Annotated Bib Peer Review Jacob Marcus

Are these Annotated Bibliographies up to par for when I have to turn them in and are these valid sources to use?

I like that you list the main points of the article and keep it condensed, short but to the point (which I like). I feel that you give enough information to know the topic you chose, but not enough information about what argument you chose about the topic. You don't really explain why you think/how you know your sources are credible. Your citations look good! (:
-Sarah-Anne Hoit

1. "No Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety." No Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety. European Network of Scientists for Social and Environmental Responsibility, 21 Oct. 2013. Web. 9 Feb. 2014.

a. The main arguments of this essay are that is no consensus on GM food safety, no epidemiological studies investigating the possible effects of GM food consumption of health, that the government has inaccurate endorsements, the EU research team doesn’t provide substantial evidence of food safety, no consensus on the environmental risks of the products and a widespread disapproval of the foods and crops.
b. I believe this is a very useful source it gives many ideas and show many links that show some fact based research. The information I have found from my other sources is much the same but some of the other sources are on the other side of the debate. They also have a list of signatures by scientists in this field that believe that these products are hurting us.
c. I can use this topic to argue on the point that the GMOs are bad for the food processing industry and also for the growers that are producing these crops.

2. Feature, WebMD. "Genetically Modified Foods (Biotech Foods) Pros and Cons." WebMD. WebMD, n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2014.

a. The main arguments from this document are that there are many people who still today do not realize that there is GMOs in the food industry or that they don’t know they are eating them at all. They also say that the European countries are trying to stay organic while the U.S. is the leading producers of GMOs. They also talk about the “Frankenfood” fears which refer to the many fears of the scientists who are researching these foods and effects.
b. I believe this is a very reliable source coming from Web MD, they have many inserted links that bring you to research about they have been doing with these certain products. Compared to the other sources this also shows the advantages and the disadvantages of the GMOs but it has many positions and facts for both sides.
c. I can use the topic page to either argue for or against the GMOs. I can use this very credible source to show that the information I am getting isn’t out of nowhere.

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?
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?
Are the reflection sections complete enough that you understand how the writer responded to the sources? Could they include more information?
Based on these two entries, in what direction do you think the writer's research is going?
What questions are you left with after reading these entries?
What are these annotations weaknesses?
What are these annotations strengths?

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