Using the guidelines below, please write a concise review that clearly communicates information
about the material to users of the TE-MAT website. A website visitor who reads the review should
be able to decide whether to order the material and have a sound understanding of what to expect from it.
I. Description of Material
Write a sentence or two to include medium or format (book, DVD, web page, etc.), length, grade level, and topic.
Your tone should be neutral.
II. Purpose and Audience
Describe what you perceive to be the major purpose and target audience for the material. When available,
incorporate quotes (with page numbers) from authors who clearly communicate the major intended purposes of
and/or the target audience for the material.
III. Content and Quality
Provide an overview of the content/focus of the material and specific comments about the quality of the material.
Use details and examples judiciously to illustrate or elaborate on key points that are made, while simultaneously
conveying specific information about the content or focus of the material. This section is generally two to three paragraphs in length.
Some questions to consider as you write this section include the following:
-
How well are the materials matched to the audiences and purposes? For example:
To what extent is the disciplinary and pedagogical content sound, coherent,
and sufficiently rigorous for its intended purposes and audiences? Are the materials clear,
understandable, accessible, and of high enough technical quality in light of purpose and audience?
-
Are the materials consistent with equitable practice? (For example, do they reflect consideration for
gender, racial, and cultural diversity; accommodate a variety of learning styles, experiences, and abilities;
lend themselves to meeting individual needs of learners?)
-
Do the materials address the assessment of participants’/users' learning? If so, how?
-
Is there evidence of effectiveness of these materials? If so, what?
IV. Reviewers’ Ideas for Using this Material
Describe how the materials could be used in a pre-service or an in-service professional development program.
It may be necessary to briefly rephrase information from Purpose and Audience and then go on to additional uses.
V. Comments and Cautions
Describe any requirements for effective use of these materials (e.g., pre-requisite knowledge of
participants or providers, length of time required, necessary materials or equipment, follow-up, etc.).
Describe cautions users should be aware of when using this material.
Add other comments, as needed.
Length of review:
Try to keep the review to 250-500 words in all.
Tips for Writing Reviews
-
When discussing quality, avoid a judgmental tone (see Example 1). Use the past tense, such as “noted” vs. “notes,” “suggested” vs. “suggests,” etc. When discussing uses for p.d., please use "could" instead of "can" (e.g., "P.D. providers could use this material as an overview...")
-
While reviews should include comments on errors found in materials, and one or two illustrative examples may be used, “laundry lists” (see Example 2) of inaccuracies should be avoided. Reviewers should cite the source of any error, including the page number.
-
If there are serious flaws in the materials, reviewers should clearly acknowledge them, but with a tone that is not excessively critical or abrasive (see Example 3). In addition, it is very important to make a parenthetical note to the Recommends Field Editor that this should NOT be recommended for NSTA Recommends. This note will not appear online.
-
Take care not to repeat sentences or phrases in different sections of the review. Decide where a particular comment fits best. If the point must be reiterated in another section, be sure to rephrase.
-
Try to use words like “reflects current national standards” rather than “current reform thinking” or “current practice.”
-
Always use the word “mathematics” instead of “math.”
-
We want to advocate sound professional development practice and avoid reference to some common pitfalls such as one-shot, short-term activities, “make-and-take” type sessions with minimal conceptual substance, etc. Similarly, we do not advocate teachers developing activities/materials or otherwise creating their own curricula. We also want to avoid commenting on the use of the materials by students, focusing instead on their use in professional development.
-
Be careful that reviews do not take on a “formulaic” tone as you address questions of equitable practice, assessment of participants’ learning, and evidence of effectiveness of the materials (Section III of Guidelines). For example, it is preferable to describe how materials are consistent with equitable practice by weaving that information into the narrative, rather than stating in multiple reviews, “The material is consistent with equitable practice...” (see Example 4).
-
While it’s often helpful to write about the contents of various parts of the material, refrain from describing each chapter in detail. Detailed information about specific activities or page numbers for examples cited are not necessary. Keep in mind that website users will not have the resource in hand, but rather will be trying to get enough information to decide whether it is a resource that is likely to match their needs as professional development providers.
-
Refrain from using quotes from jacket covers or the back covers of books. Too often these descriptions are geared more toward selling the book than accurately reflecting the author’s intent.
-
Do cite page numbers for exact quotes in your reviews. In addition, please double check the spelling of titles, authors, and publishers as entered into the website database against the physical copy you have in hand. If you spot an error, include a parenthetical comment to correct the error at the end of your review.
-
Some specific notes on formatting the review:
-
Go light on quotation marks—use only around direct quotations, not around educational jargon. A fairly standard convention for citing quotes is to use a series of periods ("...") to indicate words omitted from the original quote. Use brackets [ ] to indicate replacements/changes in text for clarification of meaning when the quote is pulled out of context. If a direct quote requires extensive editing, it would be best to paraphrase.
-
Italicize the names of publications. Put commas and periods inside quotes.
-
Be alert to how some often-used words are hyphenated in our reviews: “in-service” “pre-service” and “100-page” book.
-
Paragraphs are separated by two hard returns, rather than indents.
Example #1
While the book is an outstanding resource, users should be aware of some limitations and needed clarifications. Some activities require materials that may not be readily available, and there are some scientific inaccuracies. For example, on page 89 the author uses the phrase “prove a hypothesis,” which inaccurately portrays the process by which scientists generate data that support or refute a hypothesis.
Of particular concern was inaccurate science content (for example, in Workshop Six, the notion of energy as being “stored in the ball” is inaccurate). (Please note: make a parenthetical note to the Recommends Field Editor that this should NOT be recommended for NSTA Recommends. This note will not appear online.)
Example #2
Although the videotapes were meant to illustrate exemplary practice, they actually portrayed a wide range of quality in classroom practices.
Example #3
This excerpt comes from a review of a material that had a substantial focus on equitable practice:
A major theme in the book is that implementing the NCTM Standards is a way to give every child a better chance to learn and understand mathematics. The authors note that “students who traditionally test low, those whose schools and backgrounds are not conducive to academic achievement, often flourish in programs that follow the NCTM Standards” (p. 113). The examples in the book are drawn from multicultural settings, as are the photographs, contributing to the overall philosophy that encourages equitable practice.
This excerpt weaves in an observation about equitable practices in a review of a material that had no substantial focus on equity issues:
The videotaped segments show inquiry-based science in action in classrooms that include students and teachers of diverse gender and ethnic backgrounds.