ENG 123 Module Three Submission: Annotating Your Sources Guidelines and Rubric
Overview: Now that we have discussed the importance of using credible secondary sources for your project, let’s start annotating! Don't worry—we are going to
walk through the process one step at a time. This week, you will be given access to an interactive writing plan generator that has specific questions to help guide
you. In this section, we will first focus on finding your three required sources. Then we will help you summarize those sources, evaluate their credibility, and
explain how these sources will help support your argument. If you found a source that passed the CRAAP test earlier in this module, feel free to use that as one
of your sources. If you decided to alter your keywords and would like to start your research from scratch, that is fine too!
Prompt: In this activity, you will create a bibliography entry by following the steps in MindEdge and answering the questions as thoroughly as possible. The
questions will prompt you to engage in a conversation with your sources. You will need to complete this activity three times (for your three different sources).
A few reminders:
You may find one source on the internet, but the remainder of your sources must come from either the Opposing Viewpoints database or the Academic
Search Complete database.
At least one of your three sources should present a counterargument, a position that an opponent of your argument might make.
Be sure to test all of your sources using the CRAAP method.
Rubric
Guidelines for Submission: Your annotations must be submitted in a Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, one-inch
margins, and at least three sources.
Critical Elements Proficient (100%) Needs Improvement (85%) Not Evident (0%) Value
Sources Clearly identifies sources selected
from appropriate databases
Clearly identifies sources, but
does not use databases indicated
Does not identify sources 15
Identifies Argument Clearly identifies arguments and
includes at least one
counterargument
Clearly identifies arguments, but
does not include a
counterargument
Does not identify arguments 30
Credibility Explains rationale for credibility
of the source by providing
supporting evidence
Explains rationale for credibility
of the source, but does not
provide supporting evidence
Does not explain rationale for
credibility of the source
25
Relevance Draws a connection between the
source and intended argument by
providing supporting evidence
Draws a connection between the
source and intended argument,
but does not provide supporting
evidence
Does not draw a connection
between the source and intended
argument
25
Articulation of Response Submission has no major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
Submission has major errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that negatively impact readability
and articulation of main ideas
Submission has critical errors
related to citations, grammar,
spelling, syntax, or organization
that prevent understanding of
ideas
5
Total 100%
