This article describes some of the frustrating obstacles that a scholar researching the field of applied Chicano linguistics is likely to encounter. Good scholarship in this field is found primarily in dissertations. Sources of bad scholarship (i.e., lacking is scholarly rigor) include theses done in colleges of education, articles in teachers' magazines, and monographs written by teacher trainers. Interesting "non-" scholarship emerges in journalism, in arguments for scholastic curricula, and in many conversations regarding Chicano linguistics. The principal conclusions of the article include: (1) A bibliography on a subject such as bilingualism or language contact is likely to be more useful than a bibliography which is defined ethnically; (2) Traditional sources of information--theses, dissertations, articles, monographs, etc.--are difficult to use for a variety of reasons; and (3) Some non-traditional sources, such as journalism, school directives, and conversations, provide much useful and interesting information (Author/DB)