In the Narrative essay you will be providing an APA Reference for each of 4 career-related Internet sources. For each Reference you will need to write an annotation, which is where you show how you have evaluated the sources that you are using.
1. An annotation is a single paragraph of several (4) sentences . The annotation summarizes briefly the content of the source.
2. In each annotation, you will choose from any (at least) two of the following criteria to help you evaluate it.
(1) Accuracy (2) Authoritativeness (3) Objectivity (4) Coverage (5) Currency
3. In one sentence: your annotation summarizes the central theme (what’s the whole point?) of the article.
4. In one sentence: your annotation describes the scope, or what the article actually covers.
5. In one to two sentences: (a)evaluate the authority or background of the author, (b) comment on the intended audience, (c) compare or contrast this work with another you have cited, or (d) explain how this work backs up or supports your topic.
The following example uses the APA format for the journal citation.
Waite, L. J., Goldschneider, F. K., & Witsberger, C. (1986). Nonfamily living and the erosion
of traditional family orientations among young adults. American Sociological Review, 51 (4), 541-554.
Here is a good annotation.
The authors, researchers at the Rand Corporation and Brown University, use data from the National Longitudinal Surveys of Young Women and Young Men to test their hypothesis that nonfamily living by young adults alters their attitudes, values, plans, and expectations, moving them away from their belief in traditional sex roles. They find their hypothesis strongly supported in young females, while the effects were fewer in studies of young males. Increasing the time away from parents before marrying increased individualism, self-sufficiency, and changes in attitudes about families. In contrast, an earlier study by Williams cited below shows no significant gender differences in sex role attitudes as a result of nonfamily living.
1. Authoritativeness: who are they? What makes them an authority? Are they experts? The credentials of the Web site’s author and his/her affiliation are identified. Or the backgrounds of members of a sponsoring organization are provided. Or the expertise of the sponsoring organization is acknowledged easily by looking at other sites. The Web domain of the source shows one of the following: .gov for a government publication; .org for a professional association or organization; or .edu for an educational institution. (In the example above, these are university based researchers using government data. You can likely trust them.)
2. Objectivity: does the site use good, believeable data? Is it FAIR? Do they have anything to gain by writing it? The purpose of the site is stated, as well as any bias. The content consists mostly of facts and descriptions, or an argument is presented with a fair representation of different points of view. No advertising and commercial sponsors are associated with a Web site in a way that could influence the content. (In the example above, these are university based researchers using government data. They are probably going to be fair. They are using good data for their facts.)
3. Accuracy: Can one or more individual authors (exclude webmasters) and a sponsor can be identified and contacted? Are references, citations, or other documentation of evidence made available so a reader can verify claims made in a source? When I check independent sources, such as database articles, are the claims and facts made by the site backed up? Do the independent sources support what my site says? (In the example above, these are university based researchers using government data. You can likely contact them or their department.)
4. Currency: The source shows a recent copyright and/or revision date. Is it up to date? Be careful. Just because a site was recently updated doesn’t mean the information is up to date, or for that matter, accurate. (In the example above, this is an old study. Do you think the data is still valid? Do you really want to use this source after all? Remember, you are graded on the quality of your sources, too.)
5. Coverage: The scope of the discussed topic is adequate in regard to the site’s purpose. The links cross-reference a variety of sources for additional information. The source does not restrict access through fee requirements, copyright restrictions, or special registration and affiliation. (In the example above, there are no links because it is too old. But, does it charge? Do you have to be a member of anything? If so, what exactly do you have to be a member of, and does that affect how biased the information is?)
