Answered You can buy a ready-made answer or pick a professional tutor to order an original one.

QUESTION

Required ResourcesRead/review the following resources for this activity: Textbook: Chapter 8, 9LessonLink (Word doc): Source Evaluation WorksheetMinimum of 5 scholarly sourcesInstructionsUse the Sourc

Required ResourcesRead/review the following resources for this activity:

InstructionsUse the Source Evaluation Worksheet to submit an annotated bibliography of 5 sources that you intend to use in your paper. Prepare a citation, annotation, and evaluation for each source.

You may collect the worksheets together as one document or you may submit a separate worksheet for each source.

Click on the following link for an example of an annotation.

Link: Annotation Example

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, 541-554.

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.

Writing Requirements (APA format)

  • Length: 100-150 words per source (not including title page or references page)
  • 1-inch margins
  • Double spaced
  • 12-point Times New Roman font
  • Title page

GradingThis activity will be graded using the Annotated Bibliography Grading Rubric.

Annotated Bibliography Grading Rubric - 50 pts

You've already rated students with this rubric. Any major changes could affect their assessment results.

Annotated Bibliography Grading Rubric - 50 pts

CriteriaRatingsPts

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuantity of Sources _9627

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

5.0 to >4.25 pts

5 or more sources

_431

Edit ratingDelete rating

4.25 to >3.75 pts

4 sources

_2164

Edit ratingDelete rating

3.75 to >3.0 pts

3 sources

_3519

Edit ratingDelete rating

3.0 to >0.0 pts

2 sources

_2381

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

1 or no sources

_5384

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 5.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality /Reliability of Sources _5246

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

5.0 to >4.25 pts

All works are from scholarly sources.

_6497

Edit ratingDelete rating

4.25 to >3.75 pts

Most works are from scholarly sources; no more than 1 from a substantive source.

_7429

Edit ratingDelete rating

3.75 to >3.0 pts

Some works are from scholarly sources; no more than 2 from substantive sources.

_7047

Edit ratingDelete rating

3.0 to >0.0 pts

Sources substantive or lower in quality.

_5451

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

Few or no sources reach even substantive level; popular sources cited.

_1551

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 5.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRecency of Sources _7484

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

5.0 to >4.25 pts

All sources less than 5 years old; if older, historical significance explained

_4395

Edit ratingDelete rating

4.25 to >3.75 pts

1 source older than 5 years w/no explanation of historical significance

_3559

Edit ratingDelete rating

3.75 to >3.0 pts

2 sources older than 5 years w/no explanation of historical significance

_1835

Edit ratingDelete rating

3.0 to >0.0 pts

3 sources older than 5 years w/no explanation of historical significance

_2174

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

4 or more sources older than 5 years old w/no explanation of historical significance

_5092

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 5.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Fluency of Annotations _8926

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

25.0 to >21.25 pts

All annotations comprehensively describe scope source material; clearly conveying main idea and relationship of ideas in source to the topic and thesis of the essay and how source will be used in essay.

_4373

Edit ratingDelete rating

21.25 to >18.75 pts

Most annotations comprehensively describe scope source material; give sense of main idea and relationship of ideas in source to the topic and thesis of the essay and how source will be used in essay.

_184

Edit ratingDelete rating

18.75 to >12.0 pts

Annotations are well-written but do not describe scope of source material; do not give clear idea of how source will be used in essay.

_159

Edit ratingDelete rating

12.0 to >0.0 pts

Annotations do not describe scope of source material and/or do not give idea of how they will be used in essay.

_2015

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

Annotations lack detail, give no idea of how they will be used in essay OR no annotations.

_243

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 25.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA and Documentation _7412

view longer description

Range

threshold: pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

10.0 to >8.5 pts

Citations are formatted correctly.

_9913

Edit ratingDelete rating

8.5 to >7.5 pts

There are a few formatting errors.

_7283

Edit ratingDelete rating

7.5 to >6.0 pts

There are some formatting errors.

_3279

Edit ratingDelete rating

6.0 to >0.0 pts

There are many and/or frequent formatting errors.

_8949

Edit ratingDelete rating

0.0 to >0 pts

There is little or no adherence to APA format in the document.

_7956

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 10.0 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion

view longer description

Range

threshold: 5 pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

5to >0 pts

Full Marks

blank

Edit ratingDelete rating

0to >0 pts

No Marks

blank_2

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 5 pts

--

Total Points: 50.0 out of 50.0

I'll write free-form comments when assessing students

Remove points from rubric

Don't post Outcomes results to Learning Mastery Gradebook

Use this rubric for assignment grading

Hide score total for assessment results

CancelCreate Rubric

Description

Long Description

CancelUpdate Criterion

Additional Comments:

CancelUpdate Comments

Additional Comments:

Rating Score

Rating max scoreto > pts

Rating Title

Rating Description

CancelUpdate Rating

Rubric

Can't change a rubric once you've started using it.

Find a Rubric

Title: Find Rubric

Title

You've already rated students with this rubric. Any major changes could affect their assessment results.

Title

CriteriaRatingsPts

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion

view longer description

Range

threshold: 5 pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

5to >0 pts

Full Marks

blank

Edit ratingDelete rating

0to >0 pts

No Marks

blank_2

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 5 pts

--

Edit criterion descriptionDelete criterion row

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescription of criterion

view longer description

Range

threshold: 5 pts

Edit ratingDelete rating

5to >0 pts

Full Marks

blank

Edit ratingDelete rating

0to >0 pts

No Marks

blank_2

This area will be used by the assessor to leave comments related to this criterion.

pts

  / 5 pts

--

Total Points: 5 out of 5

I'll write free-form comments when assessing students

Show more
  • @
  • 858 orders completed
ANSWER

Tutor has posted answer for $20.00. See answer's preview

$20.00

**** ** ******************* of Affiliation Smith * W Stocks * ***** ******* * * (2015) ******** *********** ***** and ********* ********** visits for ****** ****** *** ********* ***** conditions Community mental ****** journal ***** **************** to ***** Stocks ***** ******* ****** ***** ** * **** **** ** hospital *********** ***** ** **** ** ********* ****** in *** *********** due to *** ****** health ********** *** ******* ******** **** ** *** community ******** ***** in *** **** ********* ** ***** **** ******** *** ******** ** ******* **** ****** and substance conditions ** ***** ***** **** ***** out **** *** ****** ** visits *** based ** the ********* **** ******* ************ ** **** as *** priority year of the ******** stays ** the ***** it *** ******* **** ********* status *** ****** *********** ** **** were ********* ** the insurance **** *** **** influenced *** ** ******** ** **** ** readmissions ** *** hospitals Sisti * A ***** * * ***** Emanuel E * ****** Improving long-term *********** care: ***** **** *** ****** **** ****** ********** *********** highlight *** ********* *********** **** *** had ** ****** on *** ***** ** ****** ********* in *** ******* ** the article ** ************ ** ***** ** the ****** ** inpatient *********** **** ** ***** is * decrease in the ****** ** ******** *** ***** *** ********** ********* ** *** ******* *** ******** ** ****** problems ** *** * * ** *** ** *** ********** ****** **** **** ****** ** ******* ******* ** financial ********** **** intervention ******** the ****** of ******** *** ***** need ** ****** *** emergency ****** *********** is *** Thus *** ***** of ******* ****** *** **** attributed to ****** **** facilitiesAlford D * ****** * * ***** * * Cheng * * Lloyd-Travaglini * A ***** ***** * (2016) ******* **** ******** with drug use ****** chronic **** *** self-medicate **** ******* *** ***** ***** Journal of general ******** ******** 31(5) ********** researchers ********** ** ********* ** chronic **** was ****** ** **** *** disorders Furthermore ** analysis was made **** focused ** the ************ ** ******* **** ******** **** **** used ********* ***** *** the ********* ******** ******** In *** ******** **** ********* the ******* ** to why ******* **** ******** **** medication ** *** ******* **** patients *** ****** to ******* ***** do ** **** *** ****** ********* *** ******** They **** ** seek ********* ******** ** ensure **** the ****** condition ** ********* Thus *** emergency ****** ********** *** ** **** ** address ****** ****** ****************** * * Camargo * * ***** * A ******** A * ***** * * Goldstein * B ***** ********* * * (2017) ******* prevention ** ** ********* department *********** *** ED-SAFE ***** **** ********** ***** 563-570Miller ** ** ****** **** ******** instances ** *** ****** health patients *** ** prevented ** the ********* departments In *** ******* it *** ***** that suicide *** *** leading ***** of death ******* there *** * **** ** ******* *** ************ suicided ************ ******** ** *** emergency *********** *** universal ******* ********* ********** **** ******** ** ************ measures ** *** ***** it *** ***** **** there **** ******* telephone calls **** ******* on ******** ******** risks ***** people with * ****** health ********* **** *********** are taken care ** ** *** ********* ****** ********** ** address the ********* ** ******* **** the *** ** ************ ******** ** the ********* *********** ***** *** ********** it offers in *** ******** setting Vohra * ******** * ***** ************ * ****** Emergency ********** use among adults **** ****** ******** ********* ***** ******* of ****** *** ************* ********* 46(4) 1441-1454Research work ** Vohra ******** & Sambamoorthi ****** aimed ** ********* *** ****** ** *** ****** ** adults **** ****** spectrum disorder *** ******* ****** the ********* departments The *********** ********* a cross-sectional ******** **** ***** ** ***** ****** ** the ***** of ** ****** **** the ***** ************* 04% ** *********** *** attend ** ****** are associated **** ASD ** ***** ******** which **** ********* ******* ********* ** *** noted that *** ****** ** *********** *** visited the ** **** *** was 2-3 ***** with ****** to those *** *** *** present with *** ** shows that *** are ****** ******** ** cases of emergency ********* among ****** **** a ****** health ***********************

Click here to download attached files: Annotated Bibliography.docx
or Buy custom answer
LEARN MORE EFFECTIVELY AND GET BETTER GRADES!
Ask a Question