Book : The Age of the Economist 9th edition By Fusfeld
Book reviews should be:
– Between 1000 and 1500 words long (make sure to stay in this range)
– Begin with a bibliographical entry (author, title, publication information)
– Use a 12 point font- Double-space
Each review should consist of the following four parts:
1) Summary: A strong summary describes and discusses the author’s purpose, major themes, ideas, sources and conclusions. It can be one paragraph long, though a good summary will often require one-third to one-half of the maximum length allowed. The summary should offer the reader an accurate account of the contents of the book.
2) Reception: It is useful for students to read three to five reviews of the given book prior to reviewing it. Students may find that professional reviews illuminate controversies and other issues that are not apparent to casual readers.The reception section should describe and discuss the reactions of scholars to the book in question. In particular, it should note those features of the book upon which the reviewers agreed, as well as a discussion of points of disagreement. Students might ask the following questions:
– Did the reviewers agree on the purpose of the book?
– Did they agree on the importance of the book?
– What common themes run through the professional reviews?
Reviews read in the preparation of a book review must be cited in footnotes or endnotes. It is critical to refer to the author of any ideas used in the review. Failure to do so constitutes a form of plagiarism. It is also quite easy to tell whether students only relied on professional reviews, which will result in a failing grade for this assignment.
3) Critique : A critique is a thoughtful reaction to a book under review. Students may discuss source problems, structure, and argumentation or simply their reaction to an interesting part of the book. In preparing to write the critique, students should ask themselves:
– Did the author accomplish the stated purposes of the work?
– Is the argument is convincing?
– Did the book break new ground (compared to the text and lectures)?
Answer : the book have discussed similar topics such as the definition of Wealth and Power, and also keynesian economics theories, such as that government should continue spending money even during hard times to keep the circulation of money.
– Do the citations adequately reflect the variety of sources?
If the answer to any of these questions is “no,” then the critique should contain an explanation or discussion.
4) Conclusion: A strong conclusion restates the major themes of the review and discusses the importance of the book to the reviewer. This may hinge on the author’s interests. For instance, when a student reviews a book for this class, the conclusion might address the value of the book in this course. Students might ask the following questions:
– Did the book cover material, which was well covered in the text and lectures?
Answer; yes, such as reasons for wars which mostly financial reasons. Ex, Germany WWII because it lost a lot during WWI and between both wars at time in which Germany had to pay for reparation
– Did the book include material, which should have been covered in the text and
-Did the book contradict the text, lectures, or both? If so:
– Do you think the course should be changed?
– Do you think that the book should be removed from the review list?
-Do you think that the book is valuable despite shortcomings? If so, why?