代写 Annotated Bibliography

代写 Annotated Bibliography

Assessment One: Bibliographic Exercise  Word count: 500 words
Due: 4pm (AEDT), Friday April 1
Percentage: 15%
This first piece of assessment is designed to familiarise you with some of the basic requirements in producing written work in Arts subjects.  The task  Select ONE of the essay topics from assessment 2 that interests you and produce an annotated bibliography of four sources for this topic. (NB: You might like to use this task as research toward your essay for Assessment 2; although you may write on a different identity category for the essay if you so wish.)  The annotated bibliography should use MLA style and be broken up into two sections:
1. A title and brief description of the case/object of study you have selected (approximately 100 words)
2. Bibliographical details (i.e. author, title and publication details) and descriptions (i.e. annotations) of 4 items (approximately 400  words in total). The items selected must include 2 of the following:
a. ONE peer-reviewed academic article (what is this? More information here:  <http://www.library.unimelb.edu.au/services/help_yourself/online_tutorials >) b. ONE book or book-chapters
c. ONE newspaper article  Learning Outcomes and Grading Criteria  Your annotated Bibliography will be assessed on the basis of how well it demonstrates your achievement of the following learning outcomes:  .  i) identifying, sourcing (through the library and relevant databases) and using academically valid and reliable sources;   .  ii) identifying and summarising a writer’s key arguments; and   .  iii) acknowledging or citing these sources correctly.   These are useful skills which are essential when conducting research and engaging in academic writing.  Useful information for Assessment 1  Annotated Bibliography?  A bibliography is an alphabetical list of resources (usually found at the end of a published piece of academic work). Each entry includes information on the author, title, publisher, year and place of publication, and relevant pages.  An annotated bibliography also contains concise descriptions of each resource, usually of about 100 words or so. Your description should focus on the following aspects of your chosen resource (text):  • content, aims and core argument  • special features: e.g. scope, perspective  • usefulness for your purposes  • reliability and limitations. 
Refer to General MLA style notes on the library website. http://www.lib.unimelb.edu.au/recite/citations/MLA/generalNotes.h

代写 Annotated Bibliography tml  Exemplar 
Below is an example of an annotated bibliography framed towards this task. In many ways it goes beyond the task requirement in that it develops a focus on embodiment as text. This is the kind of annotated bibliography one might produce for an essay on the proposed essay questions – assessment 2. It’s up to you: it would be possible to build a bibliography in relation to gender, race or ideology, or how the intersect in another context (such as a specific event or newsworthy debate, for example) in respect to one of the essay tasks. Indeed, you might find it more enjoyable to research something that interests you in this way. 
Bottom line: You should focus on finding useful resources in respect to the essay question you have chosen in relation to Assessment task 1. Annotated Bibliography Name: Tutor: Tutorial Day and Time: Biological Determinism: Some Problems in Reductionist Arguments.   This annotated bibliography begins to structure a platform from which to stage further research for the coming essay. Refining my research to the broader application of critical accounts of social construction in questioning the self in society, as opposed the the limitations set by biological determinism, allows a comparison and understanding of the epistemological or political objectives of the respective authors. de Beauvoir and Lindsay situate identity in society. Gowaty questions the language ideology of determinist discourse(s) and Lippert-Rasmusson attempts to argue that gender is apolitical. (86 words)   Beauvoir, Simone de. The Second Sex (1949). Trans. Constance Borde and Shiela Malovany-Chevallier. London: Vintage Books, 2010. Print.  This seminal text, first published in 1949, critically poses the question “what is a woman” (1) to challenge the ideals of androcentric definitions of femininity as natural. de Beauvoir points out that, very astutely, ‘one is not born a woman, one becomes one’ which situates the subject in culture. Basically, historically and epistemologically, the gender construct of femininity has been judged as ‘the second sex’ from the perspective of masculinity as the ideal. In this sense ‘man’ is the Subject, ‘woman’ is the Other in this gendered apparatus. This notion of ‘becoming’ is most important as it offers a critical position from which to question our social environment and consider our participation in it. (116 words)  Gowaty, Patricia Adair. “Introduction: Darwinian Feminists and Feminist Evolutionists.” Feminism and Evolutionary Biology: Boundaries, Intersections, and Frontiers. Ed. Gowaty, Patricia Adair. Boston; MA: Springer US, 1997. 1-17. Online.  Gowaty’s introduction is useful for its consideration of predetermined notions of gender difference as innate characteristics that may instead be attributed to society’s influences and the norms and expectations that are socially imposed. Questioning whether evolutionary biology is inherently sexist, in that it prioritises the male experience, this introduction poses the question of whether biological determinist views contradict feminist perspectives of social construction. This text is useful in assisting to unpack the limitations of biological determinism on gendered lived experience. (80 words)  Lindsey, Linda L. “Gender Role Development: The Social Process.” Gender Roles: A Sociological Perspective. Ed. Lindsey, Linda L. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1990. 34-56. Print.  Lindsey argues that socialisation, the process whereby infants and children prepare to become agents in society, introduces them to a society where they are conditioned to adopt gender roles. This article explores games and television programs that encourage and perpetuate ideals of masculinity and femininity and how these gendered stereotypes are reproduced in schools by unwitting educators. The author also points out how gendered titles and occupational terms can at times connote notions of the inferiority of women. This article is useful as it aligns with de Beauvoir’s notion of ‘becoming’ and articulates an understanding of how gender stereotypes are reproduced. (102 Words)  Lippert-Rasmusson, Kasper. “Gender Constructions: The Politics of Biological Constraints.” Scandavian Journal of Social Theory 11.1 (2010): 73-91 Print.  This article explores the competing arguments between “radical” [sic] (73) social construction, according to which gender differences are social and not biological, and biological determinism, whereby biological or genetic factors are proposed to be fixed or innate and thus unchangeable. Arguing for consideration of what this author terms as ‘genetically constrained constructivism,’ where social factors are considered with biological factors, the argument seeks to distance biology from the politics of determinism. Whilst this argument sounds rhetorically reasonable it in fact reproduces the discourse of determinism by resorting to sentiments such as empirical evidence to show that there are innate differences between the genders and that these are genetic. This discursive manoeuver is nothing more than a revisionist argument promoting biological determinism. (120 words)  (Word Total: 502 words not including title or references)  About this example: I wrote this annotated bibliography with a particular argument in mind. I’m hoping that this comes through in some form— even though I have not articulated it clearly, as I would in an essay. Indeed, this annotated bibliography is a good start to writing my essay because it takes a consistent approach to the key issue. See if you can identify:  1. My position on the issue of embodiment and social construction—am I likely to argue that embodiment is a social construction?  2. What sorts of things do I include in my summary?  3. Do the annotations come across clear and concise or not? What makes them so?  4. What do you notice about the structure and organization of the bibliography in formal and conceptual terms (basic 
organisation as well as the organisation of my ideas)?  5. How would you grade this bibliography? (See grading system below)  6. What feedback would you give? 


代写 Annotated Bibliography