- This topic has 5 voices and 13 replies.
-
Posts
-
Why are encyclopedias shunned (in my school anyway)? I can understand when online encyclopedias or even an everyday-use encyclopedia is not encouraged because the articles are usually not in depth. So with this said, why was this source commented on by a professor? His comment:
Generally speaking, encyclopedias are not acceptable sources.
Yeah, well, professor, generally speaking, this isn't your average encyclopedia. :-This is the source I used and that he commented on: http://www.libraryireland.com/Atlas/Irish-History-Contents.phpThis is the main link:http://www.libraryireland.com/Atlas/Home.phpI don't get it, this is hardly an Encyclopedia Brittanica. I know I'm judging without knowing , but it's like he saw the word 'encylopedia' in my footnote and went by that without looking at the source. If he did, he'd see that the direct source was a 50+ chapter book within the encyclopedia.I'll respond back to him after he grades my last two assignments.So would this one be bad as well? ??? I would very much disagree if anyone said to avoid it, because this is loaded with good stuff.LAST day of this professor…YAY.
Your professor is correct. Avoid encyclopedias. You don't need them anyway.
WHY? There are some good encyclopedias out there that cover topics that are difficult, if not impossible, to find elsewhere. I am looking for the Ivory Tower answer here because I have never gotten an adequate one other than they are not good sources.
Your professor is correct. Avoid encyclopedias. You don't need them anyway.
WHY? There are some good encyclopedias out there that cover topics that are difficult, if not impossible, to find elsewhere. I am looking for the Ivory Tower answer here because I have never gotten an adequate one other than they are not good sources.
Encyclopedias are simply annotated references for the general public. They are not meant to be academic research quality sources. It's just the way it is.
Don,Have I ever told you that I despise academic snobbery? That is one reason there is such a negative view of academia in the first place. Academics that act no different to the layman than feudal lords did to their serfs give learning and knowledge a bad name. There is enough anti-intellectualism in modern society without adding fuel to the fire through uppity disdain for non-academics and sources of knowledge.
Don,Have I ever told you that I despise academic snobbery? That is one reason there is such a negative view of academia in the first place. Academics that act no different to the layman than feudal lords did to their serfs give learning and knowledge a bad name. There is enough anti-intellectualism in modern society without adding fuel to the fire through uppity disdain for non-academics and sources of knowledge.
Okay let's put it this way. If you are in the field, would you prefer a civilian quality vehicle or a military armored one? Or would you want to go into battle with a civilian hunting rifle or an M-16 A1? This is the same thing. When you go into battle academically speaking, you want to be armed with the best weapons and vehicles you can muster, and this means the best sources. There is no way around it, and no peer review of your work will stand the test of scrutiny without them.
A specialized encyclopedia is perfectly acceptable and meets all the required scholarly standards (peer reviewed, authors are specialists in the field, etc.).Here's a good example of one that is accepted as a scholarly in the academic world:Stanford Encyclopedia of PhilosophyThese should be treated just as one would treat any other secondary source.And just because one prefers to or is told he should use a peer-reviewed journal instead doesn't mean it's correct, it's still nothing more than a secondary source with the author's opinion and/or interpretation.
Don, I have to disagree with you here to an extent. While I can accept that Encyclopedias are not the preferred source, they are by and large academically rigorous even if they do not exhaustively cover every subject. In the absence of any other readily available source material i dont think an encyclopedia should be rejected. Better to have a source to cite than none at all, or is this not a true statement? Notice I am talking about reputable encyclopedias here and not wikipedia and it's ilk.
I was never allowed to use them at either Kentucky or Louisville. I suspect most universities see it this way.
I think the biggest knock on a regular encyclopedia is that they aren't usually current enough (not to mention shallow compared to academic books) which is sort of the reverse of the knock on Wikipedia… too current (and perhaps embellished). My thought is that both are good for quick and dirty research… giving one direction and a starting point, nothing more.
I think the argument for encyclopedia use is that it can provide a relatively neutral overview of a given topic for the general reader. If information is needed for a paper on a tangential point for the purpose of setting up some larger argument, an encyclopedia could provide it in a straightforward manner.An argument against encyclopedias might be that the author of an entry isn't easily determined so we don't know about credentials or potential bias of the person. Another argument is that because they are meant for general readership, entries may lack depth needed in more serious scholarship. Finally, it may be said that encyclopedias really only report on secondary research, something that you as the student-scholar should be doing anyway. In the end I think that general encyclopedias should be distinguished from specialized encyclopedias that are more germane to particular specialties.
I never had a need for one.
Wish I was so lucky. I have had several times where the only reference I had accessible was an encyclopedia article. Not all of us have access to a good university library. Thankfully, Google is trying to fix that and get everybody access to the holdings of the libararies of some of the most prestigious schools in the country.
I never had a need for one.
Wish I was so lucky. I have had several times where the only reference I had accessible was an encyclopedia article. Not all of us have access to a good university library. Thankfully, Google is trying to fix that and get everybody access to the holdings of the libararies of some of the most prestigious schools in the country.
You don't have access to an inter-library loan system either? Surely you can have materials sent to a local library and then return them there when done. You can have copies ordered as well (for a fee of course). You'll have to do this for your thesis to be sure.
