AP World History - Ms. MacEnulty: Chicago Citation Style 18th Edition

Use the Notes and Bibliography system, you should include a footnote each time you use a source, whether through a direct quote, paraphrase, or summary. Footnotes should be added at the end of the page on which the source is referenced.  A bibliography is required at the end of the paper with sources listed alphabetically. 

• Footnotes and Bibliography
  • When using the Notes-Bibliography system, you need to use either footnotes (numbered citations that appear at the bottom of each page) Each note corresponds to a raised (superscript) number in the text.¹  (Google Docs - CTRL+. )
  • When you cite a source in a note for the second time, you do not need to put in all the information again: you can use a shortened form (Use Author name only if title is longer than 4 words).   CMOS 17th edition recommends using shortened citations – NOT the abbreviation Ibid.

  • In-text citation: "...his theory of assemblages offers “a sense of the irreducible social complexity characterizing the contemporary world.”⁴⁹

  • Footnote at bottom of page (first use of source):  49. Manuel DeLanda, A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity (London: Continuum, 2006), 6. 

  • Susbsequent footnote: 50. DeLanda, 9. (Susbsequent use of the same author should use author's last name NOT Ibid.)

• Shortened Form: 

  • Full citation: (First use of source)  1. David Harvey, “Modernity and Modernism,” in The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 1990), 12.
  •  (Second use of source) 2. Harvey, “Modernity and Modernism,” 12.
  •  (Third) 3. Harvey, 13.
  •  (Fourth) 4. Harvey, 15. (Do not use Ibid.- "in the same source")

• ---

  Bibliography

  • Book:   Last name, First name. Title of Book. Place of publication: Publisher, Year of publication.

    • DeLanda, Manuel. A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. London: Continuum, 2006.

  • Database Journal Article:  Last name, First name. "Article Title," Journal Title Volume, no. Issue (Year): page #, DOI OR URL of journal article web page OR Name of database.
    • Bent, Henry E. "Professionalization of the Ph.D. Degree.” College Composition and Communication 58, no. 4 (2007): 0-145. Accessed December 4, 2017. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1978286.

• ---

  General format for footnote and bibliography entry:

  • Footnote (N):

    1. First name Last name, Title of Book (Place of publication: Publisher, Year of publication), page number.

    Corresponding bibliographical entry (B):

    Last name, First name. Title of Book. Place of publication: Publisher, Year of publication.

  • Book by one author 

    N:

    1.  Jack Kerouac, The Dharma Bums (New York: Viking Press, 1958), 128. 
    
    B:
    Kerouac, Jack. The Dharma Bums. New York: Viking Press, 1958.

Chicago Manual of Style Annotated Bibliography

What to include:  

• Summarize: Some annotations merely summarize the source. What are the main arguments? What is the point of this book or article? What topics are covered? If someone asked what this article/book is about, what would you say?
• Assess: After summarizing a source, it may be helpful to evaluate it. Is it a useful source? How does it compare with other sources in your bibliography? Is the information reliable? Is this source biased or objective? What is the goal of this source?
• Reflect: Once you've summarized and assessed a source, you need to ask how it fits into your research. Was this source helpful to you? How does it help you shape your argument? How can you use this source in your research project? Has it changed how you think about your topic?

How to Format:

• Order your references in alphabetical order as you would in your Bibliography.
• Each annotation should be a new paragraph below its reference entry. Indent the entire annotation 0.5 in. from the left margin.
• Do not indent the first line of the annotation.
• Single-spaced within each entry (the citation and its annotation) and double-spaced between entries.

Annotated Bibliography

Agamben, Giorgio. Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life. Translated by Daniel Heller-Roazen. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998. 

Agamben explores the concept of sovereign power through the figure of "homo sacer"—a person who can be killed but not sacrificed—drawing connections between ancient Roman law and modern political structures. The work is foundational in political philosophy and biopolitics, offering a theoretical framework for understanding state violence, legal exclusion, and bare life. It is essential for studies in political theory, critical legal studies, and contemporary philosophy.

Dean, Jodi. Democracy and Other Neoliberal Fantasies: Communicative Capitalism and Left Politics. Durham: Duke University Press, 2009.

Dean critiques liberal democratic discourse and the internet's role in what she terms "communicative capitalism," where political expression is commodified rather than transformative. She challenges leftist reliance on discourse over action, urging a renewed commitment to organized political struggle. This book is useful for those examining contemporary media, democratic theory, and critiques of neoliberalism.

DeLanda, Manuel. A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity. London: Continuum, 2006.

DeLanda introduces assemblage theory—based on Deleuze and Guattari’s philosophy—as a way to conceptualize social entities as dynamic, non-reducible wholes. He applies this model to various social structures, including cities, organizations, and economies. The book is relevant to sociologists, philosophers, and theorists interested in poststructuralist approaches to social complexity and systems thinking.

Ede, Lisa, and Andrea A. Lunsford. “Collaboration and Concepts of Authorship.” PMLA 116, no. 2 (March 2001): 
                          354–69. http://www.jstor.org/stable/463522.

Ede and Lunsford challenge the traditional notion of solitary authorship, proposing instead a collaborative model that reflects how writing often occurs in practice. They analyze historical and institutional biases against collaboration and argue for more inclusive understandings of authorship. This article is valuable for scholars in rhetoric, composition studies, and literary theory, especially those exploring authorship, intellectual property, or writing pedagogy.