Review sheet for annotated bibliography

Tags:

• A Peoples History of The United States
• A world of work
• According
• Annotated Bibliography
• Anti War Movement in The United States
• Author
• Bibliography
• Citation
• Content
• Course
• Critique
• Current
• Develop
• Discrimination Against Women in The United States
• Drug
• Education in The United States
• Era
• Essay
• Ethnic Conflict in The United States
• Evaluation
• Example
• Explain
• Federal government of The United States
• Following

Show more

Pages:

1

Words:

275

Get document Get an original paper

Student’s Name: Professor’s Name: Course: DD MM YYYY Review sheet for annotated bibliography 1. Is each citation correct according to APA format? Are author, date, title, name of periodical, volume, page, URL etc. listed correctly and in order? Let the writer know if any information appears incorrect or is missing. Apparently, the first citing is not correct as the sur name should only appear . The tittle should also be done in italics; the tittle is not done in italics. The date also is incorrect as it should show the retrieval date since it is a website therefore the date should at least be a current one. Therefore the citing should be in this format. Example Research, N., Gerstein, D., & Green, L. (2018). Illicit Drug Use in the United States. Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Retrieved 23 February 2018, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234579/Consider having italics in all the topics of the citing rather than normal format. The volumes of the periodical are correct. APA format does not necessarily need page numbers although it might appear in the in text citations. The format should also follow caps where the first letters of each word have to be in caps. The DOIs should also be automatically generated from the web following the permission of the owner. 2. Is each citation summarized? Do you feel each summary gives you a good idea of the content? Point out parts that work particularly well and ask questions if it seems some information is missing or doesn’t make sense. The summary given in the annotated bibliography is supposed to critique the author, date and content. The articles give a clear capture of the three items supposed to be analyzed in