Note-making is part of the research process, helping you to understand, consider and structure information.
Good note-making helps you to avoid unintentional plagiarism by carefully and appropriately recording the details you need to use references correctly. It also enables you to focus on the important and relevant information, and to understand and make connections with other materials. Note that copying and pasting onto your computer is NOT note-making: you need to process what you read, think about the purpose for reading it, and write down only what is important.
When you have made your initial notes, you could organise the key ideas to show connections and group ideas together. This will help create a structure for your writing.
Here are some examples of how you could organise your notes, using the tips from this page:
Some students are anxious about using the Internet for their research, while others use only websites because they are easy to search. The better approach is somewhere in the middle. The Internet is just another means of communicating information. You would not use every book or periodical as an authoritative academic source, and you should exercise the same judgement and commonsense when using websites.
Search wisely
A simple Google search for a topic phrase may produce thousands of results, not in order of their academic level! Consider who may have the information you need and go there directly: for instance, a Government website for statistics on British society, or a medical research charity for research reports on a specific pharmaceutical trial. Try Google Scholar or databases like Web of Knowledge (via the Library’s website) to source journal articles.
Evaluate carefully
Academic books and journal articles go through a process of evaluation by experts before they are published. Most websites do not. Consequently you need to do your own evaluation before deciding whether to use an online source. Things to think about include:
|
Cite correctly
There are models for citing online sources in all of the different styles of referencing. The key is to look for the equivalent details to those you would need to cite a book or journal article: author, date, title and publication details. Then add the date you accessed it.
Book |
Website |
Example |
Author Year Title Place of publication/Publisher |
Author/Organisation with responsibility for website Year of last publication (or use ‘n.d.’ for ‘not dated’) Title of website/webpage URL (or DOI if electronic document)
|
The Higher Education Academy 2013 Academic Integrity |
Full citation (in Harvard style): The Higher Education Academy (2013). Academic Integrity Service. Online at http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/academic-integrity, accessed 10/5/13.
In-text citation (in Harvard style): The Higher Education Academy, 2013.
How would you cite these online sources? How could you decide whether to use them for academic research?
1. |
|
Citation |
|
Evaluation |
|
2. |
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23532-early-hominins-couldnt-have-heard-modern-speech.html |
Citation |
|
Evaluation |
|
3. |
|
Citation |
|
Evaluation |
|
4. |
|
Citation |
|
Evaluation |
|
5. |
|
Citation |
|
Evaluation |
|
These sample answers use Harvard style citations and sample access date.
1. |
|
Citation |
Cancer Research UK (n.d.). Homepage. Online at http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/home/, accessed 14/5/13 |
Evaluation |
Established charitable foundation which supports research; clear about aims and objectives; detailed annual reports including financial information. A useful source of information about current clinical trials and resources for public health initiatives. |
2. |
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23532-early-hominins-couldnt-have-heard-modern-speech.html |
Citation |
Barras, Colin (2013). Early hominins couldn’t have heard modern speech. New Scientist (13 May 2013), online at http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn23532-early-hominins-couldnt-have-heard-modern-speech.html, accessed 14/5/13 |
Evaluation |
Popular science magazine, so articles may be simplified and lack details. This article links to the original journal article it reports on, so better to read and refer to that. |
3. |
|
Citation |
Sainsbury, Roy and Corden, Anne (2013). Self-employment, tax credits and the move to Universal Credit. (Research Report No. 829). London: Department of Work and Pensions. NB This is an electronic version with no changes of a document also published as a paper ‘hard copy’, so it can be cited in the same way as the paper copy. |
Evaluation |
Research commissioned and published by government department but carried out by independent academic researchers so likely to be objective and good to use for academic research. |
4. |
|
Citation |
Skidmore, J. (with W. Saturno) (1993-2012). Mythweb homepage. online at http://www.mythweb.com/, accessed 14/5/13. |
Evaluation |
This website has details of authors and dates clearly displayed. However, the simplified language and cartoons suggest that it is not at a level that would be suitable for academic research at university. This is confirmed by looking at the section for teachers, which shows that it is aimed at schoolchildren. |
5. |
|
Citation |
Harrisson, A. (2011). Clinker microscopy. online at http://www.arthurharrisson.com/clinker%20microscopy.html, accessed 14/5/13. |
Evaluation |
Has detailed information about material science, written in a formal academic style, in detail and with useful illustrations. However, it is part of a commercial website promoting a consultancy service. Although you might use this material to help you understand the topic, it would be better to find a textbook to cite. |