Research Sources to Avoid in Your Term Paper

Go Inside e-Learning with Susan Smith Nash, Ph.D. Get an insider's look at online education by an education administrator active in online career education and professional development.

Her latest book, Excellence in College Teaching and Learning: Classroom and Online Instruction, was co-authored with George Henderson and published in 2007. Leadership and the e-Learning Organization, was published in 2006.

Research Sources to Avoid in Your Term Paper

Susan Smith Nash, Ph.D.

Related Pages:

How to Do Research Online (Without Ever Stepping 
Foot in a Library!)

Dear Dr. Moppsie,

I am at my wits' end. I am taking a first-year composition course and I had to write a research paper. I did research, quoted the material, cited my sources, and got an "F"! I asked my professor what happened, and she told me that I used Wikipedia, and that my block quotes were too long.

I totally lost confidence, so I decided to go online and find a paper I could buy or "borrow."

At termpapers.com, I found a great paper (I thought). I was going to use it as a guide, but I ran out of time (and confidence). I turned it in. I got a failing grade on it, too. I am not surprised, but I am very embarrassed.

Now I'm in real trouble. My professor is giving me one last chance to write a research paper.

Where do I start?

Sincerely,

Frazzled Fledgling E-Learner

***************************************

Dear Frazzled Fledgling E-Learner,

You've been given another chance, which is a good thing. But, don't let this "teachable moment" slip away just because you're feeling like skulking away in shame. Hold your head up high and get back into that research paper! You can do it!

Wikipedia and most other wikis:

For most people, Wikipedia is the first "go-to" source. After all, Wikipedia is what usually comes up first in Google searches. Many times, Wikipedia is a great place to start. The entries provide fairly reliable results, and there are links to other sites which allow one to investigate further. Comparisons between Wikipedia and traditional encyclopedias have pointed out that Wikipedia is often more complete, and the information is more up-to-date. So, what is so bad about Wikipedia? The problem lies in the fact that it is a wiki, and that anyone can add information to the entry. While in theory this means that there is a system of checks and balances, in operation, it has made Wikipedia the site of mischief and deliberate misinformation. Don't let yourself be unwittingly drawn into someone else's lack of complete knowledge, agenda, malicious play, or warped sense of humor. There is nothing wrong with using Wikipedia as a first step, but always be sure to double check the information and to use other information.

Second-order research results:

You're doing an online search and you find an article in the New York Times that reports the results of a recent research project. The topic is perfect, and they've selected the statistics that are perfectly aligned with your needs. You cheerfully incorporate the material from the New York Times, and you cite your source. You are happy. At least, you're happy until you happen upon another newspaper article-this one from the Chicago Tribune-- that is reporting the same results. The numbers are different, and what is worse; there are findings that the New York Times article did not include, due to space. It turns out that the New York Times article contained typographical errors, as well as significant omissions. You wish you had cited the Chicago Tribune article instead of the one from the New York Times article. But, would that have helped? Chances are, the Chicago Tribune article omitted other information that might have been useful to you but not to their general readers. What is the best approach? In this case, the best is to look for the orginal paper published to report the results of the research. It is not as hard to do as it sounds-the key is to look at the article, write down the citations, and then to look them up. Often the results are from a prominent journal, or a government study, both of which are fairly easy to locate. If you're feeling bad about your research skills at this point, don't worry. Almost everyone makes this mistake when writing research papers.

Here is a quick list of other sites to avoid.

• Op-Ed "rant-sites": Many newspapers have online editorial pages that may or may not be reliable. They are extremely biased, which is sometimes good if you're writing a paper that discusses bias, but can be problematic if you're trying to promote other things.
• Unreliable blogs: Some blogs are considered even more reliable than traditional news sources. Most are not. In fact, they can include pure disinformation or lies, and yet sometimes they get picked up by Google, to the point that the lies become so commonly believed that they become urban legends.
• Some online encyclopedias: Encyclopedias sound good. They can be very incomplete. Use them, but be careful.
• E-mails (unless part of an interview): Generally speaking, emails are unreliable unless they are used in very specific ways, such as being a part of an interview.
• Tweets (unless directly related to the topic of your paper): That said, using Twitter is a great way to share information.
• Term papers posted on the Internet
• Student papers for sale or made available
• Out-of-date statistics

At any rate, Frazzled Fledgling, don't give up. Please rewrite your paper and use your own thoughts, and use reliable sources, in moderation. Keep in mind that your paper should be about your thesis statement, and not just data.

Mainly though, write about what you care about. Gain confidence through your own interests. Express yourself and your interests.