An annotated bibliography is an alphabetized list of sources compiled for use in a research paper or project. It looks like a works cited page, except that following every citation is a short paragraph which summarizes the source, its intentions, primary audience, unique properties, and relevance to the topic at hand.
Annotated Bibliography for our purposes:
- 5 entries
- Appropriate/evaluated sources
- Correct MLA formatting including page numbering and heading!
- A title
Grading Criteria: I will be concerned with clarity, content, and form. Be professional. Do it right!
An annotated bibliography is a useful tool in writing papers which require secondary information (research/outside sources). Anno. bibs. are a simple and effective way to keep organized because sources and their citations are listed along with a summary.
Listing the attributes of each source can help a writer begin to make connections between their topic and the research available. Often professors ask for anno. bibs. to be turned in before a final paper. In the professional world, especially in careers which center on written communication, knowing how to construct an anno. bib. can be helpful.
Step One: Start with a source that is connected to your topic. It could be a book, a web page, an article, a newspaper, a film, or anything! Evaluate that source and decide it if is appropriate.
Step Two: Correctly cite the source in an MLA style bibliographical entry. Our textbook shows us step by step how to do this. I would not recommend a citation builder because they are always wrong.
Step Three: Write the annotation.
A good annotation contains the following things:
Who wrote it and what do you know about them?
What is the source trying to tell readers?
SUMMARIZE THE MAIN POINTS (that doesn’t mean write “This article talks about cheese” it means writing “The website’s author, Whassisname, a culinary expert and trained cheesemaker, argues that cheddar is better than American cheese for the following reasons: x, y, z.”)
2) A statement which comments on the purpose of the source.
Is it intended to influence the reader (of what)?
Is it an argument? Is it informational?
Is it merely written to be entertaining?
Is it trying to sell you something?
Is it serving as an official news source or educational source?
3) A statement which comments on the uniqueness of the source.
Why did you choose this source?
Are there pictures, is it well organized?
How is it different from the other sources available?
4) A statement about how the source is helpful or relevant to your topic.
What do you hope to use from this source? And how?
5) Context of the article?
Where was it published?
Is there a specific audience the writer had in mind?
What is the purpose of the article?
An easy way to be assured that you have covered each requirement is to use a formula (just make sure the annotations are in complete sentences and in paragraph form).
Step Four: You still have to proofread. Some of the biggest boo-boos in annotated bibliographies are:
1. Not putting entries in alphabetical order by author’s last name.
2. Not double spacing.
3. Incorrect capitalization.
4. Missing, or incorrect information in citation.
5. Strange spacing in citation.
6. Ignoring one of the four required statements.
7. Using completely pointless and/or unrelated sources.
8. Common grammatical errors within the entry. (Do sweat the small stuff!!!)
9. Not titling the annotations with a descriptive title like “Annotated Bibliography: The Role of Zombies in Popular Culture”
10. Not using MLA formatting on heading and page numbers.
Sentence 1-2 = Summary of source.
Sentence 3 = The purpose of this (article/book/web site) is __________________________.
Sentence 4 = This source is unique because ______________________________________.
Sentence 5 = This source is (relevant/useful) because ______________________________.
Sentence 6 = As (written/posted/published) in/on _(source description)__ this article is intended for __(What sort of audience?) .
Example:
Dretske, Fred. “How Do You Know You are Not a Zombie?” Privileged Access. Brie Gertler, ed. Burlington: Ashgate P, 2003. 1-14. This essay by Fred Dretske, senior researcher in Philosophy at Duke University, asks readers directly to consider the definition of zombie as “human-like” but not conscious, and honestly consider, not “if” they are a zombie, but “how” they know they are not a zombie. He uses philosophical theories to discuss how our senses, thoughts, self-awareness, general awareness and consciousness provide proof of our “non-zombie” status. The purpose of this article is to discuss human consciousness, and the author uses zombies as a metaphor for a lack of consciousness. This source is unique because of the author’s metaphorical use of zombies in raising important philosophical questions; zombies become a symbol for the unaware human mind. It is relevant to my research because although it provides more than information on the definition of zombies; it starts to look analytically at the idea of zombies (the concept behind it) in its discussion of philosophical ideas and there may be some information here that lends itself to my analysis of the popularity of zombies as frightening because they remind us of unthinking people? The essay, which is published in a collection of articles on philosophy, is intended for an educated audience with some familiarity with philosophical theories and terminology.