Rohde, Joy

English

Trinity University

Trinity UniversityDigital Commons @ TrinityInformation Literacy Resources for CurriculumDevelopment Information Literacy CommitteeFall 2011Secondary Annotated BibliographyJoy RohdeTrinity University, jrohde@trinity.eduFollow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/infolit_grantdocsThis Instructional Material is brought to you for free and open access by the Information Literacy Committee at Digital Commons @ Trinity. It hasbeen accepted for inclusion in Information Literacy Resources for Curriculum Development by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @Trinity. For more information, please contact jcostanz@trinity.edu.Repository CitationRohde, Joy, "Secondary Annotated Bibliography" (2011). Information Literacy Resources for Curriculum Development. 61.https://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/infolit_grantdocs/61HIST 4460: The Cold War Secondary Annotated Bibliography  Your research paper will only be as good as the sources you collect to create and support your argument. This means that you need to engage with your sources critically and analytically. Your task in this assignment is to produce an annotated bibliography of six secondary sources, FIVE of which you deem useful for your research, and ONE that that you have concluded is not useful.   This annotated bibliography is probably different from others that you have done. It demands that you articulate and apply your criteria for a useful source:  what makes each source relevant and reliable, or irrelevant and unreliable? Your annotations must critically engage with the work’s argument and evidence, examine the credibility of the author and publication itself, and describe how the work relates to your own research problem.   Rather than listing your entries alphabetically, you must RANK THEM in order of most to least useful, using the criteria you have developed for reliability and relevance. Each annotation must include: ● bibliographic information, properly cited in Chicago style. ● a one- to two-sentence description of what the book or article is about, including its thesis, in your own words. ● a one- to two-sentence assessment of the author’s scholarly credibility; what makes him or her an authority on the subject? Is he or she sufficiently objective, or does the argument or approach indicate that the information source is biased? ● a one-sentence assessment of the source’s credibility within the historical profession—in other words, is the work peer-reviewed? Is it in a reputable journal or published by a reputable press? Does it engage with other credible historical work? How so or how not? ● A brief description of the evidence the author uses to support his or her argument. ● A brief evaluation of the author’s use of his or her sources and the reliability of his or her argument. Consider particularly how the source’s argument and evidence relates to other reliable historical work on the subject.  ● A brief explanation of how the work is valuable for your research. What makes it relevant to your project? How is your research in dialogue with this source? Does this source help you refine your problem or argument? HIST 4460: The Cold War Secondary Annotated Bibliography Rubric  Exceeds Meets Developing Beginning Uses information appropriately and ethically Correctly provides all bibliographic information in Chicago style; effectively summarizes source entirely in own words; avoids plagiarism.  Correctly provides all bibliographic information in Chicago style; summarizes sources in own words with minimal quoting; avoids plagiarism. Partially provides bibliographic information in Chicago style; relies on quoting to summarize sources; evidence of some plagiarism. Fails to provide bibliographic information in Chicago style; relies heavily on quoting to summarize sources; significant evidence of plagiarism.  Accesses needed information Finds relevant, credible, discipline specific information from multiple research resources.  Finds quality information from multiple research resources.  Locates information of variable value, or information from limited kinds of research resources.  Finds little information, or information that lacks credibility, relevance, or disciplinary value.  Evaluates information critically for reliability Thoroughly evaluates a variety of discipline-specific sources based on all criteria developed in class.  Adequately evaluates a variety of quality sources based on most of the criteria developed in class.  Evaluates sources using only some of the criteria developed in class; or provides limited or superficial evaluation of information.   Rarely applies evaluative criteria to information. Evaluates information critically for relevance Thoroughly evaluates information based on all criteria developed in class; fully articulates relevance to research topic.  Adequately evaluates information based on most of the criteria developed in class; adequately articulates relevance to research topic. Applies only some of the relevant criteria; superficially articulates relevance to research topic.  Rarely applies evaluative criteria to the information source; fails to explain relevance to research topic.  

Secondary Annotated Bibliography

https://digitalcommons.trinity.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1060&amp;context=infolit_grantdocs

Secondary Annotated Bibliography

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Trinity University