Return to class homepage.
 
 

Due: Feb. 24 in lecture class.
 

Assignment: As part of your assignment for group debates at the end of the term, you will need to conduct some research on your debate topic. This assignment helps you get started on this research.

Your task here is to provide an annotated list of references of at least seven sources (at least 2 scholarly, at least 4 print media-- see below) that might be useful for the debate. Each person in your group should compile and turn in a separate reference list (which should therefore not be substantially identical). Before your debate, you will get together with your groupmates to decide which references to actually use in your debate and your team debate brief.   The annotated bibliography will be counted as part of your grade for mentor section.   Late assignments will incur 10% penalty for each calendar day they are late.
 

Print vs electronic media: Print media represent anything that has been published in print form. It can be newsmagazine, book, or journal article. Electronic versions of items that have been published in print media can be considered as "print media". You need to find at least 4 print media references. Electronic media include anything that is available only over the web or in electronic format.
 

Scholarly vs mass-media references: A scholarly reference is one that has a clearly defined date and author (or authors), and which contains reference citations or footnotes. Examples of scholarly references include all journal articles, some books, and some web sources. Scholarly references are what you and others can most rely on; they represent the results of research performed by the author ("primary research") or a synthesis (with conclusions) of research performed by others ("secondary research").   Any reference that has undergone a peer-review process (for example, reviews of scientific studies performed by other scientists) is considered scholarly. You need to find at least 2 scholarly references, which can be either print media (more likely) or electronic.

A mass-media reference is everything else; it is typically meant for the public, and represents either opinion, or a discussion of research performed by someone else whose main purpose is to disseminate information rather than draw conclusions.  Examples include most of the material available on the web, news magazines, and newspapers. Some of this material can be very useful for a debate, but because it represents either opinion or is somewhat removed from the original research, it is a less reliable source of information than scholarly research.
 

Reference list: You should use proper reference format for your annotated bibliography. This means an alphabetized list (according to author last name), with hanging paragraph indents.

References should give:

--author name (if known),
--publication date (if known),
--article title,
--journal name (italicized) with volume (bolded) and page numbers (if a journal article),
--book titles, book publishers, and publication city (if a book),
--newspaper or newsmagazine name.

For web sources, always provide the URL and the date you accessed it.  Also:

-- if an author but no date is given, list the date as "no date".
--if no author is identified, use the title of the article in the source instead.
--if no title is given, make one up which is appropriate for the content.

For each reference you should add a few sentences that give your comments as to what the reference says, how it might be useful for your debate, or anything that indicates you have grasped the essential ideas of the reference and thought about it. For each reference you give, indicate whether it is MASS-MEDIA or SCHOLARLY, and if it is PRINT-MEDIA.

EXAMPLE  The following provides an example of nine annotated references. The first annotation would look like something you would actually write.  This list satisfies the requirements of the assignment by giving at least two (in this case 3) scholarly references, and at least four (here 5) print-media references. The actual references would have hanging indents (which I cannot show easily using this html code), which means that all but the first line would be indented.  Most of the references below were found a few years ago, and the links may no longer work.  This illustrates one of the problems with the web.
 

Anderson M.K. (2002) Hot on the contrails of weather. http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,52512,00.html?tw=wn_story_related . Accessed Nov. 3, 2004.  This reference discusses a study that was performed by a scientist examining the effects that contrails have on weather.  The study found that there was 1.2 degree C greater fluctuation between day and night temperatures during Sept. 11-12, 2001, when airplanes were grounded in the U.S., compared to usual.  The writer appears to be a correspondent, but the report appears to be fairly objective, and there is an actual name of a scientist given that makes me think the information is somewhat reliable.  The study results, if legitimate, illustrate the potential for the activities of people to change weather, but don't  provide any concrete info that climate is being changed by people.  I think this webpage was interesting, but I wouldn't make a big case of it in my debate without finding more information.  It's pretty short on specifics.  MASS-MEDIA.
 

Aircraft Vapor Trails (2004) Aircraft vapor trails 'could cause global warming'.
http://breaking.examiner.ie/2004/04/29/story145192.html  . Accessed May 2, 2004. This is an actual web reference with no author, but the link is now broken only a few months after I accessed the page (illustrating one problem with purely electronic media, and why a date of downloading needs to be given).  As no author was given, I used the first part of the title instead. It is a good example of an electronic mass media reference with a relatively small amount of content. It appears to be based on scholarly research but doesn't provide many specifics which would easily lead to this research. Notice that like the other examples given here, I have not used word-wrap to break apart the URL.   MASS-MEDIA.
 

Black Soot and Snow: A Warmer Combination (2003) http://www.giss.nasa.gov/research/stories/20031222/ . Accessed May  2, 2004. This is an actual web reference. It is an example of a web source that I would consider to be "mass media", but based on reputable work.  The latter scholarly work could be found easily because it is listed in the web document.  The web site indicates a U.S. government (NASA) source, and the name of a scientist who performed the research. Although this scientist is associated with the website, he isn't the actual author of the web document, so I've used the title instead of the author for the alphabetical position. Both the source and scientist name suggest a higher degree of accountability and reputability than the previous two references. MASS-MEDIA, but almost scholarly.
 

Hansen, J., and L. Nazarenko (2004) Soot climate forcing via snow and ice albedos. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 101, 423-428, doi:10.1073/pnas.2237157100, in press.  Here is the actual reference for the study cited above.  Notice that the paper was not yet printed by the time the web page was produced.  A little work would be needed to find this article, which has presumably been published.  For annotations, you could say what the main point of the article is (that soot produced by pollution landing on ice absorbs heat because of its low albedo, and thereby leads to ice melting and atmospheric warming through a positive feedback), maybe how the study was conducted, and was was found specifically, and whether this information would be useful for your debate, either pro or con.  SCHOLARLY, PRINT MEDIA.
 

Bottoms J., Majors D.E. and A. Jones (1997) Models and Madness. Wow Books: New York. This is a fictitious example of a book. I would consider it to be scholarly if it arrives at some conclusions based on analysis of research that has been performed. SCHOLARLY, PRINT MEDIA.
 

Brains Y. and P. Smarts (1976) Girls' value systems: A study of identity and development. Human Society Today 56, 37-49. This fictitious example of a journal article is a good example of primary research.  It might be very technical.  It would probably be a good reference to use simply for saying that scientists with good credentials have done the work, but it might also be a good idea to find supplemental mass-media works that quote this study and would be easier to digest.  SCHOLARLY, PRINT MEDIA.
 

Mandelbaum R. (2004). Greenmark. Discover 25, 48-55. This is an actual print media reference. Discover is a monthly science newsmagazine. This particular article is a good example of something meant for the educated public; it has no references, but it covers a lot of ground and has information that could be useful for a debate. There are no credentials given for the author, so I would assume he is a reporter of some sort and I might not trust this source overly for that reason. But the material provided is good for a debate-- just enough detail to get into issues, without too much to get bogged down in.  If your debate rivals don't pick up on the weak credentials of the author, why not take advantage of this?  MASS-MEDIA, PRINT MEDIA.
 

Ozone Hole (no date) The Ozone Hole. http://www.theozonehole.com/ Accessed May 2, 2004. This is an actual web reference. It's a good example of a web source with no date or author. It is definitely designed for the general public and is "mass media". I wouldn't rely on this without getting back-up, but you are free to use even this type of reference in your debate if you so choose. MASS-MEDIA.
 

Yahright B. (1988) Barbie is not realistic! About time magazine 3, 194-196. This fictitious article is published, but I'm assuming from the title and journal name that it is an opinion piece written for a newsmagazine. So, it qualifies as print mass-media. MASS-MEDIA, PRINT MEDIA.