POLS 3630 Russian Politics, Government and Society Winter 2022 one book review (of approximately 750 words) on a book is assigned as recommended further reading. Book Review Assessment Rubric Excel

POLS 3630 Russian Politics, Government and Society Winter 2022

one book review 

(of approximately 750 words) on a book is assigned as recommended further reading.

Book Review Assessment Rubric

Excellent (A+) Good (A)     Fair (B/B+) Poor (C/C+/D/F) Points

    Brief overview of and introduction to the book. (A few sentences)

   Clear and very engaging introduction, telling readers what the book is, what it’s about, and who wrote it.

  Clear and engaging introduction, telling readers what the book is, what it’s about, and who wrote it.

  Not so clear or engaging, and doesn’t really tell readers what the book is, what it’s about, and who wrote it.

 The review doesn’t tell readers what the book is, or who wrote it.

   Out of 5

   Summary of main arguments of the book.

The review clearly identifies the author’s main points, thinking about units/levels of analysis, assumptions made, and supporting evidence with a high level of sophistication. Subtleties of the questions, approach, evidence are clearly highlighted.

The review clearly identifies the author’s main points, thinking about units/levels of analysis, assumptions made, and supporting evidence. A good understanding of these is presented, although nuances could be further explored.

The review identifies some of author’s research main points, thinking about units/levels of analysis, assumptions made, and supporting evidence but leaves others out or doesn’t explore them adequately.

 The review doesn’t clearly identify the main points, thinking about units/levels of analysis, assumptions made, and supporting evidence, research questions.

Out of 10

Identification of main thesis, arguments, research questions, and hypotheses.

   The review clearly identifies the author’s thesis, central arguments, assumptions, research questions, and any hypotheses with a high level of sophistication. Subtleties of the arguments, etc. are clearly highlighted.

  The review identifies the main thesis, central arguments, research questions, and some hypotheses. A good understanding of these is presented, although nuances could be further explored.

  The review identifies some of the main thesis, central arguments, research questions, and hypotheses but leaves others out or doesn’t explore them adequately.

 The review doesn’t clearly identify the author’s main thesis, central arguments, research questions, or hypotheses.

   Out of 10

 1

Analysis of audience, objectivity/bias of the author, scope/applicability of the book, and suitability of the methodological approach

  The review does a great job of providing an assessment of all of these points, and does so in a nuanced way.

 The review provides a pretty good assessment of all of these points, but could be more nuanced.

 The review provides an assessment of some of these points.

The review doesn’t provide an assessment of these points. For example, it might miss a discussion of the applicability of the book for other audiences, or provides an assessment of method that doesn’t take audience into account.

  Out of 25

 Assessment of

whether the author met their analytical goals, left anything out, used evidence to support their conclusions, and made their argument in a logical way

  The review does a great job of providing an assessment of all of these points, and does so in a nuanced way.

 The review provides a pretty good assessment of all of these points, but could be more nuanced.

 The review provides an assessment of some of these points.

The review doesn’t provide a thorough assessment of all of these points.

  Out of 25

   Conclusion: Includes assessment of the book’s contribution and significance to understanding Russia.

  The review provides a compelling argument about why/why not/if/how the book makes a contribution.

  The review provides an argument about why/why not/if/how the book makes a contribution.

 The review provides a very surface assessment of the book’s contribution/ lack of contribution.

   The review doesn’t provide a reasonable argument for the book’s contribution/ lack of contribution.

  Out of 10

Overall style, formatting, spelling, grammar, punctuation, word count. Proper citation.

  No problems with grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc. Direct quotations/ paraphrased information is cited appropriately.

 Some problems with grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc. Direct quotations/ paraphrased information is cited appropriately.

 Noticeable problems with grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc. Direct quotations/ paraphrased information are generally not cited appropriately.

Significant problems with grammar, punctuation, spelling, etc. Direct quotations/ paraphrased information are not cited appropriately.

  Out of 15