Annotated BibliographyCreate 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 appropriate style.·         Write a concise annotation that summarizes the central theme and scope of the book or article. Include one or more sentences that (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 illuminates your bibliography topic of  Standardize testing: Research Question: Is standardized testing a good measurement of knowledge for the student as well as the success of the teacher?.·         Identify whether the article is credible and useful.·         Ensure each source includes four parts: author or organization, publication date, title, and how to find it. If you have trouble finding these details, then re-evaluate the credibility of your source. If needed, include page number as a fifth part.When reviewing the 5 to 7 articles pay close attention to how the author describes the step-by-step approach to his or her own research efforts. For example, look for the following seven keywords below and briefly summarize how the author describes:Purpose of the researchProblem statementResearch questionGaps in the literatureTheoretical frameworkResearch method or design Qualitative Findings and conclusionThe Annotated bibliography must be double-spaced, 12-point font. All references must be cited using SWS style attached.
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
CRAAP Test Worksheet CRAAP Test Worksheet Select five sources related to your research topic. Use the guide below to help you evaluate the sources. Research Topic:  Standardize Testing: Research Question: Is standardized testing a good measurement of knowledge for the student as well as the success of the teacher? 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 Is the information current or out-of-date for your topic?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?  For each source, use the questions listed in the guide above to help you evaluate the credibility. For each criterion, answer the questions as appropriate, then rank each of the parts from 1 to 10 (1 = unreliable, 10 = excellent). Add up the scores to give you an idea of whether you should use the resource based on the following rating scale: 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 © 2020 Strayer University. All Rights Reserved. This document contains Strayer University Confidential and Proprietary information and may not be copied, further distributed, or otherwise disclosed in whole or in part, without the expressed written permission of Strayer University. Page 13 of 13
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




Why Choose Us

  • 100% non-plagiarized Papers
  • 24/7 /365 Service Available
  • Affordable Prices
  • Any Paper, Urgency, and Subject
  • Will complete your papers in 6 hours
  • On-time Delivery
  • Money-back and Privacy guarantees
  • Unlimited Amendments upon request
  • Satisfaction guarantee

How it Works

  • Click on the “Place Order” tab at the top menu or “Order Now” icon at the bottom and a new page will appear with an order form to be filled.
  • Fill in your paper’s requirements in the "PAPER DETAILS" section.
  • Fill in your paper’s academic level, deadline, and the required number of pages from the drop-down menus.
  • Click “CREATE ACCOUNT & SIGN IN” to enter your registration details and get an account with us for record-keeping and then, click on “PROCEED TO CHECKOUT” at the bottom of the page.
  • From there, the payment sections will show, follow the guided payment process and your order will be available for our writing team to work on it.