‹header›

‹date/time›

Click to edit Master text styles

Second level

Third level

Fourth level

Fifth level

‹footer›

‹#›

Problems:

1.The size and the level of the class

2. No indication of the types of resources students should use (journal vs. reference works)

3.No suggested starting references

4.No mention to consult reference librarians

5.No guidelines for assessing reliability

6.No guidance on number of references expected.

7.No indication that library instruction was given

Problems:

1.Library shelves journals by title, not by LC call numbers so browsing journals is not practical

2.No guidelines for selection criteria (it appears this is up to each student to develop)

3.No indication that students had library instruction (or for that matter, the professor).

4.Limited to only print journals??

Problems:

1.Topic seems way too broad to adequately address in a 5-page paper

2. No starting resources suggested

3. No evidence of library instruction

Problems:

1.How could the topic be refined or narrowed down with such a BROAD topic

2.No need to evaluate items found or even record full citation.

3.Just what is it that the students are learning here about research skills?

Problems:

1.Biographical information may not be available or very limited on some authors

2.So much effort goes into gathering required number/types of sources that little attention paid to gathering coherent set for writing final paper.

Did not put “highly specialized information” in quotes

Used key words in a different order (highly specialized information into language – clients and customers vs customers and clients -- the professions and service sector), did not put them in quotes; did not site source.

No reference to the source.

In this slide, introduce annotated bibliographies and format. Make sure to discuss the idea that the annotated bib could be required prior to the paper (reduce procrastination), with the paper, or as a replacement for paper.

Discuss the difference between descriptive and critical ann. Bibs. Note that not all elements need to be included; can use this list of information to generate a checklist for grading.

1.MLA and APA example of same article – only one entry

2.Several entries on science and writing; may not have as critical an approach as others

3.This one has a descriptive and critical example; clearly illustrated the difference between the two.

Use this slide to discuss additional reasons beyond plagiarism prevention.

If you require certain source information, you can see if students accurately understood the material based on annotations. In addition, if you are concerned about a student’s work based on annotated bibliographies, you can recommend specific works to add.

Compare features/standards of rubrics.

Not acceptable: e.g., certain web sources, material more than X number of years old (except for the classics, of course); how many sources can come from the web vs. journals, texts, juried publications, etc.

INITIAL APPRAISAL:

Author: credentials, institutional affiliation, education, past writings or experience. Mentioned by the instructor, cited in other references.

Date of Publication: Is it current or out of date, is it a classic or historical reference

Edition or Revision: Many printings/editions may indicate a standard / reliable source

Publisher: A university press (likely to be scholarly)

Title of Journal: Scholarly or popular—which do you want your students to use

CONTENT ANALYSIS:

Intended Audience: Specialized or general audience; too elementary or too advanced???

Objective Reasoning: fact, opinion or propaganda? Valid and well researched? Supported by evidence and in other readings? Objective and impartial points of view? Free of bias? Coverage: Does it update or substantiate other materials? Are they primary or secondary resources (raw materials vs research done on the raw materials)

Writing Style: Logically organized, clearly presented, is the author’s argument repetitive?

Evaluative Reviews: Are the reviews positive; considered a valuable contribution? Do various reviewers agree on the value.

Begin by discussing stages and defining stages. Emphasize that you may use fewer or more stages (or additional stages) depending on your goal.

Discuss why this is pedagogically sound

1.Seeing earlier works or versions allows instructors to see multiple samples of writing from student and recognize unusual changes.

2.Allows instructor to see earlier versions and correct errors in citation, such as large blocks without citation or improper citation formats. Can remediate or suggest additional resources (can even do in a group setting)

3.Goes with two

4.If you incorporate oral presentations or discussions with feedback from peers or instructors, students are forced to be familiar with resources used to defend their positions or answer questions.

5.Student purchasing papers will have to work backwards to meet all criteria; may not be worth work

6.By forcing students to work on this throughout semester, cannot save all until end and purchase paper. The study cited indicates some relationship between people ranking themselves highly on level of procrastination and on plagiarism.

Note that no resources offered a great deal of help in managing the additional work required by this strategy.

1.Presenting in groups allows some of the feedback burden to be removed from instructors. Can look at who is having difficulty in small groups, focus on them.

2.Draft material can be compared to final version if concerns arise

3.Can use stages as a checklist with a larger rubric for final paper.