Masters lecturer banning ALL books as sources?!?

[Ahsoka2001]

I've just started an MA in a marketing-related subject and my first essay is due tomorrow. My tutor has always said that the textbook for this module (Marketing: An Introduction) is not a suitable source and not something we can reference. I thought, fair enough, it's mainly an educational tool (similar to Pearson textbooks, etc) and isn't really academic.

However, today he clarified to me that ALL books are banned from being cited - even if they're peer-reviewed, academic works by reputable scholars. Only journal articles are acceptable as sources. Even if I'm citing a theory that originated in a book, he wants me to cite a journal article that references the theory (e.g. Smith, 2021 as cited in Jones, 2022).

I find this very bizzare. It's one thing to ban Wikipedia and whatnot, but to forbid ANY form of book and only allow articles? What purpose is this rule meant to serve? Has anyone else had experience of this?

Yes, I know I could just ask him, but I don't feel he's a tutor I can just approach with a lot of questions, for various reasons.

A wild guess but maybe he finds that students get one or two books and take all their info from there rather than reading up on lots of different relevant articles from different journals? Maybe a way to get everyone to read around more?

Yes, I had this experience. I guess there are the basic books that must be read but journals are more up to date?

I think it's fairly standard in a lot of subjects, as books are not regarded as primary sources. Was the same for my recent post-grad nursing course.

Is it just this essay / module? Or will it be everything you write? If it's a one off, I agree with @Choconut it might just to to force encourrage you to read around the subject, and to make sure you're looking at up to date info

OK, interesting. I always thought peer-reviewed, academic books were just as "worthy" as journal articles but guess I was wrong. Thanks

Standard when I was at university, we weren't able to cite books either. Had to be peer reviewed journals / articles.

When you say tutor, do you mean that he is the lecturer who convenes the course or he is a tutor who takes seminars and someone else convenes the course or programme?
I think it is completely bizarre that academic books cannot be used. It would be bad practice not to consult the original theory and just say what others have said about it. Of course, depending on the question, you might need to engage with subsequent debate, but a blanket rule on no books is bad scholarship. Can you imagine a journal article which did not refer to key academic texts where they were relevant, because they are books?

I did my masters 20 years ago in a different subject but yes we were meant to reference all journals not textbooks.

Journal articles are not primary sources either though!

It takes so long for a book to be published that the research it is based on can be out of date very quickly, journal articles tend to be much more current. I'm a lecturer, in a different subject, and we prefer students to use recent articles unless citing seminal work from books

He's not the head of the subject/degree but he is in charge of the module that this essay is for.

I agree, I found it surprising that peer-reviewed journal articles reference books all the time and we can't.

Hippychickmama but that’s the point ‘unless citing seminal work from books’! Books allow authors to develop much longer, more sophisticated arguments and bring things together in a way that journal articles don’t. Good scholarship engages with both as relevant.

Not typical in the discipline I'm in. Maybe it's different in marketing?

But it would be considered very wrong to cite a journal article that cites the original book, rather than the original book at masters level where I am, in the disciplines I know about. I'm thinking of history, social theory, etc. And then, of course, some primary sources are books!

Obviously, marketing is likely to be different to history, generally, but if a key theory, academic debate, or author originated in an academic book that can and should be cited, surely? I don't understand why it's better to cite someone citing the original academic than cite the original academic at source?

If full academic papers can cite the book, then why can't a student?

Text books are very different.

Oh I agree, there are some modules I teach on that rely heavily on books as they are based on seminal theories that haven't changed in many years. There are other modules where books really aren't appropriate due to the rate at which evidence emerges, maybe OP's module is one where this is the case

hippychickmama but then I would think the point is to teach students to tell the difference, not just to say ‘no books’? i am not an expert in marketing, having done it many moons ago as an undergrad for a year, but I cannot imagine there are no relevant books at all.

Books were frowned upon when I did my masters. We got away with using them for the first module but thereafter we were pulled up if we used more than 1 and even then it had to be because there was absolutely nothing else.

I suppose PPs have given the reason why, but I find this bizarre. When publishing in my STEM discipline, unless the paper is anticipated to have a very narrow audience who will all know the standard background, it is typical to cite books for the slightly older major results rather than to cite the original sources. Having been incorporated into books for doctoral level students and researchers is often a marker of quality or importance for a result.

I would have thought that encouraging PG students to understand the different levels of and uses for books would be much more useful than banning them.

And law is a different more complicated other ball game too (due to case law, statutes and leading textbooks eg Chitty quoted in court etc,) but I won't muddy the waters for that field....

Maybe the academic has set this as a learning exercise to force students to engage and become familiar with the journals, and to learn to develop and synthesise their own arguments. Nobody is saying you can’t ever use books again, just for this exercise. It’s a great idea.