Organising and assessing sources is a crucial part of the writing process. When researching, we not only absorb information that helps to develop our understanding of the topic, we also have to assess the strengths and weaknesses of a source and consider its relevance and value in relation to our own research focus. In one form or another, academic writing often requires this sort of appraisal. Indeed, this analysis is central to our critical thinking, allowing us to interpret a topic from various angles through the work of other scholars.
Like other things in the world of writing, there are no 'right' and 'wrong' answers when it comes to how you manage sources: you need to try out options to discover what feels organised and intuitive to you, personally. Therefore, in this guide, we'll showcase several different approaches to keeping track of academic literature, taking notes, and recording your appraisals of evidence.
The tabs of this guide will support you in managing your academic sources/literature. The sections are organised as follows:
Have you ever felt overwhelmed when trying to start an essay because your notes are scattered across two paper notebooks and three different apps...and you can't find the link to a really important article you read...and you can't remember what is where, and down feels like up, and you want to give up before you've even started?
We can't promise that maintaining digital notebooks will magically solve all of this, but this method of managing academic sources has many advantages. For example, you can...
Many digital notebook apps exist, including Microsoft OneNote. OneNote is free to Southampton students, and it works seamlessly with other 365 apps you might already use such as To Do, Loop, etc. If you haven't maintained digital notebooks in the past but want to give it a shot, OneNote is a great starting place.
The video below walks you through how to get started and includes tips to customize your digital notebooks to support more efficient writing.
The word annotated means to take notes, and a bibliography is a list of the things you’re reading.
Rather than reading in a rush and taking notes haphazardly, the annotated bibliography offers a disciplined method to manage sources you might incorporate into your writing. It contains one 'entry' per source you might use. Each entry is usually a single paragraph and comprises the following:
When you are researching, you will probably first scan through a number of articles and choose to keep a separate folder for the ones you find especially useful. When you begin reading through these chosen articles, open up a blank word processing document, or keep a notebook ready. Read through the text and highlight or annotate as you normally would. Then, when you are finished reading...
View the annotated bibliography as a letter to your future self and write it accordingly. It does not need to be overly formal, but it should reflect your own thinking about the text.
If you want to truly get the most benefit, read many articles consecutively and write your annotated bibliography entries for each. As you keep reading and writing them you will be able to connect and compare the arguments in each article. That is the essential skill required for an effective Literature Review section in longer essays--like dissertations.
Make each entry as long or as short as you will need. Transcribing the best quotes from your sources will also make it easier to insert them into your final essay.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC ENTRY→ Lamott, A. (2005). Shitty First Drafts. In: P. Eschholz, A. Rosa and V. Clark, ed., Language Awareness: Readings for College Writers, 9th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, pp.93-96.
SUMMARY→ In this article, Lamott offers a confessional description of her writing process. When she writes, it is a really chaotic and frustrating event, but one that she accepts. The purpose of the article seems to be for young writers to relax a bit in the early stages of writing. If they feel too much pressure to be perfect, then they will freak out too much and not get to those later stages with much energy or attention left.
ANALYSIS→ Her article addresses the reader in a really engaging way, and she writes with a clarity of purpose that seems to fit with the younger students she is addressing. Lamott argues that, “Almost all good writing begins with terrible first efforts. You need to start somewhere.” While I think this is important for students to read for its sense of relief, isn’t it also possible to have a specific place to start? The limitation of this text is probably that it should immediately be followed by some options for how to start in the best way for each student.
PLANNING→ In my essay on the writing process, I would use this in the section on the importance of writers to reflect on their own processes as a starting point to improving. I specifically like the quote above for discussing the need for some students to relax a bit in the early stages.
The three components of the annotated bibliography--summary, analysis, and planning--are designed to plant the seeds of later writing. Keeping track of ideas as you research will not only save time lost later in trying to recover them, but the freshness of the ideas will add depth and immediacy to the writing throughout the whole process.
This method can be adapted to your purposes and preferred organisation style. For example...
The table shown on this page provides a systematic way of assessing your academic sources (with an example to demonstrate how it can be filled out). If you prefer to take notes by hand, whether writing in a paper notebook or using a stylus and tablet, you can still take inspiration from this column approach to record key details.
Please click the Word version of the table just below this if you would like to save your own copy to edit.
| Field | Comment |
|---|---|
| Full reference | |
| Author's background and other notable works | |
| Intended audience | |
| Brief summary of the text | |
| Main argument | |
| Strengths of the source | |
| Weaknesses of the source | |
| Useful quotes (and page numbers) |
| Field | Comment | |
|---|---|---|
| Full reference | Lobato, R. (2009) ‘The politics of digital distribution: exclusionary structures in online cinema’, Studies in Australasian Cinema, 3(2), pp. 167-178. | |
| Author's background and other notable works | Well respected academic in the field of media distribution. Often cited by academics focusing on media distribution and piracy. One of the more influential figures in putting media piracy on the academic map. Other notable works include the books, Shadow Economies of Cinema: Mapping Informal Film Distribution and The Informal Media Economy with Julian Thomas. | |
| Intended audience | Academic audience, particularly those in the field of legal and illegal media distribution. | |
| Brief summary of the text | Lobato examines how the digital landscape of on-demand content is somewhat restricted by exclusionary practices which hinder the supposedly open and democratic nature of digital distribution. For instance, he shows how the on-demand market does not have the diversity of choice promised because of the ongoing battle to secure content rights to show films online. | |
| Main argument | Although digital distribution does have some positive attributes, there has yet to be the open, democratic and unfiltered access to content that many promised. | |
| Strengths of the source | In advancing his argument that digital distribution is not as democratic and disruptive as promised, Lobato covers a good range of points, from content rights to issues of marketing and promotion. Lobato also offers some balance to the argument by pointing out that there are some positive qualities to digital distribution. | |
| Weaknesses of the source | When this article was published, on-demand technology was in a nascent phase of development. Although not Lobato’s fault, this means that some of the material covered has moved on since the time of writing. For instance, there is now more diversity of content online because of the recent developments in content licensing. Some of Lobato’s points could also do with a little more development. This would help to further the complexity and depth of the work. | |
| Useful quotes (and page numbers) | However, while increasing amounts of cinema now circulate digitally, the fantasy of total online distribution has failed to materialize.” (167) “As this analysis of the nascent online VOD industry has demonstrated, the commercial structures now emerging introduce a new and different set of gatekeepers.” (176) | |
