A Better Way to Research

It often seems that college professors are sadists. They painstakingly construct writing assignments that are not only lengthy, boring, and complicated, but too point-heavy to "forget" to do. It also seems that they follow each other's lead, assigning these gigantic essays at the same time. As a college student, saddled with four or five research papers due within days of one another, it is tempting to do a less-than-adequate job and finish them all in ample time. However, this is a temptation students must resist. It is, after all, what these sadistic professors intend, as it allows them to grade students harshly. Instead, it is useful to find ways to streamline the paper-writing process. One "trick of the trade" is choosing only appropriate sources with ample information that is accurate, recent, credible, and that pertains directly to one's topic.

For example, one may be faced with a paper on the involvement of French soldiers in the American Revolution. An online search may yield four websites: "American Revolution vs. French Revolution," "Portrayal of the Essence of the French Revolution," "Rochambeau Collection," and "Expedition Particuliere Mount Vernon Commemorative Cantonment." Again, it is tempting to use a source simply because it has a catchy title or because its web address ends in ".org," rather than ".com". Students can avoid many pitfalls, however, if they simply rate their sources, based on a few criteria. Rating potential sources takes very little time and produces a reliable end result.

In the above example, there are four standards a student may use. First, a good source should have abundant, varied content. Redundancy or limited information lessens a source's value. This information should be verifiable through other sources and up-to-date. It should also be produced by a credible author, sponsored, perhaps, by a larger organization, and be free of typographical errors. These things lend to a source's believability. Most of all, a good source should strictly adhere to the subject of one's research. Otherwise, a student risks including information that is accurate for another subject, but inappropriate for his or her purposes.

To evaluate the above four websites, a system of faces may be used. A perfect, or good, score may be issued a smile, :). A mediocre effort deserves a straight face, :|. A very poor result may receive a frown, :(.

"American Revolution vs. French Revolution" starts with a good score. It has plenty of information that compares and contrasts the revolutions' origins, progressions, and endings, and therefore receives a smile, :), for content. However, there is no date of creation, and none of the data is referenced, giving it a frown, :(. Furthermore, it is authored by three eighth-grade students, does not have teacher corrections, and is not otherwise sponsored. Therefore, it rates a frown, :(, for credibility. Most importantly, it is not limited to the subject of French involvement in the United States Revolutionary War, and receives a frown, :(, for adherence to subject. Overall, this site is not a useful resource.

The second website, "Portrayal of the French Revolution," an essay, has hopeful beginnings as well. It is very thorough and creative, includes a lot of interesting information on literature that portrays the revolution, and is well-written. This paper deserves a smile, :), for content. It is dated December 8, 1994, several years ago. However, because its subject matter is historical and because the data contained in the essay is cited, it receives a straight face, :|. The author, Scott Winder, appears to be a college student, lending him more credibility than the authors of "American Revolution vs. French Revolution." However, his level of expertise in the subject is not clear and he is not endorsed by another party; therefore, he receives a straight face, :|, for credibility. The paper's content, unfortunately, does not address the French involvement in the United States Revolution, and receives a frown, :(, for adherence to subject.

At first glance, "Rochambeau Collection" seems to be a very good source. It is dated April 21, 1998, but is properly cited and is supported by the Library of Congress. In credibility and accuracy, it receives one and one half smiles,:) :|. The papers addressed by the site are firsthand accounts of a leader of the French troops during the United States Revolutionary War, and receives a smile, :), for adherence to subject. However, the papers themselves cannot be accessed from this location. Therefore, in content, "Rochambeau Collection" receives a frown, :(.

The final possible source, "Expedition Particuliere Mount Vernon Commemorative Cantonment" proves to be an excellent resource. It is rich in text covering various leaders, including Comte de Rochambeau, French naval leaders, and Lafayette, as well as addressing the Yorktown campaign and the French-American alliance of 1778. In content, it receives a smile, :). The site is dated October 2, 2002, is cited properly, and is sponsored by the Expédition Particulière Commemorative Cantonment Society. In accuracy and credibility, it earns two smiles, :) :). In coherence, it earns an enthusiastic fourth smile, :), rounding out its perfect score. "Expedition Particuliere Mount Vernon Commemorative Cantonment." is, by far, the best of the four potential sources.

Ranking source material is a skill that is worth honing in college students. It is a relatively brief process that guarantees that only pertinent materials be used in research projects. It is especially useful when an assignment limits the number or type of resources that may be used. By choosing only quality sources, one gains the most information in the least amount of sources and can rely on the accuracy and acceptability of the data.

As a college student, saddled with four or five research papers due within days of one another, it is tempting to become slack in one's efforts to complete the assignments. It is also tempting to assault these sadistic professors and rely on their medical leave to gain an extension. However, neither one of these options is advisable or necessary. Simple organizational tasks, such as ranking one's possible sources before choosing one to include in a research paper, lighten a student's load in the long run and gives him or her a chance at a better grade. It may also be helpful to remember that, while the innocent student is forced to write boring, thoughtful research papers, sadistic professors must read and analyze them. An eloquent, in-depth paper may be the best revenge.

Sources: Jacobson, Heather, Nicholas Pardon and Gretel San Juan. "American Revolution vs. French Revolution." Accessed 8 May 2003. http://hale.pepperdine.edu/~kdfletch/revwar/ amvfr.html>.
Winder, Scott. "Portrayal of the Essence of the French Revolution." 8 December 1994. Accessed 8 May 2003. http://www.msu.edu/~windersc/essays/french_revolution.html>.
"Rochambeau Collection." Library of Congress. 21 April 1998. Accessed 8 May 2003. http://www.loc.gov/spcoll/201.html>.
"Expedition Particuliere Mount Vernon Commemorative Cantonment." Expédition Particulière Commemorative Cantonment Society. 2 December 2002. accessed May 8, 2003 $http://www.xenophongroup.com/mcjoynt/ep_web.htm>.