Professional Reviews

The Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship

WE REALLY NEED REVIEWERS FOR THE NEXT ISSUE!! If you're at all interested please apply, Thanks.

DEADLINES FOR REVIEWS

SPECIAL ISSUE -- November 15

The Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship is an international, peer-reviewed journal published quarterly by Haworth, Inc.

The review section is intended to provide brief reviews of pertinent professional publications, primarily books, but, in future, planning to include other professional activities such as conference sessions and electronic resources.

In 500-1000 words, reviewers are expected to include descriptive and evaluative statements on the merits of the reviewed material and make recommendations for our audience -- which is primarily librarians and others involved with the acquisition and provision of electronic resources to users.

Those interested in writing reviews for the Journal of Electronic Resources should submit the following as email attachments to the Review Editor, Karl Bridges, at JERLReviewEditor:

1. A current curriculum vitæ or résumé
2. A writing sample; a review of a book or resource, published or unpublished, is preferred
3. One or more titles from the Books Awaiting Reviewers list that he or she feels qualified to review

Publishers who wish to have books and other media considered for review in the Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship should send two (2) copies of each item to the Review Editor at:

Karl Bridges
100 Bailey Howe Library
University of Vermont
538 Main Street
Burlington, Vermont 05403

Books Awaiting Reviewers July 1, 2008 update

For our special issue on library statistics we are actively seeking reviewers for the following books. If you have a copy of one of these books in your collection and would like to review it that would be most greatly appreciated. Please let the book review editor know as soon as possible about your interest.

Available for Review

Hilbe,Joseph. Negative binomial regression.

Warner, Rebecca. Applied statistics: from bivariate through multimvariate techniques.

Assigned and Unavailable for Review (reviews due November 15, 2008)

(*finished)

*Corty, Eric Using and interpreting statistics: a practical text for health, behaviorial, and social sciences. (Frances Rosen)

Fox, James Alan Elementary social research in statistics: the essentials (Gerrit van Dyk)

Su,Di Collection development issues in the online environment (Sanjeet Mann)

*Flaten,Trine Kolderup, Management, marketing and promotion of library services based on statistics, analyses and evaluation (B. Kaiser)

Gregory,Vicki L. Selecting and managing electronic resources : a how-to-do-it manual for librarians.

Leonhardt,Thomas W. Handbook of electronic and digital acquisitions.(Kathleen Folger)

Matthews,Joseph R. The evaluation and measurement of library services (Alvin Hutchinson)

OCLC Member's Council. Task Force on the Integration of E-books Final report : task force on the integration of e-books (Brad Eden)

Vogt, W. Paul. Quantitative research methods for professionals. (Brad Eden)

White, Andrew. E-metrics for library and information professionals : how to use data for managing and evaluating electronic resource collections. (Jennifer Leffler)

Wood Sandra, Electronic resources in medical libraries : issues and solutions (Virginia Bender)

Wright,Stephanie Library assessment ARL Spec Kit 303 (Xan Arch)

.

This was copied with permission from the web site of the Journal of Web Librarianship. As time goes on we will develop our own ways of doing things, but, for moment, his advice is clear, understandable, and will be followed by the Journal of Electronic Resources Librarianship.

Karl Bridges

"Am I ready to write reviews?"
If you're reading this text, your background and interests are likely appropriate for getting started writing reviews. At JWL, we have structured the review assignment process based on self-selection: you select materials that you think would match your specific area(s) of expertise, then email these potential candidates to me along with several other pieces of information as described above. Assuming that I can see the connection between your experiences, your talents as a writer, and the content of the material to be reviewed, I will confirm your mailing address via email and send a copy of the book to you. When I write a review, I typically devote 20 hours to the overall process, so keep in mind that there is a significant amount to intellectual effort behind this activity.

"I've received the reviewer's copy of the book. Now what?"
Conventional wisdom applies: Read the book. That comment is a gross oversimplification, and one that doesn't necessarily map directly to a high-quality review, but allow me to unpack some of the practices behind that process. When I first encounter a book to be reviewed, there are a few questions that I ask myself about the item in-hand before starting to read:

• What is the book like as a physical and aesthetic object?
  Have a look at the cover art, the binding, the typeface, and the general look-and-feel of the contents. Does it appear that the book is meant to be read cover to cover, or would it be more useful as a reference for looking up specific bits of information? Are there screenshots (and do they complement the text)?
   
• Who are the authors?
  What are their job titles, where do they work, what are their interests in the subject matter, and do these attributes seem to qualify them as authorities on the book's topic(s)? There may be a list of other publications written by the authors located in the front matter, back matter, or back cover. (If not, try a quick search on the internet, perhaps supplemented by Open WorldCat links. Or try Bowker's Books in Print.) Are these previous publications on similar topics to the book in-hand, or does the material being reviewed represent a departure from the authors' earlier works?
   
• For whom are the authors writing?
  Authors often reveal the intended audience for their book in the preface, the introduction, and/or on the back cover, and occasionally other writers will share an analysis of who the readers will be within a forward. When you start to read the book, periodically ask yourself if the authors' intended readership maps to your experience with the text as written.
  

Then I typically try to place the work within a slightly broader context, which usually involves some computer-based research followed by a visit to a nearby public library, academic library, or new/used book store.

• What other books have been published on this topic in the past two years? five years? ten years?
  In other words, does the book represent a completely original insight, or does it share the stage with other books on similar topics, say, on 'metadata' or 'open access'. If there are other books on the market that may serve as points of comparison, try to track down copies of these materials and look for unique or exemplary aspects of the book you are reviewing relative to its "competition". (If you are at an institution with subscription access to ProQuest Research Library, an example of this occurs in my review of Introduction to Reference Work in the Digital Age by Joseph Janes [Reference & User Services Quarterly 43, no. 3 (Spring 2004): 275].)
   
• Is the book a revised/updated edition, or is it part of a explicit/implicit series (e.g., collected papers from an annual conference)?
  In this case, you might find it useful to track down the previous editions/installments in order to see which aspects of the book/conference have changed over time. (If you are at an institution with subscription access to either Project Muse or ProQuest Research Library, an example of this occurs in my review of Libraries Without Walls 4: The Delivery of Library Services to Distant Users edited by Peter Brophy, Shelagh Fisher, and Zoe Clarke [Libraries & Culture 39, no. 3 (Summer 2004): 338-340].)

With this information to orient you, then read the book. Paul N. Edwards, an Associate Professor at the School of Information at the University of Michigan (and no relation of mine), has written an excellent description of How to Read a Book: Strategies for Getting the Most out of Non-Fiction Reading that might be helpful. In short: skim first, then read more deeply, and focus on the parts of the text that seem most information-rich. (Or novel. Or flawed.)

"I'm staring at a blank Word doc. How should I start my review?"
After getting a sense of how the book is positioned among the professional literature and reading through the book, you should be starting from a relatively informed position. I typically start with an outline that parallels the chapter titles of the book, and I add portions of my notes to flesh out this skeletal structure. Was there a key quote that adequately summarizes the perspective of the authors or that provides a central focus for the book? (If so, incorporate that quote in your review.) Were there aspects of particular chapters that emerged as notably strong (or weak) arguments? (If so, include one or two examples from the text.) Given that you are working within length constraints of 500-1000 words for JWL, you will most likely have space only to adequately discuss your overall evaluation of the book along with several examples of strengths and weaknesses from the text. Your review should have sufficient depth of examples to provide support for your overall evaluation, and your choices should be representative of the quality of the work rather than aiming for a comprehensive analysis. For JWL, you should also be able to address the importance of the book for librarians who work with the Web, i.e., emphasizing possible answers to the somewhat pejorative questions, "So what?" or "Why should anyone care about this book?"

"What's in it for me?"
Principally, you get to keep the reviewer's copy of the book you receive. If you are employed at an institution that encourages publication and professional writing, adding published reviews to your curriculum vitæ may have some influence on promotion and tenure decisions. (Please check with your institution, senior staff, and any formal/informal mentors for specific information on how book reviews are evaluated.) Finally, you are able to continually develop your writing and analytical skills in what I hope feels like a supportive and constructive environment.

For additional information on the reviewing process, please feel free to contact me at JERLReviewEditor or peruse the following:

• Crawford, Walt. "Reviewing." Chap. 7 in First Have Something to Say: Writing for the Library Profession. Chicago: American Library Association, 2003.

  This chapter echoes many of the ideas described above and spends a significant portion of the narrative discussing the review on nonprint materials such as CD-ROMs.

• Smith, Linda C. "Selection and Evaluation of Reference Sources." In Reference and Information Services: An Introduction, 3rd ed., edited by Richard E. Bopp and Linda C. Smith, 309-330. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, 2001.

  This chapter describes several criteria that are useful even when reviewing non-reference materials: format, scope, relation to similar works, authority, treatment, arrangement, special features, and cost. In a reviewing context, the overall tone of the evaluation should often reflect a holistic view of the work in relation to criteria and achieve an appropriate balance (but not necessarily parity) between positive and negative characteristics of the work.

Karl Bridges

(The format of this page copied with permission from that of Philip Edwards, review editor
Review Editor, Journal of Web Librarianship July 2006)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 License.