Precis-And-Annotated-Bibliography

Posted: January 20th, 2023

PART I: Précis

Select 2 relevant sources for examination. Both should be scholarly/peer-reviewed.
Read carefully looking for main conclusions and the evidence to support those conclusions.
Write a short paragraph for each source following the rhetorical précis model found on pp. 212 of the Guide to First-Year Writing.

Due in class:
PART II: Annotated Bibliography

Select 3 additional relevant sources for examination. At least 2 of these sources must be scholarly and peer-reviewed. Read each source rhetorically.
Create a bibliography entry for each source, properly formatted in MLA.
Write an annotation for each source, including the first two you examined for the =l précis exercise. Each annotation should be a short paragraph of about 100-200 words including information found in the rhetorical précis as well as a short comment on how you will use the source for your research paper. More information on annotated bibliographies is on pp. 211-214.

Requirements:

5 citations with annotations

At least 4 scholarly sources relevant to your topic (if you aren’t sure if your source is of quality, please check with me)
No more than 1 source from reputable magazines, newspapers, or websites

MLA citations for each source used
MLA formatting
Each annotation should be 100-200 words
No more than one quotation per annotation
Concision and careful selection of words
Sources should be presented in alphabetical or chronological order

Rubric for Research Paper

Outstanding – 20pts
Good  – 15pts
Fair – 10pts
Unacceptable – 5pts

Outline

Excellent section headings, indicative of a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics and subtopics clearly indicated.
Professional looking.
Good section headings, indicative to a steady “flow” to the overall paper. Topics clearly indicated, could use more subtopics.
 
Fair section headings, indicative that the paper has “flow”. Topics and subtopics not clearly indicated. Unclear organization of thoughts.
 
Disorganized appearance.
Relevant topics missing or incorrect, paper has no indicative “flow”.
Not professional.

Abstract

Highly informative, complete and easy to understand. Appropriate vocabulary is used.
Abstract makes you want to read the paper.
Informative, complete and understandable. Appropriate vocabulary is used.
Somewhat informative and understandable.
 
Not very informative or understandable.
 

Structure

Thesis is clear, easy to find, and appropriate to the assignment.
Thesis is supported by the rest of the paper.
Paper contains a “roadmap” for the reader.
There is a logical “flow” to the topics/arguments. Conclusion follows clearly from the arguments presented.
Thesis is clear and appropriate.   Thesis fairly well supported.
Paper is fairly well organized.
Conclusion follows from the rest of the paper.
Thesis is fairly clear.
Inconsistent support for thesis. Paper weakly organized. Conclusion is acceptable.
Thesis unclear and/or inappropriate.
Thesis not supported.
Paper is not organized. Conclusion doesn’t follow from the rest of the paper.

Research

The evidence comes from a wide variety of valid sources. The bibliography is complete and reflects appropriate sources.
 
The evidence comes from the minimum valid sources. The bibliography is complete.
Valid sources are inconsistently used.  The bibliography contains minor formatting errors.
 
Multiple sources cited  incorrectly.
Bibliography missing.
 

Critical
Thinki
 
ng
Arguments are pertinent to the topic.
Arguments are logical, supported with evidence. The key arguments have been made – no major points have been left out.
Arguments are
pertinent to the topic.   Arguments are fairly logical and reasonably supported.
Most key arguments have been made.
Arguments are not consistently pertinent, logical, or supported. Few key arguments have been made.
Arguments not pertinent. Arguments rarely, if at
all, logical and supported.
Almost no key arguments have been made.