118 College & Research Libraries January 2017 chapters focusing on “Delivering learning experiences,” which includes discussion about, and suggestions for, effectively leading sessions whether in-person or online. In this latest work, Dr. Allan has created a text that achieves nearly the impossible: There is something of interest to nearly everyone who works with students, including academic librarians. Though it is arguably of the greatest use to those who are least experienced, there are thoughtful ideas and suggestions that even the most experienced among us will find intriguing and useful.—Joseph Aubele, California State University, Long Beach Reviewing the Academic Library: A Guide to Self-study and External Review. Eleanor Mitchell and Peggy Seiden, eds. Chicago: American Library Association, 2015. 352p. Paper, $66.00 (ISBN 978-0-8389-8783-4). Reviewing the Academic Library, edited by Eleanor Mitchell and Peggy Seiden, is a well-structured and well-argued exposition of the multitude of elements involved in reviewing the performance and/or accreditation of the modern academic library. The book is structured into three part parts, with each of the subsequent chapters also sorted into the three parts. This organization allows a well thought-out construction of the elements involved in the review of the academic library. The first of the three sections is called “Why Review,” which has a total of four chapters that delve into the variety of reasons a library may be subject to a review; chief among these reasons is accreditation. Crystal Baird and Ellie Fogarty in chapter 1 indicate that “Academic librarians who recognize their role as central to the educa- tional quality of their college or university will find themselves and their work implicit throughout accreditation standards.” (15) The authors of the first two chapters on accreditation do a good job of illustrating the two roles a library can play in accreditation. The first role is as an academic unit within a university that is subject to certain standards. The second is the ways in which the library can help a specific department with its accreditation. Since the academic library can often walk a fine line between being the subject of review and aiding in a review process, it is helpful for the reader to see the distinction between the two. Throughout the “Why Review” section are quotes and excerpts from the different accrediting agencies for academic institutions. This can be very helpful for the reader who is employed by an institution that is governed by accreditation. The second section, entitled “Approaches to the Process,” builds from the first sec- tion in discussing the different types of approaches to the assessment/review process. These approaches are focused on the concept of self-study, through which the use of standards and external reviews are offered by the authors as methods. The interesting parts of this section are the extensive planning and discussions included in the appen- dix of chapter 7 on external reviews. The reader will find very detailed schedules as a framework for conducting an effective external review. The final chapter in section II is a very informative discussion from the standard bearers of LibQual, Texas A&M, about developing a culture of assessment. The third and final section is entitled “Gathering Supporting Data—Assessment Methods.” The chapters in this section are focused on the variety of methodologies for data collection that exist. Data collection can range from making sure that we as libraries are measuring what we are supposed to be measuring, to metrics as a source of data, and finally a very interesting chapter on measuring IT services using mixed methods. It is interesting to see an IT assessment discussion, since IT departments are often closely linked with the library as either an internal department or part of the larger campus, yet they are rarely talked about from an assessment standpoint. From there the final chapters, 15 and 16, take a larger viewpoint and move to discussions of doi:10.5860/crl.78.1.118 Book Reviews 119 where to go next. The book closes with chapter 16 from James Neal about the future of assessment. Reviewing the Academic Library is a well-organized and well-written discussion of the role assessment can play in a variety of library situations, whether that is accreditation or self-study. It demonstrates that a variety of methods can be used to achieve this goal. The challenge for this book is really one of scope. It is difficult to fit the entire nuance of accreditation and self-study into a single text. The editors and authors likely grappled with this challenge. The book begins with a very good discussion of accreditation then accelerates in the last two sections toward more of an assessment discussion. I do not think that these two topics are adequately addressed, and I am not convinced in reading the book that the methods for each are that similar. The final question I am left with is one of forward thinking as it applies to academic libraries in general. Collecting and reporting data, no matter how or why, is becoming an antiquated notion. Think about major companies like Google or Amazon who use collected data to provide real-time adaptive decision-making. Libraries should consider these concepts of anticipatory commerce or predictive analytics to be the next frontier rather than have discussions of how we can collect data better. We should be asking ourselves how we could build a system that responds and adapts immediately to the data that are collected every day.—Ryan Litsey, Texas Tech University Critical Literacy for Information Professionals. Sarah McNicol, ed. London: Facet Publishing, 2016. 172p. Paper, $95.00 (ISBN 978-1-78330-082-2). Critical Literacy for Information Professionals, edited by Sarah McNicol, is a diverse and informative book that introduces the reader to the concept of critical literacy while also demonstrating its value for a variety of library and information science settings. The first seven chapters are collected under the heading “Part 1: Theories of Critical Literacy.” These chapters bring different theoretical lenses to bear on literacy studies and information literacy. In many cases, the theories from part 1 are explored in rela- tionship to specific types of libraries and user groups, ranging from college students writing research papers to professionals sharing their expertise in the workplace. Part 2 of the book, “Critical Literacy in Practice,” offers case studies with a similar variety of approaches and settings. The reader will walk away from Critical Literacy for Information Professionals with a multifaceted definition of critical literacy, exposure to its theoretical roots, and several ideas for directions she or he could take in exploring the topic further. The Introduction to the book begins with a section helpfully titled, “What Is Criti- cal Literacy?” McNicol uses Shorr’s 1999 definition from a journal article of the same name, stating that it is a process that “challenges the status quo in an effort to discover alternative pathways for self and social development” (xi). Critical literacy, like Paulo Freire’s critical pedagogy, is focused on practical action, community engagement, and the empowerment of traditionally marginalized voices. It is concerned with the contexts in which a “text,” broadly defined, is created and read. Parts 1 and 2 of Critical Literacy for Information Professionals provide an introductory look at the theories covered, from andragogy to reader response theory, and the ap- proaches to developing a critical stance in literacy education. Just as important, the book serves as a helpful jumping-off point for further study. The robust reference lists for each chapter are supplemented by a “Further Information” section in the back of the book that features resources organized by topic and an index that adequately guides the reader. At first glance, an academic librarian may look at the table of contents and wonder if chapters on critical literacy in the workplace, in secondary schools, or in public librar- ies will have any value or relationship to her or his own practice. The reader should doi:10.5860/crl.78.1.119