4MAT BOOK REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS
Please use the following format in preparing 4-MAT Book Reviews:

Name of book is: The Great Commission to Worship

1.    ABSTRACT. Summarize what you have read into 300 words (1 page). Prove you comprehend the readings by writing a thoughtful summary. The abstract is not a commentary or listing of topics but rather an objective summary of major themes from the reader’s viewpoint. Use third person to retain objectivity.  Abstact equals an overview of contents. This section should include a minimum of 2 footnotes to the text being reviewed.

2.    CONCRETE RESPONSE. Be vulnerable. In no less than 150 words and no more than 1 page, relate a personal life experience that this book triggered in your memory. Relate your story in first person, describing action, and quoting exact words you remember hearing or saying. In the teaching style of Jesus, this is a do-it-yourself parable, case study, confession. You will remember almost nothing you have read unless you make this critical, personal connection. What video memory began to roll? This is your chance to tell your story and make new ideas your own.

3.    REFLECTION. This is the critical thinking part of the review (not critical in the sense of negative, but in the sense of questioning). In no less than 150 words and no more than 1 page, describe what questions are raised for you in response to what you have read. Keep a rough-note sheet at hand as you read. Out smart the author by asking better questions than he/she raised in the book. Tell how the author could have made the book better or more appealing to those in your field of service. One way to begin this section is by stating what bothered you most about the book. This is not a place to provide an endorsement or affirmation of the book. This should be an objective, fair evaluation of the text. Use third person to retain the objectivity.

4.    ACTION. So what are you going to do about it? In 2-3 pages, provide at least 3 action steps that describe what actions or changes you are going to make in your life, ministry, and/or work as a result of your reading. Action steps should be measurable and reveal a commitment to specific time, specific people, and identified steps.

5.    Please provide a Turabian style* title page, pagination, footnotes, and Bibliography.

*Please contact the instructor to ask permission to use an alternate format style.
Total: 56 pages

Submit each 4Mat Book Review by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Sunday of the module/week in which it is assigned.

My doctor had sent me the following instructions to employ on my research proposal. Editing and rewriting is required in the light of the two following paragraphs to be done on my research proposal.

“My concern with your proposed project at this stage is in regards to the research question(s) that you pose: the originality of the project and its potential to advance the discourse (which is required for a PhD). A number of commentators have already been discussing the legal potential/impact of the TPNW, and it is fairly clear that it would be very difficult to see it as having binding customary effect without the support of the nuclear powers, which is not going to happen any time soon. I think its fair to say that the discussion has already moved to questions of e.g. political impact, possible shifts in perspective towards humanitarian underpinnings in discourse and the relationship between disarmament and arms control in this context. I am, for example, currently supervising a PhD considering some of these wider aspects, which is already half completed. I do not think it is possible to base a PhD project on the legal impact of the treaty at this stage in the way that you envisage. In addition, other aspects of your project, such as the correctness of the ICJs conclusions regarding the compatibility of nuclear weapons with IHL principles such as distinction is of course important, but has been written about extensively since 1996.”

“I therefore think it is necessary for you to identify a more novel research question or approach that allows you to move some of these debates forward. You clearly have excellent knowledge in this area as I say, your background research work in this proposal is excellent and I would be interested in working with you on a topic in the nuclear law field, but my view is that you need a stronger research question for a viable PhD proposal.”