Examples of Common Feedback

To help you prepare for what to expect, we’ve outlined some of the most common types of feedback by type of book.

Originally Written Works


  • The book can use more citations.
  • The book can cite more timely material or the information cited is obsolete or incorrect now.
  • There are other sources that provide relevant, alternative perspectives that should be cited and are not currently cited.

Sensitive Language

  • The way information is presented/the language being used is not academically neutral.
  • Terminology used is outdated or no longer considered appropriate.

Pedagogical Elements

  • The book needs more figures/imagery or more relevant figures/imagery.
  • The book would benefit from some exercises or interactive learning activities.
  • Objectives/outcomes, key terms, and/or discussion questions should be added.

Organization and Topics

  • The book is too long or there is too much material to cover in one semester.
  • There is too much theory. There needs to be more practical examples or exercises.
  • The order of topics does not align with the reviewer’s own course.
  • A topic area that should be standard for the discipline needs to be added.

Anthologies of Previously Published Third-Party Content

  • “I like the content, but would have personally organized it like this…”
  • Some units/chapters have several readings while others have only one or two readings.
  • The content is too advanced or not appropriate for the intended audience.
  • There are alternative readings that would be more effective.
  • The unit/chapter/reading introductions are too brief and need elaboration to more adequately provide context.
  • The unit/chapter/reading introductions are too long/detailed and detract from student focus on reading the material and interpreting it for themselves.
  • The pre/post-reading questions are too easy or do not inspire reflection/discussion/critical thinking.
  • The pre/post-reading questions are too difficult for the intended audience or they do not connect to the readings in any way.
  • The readings do not reflect diversity in authorship or sources.

Contributed Volumes

  • There are inconsistencies in voice between units/chapters.
  • Some units/chapters are much longer or shorter than others.
  • Some units/chapters are suitable for the intended audience while one or the others are not.
  • Pedagogical elements (i.e., key terms, objectives, questions) are not consistent between units/chapters.