OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this project is for you to be able to demonstrate your ability to find, collect, evaluate, order, and control the bibliography of a significant research topic, using the basic tools and techniques learned in this course.

In the course of this project you will do the following:

• Define a scholarly project (or similary serious professional interest) and develop search parameters for it.
• Search for books and related items in the UCF library.
• Extend your search, using the New Grove Dictionary, WebLUIS, World Cat, RILM, the Music Index, and many other similar resources to locate items not available locally.
• Use JSTOR, Project Muse and other electronic resources, including ILL ("interlibrary loan"), to find and acquire articles and similar items.
• Assemble and present an annotated bibliography of the "best" fifty (50) items that you have located.
• As a parallel project, you will write a paper that summarizes your findings in a discussion of "the state of research" concerning your topic. (See the instructions for that paper on another web site.)

In short, you will learn how to find and evaluate information about almost any topic in music, performance, education, or related fields, which is the most imporant task before writing anything from program notes to extended research papers, organizing and preparing a performance, preparing a lecture or other teaching activity, engaging in music business dealings, or undertaking literally any other activity that requires good information for success.

STEP 1: Define a Topic

Before beginning your project, you must define its limits. The topic must be something reasonably focused and approved by me. You are encouraged to explore topics that related directly to your current or future professional interests, to possible thesis or project topics (for the completion of your degree in the next year or so), or to any other reasonable topic in music or music-related fields that you wish to explore. Please note that such general topics as the "history of the symphony," "teaching elementary band", or "learning to improvise" are far too broad. Instead, you must narrow your topic by such parameters as (1) a specific composer, group of composers, or musical style, (2) a geographic or physical location (country, city, or even a performance venue), (3) a time limt, (4) a specific group of pieces, (5) a single (narrower) aspect of performance, (6) a limited area of pedagogy, (7) specific business practices or issues, etc. You are not restricted to these specific parameters, but do think of similarly logical ways to limit your topic.

PROPOSAL AND APPROVAL OF THE TOPIC: Your topic must be approved by me, and you may therefore want to communicate with me before you submit your formal proposal. The proposal will specify (1) what you intend to study, (2) how you intend to limit your topic, and (3) any questions you hope to answer in your research. See The Craft of Research, especially chapters 3-4, for advice on how to do this.

The typed proposal:

• should be at least a half page in length, but no more than a full page. (Roughly 150-300 words) Use normal 1" margins, 12-point font, double-space the text, and indent each paragraph.
• should be followed by at least 5 basic search terms that you will use to begin your search. Note that these words are to be more than just terms you have thought might work, but rather they should be LC subject headings that you have found and tested (briefly) for relevance to the topic. Also, you are not restricted to only these 5 terms in your work. Rather, these are simply an indication of the starting point of your project.
• is due by no later than 5:00 pm on Saturday, 17 September 2011 and counts for 10% of the project grade. (2% of your overall course grade) Any proposal that does not show genuine effort toward defining a suitable topic will be returned for revision and the grade reduced by 50% per day, i.e., you have two days in which to resubmit an acceptable proposal before losing all points for the proposal. NB. If no proposal is submitted, the same deduction will continue beyond the two days until something is submitted, i.e., you can incure a negative score for the item, which will be deducted from your overall project grade.

STEP 2: Organize and Start Your Search

Before you can search for information, you need some basic background, so begin by reading the relevant entries in The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians (NGD) [Link on the "databases" page of the UCF Library web site, or use the "hard copy" in the library] or other standard reference works relevant to your topic. If your topic is not directly a music, music history or theory, or similar topic, you may wish to explore books and other reference works in education, business, psychology, etc., that better relate to you topic. Online searches and other sorts of "web surfing" may be acceptable at this stage of your initial "brain-storming," but do beware of the authority and reliability of the web pages that you use. From this reading you should notice certain names, terms, and other facts that are important to your subject. Take notes of these, as they (or variations on them) may become useful as search terms in various catalogs and databases.

Next, make your first search in the UCF LIBRARY catalogs. Remember to keep a record of all your searches (in a notebook or as a computer WORD file), noting the exact search terms that you used, how you used them, and the date of your search. If one type of search does not work (either too many items, not enough results, or simply the wrong stuff), try another approach. Remember, also, that it is possible to save and email search results to yourself, which eliminates spelling and other errors. Finally, at this stage of your searching, you should probably save most items, until you have had time to determine which are the best and most useful items for your topic.

STEP 3: Expanding Your Search

While the UCF Library does contain many, many items, it rarely has every important book, periodical, or other sorts of materials on a particular subject. Additionally, many times, the only important writings on a subject may be articles in journals or essays in collections, which cannot be found directly in the UCF Library's main catalog. Thus you need to expand your search through a number of external databases and other resources.

Among the other databases and resources that you should consult are:

• RILM
• Music Index
• WebLUIS and other regional libraries
• World Cat
• JSTOR
• Project MUSE and other online sources of pubications
• Library of Congress and other national/international libraries
• Reader's Guide to Music : History, Theory, Criticism [in the UCF Library] and similar bibliographic guides in music
• Web pages - generally limit these to web sites sponsored by professional organizations and other reputable sources.
• Any other resources, including books, articles, encyclopedias, databases, etc., that you think appropriate to your topic. (Discuss with me your needs if your topic seems unusual or fails to generate many items.)

As with your earlier searches, you should keep a written record of every search you make, including the date of your search, the database or other resources used, the specific search terms and types of searches used, and the results. Good record-keeping will allow you to make new searches that do not duplicate earlier ones.

STEP 4: Evaluating Your Search Results

Before submitting your bibliography, you should evaluate each item, consider which are the most useful, and include only the best ones.

Among the factors to consider in evaluating your search results:

• Who is author of the item? Does s/he have any special credentials (earned degrees, professional positions) in the subject? What other items has that author written or recorded?
• Who is the publisher of the item? How reputable is the publisher and what other sorts of items do they issue?
• When was the item published? Newer items will have the advantage of using earlier research, although some older items by major authors will still have value.
• How many other similar items are available? Even an older book or article by a modest author is better than no resource.
• Is the item reviewed anywhere, and what does the reviewer think of it?
• Is the item cited in the bibliographies of other items?
• Does the item include any special features, e.g., illustrations, an extensive bibliography, etc., that make it especially important or helpful?

For every item that you include in your bibliography, you must include a brief annotation of 1-3 sentences that explains what the item is and its value to your topic. (See below on submitting the final document.)

STEP 5: Preparing final product

Your final product will be a bibliography of no less than fifty (50) and no more than fifty-five (55) items.

NB. If you cannot find at least fifty (50) relevant items, you must be able to demonstrate that you have searched in every possible place. Keep good records of your searches.

Every item that you include must be presented in proper bibliographic format (following "Chicago" style), with the author, title, and complete publication information. Article in journals, and essays or chapters in books must include page numbers. Again, you are to use the "Chicago Manual of Style" to guide your formatting of citations, which should should all be in the same consistent style. All items must be in a single list, alphabetical by author/editor.

NB. Please note that the UCF Library catalog has a "cite this" feature, which appears at the top of every record, which you can use to determine (roughly) what a proper citation might be for an item. Other catalogs may have similar features, and there are links (on the MUH 6916 home web page) to a number of external web sites with information on how to format bibliographic entries. In creating your bibliography, the most important task will be creating consistent, straightforward entries that provide all necessary information for locating the items.

NB. Many catalogs and databases may include access to "Ref Works," "End Notes," "Filemaker," and other programs that format bibliographies and individual entries automatically. Please note that under NO circumstances are you allowed to use such tools in the prepartion of the final draft of your bibliography for submission to me. Any evidence that even one entry has been prepared or created by such mechanical means will result in a grade of "0" for the assignment and a grade of "F" for the course. No exceptions.

Your fifty (50) items should be distributed in the following way:

• While there is no absolute number for any one type of item, your bibliography should be filled predominantly with books, monographs, articles and essays from traditional academic sources.
• Multiple essays or articles within a single larger item devoted to your topic count together as a single item. If, however, only a few essays (3 or fewer) in a large item are related to your topic, those essays may be treated as separate items.
• Redundant sources (especially general ones) should be avoided, e.g., do not include multiple encyclopedia or dictionary entries on the same subject or term.
• Avoid too many books, articles and other items by a single author, especially when they repeat the same materials, e.g., do not include both an author's book and the dissertaion on which it was based.
• You may include reviews of items, but only if they contribute new or independent information on your topic not found elsewhere. Reviews that simply evaluate items should be avoided as bibliography entries, but you may cite such reviews in annotations as evidence of the value of items in your bibliography.
• If your topic deals with specific musical works, genres, or aspects of performance, you may include a limited number of scores and recordings. In general, such items should be more than just any score or recording, i.e., such items should be critical editions, historically important scores or recordings, or pedagogical materials directly related to your topic. (Reminder: the annotation must justify the inclusion of the item in the bibliography.)
• You may not include reference books, e.g., a thematic catalog, a Discography, or a composer's Bio-Bibliography, that would simply be used as tools in a scholarly study of your subject.
• You may include a limited number of web sites that are directly related to your topic. Such items should be clearly superior to all other web sites (and even some printed materials), e.g., have an identifiable author, current and reliable content, etc. (Again, your annotation must justify the inclusion of such items.)
• If you have any question about the suitability of an item (or type of item) for inclusion in your bibliography, see me before you submit the final draft of your work.

STEP 6: Submitting final product

Each item in the bibliography must be properly formatted, with the author's full name, the complete title, series and edition (if relevant), and accurate publication information for the item. Journal articles and essays within larger works should indicate the complete pagination of the item, as well as the year and issue for serial publications. You may use any style or system of annotation that you think appropriate, provided you are consistent in your entries, i.e., all items of the same type must be presented in the same fashion.

Following each item, inlcude the source of the information, generally meaning the specific catalog or database where you located the complete bibliographic information, e.g., the UCF Library, RILM, WorldCat, JSTOR, etc. Put this identifier in square brackets,e.g., [UCF Library], [JSTOR], etc.

Each item must be followed by a brief annotation of 1-3 sentences that explains (1) why the item is included in the bibliography (meaning what are the strengths of its author or the special value of the item itself). Any item without an annotation will not be counted.

The final copy of the bibliography should be prepared in a word-processing program using 1" margins on all four edges, consistent 10- or 12-point fonts, and a logical layout and spacing of each item and its annotation. Each item and its annotation should be clearly separated from the previous and following ones, and the entire bibliography should be in a single type-face or font. Sloppy "cut-and-paste" or othewise poorly formatted submissions will be returned for retyping and you will receive at least a one-day late penalty for such work (even if it has been submitted ahead of the deadline).

The final Bibliography is due in my email as an electronic attachment on Monday, 5 December 2011 by 5:00 pm. The Bibliography itself counts for 90% of the project grade.

Note carefully the following deadlines for submitting your work and my critera for judging it:

• Proposal: due: by 5:00 pm on Saturday, 17 September 2011 (10% of the project grade)
• Grading of the proposal will be based primarily on the coherence and viability of the proposal as a research topic, i.e., how well have you defined the parameters of what you intend to investigate.
• Annotated Bibliography: due by 5:00 pm on Monday, 5 December 2011 (90% of the project grade)
• Grading of the Bibliography will be based on the following criteria:
  • 2 points are available for each item on the Bibliography (50 items = 100 points), with one point for the presentation and formatting of each item, and one point for the annotation and the relative worth of the item to your topic.
  • You may submit up to 55 items, with the additional 5 items graded by the same criteria as all others, i.e., it is possible to earn up to ten extra credit points for those items.
  • Properly formatted entries receive one point each, with the (very) occasional missed comma, minor typo or other insignificant error overlooked or forgiven. Frequent minor errors, e.g., more than 3-4 such errors in the entire bibliography, however, may be penalized.
  • Significant errors of omission (or commission) that hinder the locating of an item, such as missing (or incorrect) page numbers, volumes, publishers, etc., will receive a 0.5 deduction for the item.
  • Serious errors that make the locating of an item impossible (or nearly so), such as wrong names, incorrect titles, etc., will receive a full point deduction.
  • Annotations that describe an item in only vague terms, i.e. without supporting evidence (a review, credentials of the author, description of a specific value within the item, etc.), will receive a 0.5 deduction for the annotation.
  • Items judged by me to be of dubious or questionable value, even if the anotation is well done, may receive either a 0.5 or a full-point deduction. NB. In no case will the deduction for a single item exceed the 2 points available for it.
  • Any fabricated entries will be cause for rejecting the entire project with a grade of "0".