Stem Cell Research
NIH Stem Cell Information Home Page. In Stem Cell Information [World Wide Web site]. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009 [cited Monday, September 28, 2009] Available at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index
The National Institutes of Health for the US Department of Health is the department that controls all medical procedures for the country. The resource discusses many aspects of stem cells, such as what they are, what they are used for, and the ethical issues that arise from stem cell research. It has a registry of private labs already researching stem cells, as well as current and future research plans. This source is reliable because it contains unbiased information about stem cells, while presenting the fact that there may be moral issues involved; also, it is a government resource.
Original:Stem Cell Research
NIH Stem Cell Information Home Page. In Stem Cell Information [World Wide Web site]. Bethesda, MD: National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2009 [cited Monday, September 28, 2009] Available at http://stemcells.nih.gov/index
This is the National Institutes of Health for the US Department of Health, the department that decides controls all medicine and medical procedures for the country. It discusses many aspects of stem cells, such as what they are, what they are used for, and even ethical issues. It has a registry of private labs already researching stem cells, as well as upcoming and current research on them. This is good because it’s unbiased information about stem cells, but still presents that there may be an ethical problem; also, it’s a government department. This is a good source because it gives a lot of information about stem cells and research concerning stem cells.
This entry is good, and far better than the original, but it looks like it may be lacking that "academic" feel, especially in the last sentence. Don't know what the bold face is for either.
ReplyDeleteThis sounds pretty good but I feel it would have gained validity had you used the name of the doctor given in the citation in the annotation as well. It would also have been nice to be a little bit more sure of what type of source this is.
ReplyDeleteThe first section of the annotation does not contain complete sentences. I am not sure if that is the way it should be done or not (might want to check)Instead of saying "The resource discusses.." maybe say (the author) discusses. Also maybe say something about the author in the annotated bib. Otherwise the info is good. :) Good job!!
ReplyDelete-Sarah T
This is pretty good but you could vary your sentence structure and include more complex vocabulary to make it more scholarly.
ReplyDeleteI thought the redo was much better but it still needs to be tweaked a little more in my opinion...
ReplyDeleteThe first sentence can be extremely confusing. Otherwise, very good.
ReplyDelete