HPS202 Assessment

AT1: Annotated Bibliography Assignment Instructions

Topic: The impact of racism on First Nations* children and adolescents in Australia

Due: Thursday 11^th August 8:00pm (AEST)

Submitted via Dropbox as a Word or PDF document

Contributes 20% of total Unit mark

Word count: 1200 words

* We use the term ‘First Nations Australians’ to refer to Aboriginal Australians, who are First Nations people of Australia along with Torres Strait Islanders. We also recognise that many Aboriginal Australians and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples prefer local terms that reflect their cultural identity.

The word count includes all words except the title page, headings and the references in each annotation (there is no need to include in-text citations)

AT1: Annotated Bibliography Assignment Instructions What is an annotated bibliography?

An annotated bibliography is a compilation of sources related to a topic that includes critical or explanatory information – a bit like an organised way of taking notes. Your annotated bibliography provides an opportunity to start compiling and planning some of the sources you will need for your Policy Brief (your Policy Brief will also involve finding additional sources). You will receive feedback on the sources you have chosen, which will help with your Policy Brief. Please read over the assignment instructions for the Policy Brief before beginning your search for literature so you have a thorough understanding of what is required.

Unit Learning Outcomes

The AT1: Annotated Bibliography assesses your achievement of these Unit Learning Outcomes:

ULO1: Demonstrate knowledge of core areas of development, including genetic and biological, cognitive, language, emotional, social, moral and motor development, and developmental disorders. ULO2: Critically review and evaluate literature (published articles) related to the topic of your research. ULO4: Effectively communicate research findings using clear and concise writing. ULO5: Consider Developmental Psychology through a culturally diverse lens, including Indigenous Knowledges and Culturally and Linguistically Diverse communities

Your assignment

You will prepare an Annotated Bibliography on the topic of your Policy Brief. The topic for the Policy Brief is:

The impact of racism on First Nations children and adolescents in Australia

Please note: You will need to focus your Policy Brief on the impact of racism and/or racial discrimination on the development of children and adolescents in Australia. While priority should be given to Australian research, to augment your brief you may also include findings from international research the impact of racism in other Indigenous populations (e.g., Māori people; First Nations Canadians). The focus is on children, adolescents, or both (aged between 0-18 years).

Step 1: Familiarise yourself with the topic

• To familiarise yourself with the topic, we suggest you access the ‘Policy Brief: Racism resources’ under the Assessment folder in Cloud Deakin. Please note: You are NOT to use these resources in your Annotated Bibliography but they may be used in some sections of the Policy Brief.

·        Please read over the assignment instructions for the Policy Brief before beginning your search for literature so you have a thorough understanding of what is required.

Step 2: Search for relevant peer-reviewed literature

• You must find, read and include 4 scholarly sources. Scholarly sources are scientific articles in peer-reviewed journals.
  • Your articles must relate to the ‘Background – what and how’ section of the Policy Brief, as this section requires the most extensive use of evidence.
• Your articles collectively need to cover a total of 4 aspects of development. This must include social, emotional and cognitive outcomes. You then need to choose one additional aspect of development from our weekly topics. You can choose from either: biological, or language, or motor, or moral development, or ADHD, or ASD. Your articles should represent key information to be used in your Policy Brief.
• Please examine the weekly topics to guide your understanding of the different aspects of development. Students must decide how appropriately an article addresses the aspects of development themselves, and clearly convey this to the marker, as this decision constitutes part of the marks awarded. You are welcome to use either a specific theory from the study guide, or to take a general approach. For example, social development could be as specific as impact on theory of mind, or as broad as impact on peer relationships. You may need to read ahead for your 4th aspect of development. You can go beyond the scope of what is covered in the weekly content. For example, depression is not covered in the weekly topics (that is covered in the HPS308/778 Psychopathology), however this could relate to emotional or cognitive development depending on what the focus of the research findings are (emotions vs. thoughts).
• Research articles can sometimes be broad and provide a variety of information. If only some of the methods and results from an article relate to the brief topic, then students should focus on the relevant parts of the article in their Annotated Bibliography. There will not be enough words to also describe the methods and results that are not relevant to the brief topic, and these can disrupt the flow of the write-up. For these reasons, it’s best to just focus on the article components relevant to the brief topic.
• The seminars include activities that are designed to help you with this assessment, so we strongly encourage you attend or listen to the recordings. Specifically, seminar 2 assists with the literature search, and seminars 3 and 4 assist with the Evaluation (seminar 3- CRAAP test; seminar 4- Evaluation checklist).

Step 3: Writing up the Annotated Bibliography

Ensure you use the AT1: Annotated Bibliography Template and list the annotations in alphabetical order (do not include an additional reference list, this is not needed because each article is already cited in full for your annotations). Please format the references in accordance with APA 7^th edition.

How to write an annotated bibliography

1. List the article using APA referencing (APA 7^th edition)     
2. Under each reference provide one short paragraph consisting of 3-4 sentences that summarise (a,b,c):
   1. The question or problem addressed by the article (the ‘topic’)
   1. The method used
   • The article’s findings and conclusions
3. An evaluation of the study in relation to your policy brief. The evaluation involves two parts:
   1. An explanation of why the article was chosen (two reasons must be offered)
   • A reflection on how the article will be used in your policy brief

Below is a colour coded example of how to lay-out each annotation. While the instructions and example use colour coding to demonstrate each section, you are NOT required to use this colour-coding system in the bibliography you hand in (no highlighting is needed).

Example

Source 1:

Trevor, C.O., Lansford, B., & Black, J.W. (2004). Employee turnover and job performance: Monitoring the influences of salary growth and promotion. Journal of Armchair Psychology, 113(2), 56 – 64. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.82.1.42

Summary: One sentence on the topic of the article (relevance to the brief topic should be considered). One sentence on the method (relevance to brief topic should be considered; For example how did they measure the specific aspect of development you are focusing on? (e.g., literacy skills, anxiety symptoms, peer relationships, etc.) Tip: look at the scales that were used to help with this. One or two sentences on the study findings and conclusions (that are relevant to the brief topic).

Evaluation:

A: Two reasons explaining reason why the article was chosen (one sentence each). Consideration could include study design strengths*, generalisability, how you know the article is a credible source, or other aspects of why the study is important for your Policy Brief. The article on critical appraisal (provided in your assignment folder), and seminar activities will help with writing this section.

B: Two or three sentences on how you plan to use the article, including which aspect of development (e.g., social, emotional, cognitive) it covers, and what statement/argument it will support. You should provide sufficient detail for your marker to understand what kinds of statements you plan to make in your Policy Brief based on the evidence offered in the article.

(Recommended word count for each source: approx. 300 words. Please note that this is just a guide to help you think about the size of your write-up for each source. Only the total word count of your document will be formally considered. Note that the title page, headings and references are not counted in the word count)

Please ensure references are in APA 7^th edition.

Your annotations should be presented in alphabetical order. No additional reference list is required.

*Commenting on the study’s strengths demonstrates your understanding of research design, which is important in evaluating a study’s contribution to the topic (see ULO2). If you have limited understanding of research methods but would like to comment on study strengths, please consult the article on the critical appraisal of studies. Below is a link explaining the difference between correlation and causation: http://theconversation.com/clearing-up-confusion-between-correlation-and-causation-30761

Frequently Asked Questions: Annotated Bibliography

What is the difference between ‘why’ the source is chosen (Evaluation A) and ‘how’ the source will be used (Evaluation B)?

‘Why’ refers to the factors that led you to select the source (e.g., was the study well designed; did it focus on your population of interest?). ‘How’ refers to what the study will contribute in your policy brief (e.g., what sort of evidence will it provide?).

Can one article cover multiple aspects of development (for example, my article covers social and emotional development- is this okay?)

Yes. You can approach selecting the articles in one of two ways. Either (1) you can have one different article for each aspect of development (i.e. one aspect of development is covered per annotation), or (2) you can have one article that covers two (or more) aspects of development (e.g., covering social and emotional development with one annotation). You just need to ensure that all four aspects are covered across the 4 annotations. Please, just be clear about your intentions – from your write-up it should be clear to markers which aspects of development are covered by each article.

How do I know if I am a HPS202 student?

HPS202 is the code given to our postgraduate students. You will know if you have enrolled as a postgraduate, but if you are unsure, please check your enrolment details in Student Connect.

Can I change my article when it comes time to write up my policy brief?

Yes. The annotated bibliography is designed to help you break down the large task of researching and writing up a policy brief by finding some key sources early. It is to your advantage to try and select articles that you intend to use in your policy brief, since you will receive feedback on whether each article is appropriate for the brief.

However, you are welcome to change your mind, and depending on the feedback you receive, you may even decide that another article would be more appropriate to use.

Can I use government or media reports, books or book chapters?

For AT1, the short answer is no. Please use only peer-reviewed articles published in scientific journals. Grey literature (such as government reports) are not appropriate for AT1, although you are welcome to use some grey literature in your AT2 in sections other than the Background. We want to ensure you are relying on scientific articles for the Background section in your Policy Brief. Please find a resource below explaining hierarchies of evidence:

What is a peer-reviewed article?

A peer reviewed article means the study has undergone a rigorous academic process of analysis, which it generally has to in order to appear in an academic journal. This is usually a requirement of good quality research. A literature review, or a meta-analysis, involves analysing other people’s research, rather than a study itself, and is a particular type of peer-reviewed article.

What is a scientific review article?

A review paper, such as a systemic review or meta-analysis, compiles previously published findings- it does not include any original research. These are fine to use, because they have undergone peer-review (so they fit the criteria of being a peer-reviewed article). Here is a link describing the difference between various types of published articles:

I have questions about APA referencing.

Please try to find the answer to your question(s) in the guides located in Cloud Deakin. Please note 7^th edition APA is required.

Do you really impose penalties for late submission?

Yes, and the penalties are stiff – 5 mark deduction for the first day and another 5 marks for each day after that. After 5 days we will not accept your assignment. This is in accordance with Deakin Policy.

Do you allow 10% leeway with the word count?

No. If you are over the word limit, your marker will stop reading your assignment at that point and the parts over the word limit will not be marked. The title page, headings and references are not counted.

Is there help to ensure I describe Aboriginal Australian and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities appropriately?

Yes! First Nations Australian peoples are two distinct cultural groups: Aboriginal Australians and Torres Strait Islander peoples. But these are broad terms, so we should not forget that there is great diversity within First Nations populations – in fact, there are over 250 language groups across Australia! The term “Indigenous Australian” is also sometimes used to refer to Australia’s First Nations peoples, but some First Nations people do not prefer this term because it is too generic. Please consult with language guides if you have any concerns about using appropriate language. Here is one helpful guide.

Importantly, the words Indigenous, Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander are always capitalised in Australia, and shortening names to acronyms like ATSI or TSI is not recommended because it can be considered offensive. We provide this information to assist students in using appropriate language terms, but your terms do not form part of your marks for this assessment.

HPS202 Annotated Bibliography Rubric and Feedback

Criterion	HD+ (100%)	HD (80+)	D (70+)	C (60+)	P (50+)	N (<50)	Not Done / Insufficient
Suitability of	All sources are relevant to the	Sources are relevant to the	Sources are mostly relevant	Sources are somewhat	Sources lacking in	Sources are very lacking in	Sources are severely
sources	topic and from credible scholarly sources with faultless	topic and from credible scholarly sources with	and from credible scholarly sources. Referencing correct	relevant and credible. May contain APA errors.	relevance/credibility. May contain APA errors May	relevance to the topic and/or credibility. May	irrelevant and not credible and/or
(15%)	APA referencing. Articles for 4	correct APA referencing.	or mostly correct. Articles for	Additional sources may be	need significant additional	contain APA errors.	missing.
	outcomes of dev present.	Articles for 4 outcomes of	4 outcomes of dev present.	needed and/or be missing	research and/or is missing	Extensive additional	0 points
	15 points	dev present.	11.25 points	outcomes of dev.	articles for outcomes of dev.	research is required and/or
		12.75 points		9.75 points	8.25 points	is missing articles for
						outcomes of dev. 6 points
Quality of summary   (20%)	All annotations succinctly, accurately, and comprehensively describe only relevant source material very clearly. 20 points	Annotations accurately, and comprehensively and mostly succinctly describe mostly relevant source material clearly. 17 points	Annotations are mostly accurate and comprehensive for mostly relevant source material. May need brevity. 15 points	Annotations are somewhat accurate and comprehensive, and may lack attention to relevant source material, and/or need brevity. 13 points	Annotations require greater accuracy, succinctness, and/or comprehensiveness, or lacking in attention to relevant source material. 11 points	Annotations fail to describe relevant source material succinctly, accurately and/or comprehensively. 8 points	Section is missing or very insufficient in all or most annotations. 0 points
Evaluation A (25%)	Offers 2 substantial insight into why each source was chosen (e.g., understanding of each source’s key study strengths relative to the Policy Brief as well as consideration of an aspect of CRAAP) and how this will be beneficial in the Policy Brief. 25 points	Demonstrates good insight for 2 reasons why each source was chosen. 21.25 points	Offers some insight into 2 reasons for why each source was chosen; or good insight for one reason and the other reason is lacking. 18.75 points	Both reasons lack depth of insight into why the sources were chosen (2 reasons should still be present) 16.25 points	Insufficient insight, and reasons for choosing why sources may be relevant to the Policy Brief. Some insight may be displayed for one reason, but the other is absent or lacking. 13.75 points	Offers little to no insight or reason into why the sources were chosen for the Policy Brief. 10 points	Section is missing or very insufficient in all or most annotations. 0 points
Evaluation B (25%)	All reflections provide a very clear, logical and succinct explanation of how the sources will be used, and provides clear justification for how all sources are highly appropriate and well-matched for use in the Policy Brief. 25 points	Reflections provide a clear, logical and mostly succinct explanation of how the sources will be used, and justification for how sources are appropriate and well- matched for use in the Policy Brief. 21.25 points	Reflections are mostly clear and logical in explanation of how the sources will be used; may need brevity or detail. Sources are mostly appropriate and well- matched for use in the Policy Brief. 18.75 points	Reflections somewhat explain how the sources will be used, but reasons may need development. Sources may not all be matched for use in the Policy Brief. 16.25 points	Reflections mention how the sources will be used, but explanations lack clarity, logic and/or detail. Sources may not all be matched for use in the Policy Brief. 13.75 points	Reflections do not explain how the sources will be used and/or lack considerable clarity / logic / detail. Sources may not all be matched for use in the Policy Brief. 10 points	Section is missing or very insufficient in all or most annotations 0 points
Writing fluency (15%)	All annotations are thoroughly thoughtful, complete, and very well written. 15 points	Annotations are thoughtful, complete, and well written. 12.75 points	Annotations are mostly thoughtful, complete, and well written. 11.25 points	Annotations are somewhat well written but needs improvement in writing / fluency / expression. 9.75 points	Poor written expression / structure / fluency. 8.25 points	Very poor written expression / structure / fluency. 6 points	Very difficult to read; needs considerably improved writing quality / structure / fluency / expression. 0 points

Get expert help for The impact of racism on First Nations and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!