Annotated Bibliography Create an annotated bibliography for the five sources identified and evaluated in the attached worksheet, in which you: · Cite the book, article, or document using the a

Currency: The timeliness of the information:

• When was the information published or posted? 

• Has the information been revised or updated?

• Is the information current or out-of-date for your topic?

• Are the links functional?

Relevance: The importance of the information for your needs:

• Does the information relate to your topic or answer your question? 

• Who is the intended audience? 

• Is the information level appropriate (i.e. not too basic or advanced for your needs)? 

• Would you be comfortable using this source in a research paper?

Authority: The source of the information:

• Who is the author/publisher/source/sponsor? 

• What are the author's credentials or organizational affiliations? 

• What are the author's qualifications to write on the topic? 

• Is there contact information, such as a publisher or e-mail address? 

• Does the URL (ex. .gov, .org, .com, etc.) reveal anything about the author or source?

Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content:

• Is the information supported by evidence?

• Has the information been reviewed or refereed? 

• Can you verify any of the information in another source? 

• Does the language or tone seem unbiased and free of emotion? 

• Is it free of spelling, grammar, or other typographical errors?

Purpose: The reason the information exists:

• What is the purpose of the information? 

• Do the authors/sponsors make their intentions or purpose clear? 

• Is the information fact? Opinion? Propaganda? 

• Does the point of view appear objective and impartial? 

• Is it free of political, ideological, cultural, religious, or personal biases? 

45–50 Excellent

40–44

Good

35–39

Average

30–34

Borderline Acceptable

Below 30

Unacceptable

Source:

Bhattacharyya, S., Junot, M., & Clark, H. (2013). Can you hear us? Voices raised against standardized testing by novice teachers. Creative Education, 4(10), 633. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2013.410091

Criteria

Rating

Currency: Timeliness of the Information

This article was received in 2nd august, 2013, and published on September 9th, 2013. The article was revised on September 2nd, 2013. The article is dated on 2013 therefore it is not too old or current. The information is still reliable and no out of date. The link is current and functional.

Relevance: The importance of the information for your needs:

Yes, the information relates to topic even though it is criticism on standardized testing. The authors argues that standardized testing focuses on teaching to test rather than impacting student with content and skill. The topic rightly addresses my research question. The intended audiences are education stakeholders that include ministry of education, parents and school administrators. The information level is too appropriate for my level. Yes, I will be comfortable using the source in research paper as it give some insight on why standardized testing does not provide most important knowledge on students.

Authority: The source of the information:

The article was published by Sumita Bhattacharyya, Mary Junot, Hillary Clark. The Sumita Bhattacharyya, Mary Junot is professor of education and assistant professor at Nicholls State University. Hillary Clark is MBA holder. The authors are qualified to write the topic for they have specialized on education. The article also includes emails addresses: [email protected]. The URL shows Org. which shows this is an academic publisher.

Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content:

The information is supported by evidence because it relies on evaluation of previous studies on the topic. According to Google scholar, the article is refereed or cited by 47 articles. The information can be verified in another source especially where the article was cited. The language use by author is seemed to be unbiased and free of emotions. Therefore there is no spelling, grammar, other typographical errors that I can identify

Purpose: The reason the information exists:

The information published in the journal criticizes the standardized testing indicating that it does not enable student gains much in studies. The authors states his purpose in the abstract where the author indicated that purpose of the standardized testing only focus on teaching to test rather than impacting student with content and skill. The author wants to document reason why standardized testing does not promote skill and content. The information is based on review of previous studies on the topic. Therefore it is not opinion based information other than facts. The point of view appears to be objective and impartial. The source is free from political, personal biases and cultural issues.

Score/Rating: Average

39

Source:

Kinay, İ., & Ardiç, T. (2017). Investigating Teacher Candidates' Beliefs about Standardized Testing. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 5(12), 2286-2293.Retrieved from DOI: 10.13189/ujer.2017.051219

Criteria

Rating

Currency: The timeliness of the information:

The journal was published on 2017. There is no information that indicated whether the article was revised on updated. The information is current as it was published in 2017. The links on are functional.

Relevance: The importance of the information for your needs:

The information relates to the topic on standardized testing and research question. The author reviewed the impact of standardized testing in term of some variables. The intended audience is the teachers. The information is appropriate to my need. I will be comfortable using this journal in research.

Authority: The source of the information:

The author of this journals include İsmail Kinay , Tuncay Ardıç. The authors are researcher associated with Dicle University turkey in the faculty of education. The authors are scholar in the field of education therefore they have right qualification to authors this topic. The contact information is shared in the publisher website. The URL indicates “eric.ed.gov/” meaning this is government database.

Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content:

The information is supported by evidence because it is a study conducted via randomized survey for the selected teachers. The information was peer reviewed. According to Google scholar, the article was referenced on five journals. The information can be verified from the journal used for literature review. The language tone is not biased and no grammatical error and typographical is reported even though some terms are in Turkish.

Purpose: The reason the information exists:

The journal purpose is to examine on variance on beliefs on the use of standardized testing by teachers. The author makes his intention clear by stating the purpose of the study to evaluate teacher belief s on standardized testing. The information is fact as it based on survey study conducted. The point of view appears to be objective. The article is free from political bias, ideology and personal biases considering that the finding were presented in the International Conference on Educational Sciences 20-23 April 2017 Antalya-Turkey

Score/Rating: Average

37

Source:

Shelton, S. A., & Brooks, T. (2019). “We Need to Get These Scores Up": A Narrative Examination of the Challenges of Teaching Literature in the Age of Standardized Testing. Journal of Language and Literacy Education, 15(2), n2. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1235207.pdf

Criteria

Rating

Currency: The timeliness of the information:

The journal was published on 2019 and was posted on fall 2019. No information on whether the journal was revised. The information is current as it was published in 2019. The links included are functional.

Relevance: The importance of the information for your needs:

The information relates to standardized testing. As well the topic relates to the research question because the journal examines the effects of standardized tests on students, classroom climates, teacher failure, and teacher morale. The audience includes student and teachers. The level of information is appropriate for my research. Therefore, I will use the journal for my research paper.

10

Authority: The source of the information:

The authors are as follow: Stephanie Anne Shelton & Tamara Brooks. The Stephanie Anne Shelton is assistant professor of qualitative research in college of education at the University of Alabama. Tamra Brooks is an English/language arts teacher at Paul Duke STEM high school in Norcross, Georgia. The authors have the qualification needed to author this journal. There are contact information about the authors and publishers. The URL read as “eric.ed.gov/”.which a government database.

10

Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content:

The information is supported by expert opinion from educators and practicing teacher. The information is peer reviewed and was referenced in six journals. The information can be verified as it supports the literature review. The language tone is not biased and no spelling, grammar and typographical errors were identified.

Purpose: The reason the information exists:

The purpose of the information is to explain the effects of standardized tests on students, classroom climates, teacher failure, and teacher morale. As well, the authors report issue associated with standardized testing and how it affects literature teaching. The information is based on expert opinions which can be termed as expert opinion. The view appears objective and impartial. As well the journal is free of political, ideological, cultural and religious bias.

Score/Rating: Good

43

Source:

• Knoester, M., & Au, W. (2017). Standardized testing and school segregation: like tinder for fire?. Race Ethnicity and Education, 20(1), 1-14. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2015.1121474

Criteria

Rating

Currency: The timeliness of the information:

The journal was published on December 28, 2015 and was accepted 08, November, 2015. No information was shared on when journal was revised even though it was presented on 2014 and published on 2015. The information is current is it was published five years ago. The links are functional.

Relevance: The importance of the information for your needs:

The information relates to the topic on standardized testing and as well answer the research question on impact of standardized testing on student knowledge. The audience includes teachers and political stakeholders. This information is on level appropriate to be used on my research papers. Therefore, I will comfortably use the journal to do further research.

Authority: The source of the information:

The authors of the article are as follow: Matthew Knoester and Wayne Au. The first author is professor in the school of education in the University of Evansville, USA. Wayne Au is professor in the school of education studies in the university of Washington Bothell, USA The authors have the qualification to write on this topic. There are contact information on publisher and authors. The URL end with com which indicates that this is an online platforms database.

Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content:

The information is supported by evidence based on literature review. The article is peer reviewed and it was cited by more 33 journals. The information can be verified using the literature reviews and information cited by the authors. The language and tone was not biased and no spelling, grammatical error was reported.

Purpose: The reason the information exists:

The purpose of the information to examine the impact of standardized testing on promoting racial coding and segregation and compound inequalities in schools. The journals document the disadvantage of using standardized testing on people of color. The author makes their intention clear. The information is based on other publication finding therefore it is not propaganda or opinion. The point of view appears to be objective. There is not biasness reported in the journal or conflict of interest.

Score/Rating: Good

41

Source:

Setiawan, H., Garnier, K., & Isnaeni, W. (2019, October). Rethinking standardized test of science education in Indonesian high school. In Journal of Physics: Conference Series (Vol. 1321, No. 3, p. 032078). IOP Publishing. Retrieved from doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1321/3/032078

Criteria

Rating

Currency: The timeliness of the information:

The journal was published on 2019 October. No information on when it was posted, or updated is shared. The information is current because it was posted last two year. The links are functional.

Relevance: The importance of the information for your needs:

The information relates to the topic on standardized testing and research question whereby it document the pros and cons of standardized test assessment of science in high school in Indonesia. The audiences are teachers. The information is appropriate for my level. Therefore I will comfortably use this source in research paper.

Authority: The source of the information:

The authors of the journal are as follow: H, Setiawan, K, Garnier and W Isnaeni. The first author is biology teacher in Global Mandiri senior high school, Jakarta. The second author is a scholar in Monash University, Australia and Third authors is a scholar in biology department, mathematic and natural science faculty in the Universitas Negeri Semarang in Indonesia. The authors are qualified to write this topic. The contact information was included in the journal. The URL “iopscience.iop.org/” which indicates an NGO, and education institution.

Accuracy: The reliability, truthfulness, and correctness of the content:

The information is supported by evidence because it is review of literature. The article is peer reviewed article. The information can be verified by examining the literature review. The language used is free from bias and emotion. There is no spelling, grammars errors.

Purpose: The reason the information exists:

The journal evaluates the cons, and pro of evaluating students before graduation. The authors made his or her intention clears. The information is based on fact from previous publication on the same topic. The point of view appears to be objective and impartial. Still, the journal is free of political, ideological and personal biases.

Score/Rating: Good

40