Annotated Bib Peer Review Dejong


1. Are you supposed to include the web link in the citation? That confused me a little.
I think it's more of a preference thing. I did not include citations and when Anna looked over mine the other day she didn't say anything about it, so I guess I'm not sure either. It can probably go either way. - Autumn
2. Do my citations look correct?
Yes your citations look great! Everything seems to be in the right place. -Autumn

* Are the summaries detailed enough that you understand what the source is all about? Are there details that the writer included that are unnecessary to the summary? What questions are you left with after reading the summaries?
Maybe mention a few of the standards the FDA says each type of water should meet (in the first summary), just to give a few examples, otherwise your summaries look good. -Autumn

  • Did the reviewer evaluate the sources using the CRAAP test? Do you see criteria based judgements about each letter (currency, relevance,authority, accuracy, purpose)? What is missing?

Both your assessments were really good. I thought the second one was good because you didn't automatically jump to conclusions that it was a bad source just because you couldn't find an author or a date published but you looked more into it for proof that this could be a valid source. -Autumn

  • Are the reflection sections complete enough that you understand how the writer responded to the sources? Could they include more information? Maybe just give a few examples of the good facts it provided for you even though the length made it a hard article to use. -Autumn

* Based on these two entries, in what direction do you think the writer's research is going?
It seems like she got some good information from these two entries and she won't have trouble finding what she needs. -Autumn

* What questions are you left with after reading these entries?
I couldn't think of any questions off the top of my head. -Autumn

* What are these annotations weaknesses?
Don't be afraid to add a little more to the summary so the reader can better understand what it's about, or using an example to help the reader understand what the article is about more. -Autumn

* What are these annotations strengths?
The assessments are really good and it looks like you used the CRAAP test to figure out if the sources are credible or not which is important. -Autumn

Nelson, Jennifer K.. "Tap Water or Bottled Water: Which Is Better?." . Mayo Clinic, 21 Mar 2012. Web. 10 Feb 2014.


This article discusses both bottled water and tap water and comes to the conclusion that they both have similar standards they are required to meet by the FDA (bottled) & the EPA (tap). So it makes the point that is comes down to preference on "which is better."
While being sponsored by the Mayo Clinic, I knew that this source it was a credible and reliable source. The author has a biography locatable on the website proving she is fully authorized to be writing this, and is clear on her position that she is not biased. She simply provides the facts and lets you decide how you choose to take them. This shows that the purpose of this article was to inform and teach the general public about both bottled water and tap water and the regulations both types of waters are required to go through.
This article was pretty short but gave me a good look to both sides of the argument. It also provided counter arguments that can make my argument more understandable and stronger later on. It was not my most useful source because of the length but it was very helpful and provided me with very reliable facts.

Szaflarski, Diane. "Tap vs. Bottled Water." Cruising Chemistry. University California, San Diego. Web. 11 Feb 2014.

In "Tap vs. Bottled Water," it informs you about how bottled water companies used to be able to label the products any way they would choose. That was until 1996 when the FDA set new standards. These standards included things like: making sure the bottles were clearly labeled, meet FDA standards, and be "processed, packaged, shipped, and stored in a safe and sanitary manner and be truthfully and accurately labeled." The article also then discusses minerals in the two types of water and has evidence that more Ca & Mg, minerals proven to lower death rates, have been found in tap water more than bottled.
Although this website/webpage had no links or a published date to be found, I did find that this website is a project created by professors at University of California, San Diego along with students there showing their studies and knowledge about this and other topics similar. Because of their studies and findings they had a lot of evidence to back up there information that could be verified. No biases were shown, solely facts, that proved their purpose was not persuasion, which is why I do think I would use this source and their studies.
Although this was a very different source, I found a lot of very helpful & credible facts, that along with the Mayo Clinic source, provided information on both sides of the two types of waters. It again helped me see both sides while still helping me take a side on the argument.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License