The Book i would like to review would be The true story of Pocahontas the other side of history

by Linwood. Custalow, Angela L. Daniel

*I have the ebook version which I can’t send it over through here but i can send it to your email or smth.

Instructions:

1. Read the book and write a book review of a 2-4 pages.

2. Use 3 sources(online journals and books but NO Wikipedia or other online encyclopedia) to support the book

3. The sources should be cite and reference on the last page

4. the citation would be Chicago style citation

5. Use the outline/ guideline below and include it in the book review. ( You do not need to address every point on this outline, but you should address several of them.)

Outline/ guideline:

1. What is your overall opinion of the book? On what basis has this opinion been
formulated? That is, tell the reader what you think and how you arrived at this
judgment. What did you expect to learn when you picked up the book? To what extent –
and how effectively – were your expectations met? Did you nod in agreement (or off to
sleep)? Did you wish you could talk back to the author? Amplify upon and explain your
reactions.

2. Identify the author’s thesis (main argument) and explain it in your own words. How
clearly and in what context is it stated and, subsequently, developed? (Hint: it’s usually
in the introduction). To what extent and how effectively (i.e., with what kind of
evidence) is this thesis proven? Use examples to amplify your responses. If arguments or
perspectives were missing, why do you think this might be?

3. What are the author’s aims? How well have they been achieved, especially regarding
the way the book is organized? Are these aims supported or justified? (You might look
back at the introduction to the book for help). How closely does the organization follow
the author’s aims?

4. How are the author’s main points presented, explained, and supported? What
assumptions lie behind these points? What would be the most effective way for you to
compress and/or reorder the author’s scheme of presentation and argument?

5. How effectively does the author draw claims from the material being presented? Are
connections between the claims and evidence made clearly and logically? Here you
should use examples to support your evaluation. (Major point here: what sources did
the author use in her research? Did she use them well and correctly?)

6. What conclusions does the author reach and how clearly are they stated? Do these
conclusions follow from the thesis and aims and from the ways in which they were
developed? In other words, how effectively does the book come together?

7. Identify the assumptions made by the author in both the approach to and the writing
of the book. For example, what prior knowledge does the author expect readers to
possess? How effectively are those assumptions worked into the overall presentation?
What assumptions do you think should not have been made? Why?

8. Are you able to detect any underlying philosophy of history held by the author (e.g.,
progress, decline, cyclical, linear, and random)? If so, how does this philosophy affect
the presentation of the argument?

9. How does the author see history as being motivated: primarily by the forces of
individuals, economics, politics, social factors, nationalism, class, race, gender,
something else? What kind of impact does this view of historical motivation have upon
the way in which the author develops the book?

10. Does the author’s presentation seem fair and accurate? Is the interpretation biased?
Can you detect any distortion, exaggeration, or diminishing of material? If so, for what
purpose might this have been done, and what effect does hit have on the overall
presentation?