What Makes a Bibliographic Annotation Useful to Students in English 330?. 

        Some of you will learn all you need to know about them by skimming the previous classes' notes and looking for the best ones at: "Previous  English Chaucer Seminars' Annotated Bibliographies."  I want to make sure I've been fair about revealing my agenda in assigning them.  Keep in mind that we're explorers in that old-fashioned, "pith-helmet" sense of people who are traveling in a strange place, not knowing exactly what will be the most important thing we will find, but having some preliminary assumptions we will be testing.  Above all, listen carefully to what you read.  Be prepared to have your mind changed if the evidence and argument are persuasive.  That's one way to define "education."

•          Before you write, pick an article or book chapter from an author who's working at the same level we are.  They should be scholarly, not "pop" pieces, and they should write in those forms that scholars use in order to help their colleagues test their assumptions, consult their sources, and extend their work to new lines of thinking (i.e., some kind of references section, attention to accuracy and logic, avoidance of any pandering to the audience's prejudices).  That will rule out a whole world of light-weight opinion mongering that passes for authority in public debates about education in recent years, but that's the point.  We want to know the truth, but we don't want to become pawns in some kind of political theater.  If you have an article or chapter that fits those criteria, skim it to see whether it's convincing and useful, and if it looks hot, settle in to read it carefully before you write your note.  (Especially at the start, if you're unsure whether you've got the right kind of piece to annotate, just ask me and I'll help you decide.)

•      These bibliographic annotations first have to tell us quickly enough about the article or book chapter so we know whether we would be well-rewarded by taking time to read it ourselves.  You may have produced annotations for other courses (or seen published annotated bibliographies) which are composed only of a few phrases or two to three sentences, but those are designed to prove to the teacher that you actually found enough pieces to satisfy the assignment.  They're not useful working documents because they are not likely to reveal enough about the article/chapter to fully inform beginning students of composition processes so that they can decide whether to take the plunge to read it themselves.  That means we need to know the article's/chapter's thesis, what kind of supporting evidence it uses, the methodology used to gather it (if it reports experimental results), and its most important theoretical assumptions.  If it's just based on the author's experience as a reader of Chaucer, tell us that.  If the author studied the use of terms for love in all of Chaucer' fabliaux, tell us that.  Use this part of the writing to practice concise summary as a nod to your readers' needs for efficient, accurate information.  "Theory" will be easier to describe if you have taken English 215, but if you can't figure it out for now, ask me and I'll help you tease out what assumptions the author brings to the table.

•      Once you've laid out the article/chapter in that "X-ray" paragraph, let us know what you think.  Why did this piece attract you and why should we be interested in that approach to what we're exploring?  How did the piece deliver on your expectations?  How can it help us to answer the questions that you think are important about how we read Chaucer, how we read the comparison author for one of Chaucer's genres, what cultural contexts we use to interpret medieval literature, etc.?  This is at least as important as the summary portion of the annotation, and it might stretch beyond a paragraph if you begin to run with the ideas.  In fact, that's a good sign you are beginning to see those connections we seek.  It may tell you that you've found a presentation or paper topic.  Be rational and fair-minded in your response, of course.  This is where your own preconceptions can really hurt analysis if they are not as fully understood as those brought to the piece by its author.  Don't be too easily impressed just because something found its way into print, but don't waste your time annotating a piece that at first glance you find lacking some fundamental scholarly quality.  It might be worth a "flame" posting in the public folder if you just can't contain your outrage/hilarity/disgust, but remember we're moving fast through complicated terrain--don't load your pack with junk.

•      As you describe the piece and as you respond to it, try to make connections to what else we have read and talked and written about.  When you can, forge networks of relationships between this writing you are bringing to our attention and the ongoing conversation we have undertaken.  Don't be afraid to point our attention back to previous responses on the public folder, readings in the Riverside Chaucer or non-Chaucerian texts, other students' bibliographic annotations, or what you have learned in other classes.  This "analysis" stage doesn't have to be terribly long (in the past, two to three paragraphs of moderate length has done the job), but it should be thoughtful and alert.

•      Finally, before you send it to me, edit your work at least to remove mechanical errors.  Start your note with a proper bibliographic description of the article, formatted in MLA style, using a hanging indent (from the Format-->Paragraph menu in Word) rather than faking it with tabs or spaces.  End each note with your name and the date so that I can organize them.  Keep in mind that these will be posted on the Internet within days of your posting it to the public folder, and I do not copy-edit them before I put them on the web page.  If you discover, after the fact, that you've let some particularly galling error slip by, I would be happy to accept your revised version, pull the whole note and post a replacement which you have re-edited.  Why am I doing this?  You are student-scholars of Chaucer in a Goucher College seminar.  This is the highest level class we teach in the English Major.  That means all of our reputations are affected depending on whether your work is well-done or flawed.  I recognize that, though you are talented, you are not yet producing authoritative writing because you are not used to "seeing yourself in print."  Nothing else cures writers of their last, most stubborn stages of laziness and inattention like the thought that people around the world can see their writing.  Links to these bibliographies are on the Chaucer seminar web site to help the other Chaucer students (like those in English 211, for instance) who want to find relevant research.  Our hit rates indicate that this site is being visited by people from other institutions, as well, which was our hope in starting this bibliography in 1994.  This is your chance to polish your prose style while you make a serious contribution to the understanding of Medieval literature.  Let's make the most of it.