HUM101 Chamberlain Evidence Based Practice Bibliography and Source Evaluation

Attached is more instructions that needed to be followed
Required Resources
Read/review the following resources for this activity:
Textbook: Chapter 8, 9
Lesson
Link (Word doc): Source Evaluation Worksheet
Minimum of 5 scholarly sources
Instructions
Use the Source Evaluation Worksheetto submit an annotated bibliography of 5 sources that you intend to usein your paper. Prepare a citation, annotation, and evaluation for eachsource.
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 orientationsamong young adults. American Sociological Review, 51, 541-554.
The authors, researchers at the Rand Corporation and BrownUniversity, use data from the National Longitudinal Surveys of YoungWomen and Young Men to test their hypothesis that nonfamily living byyoung adults alters their attitudes, values, plans, and expectations,moving them away from their belief in traditional sex roles. They findtheir hypothesis strongly supported in young females, while the effectswere fewer in studies of young males. Increasing the time away fromparents before marrying increased individualism, self-sufficiency, andchanges in attitudes about families. In contrast, an earlier study byWilliams cited below shows no significant gender differences in sex roleattitudes 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
Grading
This activity will be graded using the Annotated Bibliography Grading Rubric.
Course Outcomes (CO): 3, 5
Due Date: By 11:59 p.m. MT on Sunday
Rubric
Annotated Bibliography Grading Rubric – 50 pts
Annotated Bibliography Grading Rubric – 50 pts
Criteria
Ratings
Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuantity of Sources
5.0 pts5 or more sources
4.25pts4 sources
3.75pts3 sources
3.0pts2 sources
0.0pts1 or no sources
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality /Reliability of Sources
5.0ptsAll works are from scholarly sources.
4.25ptsMost works are from scholarly sources; no more than 1 from a substantive source.
3.75ptsSome works are from scholarly sources; no more than 2 from substantive sources.
3.0ptsSources substantive or lower in quality.
0.0ptsFew or no sources reach even substantive level; popular sources cited.
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeRecency of Sources
5.0ptsAll sources less than 5 years old; if older, historical significance explained
4.25pts1 source older than 5 years w/no explanation of historical significance
3.75pts2 sources older than 5 years w/no explanation of historical significance
3.0pts3 sources older than 5 years w/no explanation of historical significance
0.0pts4 or more sources older than 5 years old w/no explanation of historical significance
5.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Fluency of Annotations
25.0ptsAllannotations comprehensively describe scope source material; clearlyconveying main idea and relationship of ideas in source to the topic andthesis of the essay and how source will be used in essay.
21.25ptsMostannotations comprehensively describe scope source material; give senseof main idea and relationship of ideas in source to the topic and thesisof the essay and how source will be used in essay.
18.75ptsAnnotationsare well-written but do not describe scope of source material; do notgive clear idea of how source will be used in essay.
12.0ptsAnnotations do not describe scope of source material and/or do not give idea of how they will be used in essay.
0.0ptsAnnotations lack detail, give no idea of how they will be used in essay OR no annotations.
25.0 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA and Documentation
10.0ptsCitations are formatted correctly.
8.5ptsThere are a few formatting errors.
7.5ptsThere are some formatting errors.
6.0ptsThere are many and/or frequent formatting errors.
0.0ptsThere is little or no adherence to APA format in the document.

“Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results.”
Attachments
20190604024353phil347_week_5_source_evaluation_worksheet (20 kB)