The Noble Art of Referencing

From The English Companions, an 
Anglo-Saxon history society website

[First published June 2014]

(Originally written for my DD101 students, bless them. NB - DD102 students, some of the ideas here are the same but they come from a different set of text books.)

Referencing is like writing in Runes to many students - an incomprehensible and arcane knowledge which they had previously thought was only practiced by characters in Lord of the Rings. For many of my colleagues, referencing has always seemed obvious so they are a bit bemused by how confusing the students find it. However I too used to wonder when to use 'cited' and when to say 'quoted'; I too felt like someone stumbling through Mordor towards the Black Gate (Tolkein 1966), wondering why on Middle Earth you would have to give the place of publication in the final list.

I usually start explaining referencing by considering why we bother. When you can see the purpose of it, it's much easier to get your head around why it's done in the way it is done.

You should reference, because

1 - your tutor will get irate and grumpy with you if you don't.

2 - you will gain a lot of lovely ticks and extra marks, even if you just try to do some referencing. At least if you try, your tutor can explain where you are going astray with it - and who knows, you might even get it right. If you don't reference properly, by the end of the module we tutors are told not to mark your essay in the higher grades - no matter how brilliant your thinking in it is.

3 - you may be accused of plagiarism if you don't reference. You can see that I have mentioned where I found the images I use in this blogpost. I don't want to take credit for these pictures, so I tell readers of the blog where I found them. In the same way, you should reference so you show you're not pretending someone-else's good idea was yours.

4 - referencing allows you to summarise things. Students often say they don't want to put in a lot of references because it means they are having to use extra words, but you can use the reference to save words.

For example, if I want to write about the Open University in this blogpost, I could trot out lots and lots of stuff about it. Or I could just say: I teach for the Open University. You can click on the hyperlink and find out all about it, if you want to, and if you already know it all, you can just skip over to the next bit.

The Rosetta Stone, from the British Museum. 
(When Piglet and I went, the crowds 
were so thick that we couldn't get near 
enough to see it. Eventually I said: 
"Gosh, let's just get it in chocolate from 
the gift shop. We can read it and eat it!")

 Well, referencing is like really old-fashioned hyperlinking. Back in the day when there was no internet (oh yes, dear child, there was once such a time) and academics just used to carve our thoughts out on rocks, we sometimes wanted to mention somebody-else's crystal thoughts. So people developed this system of putting a little blurb in brackets in the text, then you can jump down to the final list of references to find the details of the book or chapter or whatever you want to follow up, then you can go and get the book out of the library and read all about it.

So, if I want to write about the idea that people are split into two groups of consumers: the 'seduced' and the 'repressed', I could spend a lot of words burbling on about it. Or I could just write (Bauman 1988). 

4a - now, now, wait a minute! I acksherly didn't read Bauman's book. Why should I go and get Bauman's book out of the library and read the whole thing when Kevin Hetherington has helpfully summarised it all for me in the module text book anyway? But that means that I'm not reely entitled to write (Bauman 1988) in my essay. Anyway, I want to show that I read about Bauman in Hetherington's chapter, then people realise that I read Bauman and I also read Hetherington's ideas about Bauman. What I should write is "Bauman (1988) cited in Hetherington (2009 pp.25-31)". BTW, I am saying 'cited' rather than 'quoted' because Hetherington talked about Bauman, he didn't directly quote him.

You can go to the bottom of this blogpost and find the full reference to Hetherington's chapter, where I read all about Bauman. But I have not put in Bauman's book, cuz I never read that so I don't need to list it there. If you want to know more about Bauman, you should go and read about him in Hetherington yourself, not expect me to do it all for you.

5 - Now that I have referenced Bauman and Hetherington in my essay, I have not only got good marks from my tutor for making the effort to reference, and saved some words. I have also got some additional backup for my writing. I usually describe it like playing rugby. If you're playing on your own, you're not going to do well against a team of 15 hulky big players. When you write an essay, don't just do it all on your own ideas. If you use Bauman, Hetherington and a bit of Vivienne Brown, you look more impressive than if you just say: "I think x, y and z." Check out this bit of stuff I've written and see how academic and proper it looks with Brown on my side:

Rubbish can be considered to be something of no value. However 'value' is a slippery concept (Brown 2009 p.105). Things which are of no value to one person, may have value for someone-else.

Since I have cited Brown here, I have also included her chapter in the list of references at the bottom of this blogpost.

See, referencing is easy! In the text of your essay, you just have to write (author's surname, date of publication of book, page number) and then at the bottom of your essay, you write Author's surname, Initial, Date of publication, 'Title of Chapter' (that goes in quote marks), Title of Book (put that in italics), Place of Publication, Publisher.

From Wikipedia.

God (or maybe Gandalf) knows why you have to give the place of publication. I have asked around about this and nobody has ever given me a satisfactory answer. Probably it's in case you want to saddle a horse and ride all the way to that place of publication, and make the publishers set up the amazing new printing press which they bought off Mr. Caxton yesterday and run you off a copy of the book.

References
Brown, V. (2009) ' Rubbish society: affluence, waste and values', in Taylor, S., Hinchcliffe S., Clarke, J. and Bromley S. (eds) Making Social Lives, Milton Keynes, The Open University.
Hetherington, K. (2009) 'Consumer Society? Shopping, consumption and social science', in Taylor, S., Hinchcliffe S., Clarke, J. and Bromley S. (eds) Making Social Lives, Milton Keynes, The Open University. 
Tolkein, J.R.R. (1966) The Two Towers (second edition) London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

(In case you're wondering, 'eds' is short for 'editors' - they are the editors of the book.)

I know the first two references are right cuz I just copied them out of the Assignment Booklet - there, how easy is that. 

My colleague Rob Parsons made this suggestion about why we have to put the place of publication in the reference. (He also has a very good blogpost on why to reference at: http://reallyusefulknowledge.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/tao-of-referencing.html)