Reviewing proposals, and reviewing books, chapters and edited collections

Reviewing a book or journal proposal

A proposal is reviewed before any full manuscript exists, so the questions differ from a full manuscript review. Assess whether the proposed topic fills a genuine gap, whether the proposed theoretical approach and methods are appropriate and feasible, whether the author or editorial team has the expertise to deliver what is proposed, and whether the proposed scope is realistic for the space or word count available. A proposal review is an early filter, catching problems before significant time is invested in writing.

Peer review of book chapters

A chapter is reviewed for its own coherence as well as its fit within the wider volume. Ask whether the chapter’s argument stands on its own, whether it duplicates ground covered elsewhere in the book, and whether its theoretical grounding is consistent with the standards set out earlier in this course, African or locally relevant theory prioritised, evidence properly sourced, and ethics statements specific rather than generic.

Reviewing a book before and after publication

Before publication, a book review functions much like a manuscript peer review: confidential feedback to the editor or publisher intended to improve the work before it goes to print. Assess the coherence of the argument across the full length of the work, not only individual chapters, whether the structure serves the argument, whether the conclusion draws convincingly on what came before, and whether referencing meets the same African and Global South prioritisation expected of journal manuscripts.

After publication, a book review is usually a published piece in its own right rather than confidential feedback. It should summarise the book’s purpose and argument, place it within the wider field, and offer a fair assessment of its strengths and limitations. State plainly who the book is for and what it contributes, and note where its use of African theory, language or evidence is strong or where it defaults to imported frameworks without adaptation.

Reviewing an edited book

An edited book is reviewed both at the level of the whole collection and at the level of individual contributions. Assess whether the editors have achieved a coherent volume rather than a loose set of unrelated chapters, whether the introduction adequately frames the contributions, and whether quality is consistent across chapters. Note any chapters that fall notably below the standard of the rest of the collection, since this is useful feedback for editors even where a full manuscript review of every chapter is not required.