Physical And Biological Nature
Characterize the interactive relationships between the physical and biological nature of the ocean and humanity.
Assessment task #1 (25%)
Ocean research summary and annotated bibliography
peer-reviewed literature (including textbooks and reference books) on the issue of marine oil pollution . Coherently summarise your research and information gained in relation to marine plastics pollution. Evaluate your information to identify the most important issue(s) relating to the case study and the most important feature(s) of the physical and biological nature of the ocean which affect this issue. Demonstrate your capacity to identify peer-reviewed and relevant sources of information by compiling an annotated bibliography in support of your summary document that synthesises the information gained from your research in the context of information formally presented in classes. This background assignment will be help you relate human interaction(s) with the ocean to identify potential and actual pollution issues that arise.
One page per case study summary (500 words ± 50) in your own words. The word limit excludes references.
Five references to support each case study. Each reference is to have an annotation (written in your own words) that succinctly describes the paper and its importance in NO MORE than 100 words.
References are to be peer-reviewed or from other objectively reliable sources (such as government and university websites, textbooks) and to be fully and correctly detailed in the reference list (the annotated bibliography).
Physical And Biological Nature
AIMS FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT:
- Students will summarise and collate information and then identify, with evidence, what is/are the most important issue(s) relevant to the case studies and the most important biological and/or physical feature of the ocean which influences the issue(s) identified. This should be the focus of the 500 word summary and when you critically evaluate the source, then the connection to your knowledge of oceanography is one thing that I will particularly assess.
- Students will prepare a concise (note the word limit) annotated bibliography of the references used in the summary.
- Access, collate and evaluate information on a human activity in the ocean and the physical and biological nature of the ocean as it pertains to the specified human activity.
- Synthesise the most important factors of the human activity and the most relevant features of the ocean that affect the human activity in a concise, referenced summary that characterises the interactive relationship of the ocean and the activity.
|Name:||Annotated Bibliography and Summary|
|criteria||HD (High distinction)||DN (distinction)||CR (Credit)||PP (passing grade)||NN (fail)|
|In this task you:|
Access, collate and evaluate information on a human activity in the ocean and the physical and biological nature of the ocean as it pertains to the specified human activity.
|· Wrote the annotations and the summary synthesis in your words.||·|
|· Provided > 5 sources of relevant scholarly literature, mostly of peer reviewed primary literature, per case study.||· Provided 5 sources of relevant scholarly literature, including examples of peer reviewed primary literature, per case study.||· Provided 3 or 4 sources of relevant scholarly literature, including an example of peer reviewed primary literature, per case study.||· Provided 3 sources of relevant scholarly literature.||· Provided less than 3 sources of scholarly literature.|
|· Consistently demonstrated that you could locate, accurately describe and evaluate highly relevant knowledge, data & information on specific topics.||· Demonstrated that you could locate, accurately describe and evaluate significant knowledge, data & information on specific topics.||· Demonstrated that you could locate, accurately describe, and summarise with some critical evaluation relevant data & information on specific topics.||· Located, accurately described, and summarised some data &/or information on specific topics.||· Located some information.|
|· Coherently & correctly summarised the most significant concept(s) &/or fact(s) in concise annotations for all references.||· Coherently & correctly summarised significant concept(s) or fact(s) in annotations for all references.||· Correctly summarised relevant concept(s) or fact(s) in annotations.||· Briefly summarised some part of the sources.||· Commented on sources provided.|
|· Correctly and fully listed all references with no mistakes.||· Correctly and fully listed all references with only 1 or 2 minor formatting mistakes.||· Correctly and fully listed all references with only formatting mistakes.||· Listed all references fully.||· Omitted references or components of the publication details.|
|2. Critical Evaluation (the summary)|
Collate and discuss the most important factors of the human activity and the most relevant features of the ocean that affect the human activity in a concise, referenced summary.
|· Insightfully synthesised significant, relevant concepts, facts and/or examples in the literature in your summary that clearly characterises the interactive relationship of the ocean and the activity.||· Synthesised relevant concepts, facts and/or examples of some importance in the literature in your summary that characterises the interactive relationship of the ocean and the activity.||· Collated relevant concepts, facts and/or examples of some importance in the literature in your summary that describes the interactive relationship of the ocean and the activity.||· Described relevant facts of lessor importance in the literature in your summary that describes aspects of the ocean and the activity. May have errors of fact.||· Did not summarise information or did so with significant errors or omissions.|
|· Are crystal clear, concise & precise in your writing, with neither irrelevancies nor errors.||· Are clear and concise in your writing, with only a few minor errors or irrelevancies.||· Sometimes write with clarity, but have grammatical or spelling mistakes or awkward sentences.||· Write with awkward sentence structures that obscure meaning. Basic grammar & some spelling errors.||· Write with many errors that obscure meaning.|
|· Correctly cited all required references in text.||· Correctly cited most required references in text.||· Correctly cited some references in text.||· Cited no or few required sources correctly.|
See Summarising for Understanding.
This short document explains why it is important to summarise for understanding (ie that the writer understands the content of the material that they are summarising and can thus pick out the most important and relevant issues). It then offers a method for taking notes from a source and how to subsequently write the summary.
What is an annotated bibliography.
It lists the source fully and correctly.
It provides a concise summary or overview of the source, with a focus on the major points or concepts addressed in the source.
It may also provide a critical evaluation of the source, which could comment on the data or information used; or the logic of the source; or the style of writing (e.g. clear, concise, aimed to general audience or experts) or all of these things.
What makes a good annotation?
A good annotation:
- Is associated with an accurately listed reference.
- Is concise.
- Is clearly understandable. (Has been proof read and is logically sound).
- Provides an overview in your own words of what the paper is about.
- Answers the reader’s question: “Why should I read this paper?”
- Gives a clear indication of the importance (or possibly otherwise) of the paper.
- Will state if a reference is a review paper (that is, it is secondary not primary literature) or not (and may include the number of papers reviewed).
- May comment on the style of a paper (e.g. “assumes a good background in economics”. “Is a technical paper” etc).
- Is NOT a summary of the paper. This makes it too long and likely too complex to easily answer the question “why should I read this paper?”
- Does not copy sentences from the paper, because this almost certainly removes context thereby reducing understanding.
When I have graded annotated bibliographies in previous deliveries of other classes, I identified some faults that were commonly seen in the class’s bibliographies and provided them to the class as feedback. Here are the faults that I identified. Use the list to see what you should AVOID doing.
Specific comments indicating faults in the bibliography:
- References are not in alphabetical order
- References are incomplete.
- References have incorrect information (e.g. the volume of publication).
- Formatting of references is not correct.
- Annotations do not describe the paper.
- Annotations contain incorrect information.
- Annotations do not highlight the most significant point.
- Annotations do not evaluate the paper.
- Annotations are insufficiently specific (e.g. states: “a relationship was demonstrated”, without saying what the relationship was.)
- Annotations are too long.
- Annotations are direct citations. (To explain: if you copy a sentence directly out of the source, even if you cite it correctly, then it is highly likely that it will sit badly in the logic and context of the rest of your annotation. I have never seen a good annotation that contains a direct quote.)
- Annotations show poor syntax or grammar (and become difficult to understand).
- Annotation does not relate to the reference.
Further advice on annotated bibliographies.
Please note that these links suggest annotations may be up to 500 words. However, I think that this may make a reader less likely to actually read the annotation (if there are 10 annotated references with 500-word annotations, that is 5,000 words. You’d want to be seriously interested to read that amount of material). I think much shorter annotations are more useful because they are more likely to be read. This is why I have limited your maximum words per annotation to 100 words (I will strictly check this). Writing a shorter annotation may be more difficult than a longer one because every word must count to the meaning that you want to convey. Delete any extraneous words. For example, the urls below suggest starting the annotation with: “This paper describes ….etc”. I would delete the first two words and start with the verb: “Describes ….. etc.” Given that the annotation is written directly below the reference, it is obvious which paper it is referring to.