Does the annotation include the following 3 key elements?
How does one evaluate a source? There are two methods:
Method 1:
Example:
Several references to leading wildlife preservation organizations provide a handy resource for beginning students and researchers.
Method 2:
Examples:
Although dated, covers key issues such as ______ and research on _______ that inform later studies.
The scope of research is narrow regarding its focus on ________, but proves extremely useful to __________.
The issues cover a wide scope, proving useful to ___________.
Although useful for specific studies on __________________, insufficient space is devoted to _____________.
Informative and persuasive research, but does not propose a solution to ________________.
Editing the annotation's prose style:
The two key elements:
Using brevity of language:
Example:
There are problems in trying to put laws into effect that would preserve prairie dogs.
Revise for brevity:
Passing laws to effect prairie dog preservation has met opposition.
And sometimes a sentence says the same thing even if you cut a few words:
Example:
There are problems in trying to put laws into effect that would preserve prairie dogs.
Also, avoid stating that it is the source making the claim you summarize because that is a given.
Example:
This article argues that funding for alternate fuel sources is insufficient.
Revise for brevity:
Funding for alternate fuel sources is insufficient.
Scholarly tone:
Example:
The species needs a lot of land to roam on.
Revise for scholarly tone:
The species requires much land for roaming.