Jill Markgraf, Kate Hinnant, Eric Jennings, and Hans Kishel. Maximizing the One-Shot: Connecting Library Instruction with the Curriculum. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015. 175p. Paper, $55.00 (978-1-4422-3866-4). 400 College & Research Libraries May 2016 streams, program duration and cohort size, enrollment process and criteria, program structure variables, curriculum content and program leadership theories. In essence, this gleans and aggregates the data from each chapter, thereby enabling the editor and reader to make meaningful comparisons between and among the leadership institutes discussed in the book. Absent such a chapter, the book would have been nothing more than an anecdotal assemblage of thoughts on individual institutes, which, while in- teresting, would have lacked generalizable significance. In the end, through no fault of her own, Herold is only partially successful in her mission to capture elements of success common across the field of institutes. Ultimately the final chapter, “Creating Leaders: Lessons Learned,” is the critical conclusion to this ambitious book. Here Herold attempts to assess the value and best practices of leadership institutes, particularly as they (can) contribute to the develop- ment of library leaders. While she concludes that there is no one-size-fits all model for conducting successful leadership institutes, Herold has determined that there are four leadership theories that seem to generate positive results: change management, transformative or transformational leadership, emotional intelligence and employment of frame flipping. Also, financial support is critical to the success of an institute, and institutes should strive to be self-sustaining. In addition, a multitude of curricular models have been successful, including those employing instructional methods such as face-to-face seminars, webinars, site visits, listservs, and the like. Moreover, the most successful programs are those that encourage ongoing mentorship and networking relationships. In the end, it is not surprising that Herold determines that there is no firm evidence that leadership institutes actually succeed in developing leaders. Ad- ditional and more rigorously systematic assessment is necessary to bolster this claim. Nonetheless, not surprisingly, she asserts that leadership institutes are helpful to their participants, although not necessarily with respect to leadership concerns. By incorporating indispensable bibliographical information at the conclusion of each chapter, Creating Leaders not only describes and analyzes each major leadership institute under consideration; it also provides aspiring library leaders with references to an impressive corpus of the preeminent leadership literature. This is, perhaps, its most impressive accomplishment. And, despite this fine embarkation on evaluation, more work needs to be done. Assuredly, the editor herself would be first to suggest continuation of the salient inquiry.—Lynne F. Maxwell, West Virginia University College of Law, Morgantown, West Virginia Jill Markgraf, Kate Hinnant, Eric Jennings, and Hans Kishel. Maximizing the One- Shot: Connecting Library Instruction with the Curriculum. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015. 175p. Paper, $55.00 (978-1-4422-3866-4). The struggle of academic librarians to make meaningful contributions to the curricu- lum, despite the challenge of limited access, is almost as old as the profession itself. The single session model, aka one-shot, has over time, and despite its detractors, become the de facto standard for the vast majority of academic libraries. It is with full acceptance of this reality that the authors have produced a case study describing the efforts at their institution (University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire) to first improve and standardize the library’s one-shot instruction, and then the effort to develop subsequent one-shot sessions that would build upon preceding sessions. While there is little in the way of new information regarding the one-shot instructional model, the authors have produced an interesting and useful text that offers insights not only into the process of enhancing library instruction but also how the teaching faculty with whom they collaborated in that process perceive both the process in which they were engaged as well as the instructional sessions. doi:10.5860/crl.77.3.400 Book Reviews 401 The structure of this volume is straightforward and adequate. A short introduction includes brief overviews of each chapter, all but one of the ten chapters (as well as the separate conclusion) includes a separate bibliography for anyone wishing to engage in additional study, and 43 of the final 48 pages are composed entirely of worksheets and handouts developed as part of the changes to the library’s instructional sessions, organized into ten appendixes. Finally, the text also includes a brief index and bio- graphical information about the authors. While the bulk of the book is useful and highly practical, it begins with an attempt to place the one-shot instructional model in a historical context, going so far in the first chapter as to provide an annotated list of eleven different instructional approaches (including the one-shot) that have been, and are being, employed by librarians. While information of this sort may be useful to those less experienced in librarianship, it is difficult to imagine that this primer will hold significant value for more experienced readers. Similarly, the majority of the second chapter represents an extended literature on one-shot instruction and its pedagogical underpinnings, at one point reaching back more than 30 years to highlight the genesis of active learning in higher education. These first two chapters represent weak points in the narrative, but insomuch as the remaining chapters focus primarily on the actions and activities of those involved in this endeavor, and other matters germane to the nuts and bolts of delivering effective library instruction, they are unique to the book. The heart of the book is found in chapters 3, 4, and 5; and it is here that most readers will find its greatest value. In chapter 3, the authors focus, in satisfying depth, on the effort to develop a “lesson study approach” to library instruction, one that “is an itera- tive process comprising five steps that can be repeated as needed” (25). The authors also discuss identification of a disciplinary partner with whom to work (in this case, the English department), the recruitment of stakeholders within that department, the work that this interdisciplinary group undertook, and the successes and challenges they encountered along the way. For example, initially a considerable list of student learn- ing outcomes were identified, but the group quickly realized it was too ambitious for a single instructional session. The process of paring that list down and the amount of time it took, as compared to how long it was expected to take, is also discussed. Chapter 4 provides similar depth on the process of implementing the new and improved one- shot sessions, assessing the effectiveness of the new approach and how changes were then made to incorporate information gleaned from assessment. The level of detail this discussion takes on is outstanding, in particular the use of librarian observers and student focus groups to assess the effectiveness of the instructional sessions, providing genuine insights to any librarians considering a similar change. In chapter 5, the authors build upon the preceding two chapters by describing the effort to effect similar change to library instruction for students in the sciences and nursing disciplines as well as the effort to build “a series of lessons integrated into an entire curriculum,” which the au- thors refer to as “scaffolding” (51). It is an invaluable discussion that enables the reader to see a practical, achievable path to a more robust and holistic instructional approach. Among the remaining chapters, two are worthy of mention. In “Fine-tuning the One- Shot,” the authors offer their suggestions on how any librarian engaged in instruction might make him/herself more effective. The suggestions are specific, and each includes a discussion that provides useful detail. And in “Interviewing the ‘Others’,” a number of teaching faculty are interviewed and offer their perspectives on library instruction, both before and after adoption of the lesson study approach, the reasons the faculty agreed to participate in the process, and the outcomes that they have observed among their students. These perspectives are insightful and, arguably, the most noteworthy aspect of the book. 402 College & Research Libraries May 2016 Much has been written about the current state library instruction, so much so that to say something genuinely unique has become nearly impossible. However, for those seeking to make substantive change to their library’s instruction, Markgraf, Hinnant, Jennings, and Kishel offer a model with which to begin, if not wholly adopt, and pro- vide detailed discussions about the process that will prove useful in avoiding at least some of the challenges that they themselves encountered.—Joseph Aubele, California State University, Long Beach, California Educational Programs: Innovative Practices for Archives and Special Collections. ed. Kate Theimer. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015. 208p. Paper, $55.00 (ISBN 1-4422-3852-7). Traditionally archives, rare books and special collections have been used by professional historians, bibliographers, faculty members, and individual graduate students primar- ily in historical and literary studies. More recently, many of our libraries have been promoting a wider mission and broadening the patron base to include use by classes of undergraduate students, academic disciplines outside historical and literary studies and even the general public (including K–12 students). Despite best intentions to broaden the community of researchers, we often struggle to come up with innovative and effective programs to educate and welcome these new users into our reading rooms. Archivists and librarians are being asked to engage in pedagogy more directly and use skills not typically included in the curriculum of library and information science graduate degree programs. Editor Kate Theimer’s Educational Programs: Innovative Practices for Archives and Special Collections is a useful resource to help librarians and archivists to begin thinking about the design and implementation of educational programs at our own institutions. Part of the Rowman & Littlefield’s series Innovative Practices for Archives and Special Collections, Theimer’s Educational Programs presented a collection of thirteen individu- ally authored case studies documenting thirteen real-world educational programs. Geographically based in both the United States and England, these libraries and archives ran the gamut of the special collections landscape: large and small institutions funded by both state and private revenue sources; academic research libraries and historical societies; and large staffs with dedicated outreach librarians and one-person special collections departments. The educational programs profiled in the case studies reached a wide variety of users: undergraduate and graduate students; students of schools of education; teachers and faculty members; school children of various ages; and the general public. Theimer claimed that the programs were deliberately selected for the case studies because archivists and special collections librarians will find elements transferrable to their own workplace settings or they “can serve as models, sources of inspiration or starting points for new discussions.” (vii) Those looking for a nuts and bolts “How To” manual should look elsewhere, as that is not the purpose of this volume. It should be understood from the outset that these case studies present broad sweeps rather than detailed blueprints. Averaging fifteen pages in length, each of the individual case studies were structured with common sections: an introduction followed by sections on “planning,” “implementation,” “re- sults,” “lessons learned,” and a conclusion. The authors of the case studies were able to give broad overviews of their programs. Certain themes did emerge across the case studies. One constant refrain was the need to fully engage the professors or teachers who sought to use special collections in their curriculum into the planning process of the educational programs. These lessons are relevant and useful reminders for all, whether a librarian at an academic library or a historical society. Academic librarians should not immediately dismiss the case studies involving school-age children. Many of the authors noted that K–12, undergraduates, and even doi:10.5860/crl.77.3.402