This is a very accessible book for lay people and novice practioners, and also has enough points of interest for those more experienced in TCM. However, for those familiar with modern acupuncture as currently practiced in Nanjing University of TCM, it is a little less useful in the practicals of theraputic application. It also is a little frustrating for those not so enthusiastic about Nigel Wiseman's glossary of medical terminology. All in all, though, it is a worthwhile addition to your medical library.

The poor, repetitious writing may be due to the fact that there was a "group effort" preparing and writing the book. There are a lot of good insights comparing the "old economy" labor force and the "new economy" labor force. The reader, however, must perservere to get through the repetition and disorganization. There are few short but interesting case studies in Chapter 3, and lots of left-wing policy recommendations throughout the book.

I bought this book because it seemed the only large, comprehensive history of Utah available. Perhaps it was, but "comprehensive" is a bit misleading. It does indeed dabble in most every aspect of Utah's history: cultural, religious, political, economic. But the good professor does get, suffice it to say, tiresome...Instead of actually delving into the history of Utah he seems to mostly be engaged in personal commentary, with thorough history left as an afterthought. If only he could lay off the adjectives. History is supposed to be filled with more verbs and nouns. ....

In his summation of the 1945-69 era he writes: "Any state blessed with the artistic talents...encases itself in a solid armor against the blows of those Philistines who belittle the arts and humanities as of little consequence." This said referring to people who oppose not art but taxpayer funding of it. See? Commentary, not history.

Perhaps it's being too optimistic to assume that a good, comprehensive history can be written in a 459 page book with large print. But at least the Utah State Historical Society, which commissioned this [book], could have found a better author to attempt it.

Take my advice: Search for a better book on Utah history. Wait around, if you have to.

One of the other reviewers here suggests that Alexander is the wrong man to write a comprehensive history of Utah. This statement is patently absurd! Alexander is one of the most important historians of Mormonism and Utah since Leonard Arrington. Unfortunately, this book is commissioned history, and as such, Alexander's heart doesn't really seem in it. The book is overly verbose at times, and at other times it seems as if the introductions and conclusions to chapters are tacked on. Also, the book is almost entirely narrative with very little interpretation. (Another misstatement of this same reviewer.) In short, this is a workman-like narrative history, but it is not edited or written with the excellence and care that Alexander's other works exhibit. I know that this book was expanded and updated in 2003, so if you are inclined to purchase this book, get the newer edition. If you are looking for a tightly written, superb one volume history of Utah, try Dean L. May's, Utah: A People's History.

Alexander's "official" centennial Utah history is a strong overview of the history of Utah. Their are many pictures to make the work interesting, and the narrative is flowing and enjoyable. It's only flaw its that it does focus on Mormons, but that is the majority religious group in the state so he can be forgiven. The book celebrates the people of Utah past and present and glosses over some not so pretty events. A must read for anyone interested in Utah history.

All that this book contains are practice tests, which although helpful, are not sufficient review material. There is no review section, and answers to questions are not well explained, despite what the author's might think. The answers only discuss the correct answer, and do define the other terms or indicate why they are wrong. As well, the test questions are not broken down into subtests, even for scoring purposes, so they are of little diagnostic help.

After taking the GRE, I realize that this book did not help me in my preparations. All it managed to do was upset me into thinking I was going to do terrible on the exam. The questions were 10x harder than the exam itself. Also, to my chagrine, the book did not have any review outlines in it - an essential part of test preparation.

An excellent book because all you really need to study for the psych GREs is a good introductory psych textbook and and some practice tests that this book provides. I should know, I scored a 99th percentile!

This collection is a travesty indeed. Great poems no doubt, but abysmally read. Furthermore they should have put all the introductions together separate and apart from the poems. It's nice to hear intros the first time around. But who wants to hear the intros everytime you listen to the poems? Sometimes I want to hear just a stream of poetry without any interuptions and this format makes that impossible. It's incredible that such a great concept could be so terribly executed.

I could not get this back to the store for a refund quickly enough. While the poem selection is great and the poem introductions are narrated well, the choice to use "modern poets" as the readers made this compilation utterly unlistenable. The only one that I found acceptable was Anthony Hect--the others were notably bad. In particular, I found Jorie Graham's "readings" to be abysmal. She reads each poem as if it were simply a string of unconnected words, giving equal stress to each, with halting pauses between them, never breaking out of a drowsy monotone. Other readers were not much better.

There are three major flaws in the readings:

1) The readers are no better than the average untrained person, and often much worse. (You've just got to hear them for yourself to appreciate how bad they are.)

2) Successive poems by the same poet are read by different "readers." It's jarring to hear 3 or 4 poems from Poet X, each in a wildly different voice.

3) No regard is given to matching the sex of the poet and reader. In general, it is really annoying to hear your favorite poet read by the wrong sex. In particular, making this mistake on "gender specific" poems (like having a woman read Poe's "Annabel Lee") is unforgivable.

Why is this all so upsetting? Because it is practically impossible to find poetry collections on CD, making this a serious waste of limited resources. If you are looking for a good collection on CD, buy "81 Famous Poems CD" by Audio Partners (ISBN 0-945353-82-0). It's a good collection on two CDs and is read by professionals: Alexander Scourby, Bramwell Fletcher, and Nancy Wickwire. In the meantime, we can only hope that the producers of this collection will eventually come to their senses and re-record the poems with the services of trained professionals.

If you are prepping for the GRE in literature or are trying to gain a basic understanding of literary periods and poets, this audio-collection is a must. It features a brief introduction about each poet's life. It also includes a brief introduction about the theme of each poem. The fact that you have to listen to these introductions before listening to the poem inculcate the poem and aids retention. If literature has turned into a cumbersome and overwhelming task, this collection will not only provide you with a sense of direction but will also make literature far more pleasurable.

As an ecology student, I expected a sound scientifically written ecology and management tool. Although some selected studies were quoted, this book appears to have a political agenda. Every section has a "and here's why doves should be hunted" swing which I found to be annoying.

The book lacks to too many explanations, and universities shouldn't use it for classes at all unless the proffessors are planning to use it for assigning problems only.Unfortunatly the book has less than 13-20 examples in all of its ~500 pages, which is the worst thing you can do to for a physics student who is just trying to learn the material in an advanced way after General physics.The book has no advanced concepts to say its not meant for introductory, so in both cases the book is not an introductory nor advanced.If you are looking for a better book in a little advanced concepts (( after General physics)) as modern physics then don't waste time looking for a good book if there is an excellent book written by Rohlf its an excellent second year I've ever read -Modern Physics from aá to Z0-
James William Rohlf-
ISBN: 0-471-57270-5

This book tries to be complete at first but excludes many important concepts and basically just talks about developing atomic physics the correct way instead of doing it. It is riddled with bad errors and is actually often incorrect. For instance, when dealing with Einstein's work on lasers, the formula in the book is off by a cubic factor of the energies involved -- yes, that is to the third power. Furthermore, it doesn't derive most of the formulas, so most people would learn the (very) incorrect forms. And when it does derive the formulas, sometimes the derivations lead to the correct result but are not the correct way to get there. The book often deals with deriving equations and results by analogy, in a non-rigrorous form, but then at times it will all of a sudden introduce something completely rigorous and offer no explanation as to where it came from. If it does something from freshman physics like derive the wave equation, why doesn't it introduce other concepts with proper background? Finally, the answers in the back of the book are often wrong. All of this compared with the writing style make this book horrible. The authors sound like they are writing to themselves, as if they have hidden knowledge about some of the topics (as a previous reviewer noticed, it seemed as if there were things they weren't telling, making it appear as if the concepts were hidden somewhere). My advice: get a couple of other books if you are serious about learning this material. Even the format of the book seems as if it is a bunch of notes, as there is no textual organization or pedagogy at all. Because of the nice historical accounts, it almost gets two stars; however, the subject of the book is not history, so it gets just one star. Oh, and this book is in its fourth edition, so errors in actual concepts and formulas (for instance, being off by a factor of a cubic term) is unacceptable. The only reason this book ever got used is because a faculty member at Texas A&M University helped write it, and they required it to be used at the course here for many years (all the way up till 2002, even though the 4th edition came out in 1984). Horrible book, and the faculty's greedy disposition to profit off of it like this should be looked down upon.

This is quite possibly the worst book I have ever tried to use for a class in my life. I was required to purchase this book for my Engineering Physics class at Texas A&M. By the way, Dr. Adair, co author, is a prof here (must be why its required) so I think Ill stay anonymous :). It is complete drivel written in a language that only a person with a doctorate in physics could understand. Its full of flaws, and has absolutely no example problems worked out. After having used this book I have no coice but to assume the authors were trying to keep this stuff a secret. I relied primarially on notes and used it only for homework problems assigned.

I have been made to read this book for my A level lit class and I would like to express the complete and utter boredom whilst reading this so called brilliant play. I would like to wish all the poor A level students who, like me, are made to read this.

One thing i know is that I better get a good grade for going through this absolute and utter boredom.

If you did enjoy the book then maybe you could explain to me what you found so enjoyable!

I was made to read this as part of my a level Literature class. I am sending this warning to all who intend to read it! My Advice is : DON'T! No offence to the author or anyone who actually liked the book but it was a complete waste of time! ...

Good luck to those who, like me, are forced to read it!

This book was originally published in 1987 and updated in 1996, and authored by two attorneys. It is probably targeted at the vast college market for lower division courses, where the instructor doesn't critically evaluate texts. The book is built around legal cases, usually Supreme Court cases but occasionally state court cases, that the authors use to illustrate a particular theme. However, the choice of case frequently fails to clearly illuminate the point, and the authors have a tendency to offer their opinions as conclusions without clearly identifying them as such. The book is strongest where the authors focus on their expertise - law; and weakest where they wander off into policy and philosophical issues. In particular, the authors seem ill equiped to address the broad policy and philosophical issues which they want to make the focus of this book. I can't really recommend this book to any audience. There are much better texts for discussions of environmental law, whether for students, laypersons or serious students of policy. Also, there are much better policy and philosophy texts for all levels.

More than a book it is a collection of papers, not always easy to understand and written in academic language. It could be used as a reference by one who knows already the subject. Not recommended for beginners