Project 3: Annotated Bibliography and Researched Stakeholder Argument Essay

Overview:  This assignment has two parts. 

In Part 1, you will work to ask a refined inquiry question to guide your research, find sources to help answer that question, and collect reliable, relevant, and current sources in an Annotated Bibliography. 

  • The AB will have ONE source—the annotation will be approximately 250 words.
    • It is worth 10% of your semester grade.
    • It is due Sunday, April 11 by midnight.

In Part 2, you will take your research from Part 1 (adding to it, as necessary) and write an argument essay for a specific stakeholder

  • The researched argument essay you write will be 5-7 typed, double-spaced pages (about 1,800-2,200 words for the final draft).
    • It is worth 25% of your semester grade.
    • We will use the following timeline for this essay:
      • Rough Draft will be due Sunday, April 19
      • Final draft of P3 due Friday, April 30 by NOON

Part 1:  The Annotated Bibliography (4 researched sources)

Purpose and Focus: 

The purpose of Part 1 is to craft a refined, meaningful inquiry question related to interests connected to your prospective career field/major OR the course theme of cultural studies (which helps you focus your research) and to answer that question. The topic will have to be approved. Nothing political is permitted. You do this by gathering reliable, relevant, current sources, and you’ll cite, summarize, and evaluate four of those sources in your Annotated Bibliography. 

NOTE: 1) Do not use a previous article in the AB (though you may include them in part 2, the Researched Argument, if you choose.) The purpose here is for you to gain research expertise by finding your own sources.

Development for Audience: 

An annotated bibliography is primarily a tool for the researcher; however, when it is shared within a writing community, it becomes a valuable tool for many researchers. For this assignment, your primary audience will be yourself, your instructor, and your classmates (an academic audience). As you develop your annotations for your audience, you’ll need to:

  • Research & read 4 sources–and write an annotation for ONE.
  • Ensure that the sources you use reflect a range of perspectives. You will need to address at least one counterclaim and will need a credible source supporting it. (Consider who your audience will be—and choose sources accordingly)
  • Include at least two scholarly, academic sources, (at least one from Academic Search Premier) Note: just because you found a source on ASP does not guarantee it is from an academic journal.

Genre and Organization: 

The genre for this assignment is an annotated bibliography. Each annotation is composed of three parts:

  • a complete and accurate citation in MLA format;
  • a comprehensive, academic summary of the entire text
    • NOTE:  Copying and pasting the abstract of an article OR summarizing ONLY the abstract are forms of plagiarism. You need to read the ENTIRE text and write an original summary for it.
  • a thorough evaluation of the source that explains
    • what makes the source (author and/or publication) reliable; use at least 2 CRAAP criteria.
    • how the source confirms/compares/conflicts with the information you’ve gathered from other sources.
  • a thorough reflection of the source that explains
    • how this text could be specifically used in your researched argumentative essay (e.g. Is this information valuable for background/introductory material? Are there striking examples that you might use for evidence? Will it help you refute a counterclaim? Think about your stakeholder and purpose.

Annotated bibliographies have very strict organizational standards and formats. 

  • Use MLA format for entire paper (heading, title, header, 12-point font, 1” margins, last name and page number in upper right-hand corner)
  • The title is Annotated Bibliography—it will be centered on the page with no additional formatting;
  • Underneath the title, put the final inquiry question that guided your research;
  • Double-space everything but do not “double double” space between sources;
  • Alphabetize the sources using the first word that appears in the citation;
  • Use hanging indents.
  • Refer to the examples from class on BB.

Style and Conventions:

Your tone and “voice” should be appropriate for your subject matter and the academic context in which you’re writing.  Your text should be grammatically correct and written in standard, edited English. You should use correct MLA citation and formatting conventions and continue using the skills acquired in Style and Convention Seminars.

AB Rubric/Grading Guide

I will look at the entire document to check formatting, number, and sourcing. However, when reviewing the content of the annotations, I’ll randomly grade 2—rolling a dice to determine which ones. You don’t know which (nor do I), so it’s important all 4 are done correctly. No extra credit is given for doing more. Note the highest grade that can be earned without the evaluation and reflection is 50/F.


__________/4 – MLA citation, correct format, correct in-text citations, sourcing (acacemic)

__________/6 – Summary, academic, complete, accurate, identifies thesis, uses quotes/paraphrases.

__________/6 – Evaluation of credibility, addresses at least 2 CRAAP criteria, not generic

__________/6 – Reflection (of how you will use the source in your paper), specific, thoughtful

__________/22 –Total x4________/88


__________/6 – header, complete (name, instructor name, correctly formatted date, page numbers

__________/3 – inquiry question that fits the criteria of a “good” research question

__________/1 – alphabetized, completely

__________/1 – hanging indents, for MLA and entire annotation

__________/1 – double spacing, without extra spaces between sources

__________/12 – Formatting Total

GRADE: __________

Part 2:  The Researched Stakeholder Argument Essay

Purpose and Focus:  

An argumentative essay aims to convince or persuade an audience. It will most likely fall into one of the following general categories, depending on the stakeholder audience you choose:

  • To persuade undecided stakeholders to accept your thesis.
  • To convince opposing stakeholders to be less resistant to your thesis
  • To persuade stakeholders who agree with you to take action

Your focus will be determined by the research you do in Part 1, the Annotated Bibliography.  

Development for Audience:  

The audience for this essay is a specific stakeholder of your choice. In order to best achieve your purpose (persuasion) with your audience (a particular stakeholder), you’ll need to:

  • Carefully consider which stakeholder will need to hear your argument, target them, and work to consider that audience’s needs, values, and knowledge on the issue;
  • Rely on audience appeals: logos, ethos, and pathos. Be sure that the appeals used suit the rhetorical situation.
  • Take into account the expectations your audience has of you as an author:
    • The stakeholder expects that the argument is supported with reasons and evidence from the research you’ve gathered. 
    • He/she wants to see that you are familiar with the conversation on the issue and wants to know how your argument uniquely expands and contributes to that conversation. 
    • The stakeholder would expect emphasis to be placed upon arguing the feasibility of a particular solution to a problem, should your argument lend itself to this particular form (which is especially possible when considering a claim of policy). 
    • The stakeholder (and your instructor) will expect full citations for all sources used and will want clear and concrete writing that is well-structured and organized logically.
  • Demonstrate an informed opinion about the conversation by including at least one counterargument for your position. Accurately and fairly represent and respond to such an alternative viewpoint on the issue. 
  • Show that you have conducted effective inquiry into the issue by paraphrasing, directly quoting, and explaining the source material appropriately and by documenting sources correctly in MLA style. This will bolster your ethos with your audience.   

Genre and Organization:  

Your genre will be a researched argumentative essay.

Thoughtfully consider how you will organize your essay and how you will order your reasons, where you respond to your counterargument, and what information you will place in your introduction and conclusion. To decide between the Classical Model and Rogerian, think about which will better help you reach your audience and achieve your purpose.

Style and Conventions: 

  • Your tone and voice should be appropriate for the stakeholder and academic context in which you’re writing.
  • Your stakeholder proposal should be grammatically correct and you should pay close attention to all conventions of standard, written English – especially those discussed in Style and Convention Seminars.
    • Your argument should be typed, double-spaced, using Times New Roman, 12-pt. font, and 1” margins.
    • Include your last name and page number in the upper right-hand corner of EVERY page.
    • Include a header with your name, instructor name, course title, and due date in upper left of the first page.
    • Include a title, centered underneath the header. It should be more specific than “Project 3.”
    • Include a separate Works Cited page with full citations for all source and should match the in-text citations in the body of the paper. It should have the title “Works Cited” centered (no underlining) above it.
    • Conclude with a SIGNED honor pledge: “I have not given, received, or used any unauthorized assistance” and is followed by your signature.

Hierarchy of Rhetorical Concerns for Feedback and Evaluation:

Annotated Bibliography and Researched Stakeholder Argument Essay

Your project will be evaluated based on the following hierarchy of rhetorical concerns and the extent to which the project effectively achieves its purpose with its audience in the given context. The following Hierarchy of Rhetorical Concerns will be used to guide the feedback and evaluation of the project.

This is the hierarchy of rhetorical concerns for P3.  Purpose, Development, Genre, Style and Conventions.


______ Running header on the top right of EVERY page

______ Last name

______ page number

______ Header in the upper left corner of the first page

______ Name

______ Morgan Riedl

______ E1510 (with section number)

______ Due date, written out European style (30 April 2021)

______ Title, specific, not “P3”

______ Introduction/opening

                ______ Identifies stakeholder

                ______ Makes a claim (that communicates purpose)

______ Body Paragraphs

                ______There is enough of them (4-6)

                ______Ordered logically

______Each is about ONE focused reason (information is logically organized in them)

                ______Uses sufficient evidence (quotes/paraphrases/multimodal/personal story) for logos, pathos

                ______Explains why evidence is important (So what?) to the claim

                ______Contextualizes information for audience

                ______Synthesizes sources for ethos

                ______Correctly cites sources for ethos

______ Counterclaim

                ______Is clearly identified (not with the word “counterclaim”)

                ______Is the strongest possible counterclaim

                ______Is logical for the stakeholder

                ______Treats the other side with unbiased, empathetic language

______Cites credible evidence supporting it fairly

______Identifies common ground

______ Refutation

                ______Identifies gaps or weaknesses in the counterclaim

______Does not commit logical fallacies

                ______Cites sufficient evidence (quotes/paraphrases) for logos

                ______Explains why evidence is important (So what?) to the claim

______ Organization overall: Classical? Rogerian?

______ Works Cited page with centered title: Works Cited

                ______ Alphabetized

                ______ Spacing is correct

                ______ Hanging indents

                ______ At least 5 sources, 2 academic______ Matches in-text citations