This week’s lecture focused on academic referencing and citation, with particular attention to Harvard referencing conventions. The session made it clear that referencing is not only about avoiding plagiarism, but about using sources to support and strengthen an argument.
One key idea from the lecture was that sources should be integrated into writing in a critical way. Rather than allowing academic texts to dominate the discussion, the researcher should remain in control of the argument, using references to support analysis and interpretation. This is especially important in visual analysis, where personal observation must be grounded in theory.
The lecture also addressed the importance of accurate in-text citation and bibliographic consistency. Attention was given to common mistakes, such as over-quotation, secondary referencing, or unclear attribution. These issues can weaken the credibility of an academic text, even when the ideas themselves are relevant.
In relation to my own literature review, this week encouraged me to revisit my writing and check how sources were being used. I began to refine my paraphrasing and ensure that key ideas were properly referenced. I also became more aware that images and film stills used for analysis require the same level of academic acknowledgement as written sources.
Overall, this week reinforced the idea that academic writing is a structured conversation, and referencing is the method through which this conversation remains transparent and credible. This understanding will be essential as I continue developing my critical report and scene analysis.