Source: Helen H. Lyman's Library Materials in Service to the Adult New Reader, 1973. Modified by Robinson.
Review a work of your choice in the format of your choice. Since this is a generic form, you may need to be flexible to adapt it to your particular item.
The checklist below is to be completed with a blue or black pen or a 2H pencil. After you have completed the checklist, please write a narrative review based on the information gathered by the checklist. Your review should be no more than 1,000 words or about four printed pages Using normal sized fonts and once inch margins on all sides. Hand in both checklist and typed review. A Booklist type citation should be entered on the review so gather the needed information now. Where brief essays or longer comments are required, please use the verso or separate sheets.
Content analysis begins with a succinct characterization of the work. In less than 125 words clearly indicate the purpose of the work--what the creator intended to do.
Circle below those roles which would be developed or improved by using this work. More than one may apply, but clearly indicate which one is most important.
2.11 Personal growth and self-development which enables one to meet individual and social expectations.
2.12 Family relationships and roles as parent, brother, sister, grandparents, and the like.
2.13 Non-family group relationships.
2.14 Participation in political and social life, including government, politics, social welfare, and the like.
2.15 Participation in education and learning, with emphasis on acquiring knowledge and skills for everyday life and personal enjoyment.
2.16 The choice, preparation, and work in an occupation which brings satisfaction and income.
2.17 Participation in activities which provide pleasure and enjoyment during free time.
Specifically indicate how using this work would develop or improve an
individual in one or more of the above roles.
Identify and list the major subjects present in the work. Where possible, use recognized subject headings or descriptors. Do identify and list major subjects for creative works. For example, one subject for a novel about lawyers would be "lawyers."
2.21 Briefly comment on the importance or relevance of the
subject.
2.22 How comprehensive is the treatment?
2.23 How appropriate is the format for this subject?
It is important to know the degree to which the creator's attitudes and values are visible in the work reviewed and what these attitudes and values are.
What important attitudes and values are treated in this
work?
2.31 To
what degree does the creator promote or criticize particular attitudes and
values?
2.32 Is there any indication of bias?
To the best of your knowledge, is the work accurate?
Yes
Somewhat
No
2.51 Does prefatory material explain the purpose and use of the
work?
2.511 How helpful is it?
2.52 Are graphics, color, sound used appropriately?
Yes
Sometimes
No
2.53 Does the user control the rate and sequence of the
presentation:
Yes
Sometimes
NO
2.54 Circle as many responses as appropriate for your work
2.61 How many similar items are available?
2.62 Identify other works similar to the one reviewed (either on same
subject or that does similar things or by same creator)
2.63 How does the work being reviewed differ from those above? Compare
recency, special features, accuracy, scope, point of view,
style/accessibility, utility, and user appeal. In particular, identify the
degree to which the new work is original.
2.64 Indicate specifically what the new work would add to a collection which already contains the titles listed in 2.52. Include some mention of content quality and uniqueness.
The characterization of factors which affect comprehension and enjoyment as well as ease and use.
3.1 Comment on the ease of using this work, considering legibility, ease of navigation, appropriate use of color, graphics/images, audio and video and the logical sequencing of intellectual content.
3.4 Comment on the likely durability of the work considering craftsmanship, attractiveness, and ability to withstand normal institutional use. Is the work reliable under normal use?
Maps included in content
yes
no
needed but missing
Support content
yes
no
Adequate number
yes
no
Logical placement
yes
no
Accurate content
yes
no
Clear legends
yes
no
Clear symbols
yes
no
Appropriate scales
yes
no
Reproduction quality
VG
G
M
P
Cover illustrations
yes
no
needed but missing
explains
appeals
misleads
Illustrations in content
yes
no
needed but missing
Number of__________
Color illustration
yes
no
Support text
yes
no
Logical placement
yes
no
Adequate number
yes
no
Accurate
yes
no
Artistic quality
VG
G
M
P
Production quality
VG
G
M
P
Present
yes
no
Diagrams present
yes
no
Tables present
yes
no
Charts
yes
no
Graphs
yes
no
Number and type_____________
Support text
yes
no
Logical placement
yes
no
Adequate
number
yes
no
Accurate number
yes
no
Easily used
yes
no
Artistic quality
VG
G
M
P
Reproduction quality
VG
G
M
P
Caption
quality
VG
G
M
P
Appendix or other supplementary material
present
useful/usable
inadequate
needed but missing
List of sources/references/bibliography
present
useful/usable
inadequate
needed but missing
Summaries
present
useful/usable
inadequate
needed but missing
Glossary
present
useful/usable
inadequate
needed but missing
Index
present
useful/usable
inadequate
needed but missing
Introduction
present
useful/usable
inadequate
needed but missing
Help
present
useful/usable
inadequate needed but missing
Other__________________________
present
useful/usable
inadequate
needed but missing
{More than one may apply}
Colloquial
appropriate
inappropriate
confuses
Dialect
appropriate
inappropriate
confuses
Formal
appropriate
inappropriate
confuses
Slang
appropriate
inappropriate
confuses
Technical
appropriate
inappropriate
confuses
Language suitable for intended audience
Yes
No
Is objectionable language included?
yes
no
If yes, is it appropriate in context?
Yes
No
Is language likely to cause community reaction?
Yes
No
3.5 For print material, includes text normally read on screen, please compute readability using the Gunning Fog Index. Robert Gunning in The Technique of Clear Writing states that the aim of "readability research has been to single out those factors of writing style that can be measured and to take the added, important step of finding out to what degree each affects reading difficulty."He bases his readability formula, the Fog Index, on two language factors: sentence length and hard words. Hard words are composed of three or more syllables.
The Fog Index is the reading grade level ordinarily required for understanding the material. Procedure A. Select three 100 word samples, one near the front, one near the middle, and one near the end of the work.
B. Count the number of sentences in each 100 word sample. Determine the average sentence length by dividing the number of words by the number of complete sentences.
C. Count the number of words of three syllables or over to get the number of hard words. Do not count proper nouns, easy compound words like "bookkeeper," or verb forms in which the third syllable is merely the ending.
D. Add together the number of polysyllabic words and average sentence length, then multiply by .4 which yields the reading grade level.
E. Repeat computation for each sample of 100 words.
F. Compute the mean average of these samples. Record the average grade level here rounded to a whole number. How many years of schooling are required to use this item? Is this appropriate for the intended audience?
Example: A. Number of sentences in 100 word sample: 6
B. Sentence length: 100/6 = 16.6
C. Hard words: 2
D. Add: 16.6 + 2 = 18.6
E. Multiply by constant: 18.6 x .4 = 7.4 or seventh grade
F. Second score sample: 6.6 or seventh grade
G. Third score sample: 22.8 or post graduate college
H. Mean of the three scores: 7.4 + 6.6 + 22.8 = 36.8/3 = 12.2 or grade 12
average
What subject knowledge or experience must the user have in order to
use or understand the content of this work?
As specifically as possible, identify the particular group of people most
likely to enjoy or benefit from this work. Consider such demographic
variables as age, sex, education, ethnic and racial background, occupation,
experience, and the like. Are there any elements that limit the work for
its audience? Remember that few works appeal to everyone. Selection
decisions must be made with a specific audience in view.
4.1 Convincingly answer the query: What need does this work fill and who
will Use it?
4.3 What is the work's likely value over time? Will its appeal last or is
it related to a particular set of events, fad or popular subject likely to
fade? Is this work likely to be updated?
The following rating scale summarizes your findings and conclusions about the work reviewed. The coding scheme is based on that used by Voya in its young adult book reviews. Please note that the summary evaluation [3Q 4P, for example] should precede the author's name as part of the citation which begins your review.
5Q = Hard to imagine it being better produced
4Q = Better than most, but a few minor defects
3Q = Useable--without serious defects
2Q = More work by the creator needed but some promise
1Q = Hard to understand why it was issued
5P = Every person was dying to have it yesterday
4P = Broad general appeal
3P = Will appeal without pushing
2P = For the person with a special interest
1P = Little or no appeal
E = Elementary School
M = Middle School/Junior High
S = Senior High
C = Community College
U = University/College [4 years/graduate]
A work that may appeal to several audiences will receive each appropriate tag, for example MSCU.
INSTITUTIONAL AFFILIATION: