with the work, multiple readings or viewings, and a comprehensive understanding of the creator's intentions. On the other hand, a review provides a more concise and condensed overview, focusing on the overall impression and key aspects that may interest the target audience. It may touch upon the plot, characters, writing style, or visual aesthetics, but it does not delve into the same level of detail as a critique.

Target Audience

Another aspect that sets critique and review apart is their target audience. A critique is primarily aimed at the creator or artist, providing them with valuable insights and suggestions for improvement. It assumes a certain level of knowledge and understanding of the creative process, allowing the critic to offer a more specialized analysis. On the other hand, a review is intended for a broader audience, including potential consumers, readers, or viewers. It aims to guide their decision-making process, helping them determine whether the work aligns with their preferences and interests.

Publication and Format

The publication and format of critique and review also differ. Critiques are often found in academic journals, specialized publications, or dedicated platforms that focus on critical analysis. They tend to be longer, more detailed, and written by experts or individuals with a deep understanding of the subject matter. Reviews, on the other hand, are commonly found in newspapers, magazines, online platforms, or even personal blogs. They are generally shorter, more accessible, and written by individuals who may or may not have expertise in the field but can provide an opinion that resonates with a wider audience.

Impact and Influence

Both critique and review have the potential to impact the creator and the audience, albeit in different ways. A well-executed critique can provide valuable insights and suggestions for improvement, helping the creator refine their work and grow as an artist. It can challenge their assumptions, highlight blind spots, and encourage experimentation. On the other hand, a review can influence the audience's perception and decision-making process. A positive review may attract more consumers or audience members, while a negative review can deter potential consumers or lead to a reevaluation of the work's quality.

In conclusion, while critique and review share the common goal of evaluating creative works, they differ in their approach, purpose, depth, and target audience. Critique provides an in-depth analysis, focusing on the creator's growth and improvement, while review offers a more general assessment, guiding the audience's decision-making process. Both forms of evaluation play a crucial role in the creative ecosystem, contributing to the understanding, development, and appreciation of various art forms.

Comparisons may contain inaccurate information about people, places, or facts. Please report any issues.

• Writing Home
• Writing Advice Home

The Book Review or Article Critique

• Printable PDF Version
• Fair-Use Policy

An analytic or critical review of a book or article is not primarily a summary; rather, it comments on and evaluates the work in the light of specific issues and theoretical concerns in a course. (To help sharpen your analytical reading skills, see our file on Critical Reading .) The literature review puts together a set of such commentaries to map out the current range of positions on a topic; then the writer can define his or her own position in the rest of the paper. Keep questions like these in mind as you read, make notes, and write the review

• What is the specific topic of the book or article? What overall purpose does it seem to have? For what readership is it written? (The preface, acknowledgements, bibliography and index can be helpful in answering these questions. Don’t overlook facts about the author’s background and the circumstances of the book’s creation and publication.)
• Does the author state an explicit thesis? Does he or she noticeably have an axe to grind? What are the theoretical assumptions? Are they discussed explicitly? (Again, look for statements in the preface, etc. and follow them up in the rest of the work.)
• What exactly does the work contribute to the overall topic of your course? What general problems and concepts in your discipline and course does it engage with?
• What kinds of material does the work present (e.g. primary documents or secondary material, literary analysis, personal observation, quantitative data, biographical or historical accounts)?
• How is this material used to demonstrate and argue the thesis? (As well as indicating the overall structure of the work, your review could quote or summarize specific passages to show the characteristics of the author’s presentation, including writing style and tone.)
• Are there alternative ways of arguing from the same material? Does the author show awareness of them? In what respects does the author agree or disagree?
• What theoretical issues and topics for further discussion does the work raise?
• What are your own reactions and considered opinions regarding the work?

Browse in published scholarly book reviews to get a sense of the ways reviews function in intellectual discourse. Look at journals in your discipline or general publications such as the London Review of Books or the New York Review of Books

Some reviews summarize the book’s content and then evaluate it; others integrate these functions, commenting on the book and using summary only to give examples. Choose the method that seems most suitable according to your professor’s directions

To keep your focus, remind yourself that your assignment is primarily to discuss the book’s treatment of its topic, not the topic itself. Your key sentences should therefore say “This book shows…the author argues” rather than “This happened…this is the case.

ENGLISH: Research Guide

• Get Started
• Book Reviews vs. Literary Criticism
• Find Books & Media
• Creative Writing

Your Librarian

In This Section

In this section, you'll find:.

• Information on book reviews and where to find them
• Information on literary criticism  and where to find it

Book Reviews

Book reviews describe and analyze the contents of a book, and often make a recommendation about whether or not to read or purchase the book. Reviews vary in length from single paragraphs to full-length essays (remember writing book reports in middle school?).

Reviews of nonfiction books analyze the topics and/or arguments of the book. Reviewers judge the effectiveness of the authors' support for their arguments and assertions. An author should have some form of authority - they should have a credible reason for writing on the subject. Thus, a book review should cover the authors' credentials. Typically, book reviews compare the book to similar books on the subject. Pay attention to what reviewers consider to be important omissions and any potential biases.

Book Reviews - Fiction & Popular Works

• The New York Review of Books Literary magazine with essays and reviews (of theater and more, not just books).

Book Reviews - Nonfiction & Scholarly Works

• H-Net Reviews The largest online professional reviewing archive, with approximately 46,000 free reviews of scholarly books.

Literary Criticism

Literary criticism is the term given to studies that define, classify, analyze, interpret, and evaluate works of literature. There are many types of literary criticism:

• Moral Criticism, Dramatic Construction (~360 BC-present)
• Formalism, New Criticism, Neo-Aristotelian Criticism (1930s-present)
• Psychoanalytic Criticism, Jungian Criticism(1930s-present)
• Marxist Criticism (1930s-present)
• Reader-Response Criticism (1960s-present)
• Structuralism/Semiotics (1920s-present)
• Post-Structuralism/Deconstruction (1966-present)
• New Historicism/Cultural Studies (1980s-present)
• Post-Colonial Criticism (1990s-present)
• Feminist Criticism (1960s-present)
• Gender/Queer Studies (1970s-present)
• Critical Race Theory (1970s-present)

Literary criticism may examine a particular literary work or it may look at an author's writings as a whole. 

Literary Criticism in Academic Journals

• << Previous: Find Articles
• Next: Find Books & Media >>
• Last Updated: Dec 12, 2023 9:36 AM
• URL: https://libguides.uj.edu/english

• U.S. Locations
• UMGC Europe
• Learn Online
• Find Answers
• 855-655-8682
• Current Students

Online Guide to Writing and Research

Other frequently assigned papers, explore more of umgc.

• Online Guide to Writing

Reviews and Reaction Papers

Article and book reviews.

Some assignments may ask you to write a review of a book or journal article. Sometimes, students think a book report and a book review are the same. However, there are significant differences.

A  book report  summarizes the contents of the book, but a  book review  is a critical analysis of the book that describes, summarizes, and critiques the ideas in the book. A review is a means of going beyond the literal content of a source and is a tool for connecting ideas from a variety of academic sources. A review provides an objective analysis of ideas, support for opinions, and a way to evaluate your own opinions.

Why are book reviews beneficial to write?

Some instructors like to assign book reviews to help students broaden their view of the subject matter and to give students practice in critically evaluating ideas in the subject area. Instructors often require that students follow existing review formats modeled in the journals in their disciplines. 

If you are asked to use such formats, remember that citations for books and journal articles differ from discipline to discipline. Find out which style guide is appropriate for the discipline in which you are writing. (Refer to the discussion of style manuals in chapter 5 of this guide for more information.)

Reviews let you relate to authors and agree or disagree with their ideas. A review allows you to examine your understanding of a subject area in light of the ideas presented in the reviewed book and interact with the author and his or her ideas. Also, a book review helps your instructor evaluate your understanding of the subject matter and your ability to think competently in your discipline.

Here are some questions to keep in mind when you are writing a book review:

What exactly is the subject of the book? What are the author’s credentials to write about this subject? Is the title suggestive? Does the preface contain information about the author’s purpose?

What is the author’s thesis? Is it clearly stated, or do you have to dig it out of the facts and opinions? Does the author present the ideas in a balanced way? What are the author’s biases?

What organizational approach does the author use? Does the chosen organization support the author’s thesis effectively?

What conclusion or conclusions does the author draw? Does the conclusion agree with the thesis or stated purposes? How does the conclusion differ from or agree with your course textbook or other books you have read?

How has this book helped you understand the subject you are studying in the course? Would you recommend the book to your reader?

As you write your review, ask yourself these questions:

Have I represented the author and the ideas presented in the book in a fair and balanced way?

Does the ethical tone of my review prompt the reader to trust my judgment? (You may want to review the discussion on writing arguments in this chapter.)

Does my review reflect the interests of my readers and fulfill my reasons for writing the review?

Have I demonstrated my understanding of the content of the article or book I’m reviewing? Have I clearly addressed the major issues in the subject area?

Have I clearly stated my own biases as a reviewer?

Have I clearly expressed my position about how much or how little the author has contributed to my understanding of the subject in question? Have I recommended or not recommended the book to other prospective readers?

Have I checked my review for organizational, grammatical, and mechanical errors?

Key Takeaway

A book review or article review is a critical analysis of the material that describes, summarizes, and critiques the ideas presented. The purpose of a book or article review assignment is to broaden your knowledge base and understanding of a topic.

Mailing Address: 3501 University Blvd. East, Adelphi, MD 20783 This work is licensed under a  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License . © 2022 UMGC. All links to external sites were verified at the time of publication. UMGC is not responsible for the validity or integrity of information located at external sites.

Table of Contents: Online Guide to Writing

Chapter 1: College Writing

How Does College Writing Differ from Workplace Writing?

What Is College Writing?

Why So Much Emphasis on Writing?

Chapter 2: The Writing Process

Doing Exploratory Research

Getting from Notes to Your Draft

Introduction

Prewriting - Techniques to Get Started - Mining Your Intuition

Prewriting: Targeting Your Audience

Prewriting: Techniques to Get Started

Prewriting: Understanding Your Assignment

Rewriting: Being Your Own Critic

Rewriting: Creating a Revision Strategy

Rewriting: Getting Feedback

Rewriting: The Final Draft

Techniques to Get Started - Outlining

Techniques to Get Started - Using Systematic Techniques

Thesis Statement and Controlling Idea

Writing: Getting from Notes to Your Draft - Freewriting

Writing: Getting from Notes to Your Draft - Summarizing Your Ideas

Writing: Outlining What You Will Write

Chapter 3: Thinking Strategies

A Word About Style, Voice, and Tone

A Word About Style, Voice, and Tone: Style Through Vocabulary and Diction

Critical Strategies and Writing

Critical Strategies and Writing: Analysis

Critical Strategies and Writing: Evaluation

Critical Strategies and Writing: Persuasion

Critical Strategies and Writing: Synthesis

Developing a Paper Using Strategies

Kinds of Assignments You Will Write

Patterns for Presenting Information

Patterns for Presenting Information: Critiques

Patterns for Presenting Information: Discussing Raw Data

Patterns for Presenting Information: General-to-Specific Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Problem-Cause-Solution Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Specific-to-General Pattern

Patterns for Presenting Information: Summaries and Abstracts

Supporting with Research and Examples

Writing Essay Examinations

Writing Essay Examinations: Make Your Answer Relevant and Complete

Writing Essay Examinations: Organize Thinking Before Writing

Writing Essay Examinations: Read and Understand the Question

Chapter 4: The Research Process

Planning and Writing a Research Paper

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Ask a Research Question

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Cite Sources

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Collect Evidence

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Decide Your Point of View, or Role, for Your Research

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Draw Conclusions

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Find a Topic and Get an Overview

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Manage Your Resources

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Outline

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Survey the Literature

Planning and Writing a Research Paper: Work Your Sources into Your Research Writing

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Human Resources

Research Resources: What Are Research Resources?

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found?

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Electronic Resources

Research Resources: Where Are Research Resources Found? - Print Resources

Structuring the Research Paper: Formal Research Structure

Structuring the Research Paper: Informal Research Structure

The Nature of Research

The Research Assignment: How Should Research Sources Be Evaluated?

The Research Assignment: When Is Research Needed?

The Research Assignment: Why Perform Research?

Chapter 5: Academic Integrity

Academic Integrity

Giving Credit to Sources

Giving Credit to Sources: Copyright Laws

Giving Credit to Sources: Documentation

Giving Credit to Sources: Style Guides

Integrating Sources

Practicing Academic Integrity

Practicing Academic Integrity: Keeping Accurate Records

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Paraphrasing Your Source

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Quoting Your Source

Practicing Academic Integrity: Managing Source Material - Summarizing Your Sources

Types of Documentation

Types of Documentation: Bibliographies and Source Lists

Types of Documentation: Citing World Wide Web Sources

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - APA Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - CSE/CBE Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - Chicago Style

Types of Documentation: In-Text or Parenthetical Citations - MLA Style

Types of Documentation: Note Citations

Chapter 6: Using Library Resources

Finding Library Resources

Chapter 7: Assessing Your Writing

How Is Writing Graded?

How Is Writing Graded?: A General Assessment Tool

The Draft Stage

The Draft Stage: The First Draft

The Draft Stage: The Revision Process and the Final Draft

The Draft Stage: Using Feedback

The Research Stage

Using Assessment to Improve Your Writing

Chapter 8: Other Frequently Assigned Papers

Reviews and Reaction Papers: Article and Book Reviews

Reviews and Reaction Papers: Reaction Papers

Writing Arguments

Writing Arguments: Adapting the Argument Structure

Writing Arguments: Purposes of Argument

Writing Arguments: References to Consult for Writing Arguments

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Anticipate Active Opposition

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Determine Your Organization

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Develop Your Argument

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Introduce Your Argument

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - State Your Thesis or Proposition

Writing Arguments: Steps to Writing an Argument - Write Your Conclusion

Writing Arguments: Types of Argument

Appendix A: Books to Help Improve Your Writing

Dictionaries

General Style Manuals

Researching on the Internet

Special Style Manuals

Writing Handbooks

Appendix B: Collaborative Writing and Peer Reviewing

Collaborative Writing: Assignments to Accompany the Group Project

Collaborative Writing: Informal Progress Report

Collaborative Writing: Issues to Resolve

Collaborative Writing: Methodology

Collaborative Writing: Peer Evaluation

Collaborative Writing: Tasks of Collaborative Writing Group Members

Collaborative Writing: Writing Plan

General Introduction

Peer Reviewing

Appendix C: Developing an Improvement Plan

Working with Your Instructor’s Comments and Grades

Appendix D: Writing Plan and Project Schedule

Devising a Writing Project Plan and Schedule

Reviewing Your Plan with Others

By using our website you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more about how we use cookies by reading our  Privacy Policy .

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Assignments

• Annotated Bibliography
• Analyzing a Scholarly Journal Article
• Group Presentations
• Dealing with Nervousness
• Using Visual Aids
• Grading Someone Else's Paper
• Types of Structured Group Activities
• Group Project Survival Skills
• Leading a Class Discussion
• Multiple Book Review Essay
• Reviewing Collected Works
• Writing a Case Analysis Paper
• Writing a Case Study
• About Informed Consent
• Writing Field Notes
• Writing a Policy Memo
• Writing a Reflective Paper
• Writing a Research Proposal
• Generative AI and Writing
• Acknowledgments

A book review is a thorough description, critical analysis, and/or evaluation of the quality, meaning, and significance of a book, often written in relation to prior research on the topic. Reviews generally range from 500-2000 words, but may be longer or shorter depends on several factors: the length and complexity of the book being reviewed, the overall purpose of the review, and whether the review examines two or more books that focus on the same topic. Professors assign book reviews as practice in carefully analyzing complex scholarly texts and to assess your ability to effectively synthesize research so that you reach an informed perspective about the topic being covered.

There are two general approaches to reviewing a book:

• Descriptive review: Presents the content and structure of a book as objectively as possible, describing essential information about a book's purpose and authority. This is done by stating the perceived aims and purposes of the study, often incorporating passages quoted from the text that highlight key elements of the work. Additionally, there may be some indication of the reading level and anticipated audience.
• Critical review: Describes and evaluates the book in relation to accepted literary and historical standards and supports this evaluation with evidence from the text and, in most cases, in contrast to and in comparison with the research of others. It should include a statement about what the author has tried to do, evaluates how well you believe the author has succeeded in meeting the objectives of the study, and presents evidence to support this assessment. For most course assignments, your professor will want you to write this type of review.

Book Reviews. Writing Center. University of New Hampshire; Book Reviews: How to Write a Book Review. Writing and Style Guides. Libraries. Dalhousie University; Kindle, Peter A. "Teaching Students to Write Book Reviews." Contemporary Rural Social Work 7 (2015): 135-141; Erwin, R. W. “Reviewing Books for Scholarly Journals.” In Writing and Publishing for Academic Authors . Joseph M. Moxley and Todd Taylor. 2 nd edition. (Lanham, MD: Rowan and Littlefield, 1997), pp. 83-90.

How to Approach Writing Your Review

NOTE:   Since most course assignments require that you write a critical rather than descriptive book review, the following information about preparing to write and developing the structure and style of reviews focuses on this approach.

I.  Common Features

While book reviews vary in tone, subject, and style, they share some common features. These include:

• A review gives the reader a concise summary of the content . This includes a description of the research topic and scope of analysis as well as an overview of the book's overall perspective, argument, and purpose.
• A review offers a critical assessment of the content in relation to other studies on the same topic . This involves documenting your reactions to the work under review--what strikes you as noteworthy or important, whether or not the arguments made by the author(s) were effective or persuasive, and how the work enhanced your understanding of the research problem under investigation.
• In addition to analyzing a book's strengths and weaknesses, a scholarly review often recommends whether or not readers would value the work for its authenticity and overall quality . This measure of quality includes both the author's ideas and arguments and covers practical issues, such as, readability and language, organization and layout, indexing, and, if needed, the use of non-textual elements .

To maintain your focus, always keep in mind that most assignments ask you to discuss a book's treatment of its topic, not the topic itself . Your key sentences should say, "This book shows...,” "The study demonstrates...," or “The author argues...," rather than "This happened...” or “This is the case....”

II.  Developing a Critical Assessment Strategy

There is no definitive methodological approach to writing a book review in the social sciences, although it is necessary that you think critically about the research problem under investigation before you begin to write. Therefore, writing a book review is a three-step process: 1) carefully taking notes as you read the text; 2) developing an argument about the value of the work under consideration; and, 3) clearly articulating that argument as you write an organized and well-supported assessment of the work.

A useful strategy in preparing to write a review is to list a set of questions that should be answered as you read the book [remember to note the page numbers so you can refer back to the text!]. The specific questions to ask yourself will depend upon the type of book you are reviewing. For example, a book that is presenting original research about a topic may require a different set of questions to ask yourself than a work where the author is offering a personal critique of an existing policy or issue.

Here are some sample questions that can help you think critically about the book:

• Thesis or Argument . What is the central thesis—or main argument—of the book? If the author wanted you to get one main idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world that you know or have experienced? What has the book accomplished? Is the argument clearly stated and does the research support this?
• Topic . What exactly is the subject or topic of the book? Is it clearly articulated? Does the author cover the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion? Can you detect any biases? What type of approach has the author adopted to explore the research problem [e.g., topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive]?
• Evidence . How does the author support their argument? What evidence does the author use to prove their point? Is the evidence based on an appropriate application of the method chosen to gather information? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Does any of the author's information [or conclusions] conflict with other books you've read, courses you've taken, or just previous assumptions you had about the research problem?
• Structure . How does the author structure their argument? Does it follow a logical order of analysis? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense to you? Does it persuade you? Why or why not?
• Take-aways . How has this book helped you understand the research problem? Would you recommend the book to others? Why or why not?

Beyond the content of the book, you may also consider some information about the author and the general presentation of information. Question to ask may include:

• The Author: Who is the author? The nationality, political persuasion, education, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details about how a work takes shape. Does it matter, for example, that the author is affiliated with a particular organization? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events they wrote about? What other topics has the author written about? Does this work build on prior research or does it represent a new or unique area of research?
• The Presentation: What is the book's genre? Out of what discipline does it emerge? Does it conform to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or other contextual standard upon which to base your evaluations. If you are reviewing the first book ever written on the subject, it will be important for your readers to know this. Keep in mind, though, that declarative statements about being the “first,” the "best," or the "only" book of its kind can be a risky unless you're absolutely certain because your professor [presumably] has a much better understanding of the overall research literature.

NOTE: Most critical book reviews examine a topic in relation to prior research. A good strategy for identifying this prior research is to examine sources the author(s) cited in the chapters introducing the research problem and, of course, any review of the literature. However, you should not assume that the author's references to prior research is authoritative or complete. If any works related to the topic have been excluded, your assessment of the book should note this . Be sure to consult with a librarian to ensure that any additional studies are located beyond what has been cited by the author(s).

Book Reviews. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Book Reviews. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Hartley, James. "Reading and Writing Book Reviews Across the Disciplines." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 (July 2006): 1194–1207;   Motta-Roth, D. “Discourse Analysis and Academic Book Reviews: A Study of Text and Disciplinary Cultures.”  In Genre Studies in English for Academic Purposes . Fortanet Gómez, Inmaculada  et  al., editors. (Castellò de la Plana: Publicacions de la Universitat Jaume I, 1998), pp. 29-45. Writing a Book Review. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing Book Reviews. Writing Tutorial Services, Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning. Indiana University; Suárez, Lorena and Ana I. Moreno. “The Rhetorical Structure of Academic Journal Book Reviews: A Cross-linguistic and Cross-disciplinary Approach .” In Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, María del Carmen Pérez Llantada Auría, Ramón Plo Alastrué, and Claus Peter Neumann. Actas del V Congreso Internacional AELFE/Proceedings of the 5th International AELFE Conference . Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, 2006.

Structure and Writing Style

I.  Bibliographic Information

Bibliographic information refers to the essential elements of a work if you were to cite it in a paper [i.e., author, title, date of publication, etc.]. Provide the essential information about the book using the writing style [e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago] preferred by your professor or used by the discipline of your major . Depending on how your professor wants you to organize your review, the bibliographic information represents the heading of your review. In general, it would look like this:

[Complete title of book. Author or authors. Place of publication. Publisher. Date of publication. Number of pages before first chapter, often in Roman numerals. Total number of pages]. The Whites of Their Eyes: The Tea Party's Revolution and the Battle over American History . By Jill Lepore. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2010. xii, 207 pp.)

Reviewed by [your full name].

II.  Scope/Purpose/Content

Begin your review by telling the reader not only the overarching concern of the book in its entirety [the subject area] but also what the author's particular point of view is on that subject [the thesis statement]. If you cannot find an adequate statement in the author's own words or if you find that the thesis statement is not well-developed, then you will have to compose your own introductory thesis statement that does cover all the material. This statement should be no more than one paragraph and must be succinctly stated, accurate, and unbiased.

If you find it difficult to discern the overall aims and objectives of the book [and, be sure to point this out in your review if you determine that this is a deficiency], you may arrive at an understanding of the book's overall purpose by assessing the following:

• Scan the table of contents because it can help you understand how the book was organized and will aid in determining the author's main ideas and how they were developed [e.g., chronologically, topically, historically, etc.].
• Why did the author write on this subject rather than on some other subject?
• From what point of view is the work written?
• Was the author trying to give information, to explain something technical, or to convince the reader of a belief’s validity by dramatizing it in action?
• What is the general field or genre, and how does the book fit into it? If necessary, review related literature from other books and journal articles to familiarize yourself with the field.
• Who is the intended audience?
• What is the author's style? Is it formal or informal? You can evaluate the quality of the writing style by noting some of the following standards: coherence, clarity, originality, forcefulness, accurate use of technical words, conciseness, fullness of development, and fluidity [i.e., quality of the narrative flow].
• How did the book affect you? Were there any prior assumptions you had about the subject that were changed, abandoned, or reinforced after reading the book? How is the book related to your own personal beliefs or assumptions? What personal experiences have you had related to the subject that affirm or challenge underlying assumptions?
• How well has the book achieved the goal(s) set forth in the preface, introduction, and/or foreword?
• Would you recommend this book to others? Why or why not?

III.  Note the Method

Support your remarks with specific references to text and quotations that help to illustrate the literary method used to state the research problem, describe the research design, and analyze the findings. In general, authors tend to use the following literary methods, exclusively or in combination.

• Description : The author depicts scenes and events by giving specific details that appeal to the five senses, or to the reader’s imagination. The description presents background and setting. Its primary purpose is to help the reader realize, through as many details as possible, the way persons, places, and things are situated within the phenomenon being described.
• Narration : The author tells the story of a series of events, usually thematically or in chronological order. In general, the emphasis in scholarly books is on narration of the events. Narration tells what has happened and, in some cases, using this method to forecast what could happen in the future. Its primary purpose is to draw the reader into a story and create a contextual framework for understanding the research problem.
• Exposition : The author uses explanation and analysis to present a subject or to clarify an idea. Exposition presents the facts about a subject or an issue clearly and as impartially as possible. Its primary purpose is to describe and explain, to document for the historical record an event or phenomenon.
• Argument : The author uses techniques of persuasion to establish understanding of a particular truth, often in the form of addressing a research question, or to convince the reader of its falsity. The overall aim is to persuade the reader to believe something and perhaps to act on that belief. Argument takes sides on an issue and aims to convince the reader that the author's position is valid, logical, and/or reasonable.

IV.  Critically Evaluate the Contents

Critical comments should form the bulk of your book review . State whether or not you feel the author's treatment of the subject matter is appropriate for the intended audience. Ask yourself:

• Has the purpose of the book been achieved?
• What contributions does the book make to the field?
• Is the treatment of the subject matter objective or at least balanced in describing all sides of a debate?
• Are there facts and evidence that have been omitted?
• What kinds of data, if any, are used to support the author's thesis statement?
• Can the same data be interpreted to explain alternate outcomes?
• Is the writing style clear and effective?
• Does the book raise important or provocative issues or topics for discussion?
• Does the book bring attention to the need for further research?
• What has been left out?

Support your evaluation with evidence from the text and, when possible, state the book's quality in relation to other scholarly sources. If relevant, note of the book's format, such as, layout, binding, typography, etc. Are there tables, charts, maps, illustrations, text boxes, photographs, or other non-textual elements? Do they aid in understanding the text? Describing this is particularly important in books that contain a lot of non-textual elements.

NOTE:   It is important to carefully distinguish your views from those of the author so as not to confuse your reader. Be clear when you are describing an author's point of view versus expressing your own.

V.  Examine the Front Matter and Back Matter

Front matter refers to any content before the first chapter of the book. Back matter refers to any information included after the final chapter of the book . Front matter is most often numbered separately from the rest of the text in lower case Roman numerals [i.e. i - xi ]. Critical commentary about front or back matter is generally only necessary if you believe there is something that diminishes the overall quality of the work [e.g., the indexing is poor] or there is something that is particularly helpful in understanding the book's contents [e.g., foreword places the book in an important context].

Front matter that may be considered for evaluation when reviewing its overall quality:

• Table of contents -- is it clear? Is it detailed or general? Does it reflect the true contents of the book? Does it help in understanding a logical sequence of content?
• Author biography -- also found as back matter, the biography of author(s) can be useful in determining the authority of the writer and whether the book builds on prior research or represents new research. In scholarly reviews, noting the author's affiliation and prior publications can be a factor in helping the reader determine the overall validity of the work [i.e., are they associated with a research center devoted to studying the problem under investigation].
• Foreword -- the purpose of a foreword is to introduce the reader to the author and the content of the book, and to help establish credibility for both. A foreword may not contribute any additional information about the book's subject matter, but rather, serves as a means of validating the book's existence. In these cases, the foreword is often written by a leading scholar or expert who endorses the book's contributions to advancing research about the topic. Later editions of a book sometimes have a new foreword prepended [appearing before an older foreword, if there was one], which may be included to explain how the latest edition differs from previous editions. These are most often written by the author.
• Acknowledgements -- scholarly studies in the social sciences often take many years to write, so authors frequently acknowledge the help and support of others in getting their research published. This can be as innocuous as acknowledging the author's family or the publisher. However, an author may acknowledge prominent scholars or subject experts, staff at key research centers, people who curate important archival collections, or organizations that funded the research. In these particular cases, it may be worth noting these sources of support in your review, particularly if the funding organization is biased or its mission is to promote a particular agenda.
• Preface -- generally describes the genesis, purpose, limitations, and scope of the book and may include acknowledgments of indebtedness to people who have helped the author complete the study. Is the preface helpful in understanding the study? Does it provide an effective framework for understanding what's to follow?
• Chronology -- also may be found as back matter, a chronology is generally included to highlight key events related to the subject of the book. Do the entries contribute to the overall work? Is it detailed or very general?
• List of non-textual elements -- a book that contains numerous charts, photographs, maps, tables, etc. will often list these items after the table of contents in the order that they appear in the text. Is this useful?

Back matter that may be considered for evaluation when reviewing its overall quality:

• Afterword -- this is a short, reflective piece written by the author that takes the form of a concluding section, final commentary, or closing statement. It is worth mentioning in a review if it contributes information about the purpose of the book, gives a call to action, summarizes key recommendations or next steps, or asks the reader to consider key points made in the book.
• Appendix -- is the supplementary material in the appendix or appendices well organized? Do they relate to the contents or appear superfluous? Does it contain any essential information that would have been more appropriately integrated into the text?
• Index -- are there separate indexes for names and subjects or one integrated index. Is the indexing thorough and accurate? Are elements used, such as, bold or italic fonts to help identify specific places in the book? Does the index include "see also" references to direct you to related topics?
• Glossary of Terms -- are the definitions clearly written? Is the glossary comprehensive or are there key terms missing? Are any terms or concepts mentioned in the text not included that should have been?
• Endnotes -- examine any endnotes as you read from chapter to chapter. Do they provide important additional information? Do they clarify or extend points made in the body of the text? Should any notes have been better integrated into the text rather than separated? Do the same if the author uses footnotes.
• Bibliography/References/Further Readings -- review any bibliography, list of references to sources, and/or further readings the author may have included. What kinds of sources appear [e.g., primary or secondary, recent or old, scholarly or popular, etc.]? How does the author make use of them? Be sure to note important omissions of sources that you believe should have been utilized, including important digital resources or archival collections.

VI.  Summarize and Comment

State your general conclusions briefly and succinctly. Pay particular attention to the author's concluding chapter and/or afterword. Is the summary convincing? List the principal topics, and briefly summarize the author’s ideas about these topics, main points, and conclusions. If appropriate and to help clarify your overall evaluation, use specific references to text and quotations to support your statements. If your thesis has been well argued, the conclusion should follow naturally. It can include a final assessment or simply restate your thesis. Do not introduce new information in the conclusion. If you've compared the book to any other works or used other sources in writing the review, be sure to cite them at the end of your book review in the same writing style as your bibliographic heading of the book.

Book Reviews. Writing@CSU. Colorado State University; Book Reviews. The Writing Center. University of North Carolina; Gastel, Barbara. "Special Books Section: A Strategy for Reviewing Books for Journals." BioScience 41 (October 1991): 635-637; Hartley, James. "Reading and Writing Book Reviews Across the Disciplines." Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57 (July 2006): 1194–1207; Lee, Alexander D., Bart N. Green, Claire D. Johnson, and Julie Nyquist. "How to Write a Scholarly Book Review for Publication in a Peer-reviewed Journal: A Review of the Literature." Journal of Chiropractic Education 24 (2010): 57-69; Nicolaisen, Jeppe. "The Scholarliness of Published Peer Reviews: A Bibliometric Study of Book Reviews in Selected Social Science Fields." Research Evaluation 11 (2002): 129-140;.Procter, Margaret. The Book Review or Article Critique. The Lab Report. University College Writing Centre. University of Toronto; Reading a Book to Review It. The Writer’s Handbook. Writing Center. University of Wisconsin, Madison; Scarnecchia, David L. "Writing Book Reviews for the Journal Of Range Management and Rangelands." Rangeland Ecology and Management 57 (2004): 418-421; Simon, Linda. "The Pleasures of Book Reviewing." Journal of Scholarly Publishing 27 (1996): 240-241; Writing a Book Review. The Writing Lab and The OWL. Purdue University; Writing Book Reviews. Writing Tutorial Services, Center for Innovative Teaching and Learning. Indiana University.

Writing Tip

Always Read the Foreword and/or the Preface

If they are included in the front matter, a good place for understanding a book's overall purpose, organization, contributions to further understanding of the research problem, and relationship to other studies is to read the preface and the foreword. The foreword may be written by someone other than the author or editor and can be a person who is famous or who has name recognition within the discipline. A foreword is often included to add credibility to the work.

The preface is usually an introductory essay written by the author or editor. It is intended to describe the book's overall purpose, arrangement, scope, and overall contributions to the literature. When reviewing the book, it can be useful to critically evaluate whether the goals set forth in the foreword and/or preface were actually achieved. At the very least, they can establish a foundation for understanding a study's scope and purpose as well as its significance in contributing new knowledge.

Distinguishing between a Foreword, a Preface, and an Introduction . Book Creation Learning Center. Greenleaf Book Group, 2019.

Locating Book Reviews

There are several databases the USC Libraries subscribes to that include the full-text or citations to book reviews. Short, descriptive reviews can also be found at book-related online sites such as Amazon , although it's not always obvious who has written them and may actually be created by the publisher. The following databases provide comprehensive access to scholarly, full-text book reviews:

• ProQuest [1983-present]
• Book Review Digest Retrospective [1905-1982]

Some Language for Evaluating Texts

It can be challenging to find the proper vocabulary from which to discuss and evaluate a book. Here is a list of some active verbs for referring to texts and ideas that you might find useful:

• account for
• demonstrate
• distinguish
• investigate

Examples of usage

• "The evidence indicates that..."
• "This work assesses the effect of..."
• "The author identifies three key reasons for..."
• "This book questions the view that..."
• "This work challenges assumptions about...."

Paquot, Magali. Academic Keyword List. Centre for English Corpus Linguistics. Université Catholique de Louvain.

• << Previous: Leading a Class Discussion
• Next: Multiple Book Review Essay >>
• Last Updated: Mar 6, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/assignments

IOE Writing Centre

• Writing a Critical Review

Writing a Critique

A critique (or critical review) is not to be mistaken for a literature review. A 'critical review', or 'critique', is a complete type of text (or genre), discussing one particular article or book in detail.  In some instances, you may be asked to write a critique of two or three articles (e.g. a comparative critical review). In contrast, a 'literature review', which also needs to be 'critical', is a part of a larger type of text, such as a chapter of your dissertation.

Most importantly: Read your article / book as many times as possible, as this will make the critical review much easier.

1. Read and take notes 2. Organising your writing 3. Summary 4. Evaluation 5. Linguistic features of a critical review 6. Summary language 7. Evaluation language 8. Conclusion language 9. Example extracts from a critical review 10. Further resources

Read and Take Notes

To improve your reading confidence and efficiency, visit our pages on reading.

Further reading: Read Confidently

After you are familiar with the text, make notes on some of the following questions. Choose the questions which seem suitable:

• What kind of article is it (for example does it present data or does it present purely theoretical arguments)?
• What is the main area under discussion?
• What are the main findings?
• What are the stated limitations?
• Where does the author's data and evidence come from? Are they appropriate / sufficient?
• What are the main issues raised by the author?
• What questions are raised?
• How well are these questions addressed?
• What are the major points/interpretations made by the author in terms of the issues raised?
• Is the text balanced? Is it fair / biased?
• Does the author contradict herself?
• How does all this relate to other literature on this topic?
• How does all this relate to your own experience, ideas and views?
• What else has this author written? Do these build / complement this text?
• (Optional) Has anyone else reviewed this article? What did they say? Do I agree with them?

^ Back to top

Organising your writing

You first need to summarise the text that you have read. One reason to summarise the text is that the reader may not have read the text. In your summary, you will

• focus on points within the article that you think are interesting
• summarise the author(s) main ideas or argument
• explain how these ideas / argument have been constructed. (For example, is the author basing her arguments on data that they have collected? Are the main ideas / argument purely theoretical?)

In your summary you might answer the following questions:     Why is this topic important?     Where can this text be located? For example, does it address policy studies?     What other prominent authors also write about this?

Evaluation is the most important part in a critical review.

Use the literature to support your views. You may also use your knowledge of conducting research, and your own experience. Evaluation can be explicit or implicit.

Explicit evaluation

Explicit evaluation involves stating directly (explicitly) how you intend to evaluate the text. e.g. "I will review this article by focusing on the following questions. First, I will examine the extent to which the authors contribute to current thought on Second Language Acquisition (SLA) pedagogy. After that, I will analyse whether the authors' propositions are feasible within overseas SLA classrooms."

Implicit evaluation

Implicit evaluation is less direct. The following section on Linguistic Features of Writing a Critical Review contains language that evaluates the text. A difficult part of evaluation of a published text (and a professional author) is how to do this as a student. There is nothing wrong with making your position as a student explicit and incorporating it into your evaluation. Examples of how you might do this can be found in the section on Linguistic Features of Writing a Critical Review. You need to remember to locate and analyse the author's argument when you are writing your critical review. For example, you need to locate the authors' view of classroom pedagogy as presented in the book / article and not present a critique of views of classroom pedagogy in general.

Linguistic features of a critical review

The following examples come from published critical reviews. Some of them have been adapted for student use.

Summary language

•     This article / book is divided into two / three parts. First...
•     While the title might suggest...
•     The tone appears to be...
•     Title is the first / second volume in the series Title, edited by...The books / articles in this series address...
•     The second / third claim is based on...
•     The author challenges the notion that...
•     The author tries to find a more middle ground / make more modest claims...
•     The article / book begins with a short historical overview of...
•     Numerous authors have recently suggested that...(see Author, Year; Author, Year). Author would also be once such author. With his / her argument that...
•     To refer to title as a...is not to say that it is...
•     This book / article is aimed at... This intended readership...
•     The author's book / article examines the...To do this, the author first...
•     The author develops / suggests a theoretical / pedagogical model to…
•     This book / article positions itself firmly within the field of...
•     The author in a series of subtle arguments, indicates that he / she...
•     The argument is therefore...
•     The author asks "..."
•     With a purely critical / postmodern take on...
•     Topic, as the author points out, can be viewed as...
•     In this recent contribution to the field of...this British author...
•     As a leading author in the field of...
•     This book / article nicely contributes to the field of...and complements other work by this author...
•     The second / third part of...provides / questions / asks the reader...
•     Title is intended to encourage students / researchers to...
•     The approach taken by the author provides the opportunity to examine...in a qualitative / quantitative research framework that nicely complements...
•     The author notes / claims that state support / a focus on pedagogy / the adoption of...remains vital if...
•     According to Author (Year) teaching towards examinations is not as effective as it is in other areas of the curriculum. This is because, as Author (Year) claims that examinations have undue status within the curriculum.
•     According to Author (Year)…is not as effective in some areas of the curriculum / syllabus as others. Therefore the author believes that this is a reason for some school's…

Evaluation language

•     This argument is not entirely convincing, as...furthermore it commodifies / rationalises the...
•     Over the last five / ten years the view of...has increasingly been viewed as 'complicated' (see Author, Year; Author, Year).
•     However, through trying to integrate...with...the author...
•     There are difficulties with such a position.
•     Inevitably, several crucial questions are left unanswered / glossed over by this insightful / timely / interesting / stimulating book / article. Why should...
•     It might have been more relevant for the author to have written this book / article as...
•     This article / book is not without disappointment from those who would view...as...
•     This chosen framework enlightens / clouds...
•     This analysis intends to be...but falls a little short as...
•     The authors rightly conclude that if...
•     A detailed, well-written and rigorous account of...
•     As a Korean student I feel that this article / book very clearly illustrates...
•     The beginning of...provides an informative overview into...
•     The tables / figures do little to help / greatly help the reader...
•     The reaction by scholars who take a...approach might not be so favourable (e.g. Author, Year).
•     This explanation has a few weaknesses that other researchers have pointed out (see Author, Year; Author, Year). The first is...
•     On the other hand, the author wisely suggests / proposes that...By combining these two dimensions...
•     The author's brief introduction to...may leave the intended reader confused as it fails to properly...
•     Despite my inability to...I was greatly interested in...
•     Even where this reader / I disagree(s), the author's effort to...
•     The author thus combines...with...to argue...which seems quite improbable for a number of reasons. First...
•     Perhaps this aversion to...would explain the author's reluctance to...
•     As a second language student from ...I find it slightly ironic that such an anglo-centric view is...
•     The reader is rewarded with...
•     Less convincing is the broad-sweeping generalisation that...
•     There is no denying the author's subject knowledge nor his / her...
•     The author's prose is dense and littered with unnecessary jargon...
•     The author's critique of...might seem harsh but is well supported within the literature (see Author, Year; Author, Year; Author, Year). Aligning herself with the author, Author (Year) states that...
•     As it stands, the central focus of Title is well / poorly supported by its empirical findings...
•     Given the hesitation to generalise to...the limitation of...does not seem problematic...
•     For instance, the term...is never properly defined and the reader left to guess as to whether...
•     Furthermore, to label...as...inadvertently misguides...
•     In addition, this research proves to be timely / especially significant to... as recent government policy / proposals has / have been enacted to...
•     On this well researched / documented basis the author emphasises / proposes that...
•     Nonetheless, other research / scholarship / data tend to counter / contradict this possible trend / assumption...(see Author, Year; Author, Year).
•     Without entering into detail of the..., it should be stated that Title should be read by...others will see little value in...
•     As experimental conditions were not used in the study the word 'significant' misleads the reader.
•     The article / book becomes repetitious in its assertion that...
•     The thread of the author's argument becomes lost in an overuse of empirical data...
•     Almost every argument presented in the final section is largely derivative, providing little to say about...
•     She / he does not seem to take into consideration; however, that there are fundamental differences in the conditions of…
•     As Author (Year) points out, however, it seems to be necessary to look at…
•     This suggest that having low…does not necessarily indicate that…is ineffective.
•     Therefore, the suggestion made by Author (Year)…is difficult to support.
•     When considering all the data presented…it is not clear that the low scores of some students, indeed, reflects…

Conclusion language

•     Overall this article / book is an analytical look at...which within the field of...is often overlooked.
•     Despite its problems, Title offers valuable theoretical insights / interesting examples / a contribution to pedagogy and a starting point for students / researchers of...with an interest in...
•     This detailed and rigorously argued...
•     This first / second volume / book / article by...with an interest in...is highly informative...

Example extracts from a critical review

Writing critically.

If you have been told your writing is not critical enough, it probably means that your writing treats the knowledge claims as if they are true, well supported, and applicable in the context you are writing about. This may not always be the case.

In these two examples, the extracts refer to the same section of text. In each example, the section that refers to a source has been highlighted in bold. The note below the example then explains how the writer has used the source material.    

There is a strong positive effect on students, both educationally and emotionally, when the instructors try to learn to say students' names without making pronunciation errors (Kiang, 2004).

Use of source material in example a: 

This is a simple paraphrase with no critical comment. It looks like the writer agrees with Kiang. (This is not a good example for critical writing, as the writer has not made any critical comment).        

Kiang (2004) gives various examples to support his claim that "the positive emotional and educational impact on students is clear" (p.210) when instructors try to pronounce students' names in the correct way. He quotes one student, Nguyet, as saying that he "felt surprised and happy" (p.211) when the tutor said his name clearly . The emotional effect claimed by Kiang is illustrated in quotes such as these, although the educational impact is supported more indirectly through the chapter. Overall, he provides more examples of students being negatively affected by incorrect pronunciation, and it is difficult to find examples within the text of a positive educational impact as such.

Use of source material in example b: 

The writer describes Kiang's (2004) claim and the examples which he uses to try to support it. The writer then comments that the examples do not seem balanced and may not be enough to support the claims fully. This is a better example of writing which expresses criticality.

^Back to top

Further resources

You may also be interested in our page on criticality, which covers criticality in general, and includes more critical reading questions.

Further reading: Read and Write Critically

We recommend that you do not search for other university guidelines on critical reviews. This is because the expectations may be different at other institutions. Ask your tutor for more guidance or examples if you have further questions.

IOE Writing Centre Online

Self-access resources from the Academic Writing Centre at the UCL Institute of Education.

Anonymous Suggestions Box

Information for Staff

Academic Writing Centre

Academic Writing Centre, UCL Institute of Education [email protected] Twitter:   @AWC_IOE Skype:   awc.ioe

Book Reviews

What this handout is about.

This handout will help you write a book review, a report or essay that offers a critical perspective on a text. It offers a process and suggests some strategies for writing book reviews.

What is a review?

A review is a critical evaluation of a text, event, object, or phenomenon. Reviews can consider books, articles, entire genres or fields of literature, architecture, art, fashion, restaurants, policies, exhibitions, performances, and many other forms. This handout will focus on book reviews. For a similar assignment, see our handout on literature reviews .

Above all, a review makes an argument. The most important element of a review is that it is a commentary, not merely a summary. It allows you to enter into dialogue and discussion with the work’s creator and with other audiences. You can offer agreement or disagreement and identify where you find the work exemplary or deficient in its knowledge, judgments, or organization. You should clearly state your opinion of the work in question, and that statement will probably resemble other types of academic writing, with a thesis statement, supporting body paragraphs, and a conclusion.

Typically, reviews are brief. In newspapers and academic journals, they rarely exceed 1000 words, although you may encounter lengthier assignments and extended commentaries. In either case, reviews need to be succinct. While they vary in tone, subject, and style, they share some common features:

• First, a review gives the reader a concise summary of the content. This includes a relevant description of the topic as well as its overall perspective, argument, or purpose.
• Second, and more importantly, a review offers a critical assessment of the content. This involves your reactions to the work under review: what strikes you as noteworthy, whether or not it was effective or persuasive, and how it enhanced your understanding of the issues at hand.
• Finally, in addition to analyzing the work, a review often suggests whether or not the audience would appreciate it.

Becoming an expert reviewer: three short examples

Reviewing can be a daunting task. Someone has asked for your opinion about something that you may feel unqualified to evaluate. Who are you to criticize Toni Morrison’s new book if you’ve never written a novel yourself, much less won a Nobel Prize? The point is that someone—a professor, a journal editor, peers in a study group—wants to know what you think about a particular work. You may not be (or feel like) an expert, but you need to pretend to be one for your particular audience. Nobody expects you to be the intellectual equal of the work’s creator, but your careful observations can provide you with the raw material to make reasoned judgments. Tactfully voicing agreement and disagreement, praise and criticism, is a valuable, challenging skill, and like many forms of writing, reviews require you to provide concrete evidence for your assertions.

Consider the following brief book review written for a history course on medieval Europe by a student who is fascinated with beer:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600, investigates how women used to brew and sell the majority of ale drunk in England. Historically, ale and beer (not milk, wine, or water) were important elements of the English diet. Ale brewing was low-skill and low status labor that was complimentary to women’s domestic responsibilities. In the early fifteenth century, brewers began to make ale with hops, and they called this new drink “beer.” This technique allowed brewers to produce their beverages at a lower cost and to sell it more easily, although women generally stopped brewing once the business became more profitable.

The student describes the subject of the book and provides an accurate summary of its contents. But the reader does not learn some key information expected from a review: the author’s argument, the student’s appraisal of the book and its argument, and whether or not the student would recommend the book. As a critical assessment, a book review should focus on opinions, not facts and details. Summary should be kept to a minimum, and specific details should serve to illustrate arguments.

Now consider a review of the same book written by a slightly more opinionated student:

Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 was a colossal disappointment. I wanted to know about the rituals surrounding drinking in medieval England: the songs, the games, the parties. Bennett provided none of that information. I liked how the book showed ale and beer brewing as an economic activity, but the reader gets lost in the details of prices and wages. I was more interested in the private lives of the women brewsters. The book was divided into eight long chapters, and I can’t imagine why anyone would ever want to read it.

There’s no shortage of judgments in this review! But the student does not display a working knowledge of the book’s argument. The reader has a sense of what the student expected of the book, but no sense of what the author herself set out to prove. Although the student gives several reasons for the negative review, those examples do not clearly relate to each other as part of an overall evaluation—in other words, in support of a specific thesis. This review is indeed an assessment, but not a critical one.

Here is one final review of the same book:

One of feminism’s paradoxes—one that challenges many of its optimistic histories—is how patriarchy remains persistent over time. While Judith Bennett’s Ale, Beer, and Brewsters in England: Women’s Work in a Changing World, 1300-1600 recognizes medieval women as historical actors through their ale brewing, it also shows that female agency had its limits with the advent of beer. I had assumed that those limits were religious and political, but Bennett shows how a “patriarchal equilibrium” shut women out of economic life as well. Her analysis of women’s wages in ale and beer production proves that a change in women’s work does not equate to a change in working women’s status. Contemporary feminists and historians alike should read Bennett’s book and think twice when they crack open their next brewsky.

This student’s review avoids the problems of the previous two examples. It combines balanced opinion and concrete example, a critical assessment based on an explicitly stated rationale, and a recommendation to a potential audience. The reader gets a sense of what the book’s author intended to demonstrate. Moreover, the student refers to an argument about feminist history in general that places the book in a specific genre and that reaches out to a general audience. The example of analyzing wages illustrates an argument, the analysis engages significant intellectual debates, and the reasons for the overall positive review are plainly visible. The review offers criteria, opinions, and support with which the reader can agree or disagree.

Developing an assessment: before you write

There is no definitive method to writing a review, although some critical thinking about the work at hand is necessary before you actually begin writing. Thus, writing a review is a two-step process: developing an argument about the work under consideration, and making that argument as you write an organized and well-supported draft. See our handout on argument .

What follows is a series of questions to focus your thinking as you dig into the work at hand. While the questions specifically consider book reviews, you can easily transpose them to an analysis of performances, exhibitions, and other review subjects. Don’t feel obligated to address each of the questions; some will be more relevant than others to the book in question.

• What is the thesis—or main argument—of the book? If the author wanted you to get one idea from the book, what would it be? How does it compare or contrast to the world you know? What has the book accomplished?
• What exactly is the subject or topic of the book? Does the author cover the subject adequately? Does the author cover all aspects of the subject in a balanced fashion? What is the approach to the subject (topical, analytical, chronological, descriptive)?
• How does the author support their argument? What evidence do they use to prove their point? Do you find that evidence convincing? Why or why not? Does any of the author’s information (or conclusions) conflict with other books you’ve read, courses you’ve taken or just previous assumptions you had of the subject?
• How does the author structure their argument? What are the parts that make up the whole? Does the argument make sense? Does it persuade you? Why or why not?
• How has this book helped you understand the subject? Would you recommend the book to your reader?

Beyond the internal workings of the book, you may also consider some information about the author and the circumstances of the text’s production:

• Who is the author? Nationality, political persuasion, training, intellectual interests, personal history, and historical context may provide crucial details about how a work takes shape. Does it matter, for example, that the biographer was the subject’s best friend? What difference would it make if the author participated in the events they write about?
• What is the book’s genre? Out of what field does it emerge? Does it conform to or depart from the conventions of its genre? These questions can provide a historical or literary standard on which to base your evaluations. If you are reviewing the first book ever written on the subject, it will be important for your readers to know. Keep in mind, though, that naming “firsts”—alongside naming “bests” and “onlys”—can be a risky business unless you’re absolutely certain.

Writing the review

Once you have made your observations and assessments of the work under review, carefully survey your notes and attempt to unify your impressions into a statement that will describe the purpose or thesis of your review. Check out our handout on thesis statements . Then, outline the arguments that support your thesis.

Your arguments should develop the thesis in a logical manner. That logic, unlike more standard academic writing, may initially emphasize the author’s argument while you develop your own in the course of the review. The relative emphasis depends on the nature of the review: if readers may be more interested in the work itself, you may want to make the work and the author more prominent; if you want the review to be about your perspective and opinions, then you may structure the review to privilege your observations over (but never separate from) those of the work under review. What follows is just one of many ways to organize a review.

Introduction

Since most reviews are brief, many writers begin with a catchy quip or anecdote that succinctly delivers their argument. But you can introduce your review differently depending on the argument and audience. The Writing Center’s handout on introductions can help you find an approach that works. In general, you should include:

• The name of the author and the book title and the main theme.
• Relevant details about who the author is and where they stand in the genre or field of inquiry. You could also link the title to the subject to show how the title explains the subject matter.
• The context of the book and/or your review. Placing your review in a framework that makes sense to your audience alerts readers to your “take” on the book. Perhaps you want to situate a book about the Cuban revolution in the context of Cold War rivalries between the United States and the Soviet Union. Another reviewer might want to consider the book in the framework of Latin American social movements. Your choice of context informs your argument.
• The thesis of the book. If you are reviewing fiction, this may be difficult since novels, plays, and short stories rarely have explicit arguments. But identifying the book’s particular novelty, angle, or originality allows you to show what specific contribution the piece is trying to make.
• Your thesis about the book.

Summary of content

This should be brief, as analysis takes priority. In the course of making your assessment, you’ll hopefully be backing up your assertions with concrete evidence from the book, so some summary will be dispersed throughout other parts of the review.

The necessary amount of summary also depends on your audience. Graduate students, beware! If you are writing book reviews for colleagues—to prepare for comprehensive exams, for example—you may want to devote more attention to summarizing the book’s contents. If, on the other hand, your audience has already read the book—such as a class assignment on the same work—you may have more liberty to explore more subtle points and to emphasize your own argument. See our handout on summary for more tips.

Analysis and evaluation of the book

Your analysis and evaluation should be organized into paragraphs that deal with single aspects of your argument. This arrangement can be challenging when your purpose is to consider the book as a whole, but it can help you differentiate elements of your criticism and pair assertions with evidence more clearly. You do not necessarily need to work chronologically through the book as you discuss it. Given the argument you want to make, you can organize your paragraphs more usefully by themes, methods, or other elements of the book. If you find it useful to include comparisons to other books, keep them brief so that the book under review remains in the spotlight. Avoid excessive quotation and give a specific page reference in parentheses when you do quote. Remember that you can state many of the author’s points in your own words.

Sum up or restate your thesis or make the final judgment regarding the book. You should not introduce new evidence for your argument in the conclusion. You can, however, introduce new ideas that go beyond the book if they extend the logic of your own thesis. This paragraph needs to balance the book’s strengths and weaknesses in order to unify your evaluation. Did the body of your review have three negative paragraphs and one favorable one? What do they all add up to? The Writing Center’s handout on conclusions can help you make a final assessment.

Finally, a few general considerations:

• Review the book in front of you, not the book you wish the author had written. You can and should point out shortcomings or failures, but don’t criticize the book for not being something it was never intended to be.
• With any luck, the author of the book worked hard to find the right words to express her ideas. You should attempt to do the same. Precise language allows you to control the tone of your review.
• Never hesitate to challenge an assumption, approach, or argument. Be sure, however, to cite specific examples to back up your assertions carefully.
• Try to present a balanced argument about the value of the book for its audience. You’re entitled—and sometimes obligated—to voice strong agreement or disagreement. But keep in mind that a bad book takes as long to write as a good one, and every author deserves fair treatment. Harsh judgments are difficult to prove and can give readers the sense that you were unfair in your assessment.
• A great place to learn about book reviews is to look at examples. The New York Times Sunday Book Review and The New York Review of Books can show you how professional writers review books.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Drewry, John. 1974. Writing Book Reviews. Boston: Greenwood Press.

Hoge, James. 1987. Literary Reviewing. Charlottesville: University Virginia of Press.

Sova, Dawn, and Harry Teitelbaum. 2002. How to Write Book Reports , 4th ed. Lawrenceville, NY: Thomson/Arco.

Walford, A.J. 1986. Reviews and Reviewing: A Guide. Phoenix: Oryx Press.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

How to Write a Critical Book Review

Your review should have two goals: first, to inform the reader about the content of the book, and second, to provide an evaluation that gives your judgment of the book’s quality.

Your introduction should include an overview of the book that both incorporates an encapsulated summary and a sense of your general judgment. This is the equivalent to a thesis statement.

Do NOT spend more than one-third or so of the paper summarizing the book. The summary should consist of a discussion and highlights of the major arguments, features, trends, concepts, themes, ideas, and characteristics of the book. While you may use direct quotes from the book (make sure you always give the page number), such quotes should never be the bulk of the summary. Much of your grade will depend on how well you describe and explain the material IN YOUR OWN WORDS. You might want to take the major organizing themes of the book and use them to organize your own discussion. This does NOT mean, however, that I want a chapter-by-chapter summary. Your goal is a unified essay.

So what do I want, if not just a summary? Throughout your summary, I want you to provide a critique of the book. (Hence the title: “A Critical Book Review.”) A critique consists of thoughts, responses, and reactions. It is not necessarily negative. Nor do you need to know as much about the subject as the author (because you hardly ever will). The skills you need are an ability to follow an argument and test a hypothesis. Regardless of how negative or positive your critique is, you need to be able to justify and support your position.

Here are a number of questions that you can address as part of your critique. You need not answer them all, but questions one and two are essential to any book review, so those must be included. And these are ABSOLUTELY NOT to be answered one after another ( seriatim ). Don’t have one paragraph that answers one, and then the next paragraph that answers the next, etc. The answers should be part of a carefully constructed essay, complete with topic sentences and transitions.

• What is your overall opinion of the book? On what basis has this opinion been formulated? That is, tell the reader what you think and how you arrived at this judgment. What did you expect to learn when you picked up the book? To what extent – and how effectively – were your expectations met? Did you nod in agreement (or off to sleep)? Did you wish you could talk back to the author? Amplify upon and explain your reactions.
• Identify the author’s thesis and explain it in your own words. How clearly and in what context is it stated and, subsequently, developed? To what extent and how effectively (i.e., with what kind of evidence) is this thesis proven? Use examples to amplify your responses. If arguments or perspectives were missing, why do you think this might be?
• What are the author’s aims? How well have they been achieved, especially with regard to the way the book is organized? Are these aims supported or justified? (You might look back at the introduction to the book for help). How closely does the organization follow the author’s aims?
• How are the author’s main points presented, explained, and supported? What assumptions lie behind these points? What would be the most effective way for you to compress and/or reorder the author’s scheme of presentation and argument?
• How effectively does the author draw claims from the material being presented? Are connections between the claims and evidence made clearly and logically? Here you should definitely use examples to support your evaluation.
• What conclusions does the author reach and how clearly are they stated? Do these conclusions follow from the thesis and aims and from the ways in which they were developed? In other words, how effectively does the book come together?
• Identify the assumptions made by the author in both the approach to and the writing of the book. For example, what prior knowledge does the author expect readers to possess? How effectively are those assumptions worked into the overall presentation? What assumptions do you think should not have been made? Why?
• Are you able to detect any underlying philosophy of history held by the author (e.g., progress, decline, cyclical, linear, and random)? If so, how does this philosophy affect the presentation of the argument?
• How does the author see history as being motivated: primarily by the forces of individuals, economics, politics, social factors, nationalism, class, race, gender, something else? What kind of impact does this view of historical motivation have upon the way in which the author develops the book?
• Does the author’s presentation seem fair and accurate? Is the interpretation biased? Can you detect any distortion, exaggeration, or diminishing of material? If so, for what purpose might this have been done, and what effect does hit have on the overall presentation?

These questions are derived from Robert Blackey, “Words to the Whys: Crafting Critical Book Reviews,” The History Teacher, 27.2 (Feb. 1994): 159-66.

– Serena Zabin, Feb. 2003

Book Review or Article Critique:

• Brandon Kingsman
• December 24, 2023

Understanding the Differences and Importance

Introduction.

Book reviews and article critiques are frequent forms of evaluation that offer insightful analyses and comments on written works in the field of academics and literary analysis.

While they have certain shared traits, they also have unique qualities that make them unique. The contrasts between book reviews and article critiques, their importance in academic settings, and advice on how to write a successful review or critique are all covered in this article.

I. Understanding Book Reviews

A book review is an in-depth review of a published book that is prepared to educate potential readers about the book’s subject matter, writing style, and general caliber.

A book review’s main objective is to inform readers about whether a book is worthwhile to read. It frequently occurs in newspapers, periodicals, or internet resources.

A well-written book review should offer an objective assessment and viewpoint while staying away from details that can spoil the reading time of other people.

Importance of Book Reviews

Readers’ Choices: Book reviews are extremely important in influencing readers’ decisions. Positive reviews can increase readership, which will increase book sales and the author’s and book’s popularity.

Feedback for Authors: Authors can benefit much from helpful critique in book reviews, which enables them to see what aspects of their writing are strong and what could use some work.

Literary Discourse: By providing different points of view and assessments of a book’s topics, characters, and writing style, book reviews contribute to the greater literary discourse.

Tips for Writing an Effective Book Review

Give the book a careful read: Before starting the review, take the time to read and comprehend the book in its entirety. Consider the main point, the author’s writing style, and the character development.

Be Objective: It’s acceptable to voice your opinions, but make sure they are supported by facts from the book in your review. Avoid letting your biases get the better of you.

Give Context: Provide some background information about the author’s background, the genre of the book, and how the book fits within the larger literary landscape.

Highlight drawbacks and Strengths: List the book’s good points and drawbacks, giving concrete examples to back up your arguments.

Avoid Spoilers: Take care not to disclose significant narrative changes or the book’s resolution. Consider your readers’ need to have a first-hand account of the story.

II. Unraveling Article Critiques

A thorough evaluation of a scientific or academic paper is what is known as an article criticism.

An article critique’s goal is to analyze an article’s validity, technique, and significance in the field of knowledge, not to suggest that readers read it.

In academic settings, article critiques are frequently required to show a student’s capacity for critical research evaluation.

Importance of Article Critiques

Quality Evaluation: Article critiques assist in evaluating the caliber and dependability of research investigations, guaranteeing that readers can have confidence in the conclusions.

Research Advancement: Positive criticism encourages authors to address flaws and improve their work, which helps research advance.

Critical Thinking: Participating in article critiques helps students and scholars develop their critical thinking abilities.

Tips for Writing an Effective Article Critique

Understand the Research: Become familiar with the topic, research the issue, and structure of the article. See if the author’s strategy fits the needs of the study by evaluating it.

Examine the evidence that the author has provided to back up their assertions. Verify the validity, dependability, and applicability of the data to the research topic.

Analyze the Structure: Consider the article’s clarity, organization, and structure. Comment on how well the author presents their results and defenses.

Think about the Contribution Consider the article’s impact on the subject area. Does it add fresh knowledge or does it advance what is already known?

Cite Examples: To substantiate your conclusions in your critique, use specific instances from the article. To credit the work of the original author, use the correct citation formats.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, book reviews and article evaluations each have unique functions within the fields of academics and literature. Reviews of books help readers decide what to read next, while critiques of articles help academic research go better.

Ambitious authors and experts can create captivating and insightful analyses of literary works by comprehending the distinctions and using the supplied advice. These reviews improve the reading experience and comprehension, whether you’re a scholar conducting research or a reader looking for recommendations.

Leave a Reply Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Name  *

Email  *

 Yes, add me to your mailing list

Add Comment  *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Post Comment

Library & Learning Commons

• Search for sources
• APA style guide

Writing Help: Grammar, Style & Structure

• Book or Literature Reviews
• Library Guide to Writing Styles, Structure & Grammar
• Annotated Bibliographies
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• FAQs This link opens in a new window

#wrapbox7171450 .headerbox { display: none; }

• What is a Book Review or Book Report?
• What is a Literature Review?

Also referred to as a book report, a  book review  consists of "critical comments on a book, especially when it is first published" ("Book Review, 2006). 

Similar to a short essay, a book review typically includes several of these elements:

     •  Description of the book's main topic, purpose and/or point of view, answering questions such as:

            •  What is the genre of the work (i.e. novel, non-fiction, memoir etc.)?

            •  Who is the intended audience?

            •  If a fictional work, what are the key themes, motifs, and/or plot devices?

            •  If a non-fictional work, what are the main arguments and ideas?

      •  Assessment of the book's main points, biases or flaws

      •  Critical analysis of the book's strengths and weaknesses, literary value and/or overall quality and contribution to the subject area

      •  If non-fiction, an explanation of how the book fits into the academic or popular discourse on a topic or subject area

Book Review. (2006). In P. Collin (Ed.),  Dictionary of publishing and printing . London, United Kingdom: A&C Black. Retrieved from http://search.credoreference.com

Follow these links to learn more about book reviews:

• Book Reviews - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
• How to Write Book Reviews - Queens University
• How to write a book report and a book review - Concordia University Libraries

A literature review is a "comprehensive study and interpretation of literature that addresses a specific topic" (Aveyard, 2010).

Literature reviews are generally conducted in one of two ways:

1) As a preliminary review before a larger study in order to critically evaluate the current literature and justify why further study and research is required.

In this case, the researcher must "systematically search, critique and combine the literature to demonstrate a gap in the existing research base" while demonstrating "their understanding of both the research and the methods previously used to investigate the area" (Aveyard, 2010).

2) As a project in itself that provides a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular discipline or area of research over a specified period of time.

Sometimes referred to as a systematic literature review or meta-analysis, this type of literature review is a critical survey that attempts to "evaluate and interpret all available research evidence relevant to a particular question" (Glasziou, 2001).

Aveyard, H. (2010). Doing a literature review in health and social care: A practical guide (2nd ed.). Bershire, United Kingdom: Open University Press.

Galsziou, P. (2001). Systematic reviews in health care: A practical guide . New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Learn more about literature reviews:

• Guidelines for writing a literature review - University of Minnesota Duluth A step-by-step guide for writing a literature review
• << Previous: Annotated Bibliographies
• Next: Essays >>
• Last Updated: Jan 25, 2024 2:56 PM
• URL: https://bowvalleycollege.libguides.com/writing-help

How to Write a Book Review: The Ultimate Guide

WHAT IS A BOOK REVIEW?

Traditionally, book reviews are evaluations of a recently published book in any genre. Usually, around the 500 to 700-word mark, they briefly describe a text’s main elements while appraising the work’s strengths and weaknesses. Published book reviews can appear in newspapers, magazines, and academic journals. They provide the reader with an overview of the book itself and indicate whether or not the reviewer would recommend the book to the reader.

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF A BOOK REVIEW?

There was a time when book reviews were a regular appearance in every quality newspaper and many periodicals. They were essential elements in whether or not a book would sell well. A review from a heavyweight critic could often be the deciding factor in whether a book became a bestseller or a damp squib. In the last few decades, however, the book review’s influence has waned considerably, with many potential book buyers preferring to consult customer reviews on Amazon, or sites like Goodreads, before buying. As a result, book review’s appearance in newspapers, journals, and digital media has become less frequent.

WHY BOTHER TEACHING STUDENTS TO WRITE BOOK REVIEWS AT ALL?

Even in the heyday of the book review’s influence, few students who learned the craft of writing a book review became literary critics! The real value of crafting a well-written book review for a student does not lie in their ability to impact book sales. Understanding how to produce a well-written book review helps students to:

●     Engage critically with a text

●     Critically evaluate a text

●     Respond personally to a range of different writing genres

●     Improve their own reading, writing, and thinking skills.

Not to Be Confused with a Book Report!

WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A BOOK REVIEW AND A BOOK REPORT?

While the terms are often used interchangeably, there are clear differences in both the purpose and the format of the two genres. Generally speaking, book reports aim to give a more detailed outline of what occurs in a book. A book report on a work of fiction will tend to give a comprehensive account of the characters, major plot lines, and themes in the book. Book reports are usually written around the K-12 age range, while book reviews tend not to be undertaken by those at the younger end of this age range due to the need for the higher-level critical skills required in writing them. At their highest expression, book reviews are written at the college level and by professional critics.

Learn how to write a book review step by step with our complete guide for students and teachers by familiarizing yourself with the structure and features.

BOOK REVIEW STRUCTURE

ANALYZE Evaluate the book with a critical mind.

THOROUGHNESS The whole is greater than the sum of all its parts. Review the book as a WHOLE.

COMPARE Where appropriate compare to similar texts and genres.

THUMBS UP OR DOWN? You are going to have to inevitably recommend or reject this book to potential readers.

BE CONSISTENT Take a stance and stick with it throughout your review.

FEATURES OF A BOOK REVIEW

PAST TENSE You are writing about a book you have already read.

EMOTIVE LANGUAGE Whatever your stance or opinion be passionate about it. Your audience will thank you for it.

VOICE Both active and passive voice are used in recounts.

A COMPLETE UNIT ON REVIEW AND ANALYSIS OF TEXTS

⭐ Make  MOVIES A MEANINGFUL PART OF YOUR CURRICULUM  with this engaging collection of tasks and tools your students will love. ⭐ All the hard work is done for you with  NO PREPARATION REQUIRED.

This collection of  21 INDEPENDENT TASKS  and  GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS  takes students beyond the hype, special effects and trailers to look at visual literacy from several perspectives offering DEEP LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES by watching a  SERIES, DOCUMENTARY, FILM, and even  VIDEO GAMES.

ELEMENTS OF A BOOK REVIEW

As with any of the writing genres we teach our students, a book review can be helpfully explained in terms of criteria. While there is much to the ‘art’ of writing, there is also, thankfully, a lot of the nuts and bolts that can be listed too. Have students consider the following elements before writing:

●     Title: Often, the title of the book review will correspond to the title of the text itself, but there may also be some examination of the title’s relevance. How does it fit into the purpose of the work as a whole? Does it convey a message or reveal larger themes explored within the work?

●     Author: Within the book review, there may be some discussion of who the author is and what they have written before, especially if it relates to the current work being reviewed. There may be some mention of the author’s style and what they are best known for. If the author has received any awards or prizes, this may also be mentioned within the body of the review.

●     Genre: A book review will identify the genre that the book belongs to, whether fiction or nonfiction, poetry, romance, science-fiction, history etc. The genre will likely tie in, too with who the intended audience for the book is and what the overall purpose of the work is.

●     Book Jacket / Cover: Often, a book’s cover will contain artwork that is worthy of comment. It may contain interesting details related to the text that contribute to, or detract from, the work as a whole.

●     Structure: The book’s structure will often be heavily informed by its genre. Have students examine how the book is organized before writing their review. Does it contain a preface from a guest editor, for example? Is it written in sections or chapters? Does it have a table of contents, index, glossary etc.? While all these details may not make it into the review itself, looking at how the book is structured may reveal some interesting aspects.

●     Publisher and Price: A book review will usually contain details of who publishes the book and its cost. A review will often provide details of where the book is available too.

BOOK REVIEW KEY ELEMENTS

As students read and engage with the work they will review, they will develop a sense of the shape their review will take. This will begin with the summary. Encourage students to take notes during the reading of the work that will help them in writing the summary that will form an essential part of their review. Aspects of the book they may wish to take notes on in a work of fiction may include:

●     Characters: Who are the main characters? What are their motivations? Are they convincingly drawn? Or are they empathetic characters?

●     Themes: What are the main themes of the work? Are there recurring motifs in the work? Is the exploration of the themes deep or surface only?

●     Style: What are the key aspects of the writer’s style? How does it fit into the wider literary world?

●     Plot: What is the story’s main catalyst? What happens in the rising action? What are the story’s subplots? 

A book review will generally begin with a short summary of the work itself. However, it is important not to give too much away, remind students – no spoilers, please! For nonfiction works, this may be a summary of the main arguments of the work, again, without giving too much detail away. In a work of fiction, a book review will often summarise up to the rising action of the piece without going beyond to reveal too much!

The summary should also provide some orientation for the reader. Given the nature of the purpose of a review, it is important that students’ consider their intended audience in the writing of their review. Readers will most likely not have read the book in question and will require some orientation. This is often achieved through introductions to the main characters, themes, primary arguments etc. This will help the reader to gauge whether or not the book is of interest to them.

Once your student has summarized the work, it is time to ‘review’ in earnest. At this point, the student should begin to detail their own opinion of the book. To do this well they should:

i. Make It Personal

Often when teaching essay writing we will talk to our students about the importance of climbing up and down the ladder of abstraction. Just as it is helpful to explore large, more abstract concepts in an essay by bringing it down to Earth, in a book review, it is important that students can relate the characters, themes, ideas etc to their own lives.

Book reviews are meant to be subjective. They are opinion pieces, and opinions grow out of our experiences of life. Encourage students to link the work they are writing about to their own personal life within the body of the review. By making this personal connection to the work, students contextualize their opinions for the readers and help them to understand whether the book will be of interest to them or not in the process.

ii. Make It Universal

Just as it is important to climb down the ladder of abstraction to show how the work relates to individual life, it is important to climb upwards on the ladder too. Students should endeavor to show how the ideas explored in the book relate to the wider world. The may be in the form of the universality of the underlying themes in a work of fiction or, for example, the international implications for arguments expressed in a work of nonfiction.

iii. Support Opinions with Evidence

A book review is a subjective piece of writing by its very nature. However, just because it is subjective does not mean that opinions do not need to be justified. Make sure students understand how to back up their opinions with various forms of evidence, for example, quotations, statistics, and the use of primary and secondary sources.

EDIT AND REVISE YOUR BOOK REVIEW

As with any writing genre, encourage students to polish things up with review and revision at the end. Encourage them to proofread and check for accurate spelling throughout, with particular attention to the author’s name, character names, publisher etc. 

It is good practice too for students to double-check their use of evidence. Are statements supported? Are the statistics used correctly? Are the quotations from the text accurate? Mistakes such as these uncorrected can do great damage to the value of a book review as they can undermine the reader’s confidence in the writer’s judgement.

The discipline of writing book reviews offers students opportunities to develop their writing skills and exercise their critical faculties. Book reviews can be valuable standalone activities or serve as a part of a series of activities engaging with a central text. They can also serve as an effective springboard into later discussion work based on the ideas and issues explored in a particular book. Though the book review does not hold the sway it once did in the mind’s of the reading public, it still serves as an effective teaching tool in our classrooms today.

Teaching Resources

Use our resources and tools to improve your student’s writing skills through proven teaching strategies.

BOOK REVIEW GRAPHIC ORGANIZER (TEMPLATE)

101 DIGITAL & PRINT GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS FOR ALL CURRICULUM AREAS

Introduce your students to 21st-century learning with this GROWING BUNDLE OF 101 EDITABLE & PRINTABLE GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS. ✌ NO PREP REQUIRED!!! ✌ Go paperless, and let your students express their knowledge and creativity through the power of technology and collaboration inside and outside the classroom with ease.

Whilst you don’t have to have a 1:1 or BYOD classroom to benefit from this bundle, it has been purpose-built to deliver through platforms such as ✔ GOOGLE CLASSROOM, ✔ OFFICE 365, ✔ or any CLOUD-BASED LEARNING PLATFORM.

Book and Movie review writing examples (Student Writing Samples)

Below are a collection of student writing samples of book reviews.  Click on the image to enlarge and explore them in greater detail.  Please take a moment to both read the movie or book review in detail but also the teacher and student guides which highlight some of the key elements of writing a text review

Please understand these student writing samples are not intended to be perfect examples for each age or grade level but a piece of writing for students and teachers to explore together to critically analyze to improve student writing skills and deepen their understanding of book review writing.

We would recommend reading the example either a year above and below, as well as the grade you are currently working with to gain a broader appreciation of this text type .

BOOK REVIEW VIDEO TUTORIALS

OTHER GREAT ARTICLES RELATED TO BOOK REVIEWS

Transactional Writing

How to write a text response

How to Write a Compare and Contrast Essay

How to Write Excellent Expository Essays

• How It Works
• Prices & Discounts

Step-by-Step Guide: Writing an Excellent Book Critique Made Easy for Students

Table of contents

So, you've got a book to critique. Whether it's a bestseller, a scholarly piece, or a lesser-known gem, breaking it down can feel like a monumental task. It's not just about summarizing the plot or stating whether you enjoyed the book or not. A book critique dives deeper, examining elements such as theme, character development, style, and context, all while offering a balanced, informed perspective.

If the thought of critiquing a book seems daunting, you're not alone. The process can be intricate, and it requires more than just surface-level engagement with the text. However, the rewards are equally significant - improving your analytical skills, understanding literature on a deeper level, and sharpening your writing skills.

In this guide, we aim to demystify the process of writing a book critique. We'll take you through a step-by-step journey, from initial reading to final draft. So, pull up a chair, grab your favorite book, and let's delve into the world of book critique.

What Does a Book Critique Entail

When you think about a book critique, you may be picturing a simple book review or summary. But there's so much more to it than that. A book critique is an analytical piece of writing where you will be expected to engage with the book on a deeper level, exploring the various themes, narrative structure, character development, and the author's writing style.

Comprehending the Content : This is the basic stage where you read the book thoroughly and understand its plot, characters, themes, and settings. Your critique will be based on your comprehension of these elements.

Analyzing the Elements : Once you understand the content, you dig deeper. How have the characters been developed? How do different themes interplay? How is the plot structured, and how does it build over the course of the book? These are the kind of questions you should be asking.

Assessing the Author's Style : How does the author use language? What's unique about their writing style? Do they favor long, descriptive passages, or is their writing more dialogue-driven?

Critiquing the Book : Finally, you evaluate and critique the book. This isn't just about saying whether you liked it or not. It's about offering an informed, balanced analysis.

Now that you have a general understanding of what a book critique entails, let's delve into the step-by-step guide on how to write one effectively.

Pre-Writing Stage: Preparations for Your Book Critique

Before you start writing your book critique, there's some preparation you need to do. This stage is crucial as it sets the foundation for your critique. Here's what the pre-writing stage entails:

This might seem obvious, but it's the most important step. Make sure to read the book attentively, absorbing its storyline, characters, settings, and themes.

As you read, make sure to take notes. Write down your observations about the plot, characters, themes, and any other significant elements. Jotting down your thoughts can help you remember crucial points and will make the actual writing process smoother.

What's the main idea or message of the book? What themes does the author explore? Identifying these can provide a framework for your critique.

The characters are the heart of any book. Understand their motives, their character arcs, and how they contribute to the overall story.

How is the plot constructed? Is it linear, or does it use flashbacks? Is it character-driven or plot-driven? These factors can greatly impact the reader’s experience.

By following these steps, you'll be well-prepared to start writing your book critique. Now, let's explore the actual writing process.

Step-By-Step Guide to Write Compelling Book Critique

Once you've thoroughly read the book and have your notes at hand, you're ready to start writing your critique. Here's a step-by-step guide on how to go about it.

Step 1: Understanding the Book

Fully understanding the book is crucial to a strong critique. To do this, you may need to read the book more than once. As a student, consider the book in the context of your coursework. What themes, motifs, or literary devices has your teacher emphasized in class? Also, try to view the book through the author's lens. What were their likely intentions? The better you understand the book, the more nuanced and insightful your critique can be.

Step 2: Taking Detailed Notes

As you read, it's important to actively engage with the text, not just passively absorb it. Highlight key passages, jot down interesting quotes, and record your reactions. Write down questions that come to mind or aspects that confuse you. Try to observe patterns and connections between different parts of the book. These notes will serve as the raw material for your critique.

Step 3: Identifying Key Themes and Messages

Look for recurring ideas or themes within the book. How are they expressed? How do they contribute to the overall story? Do they resonate with you? Consider if the author is making a larger comment about society, human nature, or life in general. Remember, a book may not have one singular message but several underlying themes.

Step 4: Critiquing the Author's Writing Style

Analyze the author's choice of words, sentence structure, rhythm, and pacing. Notice the tone and mood of the book. Is the language formal or casual? Is the writing dense with imagery or straightforward and direct? How do these choices contribute to or detract from the book's impact? Does the writing style make it easier or harder to understand the book's themes?

Step 5: Character Analysis

Pay attention to the main characters and how they change over the course of the book. Are the characters believable and relatable? Do their motivations and actions make sense? Do they experience growth or remain static? How do they interact with each other and respond to the events in the plot? A deeper understanding of the characters can often provide insights into the book's main themes.

Step 6: Plot Evaluation

Analyze the plot structure. Does the story progress logically? Are there unexpected twists or turns? How does the author build suspense or interest? Does the climax provide a satisfying resolution? Examine how the plot devices contribute to the overall narrative and themes.

Step 7: Developing Your Thesis

Your thesis is the cornerstone of your critique. It should summarize your overall assessment of the book and guide your critique. Use your notes and observations to form a clear, concise thesis statement. It should indicate whether you believe the book was successful in achieving its purpose and why.

Step 8: Writing the Introduction

Your introduction should hook the reader's attention and provide basic information about the book, including the author's name, the title of the book, and a brief summary of its content. Also, introduce your thesis statement here. A well-crafted introduction sets the tone for the rest of your critique.

Step 9: Writing the Body

The body paragraphs are where you make your case. Each paragraph should focus on a single point related to your thesis. Start with a topic sentence, provide evidence or examples from the book to support your point, and then explain how this supports your thesis. Ensure there is a logical flow from one paragraph to the next.

Step 10: Writing the Conclusion

Your conclusion should not just restate your thesis but also synthesize your main points. Avoid introducing new information or arguments here. Instead, tie everything together, and leave the reader with a clear understanding of your perspective on the book.

Step 11: Revising and Editing

After writing, take the time to revise your critique. Check for clarity, coherence, grammar, punctuation, and spelling errors. Consider getting a peer or teacher to review your critique for an outside perspective. Revision is where good writing becomes great, so don't skip this step!

REMEMBER : good book critique doesn't just summarize the story but provides insightful analysis and evaluation of the book. It should give readers a deeper understanding of the book and help them decide whether it's worth their time.

Deconstructing "The Boy Who Lived": A Practical Example of a Chapter Analysis from Harry Potter

To help you better understand how to critique a book, let's take a practical example. We'll be analyzing the first chapter "The Boy Who Lived" from J.K. Rowling's renowned book, "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone".

Introduction : The first chapter of J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone" sets the stage for the epic saga of magic and adventure that is to follow. The chapter is titled "The Boy Who Lived," signaling the extraordinary circumstances surrounding the protagonist, Harry Potter.

Summary : The chapter introduces us to the Dursleys, an ordinary family living in England, who are perturbed by the strange occurrences happening around them. These are linked to the celebration of the magical community, following the downfall of the dark wizard Lord Voldemort, who lost his powers while trying to kill the infant Harry Potter.

Analysis : Rowling's writing style is descriptive and imaginative, making the fictional world feel real and engaging. The use of humor, particularly in the depiction of the Dursleys, keeps the narrative light-hearted, despite the grim circumstances. Rowling presents a clear contrast between the ordinary (Dursleys) and the extraordinary (Potter). The characters introduced are memorable, and the plot successfully generates curiosity about the events to follow.

Evaluation : The first chapter serves its purpose well, setting up the tone and premise for the series. Rowling’s characterization and attention to detail make the chapter compelling, paving the way for the magical journey ahead. It provides an enticing entry point into the magical world that appeals to readers across age groups.

Conclusion : In essence, "The Boy Who Lived" serves as an excellent first chapter, skillfully balancing exposition and intrigue. It leaves the reader eager to delve further into the extraordinary life of Harry Potter, marking a strong start to an iconic series.

This is a simplified example, but it gives you a clear idea of how to structure your book critique and what points to consider while writing it. Always remember to back up your points with examples from the book.

Challenges in Writing a Book Critique and Strategies to Overcome Them

Even for seasoned readers and writers, crafting a book critique can pose unique challenges. However, understanding these difficulties can help you devise strategies to conquer them. Let's unpack some of the most common obstacles you might face and explore ways to address them.

1. Trouble Getting Started : You've read the book, you have an opinion, but the blank page is staring back at you. The initial inertia can be challenging.

* Solution : Begin by jotting down your immediate reactions and thoughts about the book. Don't worry about structure or coherence at this point; the key is to get your thoughts flowing.

2. Understanding the Difference between Summary and Analysis : Many students tend to summarize the book rather than critique it.

* Solution : Remember, a critique requires you to delve deeper, examining the book's elements and providing your perspective on them. Keep summary to a minimum and focus on your analysis and interpretation.

3. Being Overly Critical or Generous : Some students may veer towards being overly critical or excessively generous in their critique. It’s important to find a balance.

* Solution : Support your critique with evidence from the book. If you didn't like a particular aspect, explain why and provide examples from the text.

4. Difficulty Expressing Opinions : Some students may feel uncomfortable expressing their opinions, particularly if they are negative or controversial.

* Solution : Remember that a critique is a space for you to articulate your viewpoints. Keep your tone respectful and your criticism constructive. Back your opinions with reasons to make your critique credible and persuasive.

5. Struggling with Structure : A well-structured critique can significantly enhance its effectiveness. Some students may struggle with organizing their critique coherently.

* Solution : Follow the structure outlined in the guide above. Having a clear roadmap can help ensure your critique flows logically.

It's perfectly fine to encounter challenges along the way. What's important is to persevere and learn from the process. Each critique you write will bring you a step closer to mastering the art of book critique writing.

Conclusion 

With each book critique you pen, you are not just providing an analysis of a book. You're undertaking a journey that holds tremendous value. By engaging critically with a text, you strengthen your analytical thinking, deepen your understanding of literature, and refine your writing skills. The process of crafting a critique is, in itself, an enriching learning experience.

Writing a book critique may seem daunting, especially if you're new to it. But remember, every seasoned critic was once a beginner. The key is to start - pick up a book, follow the steps outlined in this guide, and begin your journey. Don't worry about getting it perfect the first time around. Like any skill, critique writing improves with practice.

If you ever find yourself feeling stuck or overwhelmed, remember, help is just a click away. At Writers Per Hour, we have a team of professional writers who can assist you in writing book reports and critiques . No matter the book or the deadline, our experienced writers are here to support you in your critique writing journey.

So, grab your pen, or open that laptop, dive into the world of the book you've chosen, and let your critical journey begin.

Share this article

Achieve Academic Success with Expert Assistance!

Crafted from Scratch for You.

Ensuring Your Work’s Originality.

Transform Your Draft into Excellence.

Perfecting Your Paper’s Grammar, Style, and Format (APA, MLA, etc.).

Calculate the cost of your paper

Get ideas for your essay

Critical Reviews (Summary and Critique)

A Critical Review (also called a ‘Summary and Critique’) is similar to a Annotated Bibliography in that it is a written response to a single text. This text can be a peer-reviewed journal article, a book chapter, or a book. A critical review is usually much longer than an annotated bibliography (800-1000 words or more).  

Typically, a critical review will begin with a short introduction, then provide a summary of the key ideas contained in the source text. The summary section should be sufficiently detailed so that the reader does not need to read the original source article. This will be followed immediately by an appraisal or critique of those ideas, after which a short conclusion is provided. The weighting of the summary and critique sections should be approximately equal. Your lecturer might specify additional elements to be included in your critical review (e.g., the search terms used to find source articles, the criteria used to judge an article, or appendices outlining CASP checklists *).

Avoid using quotations when writing a critical review; the review must include your paraphrases of key ideas in the article in the summary section and your own critical evaluation in response to the article in the ‘critique’ section. No headings or subheadings are used in a critical review.

What is a Critique?

What is a critique? It is an assessment of both the positive and negative elements of an article. You must make clear judgments – don’t ‘sit on the fence’.

When you read an article prior to writing a critical review, think about the following:

• Objectives: what does the article set out to do? What is the writer/research intention or purpose?
• Question: what is the research question(s)? Are you convinced by the answers to these questions?
• Hypotheses: Are there specific hypotheses? Are the hypotheses testable?
• Theory: is there an explicit theoretical framework? If not, are there important theoretical assumptions or beliefs?
• Concepts: what are the central concepts in the article? Are they clearly defined? Has the author overlooked key concepts?
• Argument: what is the central argument? Is it valid and are the premises sound? Do you agree with it?
• Method: what methods are employed to test the hypothesis(es)? Are they reasonable (see below)
• Evidence: is evidence provided in the article? How adequate is it?
• Values: what value judgments does the author express? Are they clear or are they tacit/hidden? Should they be made clearer?
• Literature: how does the work fit into the wider literature in the area? Is important literature in the field missing?
• Contribution: how well does the work advance our knowledge of the subject?
• Style: how clear is the author’s language/style/expression?       (adapted from ANU, 2022)

In relation to methodological considerations, ask yourself:

• Is the method sound and validated, considering other research in the field?
• Is there a sufficient sample size of participants tested (if a quantitative study)?
• If questionnaires are used, are the questions clear and unambiguous? Fair/unfair?
• Are common flaws identified in the research design, such as confirmation or observer bias, or unexplained or overstated results?
• Does the evidence support the conclusions?

Structure of a Critical Review

The structure of a critical review is shown below. A Critical Review will make liberal use of critical review language and signposting . See examples in bold below.

Introduction

This includes:

• A citation of the article reviewed in a conventional referencing style (usually APA 7th Edition).
• A general overview of the topic, question(s), or aim(s) raised in the text
• An overall evaluative comment on the text being reviewed.

The Summary Section

The summary section requires you to:

• Establish the key ideas/evidentiary or experimental claims made in the text
• List them from most to least significant
• Summarise each idea/evidentiary claim dispassionately as though you were providing a concise overview of the article for someone who has not read the article.
• Use the present tense for the author’s ideas even if they are published in the past (it is assumed they still believe their ideas). For research findings, use the past tense, e.g., found that…).

The Critique Section

This section is the most important as it demonstrates your ability to critically assess the article. In writing this section:

• Take it for granted that published articles by world experts are never perfect. There are always limitations and caveats and ways that research can be improved. Research articles will often identify ‘limitations’ as part of the paper. You can expand on these limitations but you need to consider other areas in which the article might be flawed as part of your critical review.
• Devote a paragraph for each critical response if you have a lot to say; combine ideas together in one paragraph if they are closely related concerns.
• If your critique is more positive than negative, present the negative points first and the positive points last. End with a statement of why you agree with the article overall. If your critique is more negative than positive, do the opposite.
• If the article is equally balanced in terms of positive and negative points, you need to decide overall what your judgement is after weighing up the positive and negative points. Don’t ‘sit on the fence’.
• Consider including recommendations for how the text can be improved in terms of methodological improvements, a clearer research approach, the inclusion of additional theories or frameworks, or a more suitable experimental paradigm.           (adapted from University of New South Wales, 2022)

The Conclusion Section

This must be as brief and succinct as possible. In a critical review of 800 words, a conclusion might not even be necessary. If required, do the following:

• Remind the reader in a single sentence of your overall position on the article, positive or negative, and why you have made this judgement.
• End with a positive point about how the text has contributed to your understanding of the topic and the discipline as a whole. If it hasn’t done so, leave this sentence out.
• Australian National University. (2022). Critical review. https://www.anu.edu.au/students/academic-skills/writing-assessment/other-assessments/critical-review
• Davies, M. (2022). ‘Writing a critical review: A step by step guide’. In Study skills for international postgraduates. Bloomsbury. https://www.bloomsbury.com/au/study-skills-for-international-postgraduates-9781352012569/
• University of new South Wales. (2022). Structure of a critical review. https://www.student.unsw.edu.au/structure-critical-review

*These additional requirements are discipline-specific and not always required for critical reviews. NB: CASP checklists are critical appraisal tools to be used when reading research articles. See: https://casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists/

For a downloadable helpsheet, see Critical reviews .

Quick links

• Apply online
• Course Finder
• Scholarships
• Indigenous matters
• my Student Centre
• Student Webmail
• FedUni Moodle
• ePortfolios
• Staff email
• Captive portal
• Change password
• General enquiries
• Staff directory
• Facilities and services
• Emergency and security
• ITS Service Desk portal

You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

How to Write a Book Critique Like a Professional

Last updated: November 2019

First and foremost, let’s define critique:

Do not confuse book critique and book reviews! When assigned to write a critique essay, you need to analyze a book (or an article) rather than summarize and retell its contents.

In other words, it’s not about information but analysis and persuasion . When writing a critique paper, you enhance brain functions and critical thinking. And teachers assign such tasks to encourage students to  read books  and help them shape an opinion on literary works.

Ready to learn how to write a book critique like a boss?

Table of Contents:

• What is a critique?
• Types of critique

What to do before writing

How to start a critique, a body of your critique paper.

• How to write a critique conclusion
• How to critique an article
• The format of your critique paper
• Critique examples
• Your checklist for writing a critique

What is a Critique?

When assigned to write a critique, don’t hurry up to fly to a pen or a keyboard. First, make sure you understand the critique meaning and the specification of this task.

Critique is a detailed analysis and assessment of something: a book, an article, a political or philosophical theory, etc.

To define critique, remember that it’s not the same with a review. And here’s the difference:

• A book review  = its summary aimed at telling readers about the plot.
• A book critique  = its analysis aimed at critical responding and evaluating its quality.

When writing a critique paper, you need to give an assessment of literary works. It’s a systematic analysis discussing a book’s validity and evaluating its worth. Also known as a critical response , this type of writing argues whether a book is worth reading and why. In other words, your paper should discuss:

• a book’s thesis and major argument
• a book’s style
• a reviewer’s (your) comments and assumptions on the book

Critique synonyms are analysis , evaluation , discourse , assessment , commentary , opinion , or study .

Types of Critique

No matter what written work you need to critique, you’ll conduct its systematic analysis, describe its strengths and weaknesses, and decide on a strategy to use for critiquing.

The most common types of critique you’ll meet in college:

• A book critique.  Here you’ll need to describe its contents, summarize the book’s strong and weak points, and provide a recommendation for the audience: to read or not to read this book.
• An article summary (critique).  Here you’ll review an article, discuss its key concepts, and analyze if it’s of value for the field.

For a paper to sound professional, you need to choose and adhere to a language strategy for stating your points.

If you offer praise or criticism, use  modal words and expressions , consider qualifying adjectives and adverbs, and remember about tentative verbs.

Examples ( source ):

• The approach of an online orientation program could be useful for students as it would allow them to have important information at their fingertips, regardless of if they are on campus or not.
• Significant results were noted in the results of this study, but there are limitations to these findings.
• This article focused on an important topic within higher education, as administrators need to find solutions to improve retention.

If you offer suggestions on what could be done for a book or an article to look better, consider conditional verb forms such as “would… if…” and “would have been… if.”

Example ( source ):

• Bolland’s dialectical analysis of Creole society  would be  put to test  if  the antagonisms he identifies were examined in the context of a Hispanic environment.

How to Write a Book Critique

As well as any other type of academic paper, a critique has its structure. It should include:

• An introduction with a clear  thesis statement .
• A body with your synopsis and arguments.
• A conclusion with your article summary and thesis re statement.

So, let’s get right to it. Here’s how to write a critique essay that’s worth A+.

No matter if it was a teacher who assigned a particular book for you to analyze or you had a freedom of choice here, you’ll need to do research and craft a detailed essay outline before writing.

Say you’ve got a book to assess in your essay. What’s next?

• Read the book, taking notes of its main points.
• While reading, write a brief summary for each section.
• Determine the author’s core statement.
• Read some reviews of the book to get a better idea of its content and message.
• Make notes from those reviews. (You can use them for arguments afterward.)
• State your thesis .
• Make sure that you don’t plagiarize it from other reviewers.
• Come up with 3-5 arguments for your thesis.
• Search for relevant references to support your thesis and  arguments .
• Find evidence from the book and write a detailed outline of your critique.

That’s a suggested outline for your work:

Once ready, it’s time to start writing the first draft. Be sure your outline relates to the thesis, and you’ve organized each section coherently.

This one is the easiest part of critique writing because it reminds a summary of a book. Your introduction includes basic information: the book’s title, author, topic, and core ideas. Also,  hook a reader  by stating your essay’s purpose and your reaction to the book (it will be your thesis statement).

With this in mind, the introduction might be as follows:

• Sentence 1:  A book’s author + its title + the main idea. Be objective, and use so-called evaluative verbs to power your writing.
• Sentence 2:  A book’s summary + its purpose ( a core argument ). Stay unbiased and avoid details.
• Sentence 3:  A brief statement of your evaluation. It can be positive-positive (when you want to praise a book) or positive-negative (when you want to criticize it and offer suggestions on what might be done better there).

Depending on a literary work you criticize, the essay introduction may consist of 1-2 sentences or 1-3 paragraphs.

No strict rules exist for how to critique and how many paragraphs to write in your paper’s body. It depends on your task’s requirements and a book you evaluate. With a standard 5-paragraph essay structure, let’s say a body of your critique paper will consist of three paragraphs.

Points to consider while writing:

• Organization.  Depending on the approach, you can arrange paragraphs by points, strengths vs. weaknesses, or topics. Your goal isn’t to just negatively criticize a book but also point out what the author did well.
• Writing techniques and style.  Evaluating a book, don’t forget to mention these points. Discuss how effectively (or not) the author used stylistic devices to prove their ideas.
• Evidence.  Describe what types of arguments the author used. Were they logical and appropriate? Don’t forget to explain why the evidence supports your point.
• Usefulness.  Discuss what the book adds to understanding its topic. Is it useful? Does it present ideas in original and engaging ways? How does it address the core aspects of society?
• Examples.  Support every argument of your critique with examples. You can’t just write that the book was boring; provide a quote as evidence and explain why it does not appeal to you.

And that’s what David Taylor, senior  advisor from UMUC , determines as evaluative criteria for how to critique:

How to write a conclusion

The final part of your paper, this is a paragraph where you summarize and qualify judgments, as well as offer your recommendations on a book.

Writing your  essay conclusion , answer the questions:

• Do you agree with the author? Why, or why not?
• What is the overall opinion on this book?

Be specific . Remind readers of the importance of a literary work you criticized, focus on its strengths and weaknesses, and state what you consider its ultimate success.

The same approach works for those asking how to write analytical book review an article.

How to Critique an Article

An article review of a book essay is a paper when you summarize and evaluate a piece of research, specifying its strengths and weaknesses.

Unlike with a review, the main focus here is on your analysis , not a  narrative  of what the article is about.

As well as a book critique, an article one consists of:

• An introduction.  Here you write about the article’s title, author, and the main point, also stating your thesis that will preview your analysis.
• An article summary .  In short, introduce the arguments and the findings of the article.
• A critique itself.  Discuss the article’s pros and cons, and state your opinion about its clarity and accuracy. Use the data and examples from the article to support your arguments.
• A conclusion.  Summarize the article as well as key points from your analysis and comment about why such research matters or what else needs to be researched in the field.

Article summary example:

The Format of Your Paper

This essay type has clear style guidelines for students to adhere while writing, which are:

• Typed, double-spaced, on one side of a paper
• One-inch margins on all sides
• All pages numbered (except the first one)
• Turabian  or  Chicago  citation style
• No first-person (except referring to your opinion)
• Active voice
• A new paragraph each time you change the point

Content and grammar are of equal importance here. If a reader doesn’t understand your sentence structure, they won’t be able to follow your argument. That’s why revise and proofread your essay but don’t rely much on spell-checkers, as they often miss even the  most obvious spelling mistakes .

Instead, ask someone to proofread your work and revise it accordingly. Or,  chat with our essay writers for help .

Critique Examples

That’s all well and fine, but are there any examples of how to write a critical book review ?

 Here go samples for your consideration.

  ( Note!  Samples are aimed for assistance purposes only: don’t plagiarize them and don’t copy their parts to use in own papers.)

And here go additional resources for you to check when you need the information on how to write:

• How to Write the Academic Assignment , video
• Critical Analysis , with a sample outline
• How to Write a Book Review
• The Article Analysis , with a process of writing and evaluating your critique
• How to Write a Book Analysis

Your Checklist for Writing a Critique

Answer these questions to make sure you have enough data for writing a book evaluation:

To smooth things down, just save this checklist to make sure you haven’t missed anything – and refer to it every time you need a guide for writing a book critical analysis.

Ready to start writing? Essay maker is an amazing tool to help you write an essay quickly and efficiently. With it, you can create an incredible essay in no time!

Related posts

• How to Write a Mission Statement?
• Unlocking Your Potential: Improving Memory Techniques
• What are Scholarly Sources?

Our Writing Guides

How Scholarly Book Review Differs from an Article Review

Almost every week I read scholarly book reviews in Chemical and Engineering News. Fairly often in journals I read reviews of scientific articles previously published. Both reviews have some common element but differ considerably in their purpose and style.

Academic Book Reviews

A scholarly or academic book review has two goals: to critique the book for accuracy and style and to inform the reader as to whether he might want to read the book or not. About half the scholarly book reviews I come across are laudatory; the reviewer loved the book and has good things to say about the author. Perhaps he was a little long winded or simplistic in style but there was nothing wrong with his arguments or the completeness. In the remainder of the cases the reviewer takes exception to some parts of the author’s arguments, praising some, quibbling or dismissing others. All this is part of the critical process. But a book review goes further to advise a potential reader as to whether he should invest the time in obtaining and reading the book in question. Perhaps it is a valuable but highly technical work which will only be of interest to specialists in the field. Or it may be a simplified account of a complex problem intended for the general population and not for the researcher in the field. None of this might be apparent from the title and is valuable information.

Article Reviews

In contrast, article reviews are typically more focused. They are intended to set the record straight. The author disagrees with the conclusions of an article and presents a counterargument and a criticism of the original paper. I well remember one of these from my grad school days. One article came out claiming the first synthesis of a tetracoordinate square planar silicon compound, one of the goals of my research. However, the authors’ evidence was not a crystal structure determination but a space group determination that they argued indicated the correct symmetry for the novel structure. In the next issue of the journal a review of the article appeared arguing that a space group determination was useless for determining molecular symmetry. Published alongside the review was the authors’ response which maintained that the reviewer, instead of countering their argument, had furnished powerful support in favor of it. I forget their reasoning on this point. But this is the usual pattern of a scholarly review of an article —a critique of the original article, followed by a response from the authors. Point, counterpoint.

Laudatory article reviews are occasionally published but they are rare and in my opinion, serve little purpose. Although a review article might put in a complimentary word for an author, an article review should stick to the subject of the piece.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Old Webinars
• Webinar Mobile App

Improving Your Chances of Publication in International Peer-reviewed Journals

Types of literature reviews Tips for writing review articles Role of meta-analysis Reporting guidelines

Introduction to Review Articles: Writing Systematic and Narrative Reviews

综述文章简介：如何撰写系统综述与叙述性综述文章

学术出版中综述文章的概述和意义 不同类型文献综述的比较分析 写好系统综述与叙述性综述的技巧 整合分析（meta-analysis）的作用

了解国际SCI期刊对综述论文作者的要求

综述论文的种类-系统综述与叙述性综述 PRISMA 检核表及流程图 综述论文的组成 为您的综述选择合适的期刊以发表

How to Author a Review Article

Systematic and Non-Systematic Reviews PRISMA Flowcharts and Checklists Parts of a Review Article Drafting a…

What Is a Systematic Review in Research?

Systematic Review: Structure and Process

How to Write a Scientific Review Article

New Physics Framework by Dan S. Correnti: A Book Review

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

What should universities' stance be on AI tools in research and academic writing?

The Difference Between Article Review and Book Review – 2023 Guide

What is an article review?

As with any kind of review, an article review involves critical analysis and evaluation of an article written by someone else. It is not just merely a summary; rather it is quite involving and requires deep assessment and analysis of the article or piece of literature you are working with.

When one undertakes to carry out an article review they have to keep an open mind in order to give an unbiased review. All that is required of you when you are writing an article review is a clear understanding and presentation in summary of the topic, subject matter, and arguments presented in the article.

Having a clear understanding of what an article review involves is therefore vital before you start working on it. This is the very first step in writing an article review.

Steps to writing an article review

• Read the article carefully. You need to understand the material you are working with clearly. My advice and I have found that it has worked for me over the years, is for you to read the article more than once.
• Go through various samples of article reviews. This will give you a general idea of what you should include in your review. In fact, look through reviews that have been done in the same field of study. It will provide more information that you can include in your study. However, be careful not to copy-paste and paraphrase a review that has already been done.
• Take notes. It is worth mentioning that as you read the article you need to take notes. Your notes should be short but clear. Write down phrases or words you might need to look up later. Write down excerpts that you might want to include in your review. Takedown as many notes as you can because you will need all the information you can get to write your review.
• Carry out further research. It is not enough just to work with the material contained in the article you are working with. Take it a step further and collect more information related to the article you are reviewing. If say for example the article is dealing with ‘malpractice in hospitals’, you need to conduct further research on this subject. Go beyond what the writer of the article has covered. If possible visit some hospitals and conduct interviews with the staff to get more information.
• Abstract. Include the main points of your review.
• Introduction. The first paragraph of your review. It is vital that your introduction is strong and engaging, grabbing the reader’s attention right from the start.
• The body. This is where you will present your arguments, where you will provide a detailed analysis of the article. Your critique and evaluation of the themes contained in the review will also be addressed in this part. Basically, this is the part of your essay where you will include the bulk of information you have gathered for your article review. Just be keen and divide this information into workable paragraphs.
• Conclusion. The conclusion of your article review should be just as strong as your introduction. Give a brief summary of the points you highlighted in the review.
• List of citations. Remember to cite any other sources you used in writing your article review.
• Edit and proofread your work.
• Write the final draft.

In case you are in need of help never hesitate to contact this site . We have years of experience and offer a vast array of writing services including book reviews. Our dedicated team of writers will work on and deliver a great book review that will be sure to earn you top marks.

How to write a book review

Writing a book review is part and parcel of any student’s life. A book review requires you to read and critically analyze every component of the book. The very basis of a book review is for you to present your understanding of all these components and how they contribute to the overall message being relayed by the writer.

A common misconception that most students have is that a book review is simply a summary. This is hardly the case because a book review includes a critical discussion and arguments of the plot, themes, and ideas presented in the book.

It is important to note that a book report is not a book review. The major difference between the two is that a book report is a summary of the book you have been assigned to read whereas a book review involves a more detailed and in-depth analysis of a book.

Being a professional writer, I have had an opportunity to assist a number of students to write exceptional book reviews. Allow me to share my insights on how to write a book review that will earn you top grades.

• READ THE BOOK

This might seem so obvious to some people, but you may be surprised at how many students skip this part. Take time to actually read the whole book and not just skim through it, if possible, read it twice. Reading the whole book gives you a chance to get all the information you need. It allows you to form your own opinion of the characters, the plot and the themes highlighted in the book. This information will be vital when you are writing your book review.

As you read the book you will be writing your review on, be sure to take notes. This is important because the notes will guide you when you sit down to write your book review. Make notes of only the important parts of the book and ensure that the notes are detailed enough to give you enough information when writing the book review.

It is always a good idea to go the extra mile when doing anything. The same applies to your book review. If you are able to read other books by the same author, it is advisable to do so. This will give you an insight as to who the author is; his or her background, writing style, and similar themes they address in those other books. It may not seem important, but this information will be of major help to you when writing your book review.

• FIRST DRAFT

As a writer, my advice to anyone undertaking any form of writing is to always have the first draft. This is just a rough overview of how you want your book review to flow so avoid stressing too much about making it perfect. The important thing is for you to have a general outline of your ideas for the book review. Do not focus too much on grammatical errors and spelling mistakes at this point those can be corrected when you are editing your work.

As with all other written works, a great book review should have an outline. Before writing your book review read the instructions given at the beginning of the assignment. This is in case there is a specific outline you are required to use. However, if it is not included in the instructions, you can use the general outline that follows this order: Title, introduction, body, and conclusion. The introduction will be a summary of your review. Most of the information in the book review will be contained in the body. Final remarks and sign off will make up the conclusion.

Written by Charles Givens

15 Beautiful Digital Mixed Media Art Photoshop Tutorials

Comparing Different Bitcoin Trading Platforms – 2023 Crypto Guide

© 2023 Iniwoo.net