In the early years, graduate students are often asked to prepare annotated bibliographies to evaluate the quality of the sources used in conducting research. Creating simple bibliography seems difficult to the early year student; however, the addition of evaluation of each source included in the bibliography adds fuel to the fire. Due to inadequate or complete lack of knowledge about the proper rules of preparing such bibliographies, students commit many mistakes.
Errors common in annotated bibliographies:
An annotation bibliography must follow pre-defined structural guidelines. It must be neither too long nor too short. Determining the difference between the too long and too short length is indeed a difficult process, especially for students. Thus, it results in misalignment of content with the structure and layout. Simply, it must be written in the form of a short paragraph containing a word limit range between 100-150 words.
For the majority of the students referencing is nothing more than just copying all important information from a research source and putting it into a paper. It means majority do not know what is the exact purpose of giving references or preparing bibliographies. In light of this negligence, most of the student’s research papers either miss the in-text citation of a reference or a detailed reference of an in-text citation.
Poorly- organized references:
Poorly organized references are the most irritating thing, especially for advisors. This type of mistake is the most common in Vancouver style of referencing that use a numbering style of giving citations instead of using ‘author name, date’ referencing style. In Vancouver style, missing only one reference from a bibliographic list or citation from the text disturbs the whole organization.
Too broad focus:
Annotated bibliographies demand additional efforts from students to evaluate the sources (summarize, assess, and reflect). The moment a student know about evaluating research sources, they mostly forget that only highly precise, and to-the-point description is required for annotation. Adding complete stories or personal experiences seems irrelevant; rather, you need to keep your focus relatively narrow. Narrow focus means you must formulate narrow research questions or thesis statements with a clear angle to be addressed in the annotation.
Irrelevant selected sources:
The most important aspect of an annotated bibliography is to describe how a particular research source fits into your context. To achieve excellence in this task, a selected reference must need to be highly relevant to research goals. The problem arises when a student tries to evaluate a mismatched reference while annotating it.
Inconsistency in bibliographic style:
Synchronization between the style of in-text citation and complete reference is another awful mistake. Sometimes when we pick a student’s research paper, it seems that the student does not have proper knowledge about different referencing styles. Lack of knowledge about the differences in a citation or referencing rules in different styles is an ultimate reason that poses inconsistency issues in annotated bibliographies.
One-step reference evaluating process:
As explained earlier, evaluating sources is the main task in preparing annotated bibliographies. Another common problem arises when a student thing evaluation is a one-stepped process and uses either summarisation or reflection to complete the annotation.
Apart from all this, the chances of committing such mistakes increase when a student prepares a bibliography in the end. Annotated bibliographies must be prepared at the moment when you search for a relevant piece of information. However, starting an assignment after making a complete source library can also simplify the process. For creating good source libraries, the experts at professional assignment writing services use a number of automated tools that make preparing annotated bibliographies easier.