ZOOL 304

Review Paper Guidelines

Goals for assignment Book selection Suggested Books Format Hints Outline Introduction Content review Evaluation Conclusion Citations Deadlines Grading

HELP WITH COMPOSITION The Writing Center On-line writing resources Handouts Outside links More links

One book review is required for this course.  You shall be expected to apply information learned in this course to describe a book's place in evolutionary biology, review its content, and evaluate its effectiveness.  The experience may be most rewarding if your choice of book is meaningfully related to your own personal interests and educational goals.  

This assignment is NOT a grade-school "book report" but an exercise in critical reading and writing.

• Principal goals:
  • Encounter evolutionary biology in some depth and detail.
  • Apply textbook concepts.
  • Exercise critical reading and writing skills.

This exercise should provide an opportunity to appreciate high-quality science writing (seldom encountered in either textbooks or primary literature) and to engage in some depth with a richness of information that can seldom be attained in class. 

• Any book on the list of suggested books is acceptable.  
   
• Any titles that are NOT on the list of suggested books must receive written approval from the instructor or the subsequent review may not be acceptable.  
   
• For your own sake, please browse several books before selecting one to review.  Reading and thinking about the book should be a significant educational experience, not just a rote exercise.

Choose a book carefully, one that is suited to your interests and your level of appreciation.  Be practical; do not choose a professional monograph (i.e., a book intended for Ph.D.-level specialists) unless intend to pursue graduate study in a related area and you are confident of your own abilities.  

Caution:  Examine the suggested outline for review before choosing a book.  If, after reading a chapter or two of your chosen book or other source material, you cannot begin to imagine how to prepare a review that meets the criteria, it is probably time either to switch books or to consult with the instructor.

Format

Good writing style is essential; see criteria for grading, below.  If you have any doubts about how to proceed, please consult with your instructor.

For help with composition, visit The Writing Center.  The Writing Center also provides extensive links to on-line writing resources.  For general guidance with written assignments, see The Writing Handbook.

Papers may be submitted as as electronic files or on paper.

Electronic file submission is encouraged.  Files may be plain-text (*.txt), rich-text format (*.rtf), or Microsoft Word (*.doc) files), and may be submitted either on a floppy disk or as an e-mail attachment sent to dgking@siu.edu.  Make sure you keep a copy of any submitted file.

Typed or printed papers should be double-spaced in a standard 10 or 12 point font.  Hand-written papers must be double-spaced and clearly legible.  

Expected length is between 1500 and 5000 words (i.e. about 5-15 double-spaced, typewritten pages).  But length per se is not as important as clarity of expression and substantial content.  

• A short paper (less than 2000 words) is acceptable ONLY IF it very concisely and "tightly" written.  
• A lengthy paper (longer than 3000 words) is acceptable ONLY IF the length is justified by extensive, thorough, and well-organized coverage of a topic (NOT by rambling, inefficient prose). 

Note that examples of professionally-written book reviews for general audiences can be found in many magazines or journals, such as Science, Natural History, American Scientist.

Hints.  

Find your own "voice" (i.e., a style that feels natural to you).  Imagine your audience is a reader who hasn't read the book and doesn't know much about evolution, but who would like to learn something worthwhile from you.

Remember, this is your paper, written to present the book from your own thoughtful and informed perspective.  If the book was heavy slogging, say so.  If you enjoyed any parts of the book, share them.  And whatever you have to say, support it with particulars -- details or examples from the book, alternative perspectives from other sources (such as our course textbook, or your prior understanding).  

If, as you begin to read the book, you can't anticipate finding much worth sharing from the book, for heaven's sake choose a different book!

Read over the outline below.  As you read, keep in mind what you will need to say about the book.  Take notes!  

Pretend a friend has noticed you reading, and is asking you some questions.  Answer the questions below with enthusiasm, using your own voice.  

• What are you reading?  
• What is it about?  Tell me more...
• Who's the author?  Is he/she anybody special?  Why should you believe anything in the book?
• Is it interesting?  Tell me about it.  Share some stories.  What have you learned?  Teach me something!
• What kind of experience should I expect if I read the book?
• Why should anyone care about this?  How does this book relate to my life?
• Do I need any special background to appreciate the book?  Will it help me understand or appreciate what I am studying in my courses?
• What does anybody else think about this book?  Is it respected by any other educated people?

Afterwards, edit so that spelling, punctuation, grammar, and sentence structure are all correct, and so that ideas are developed clearly and logically.  At this point, visit The Writing Center.

Sample outline for book review.  You need not follow this outline slavishly, but the basic information listed should be present in your review.

1. Introduction.  An introductory paragraph(s) should not only provide basic information about the book and its author, it should also place the book in a broader context and establish some criteria for subsequent evaluation of the book.
    
   1. The introduction should identify the title, author, date of publication, and publisher, and should list basic features (number of pages, illustrations, preface, foreward, appendices, index, etc.).
       
   2. The introduction should describe the author's background and qualifications, including contributions, if any, that the author has made to evolutionary biology.   Besides writing this book, does the author have any other claim to fame?
   • Do not limit yourself here to information from the book itself.  Use library resources or the internet, and include appropriate citations.
      
   3. The introduction should identify the subject and scope of the book, by addressing questions such as the following.
      • What is the author's goal or purpose or controlling idea for the book?  (This may be explicitly stated in the author's preface or introduction, or it may be implicit in opening or concluding chapters.)  
      • Does the author' purpose extend beyond sharing scientific information and/or entertainment?
      • Who is the author's intended audience for this book? (What background does the author expect a reader to bring to the book?)
         
   4. Finally, the introduction should indicate your initial expectations for the book.  This may forshadow your subsequent evaluation.  Why did you choose this book?  (For your own sake, please exercise some intelligence in your selection.  Don't pick a book just because it had few pages or was the first title you could find in the library.)
      • Examples:  "I expected to find an excellent introduction to several important ideas in evolutionary biology, but instead I was frustrated and confused." Or, "I expected to see how different the author's ideas were, at the time this book was written, from current undertanding as represented by our course textbook." Or, "I expected to be entertained by remarkable facts and fascinating explanations, and I was not disappointed." Or, "I expected to learn how concepts in modern evolutionary biology, as represented in our course or textbook, can be applied in a specific area.")
         
2. Content review.  The body of your paper should include a substantive summary of the book's content, with details and examples.  Share some specific ideas and information from the book.  (This will probably be the longest section of your paper.  It may be efficiently prepared chapter-by-chapter, while reading the book.)
• Always write as if the facts and ideas that you address were not already familiar to the reader but must be expressed clearly and completely (i.e., write as if your intended reader were an undergraduate biology major who had not yet taken this course, someone who really wanted to learn something from your explanation).
• Provide some brief explanation (e.g., definition; or scientific, historical, or cultural context) for any any particular facts or names you mention (e.g., persons, species, places, concepts), especially if these were not previously familiar to you or might not be familiar to the average college-educated person.
• Include references to course content, with clear and accurate statements of any major concepts that are relevant to appreciating the book that you are reviewing.  
 
3. Evaluation.  Your introduction should have introduced the context in which this book should be appreciated, including the author's intent, the content of our course, and your own expectations.  Now evaluate the book in relation to this context.  Every statement of opinion should be justified with substantial reasons or illustrated with examples and details.  Your evaluation should address questions a., b., and c., below, and also several of the following questions.
   1. Where does the book stand in relation to modern evolutionary biology, as represented by our textbook?  (Relate the author's purpose to course objectives, taking into account the author's credentials and date of publication.  Books commonly provide some relevant context in a foreward or preface, sometimes written by a different author.  Published reviews may also be helpful, but must be cited if used.)
   2. What (if any) critical review has this book received?  You should try to cite at least one professional review of the book (i.e., a review written by another evolutionary biologist).  Include the source of the review, identifying the reviewer and his/her credentials.  To find reviews, use library resources and/or the internet.  For example, try copying and pasting the book's title, in quotes, into the search window at New York Review of Books.  Alternatively, paste the book's title into a general-purpose search engine, such as Yahoo.com.  
   3. How well does the book support the author's purpose (as presented in your introduction)?  
   4. Where does the book stand in relation to wider culture?  Does the author address any philosophical, political, moral or religious issues?  (What is the author's worldview?  Authors sometimes provide some interpretative guidance in a foreward or preface.  Published reviews may also be helpful, but must be cited if used.)  
   5. To what extent did the book meet, exceed, or disappoint your expectations (as presented in your introduction)?  
   6. What are the book's particular strengths and weaknesses?
   7. Which ideas from the book have been previously discussed in class?
   8. Does the author present any concepts which are surprising to you or different from what you have learned in our text, our course, or your prior coursework?
   9. Have you learned much or little from the book?  (Give examples, e.g. concepts you had not already learned from the course and or things you had.)
   10. For any evolutionary concept that is addressed in the book (and there should be at least one!), indicate how well the concept has been explained.  Does the author presume that the reader understands basic concepts of biology (e.g., genetics, microevolutionary processes of mutation and selection, biological classification)?  Or are the basics explained as well?  That is, what background should the reader bring to the book?
        

   For every assertion, give specific examples!  And always, write as if the facts and ideas that you address were not already familiar to the reader, but must be expressed clearly and completely.  Do not just allude to course content but include clear and accurate statements of any major concepts to which you refer.  

4. Conclusion.  Conclude with a concise statement of evaluation and recommendation, addressed to students at your level.  Your conclusion must be consistent with and supported by the ideas expressed in your introduction, content review, and evaluation, above.
    
5. Citations. Any sources used in addition to the book itself (e.g., biographical information about the author or published reviews of the book, including internet sources) must be adequately identified and cited appropriately within the review.  See note below regarding plagiarism.

Deadlines.  Timely submissions that adhere to the schedule below and that are consistent with the outline above will automatically receive partial credit.  They will be returned with provisional grade and suggestions for revision.

1. Selection of book title is due at the beginning of the third week of class.
   • You should have a copy of the selected book in hand at this time.  
   • Books on the list of suggested books receive automatical approval, but the title must still be submitted.  
   • Unlisted titles must receive written approval from the instructor or the subsequent review may not be acceptable.  Any request to review a title that is NOT on the list of suggested books should be accompanied by author, publication date, and brief rationale indicating relevance to this course.   
   • Choose a book carefully, one that is suited to your interests and your level of appreciation.  Read a chapter or two right away.  If you cannot begin to imagine how to prepare a review according to the above outline, it is probably time either to switch books or to consult with the instructor.
      
2. A written introduction (approx. 300-500 words) is due at the beginning of the fourth week of class.
   • By this point, you should have begun reading the book.  If you do not like the book, or you cannot imagine writing a review according to the outline above, for your own sake please consider choosing a different book.
      
3. A sample of content review (one paragraph, approx. 100-300 words), reviewing one chapter or section of the book) is due at the beginning of the fifth week of class.
• If at this point you do not like the book, or you cannot imagine writing a review according to the outline above, for your own sake please consider choosing a different book.
   
4. A complete content review (approx. 1000-3000 words) and a revised introduction are due at the beginning of the eighth week of class.
    
5. A critical evaluation (approx. 300-500 words) is due at the beginning of the ninth week of class.
    
6. The completed final draft at the end of the fourteenth week.
    
7. Final deadline for a non-zero grade is the last scheduled class period (for spring 2003, April 25).  No papers or revisions will be accepted after this deadline without prior written approval from the instructor.  

Grading.  The review paper will count for *** of your final grade (see syllabus). 

Note the outstanding features in the outline above.

Your content review should provide evidence for the grader that you have encountered a substantial body of information related to evolution.  Your evaluation should establish that you have engaged thoughtfully with that information and can place it into the context of evolutionary biology as it is presented in our textbook and class discussion.  

Such content qualities can only be achieved with good composition values (clarity of organization and expression, proper grammar and word usage, etc.) and adequate citation of particular details.

If you have any doubts about how to proceed, please consult with your instructor.  

Grading of review papers will be based on the following features:

• Composition (If in doubt, visit The Writing Center.)
  • Correct grammar, mechanics, punctuation, spelling, and word usage.
  • Effective sentence and paragraph structure.
  • Logical presentation.
  • Overall organization, clarity and coherence of expression.
• Content
  • Substance -- thorough and substantive engagement, either in breadth or in depth, with content relevant to ZOOL 304 (as represented in class and course textbook), with appropriate citations.  See the suggested outline for particulars.
  • Critical evaluation -- thoughtful discussion and assessment.  See the suggested outline for particulars.
  • Accuracy -- correct and appropriate use of concepts and information.
  • Detail -- inclusion of supporting information, explanation, and examples, with appropriate citations.
  • Originality -- contribution from your own additional reading, prior knowledge, creative thought, or personal experience, substantially supported by citations and/or well-developed explanation.  (NOTE:  Mere declaration of personal opinion has minimal value.  If you admire something an author has said, or if you disagree, it is okay to say so.  But then support your opinion with some substantive rationale and examples.)

Note that several of these criteria are synergistic.  For example, critical evaluation cannot be satisfactorily expressed without accurate conceptual and factual information and logical organization.  Originality cannot be recognized without some critical evaluation supported by substantial detail.  No aspect of content can be assessed favorably with without clarity of expression, which implies good composition, including correct grammar and sound sentence and paragraph structure.  

Sample grading scale:  

• A, successful on all criteria of composition AND content (i.e., clear and well organized, substantial, accurate, detailed, well-reasoned, thoughtfully expressing personal insight or synthesis, and with very few errors in spelling, punctuation, etc.).
• B, lacking in one aspect of composition OR in one aspect of content.
• C, lacking in two or three aspects of composition and content.
• D, substantially inadequate in more than three aspects of composition and content.
• F, failure to turn in a paper by deadline; substantial failure to follow instructions (e.g., reviewing an unapproved book); plagiarism.

NOTE:  "Plagiarism, representing the work of another as your own work" ( SIU Student Conduct Code II.A.1), is an act of academic dishonesty and a violation of the SIU Student Conduct Code.  "A failing grade (F) may be assigned for the course in which the violation occurred" (SIU Student Conduct Code III.B).

To avoid a charge of plagiarism in any written work, any quotation from others' work, including substantial paraphrasing, must be explicitly acknowledged (e.g., with quotation marks) and must receive a citation adequate to identify the source.  

For help with composition, visit The Writing Center.  The Writing Center also has on-line resources.  For general guidance with written assignments, see The Writing Handbook.

304 home page

Comments and questions: dgking@siu.edu
Department of Zoology e-mail: zoology@zoology.siu.edu
Comments and questions related to web server: webmaster@science.siu.edu