From: Gawel, Richard <Richard.Gawel_at_penton.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 07:59:13 -0600

Please change my subscription to digest form. My inbox can't handle all of these individual e-mails.

Richard Gawel

On 11/17/09 1:03 AM, "CCBC Network digest" wrote:

CCBC-NET Digest for Monday, November 16, 2009.

1. Anonymous v. Signed Reviews 2. RE: Reviewing & fact checking 3. Anonymous v. Signed Reviews 4. anonymous vs. signed reviews 5. Reviews 6. Re: Reviewing 7. RE: reviews 8. How to write so you get good reviews, by Rick Roche 9. RE: Reviewing 10. Re: Reviews 11. Reviews 12. RE: Reviews 13. Re: reviewing 14. Reviews for the school librarian 15. reviews and reviewing, anonymous and otherwise 16. RE: Reviews for the school librarian 17. Re: reviews and reviewing, anonymous and otherwise 18. Finding Reviews 19. Correcting error 20. reviewing 21. Re: Anonymous v. Signed Reviews 22. RE: reviews and reviewing, anonymous and otherwise 23. Re: reviews and reviewing, anonymous and otherwise 24. Re: reviews and reviewing, anonymous and otherwise 25. Another search problem 26. Digest Form 27. CCBC messages in digest form, please 28. Digest form, please 29. RE: Digest Form 30. Digest Form 31. ccbc in digest form please 32. Re: reviews and reviewing, anonymous and otherwise


----------------------------------------------------------------------



Subject: Anonymous v. Signed Reviews From: "Stohr-Hunt, Tricia" Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 06:39:47 -0500 X-Message-Number: 1

Dear Friends,

I am acutely aware that we are now at the halfway point in the month, but I did have one last question regarding reviewing. I would love for folks to share their thoughts on anonymous v. signed reviews. What are the differenc es, if any? Are there advantages for both reviewer and reader in anonymous reviews? Disadvantages? There are times when I find anonymous reviews to be different in tone, and on occasion, not written with the kind of professio nal courtesy I would expect from a reviewer. I suppose I'm asking, why anon ymity at all? I know there are certain names I look for, and when I find re views written by those folks, I feel I can trust them. So, why not put our names to reviews we write?

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Best, Tricia
----------

Dr. Patricia M. Stohr-Hunt Chair, Education Department 28 Westhampton Way University of Richmond, VA 23173

My Blog: http://missrumphiuseffect.blogspot.com/ My Home Page: http://blog.richmond.edu/pstohrhu/

Teachers open the door, but you must enter by yourself. -- Chinese Proverb


----------------------------------------------------------------------



Subject: RE: Reviewing & fact checking From: Donna German Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 07:44:54 -0500 X-Message-Number: 2

Because our focus is science & math through (fun-to-read) literature, we fact check and work with experts in the field prior to publication. I could probably write a book about things I've learned through the vetting experience!

Donna German

Editor

Sylvan Dell Publishing 976 Houston Northcutt Blvd., Ste. 3

Mount Pleasant, SC 29464

843-971-6722 (off), 877-958-2600 (toll free), 843-216-3804 (fax)

Science and Math through Literature

For more information, please visit our website at www.SylvanDellPublishing.com


Message-----

From: Dean Schneider
 Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 8:49 PM To: ccbc-net_at_ccbc.education.wisc.edu Subject:
 Reviewing

On fact checking:

Several times over the years, I have caught errors--from copy editing to factual, minor and major--and been able to report them to my editor who the n contacts the publisher, and there has been time for the publisher to make changes in the finished copy. Of course this only works if I have read the advanced reader copy well ahead of schedule (which I tend to do), but it's a way for reviewers and writers to--pun intended--be on the same page in the name of a stronger book. What's distressing is when major problems are caught and there's NOT time to correct them, until subsequent editions. Lot s of reviewers have that internal voice while reading a really good book and cheering it on, hoping it finishes as well as it has started. Reviewers lov e to celebrate the well-crafted books, but it's painful though necessary to comment on major problems with a book, where the story doesn't work as well as it might have. A good reviewer doesn't include negative analyses lightheartedly, though I know there are reviewers o ut there who too often write with venomous pens (or cantankerous keyboards?).

Dean Schneider

Ensworth school

Nashville, Tennessee

---

Received on Tue 17 Nov 2009 07:59:13 AM CST