APA
STYLE FOR EDOK
The College of Education and Health Professions at the University of Arkansas has adopted the American Psychological Association (APA) writing style. In order to comply with these requirements, all bibliographies, article critiques, and papers must be APA style. The following information explains how the EDOK (Expert Distiller of Knowledge) follow the APA guidelines. I would suggest that you purchase a copy of the 2001 Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.), which is also available in Mullins Library. APA style guidelines can also be found on the Internet, but students have discovered that not all questions are easily answered via the website or other sources.
Citation example for a peer-reviewed journal article as
required for this class:
Van Patten, J.J., & Bolding, J.T. (1993). Character building: The contributions of
"Coin" Harvey. Educational Forum, 57,186-190.
Article
Critique/Summary
You will write three article critiques / summaries as part of your graded requirements. The purpose of the EDOK is to write a succinct evaluation of a piece of scholarly writing. For this class, I will direct you to the information that you will read. All EDOKs are typed, one-page summaries with an evaluative comment (reflection and application) of the articles. Use 12 pt Times New Roman and include a heading with your name, date, and article number (one, two, or three).
The required format follows:
EDOK (Expert Distiller of Knowledge)
The EDOK is a system that enables you to summarize articles in a succinct manner.
§ Bibliographic information: Give a complete APA citation for the source as illustrated above. Note: some journals also have an issue number.
§ Central theme: State the central theme, concern, or argument of the author. Use your own words.
§ Main idea: Each main idea, point, or position in the article should be stated in a complete sentence. Please do not use fragments. Use your own words.
§ Author’s conclusion: State the author’s conclusion. Use your own words. Sometimes the author’s conclusion is stated in the article and sometimes you must infer it.
§ Evaluative comment: State how the article applies to you as an emerging professional AND how it relates to the class content. Use your own words. Note: “I like this article” is not sufficient.
§
Papers should be well edited for spelling,
grammar, and punctuation.
Example of an EDOK
paper:
Freddie Bowles
CIED 5022
EDOK #1, 8-20-07
Eylon, B.S., & Lin, M.C. (1988). Learning and instruction, an examination of four
research perspectives in science education. Review of Educational Research, 58, 251-301.
In-depth coverage of several science topics will benefit students far more than superficial coverage of a number of science topics, according to an examination of science education programs from four different perspectives.
*Concept-learning perspectives: Teaching a few concepts in-depth provides the students with the ability to sort through the ideas and put them into a usable perspective.
*Developmental perspective: Students have developmental stages of learning and seem to be more successful when these stages are aligned with instructional strategies.
*Differential perspectives: These use the intellectual and psychological aspects of learning to explain why some students understand scientific concepts better than others.
*Problem-solving perspective: This, like developmental and differential perspectives, has stages through which students need to progress, but more research in how they are connected is needed.
Curriculum and instruction are constantly changing with additional research in the area of student learning, which has implications for science education.
The article was useful because it detailed four different perspectives concerning science education in a manner that was readable and readily usable for me to consider when I teach a lesson for my science class. It relates to this class because a well-designed lesson that considers differentiation of instruction and student learning keeps the students engaged and active. Classroom management and discipline issues may be eliminated or resolved more easily when a lesson plan is complete and thoroughly designed.
(Please note that this example is brief and
concise in order to illustrate the main points of the format; the evaluative
comment will be more developed for this class.)
|
|
Excellent |
Acceptable |
Needs Work |
Bibliography
5 pts. |
All bibliographic information is included and in correct format. 5 |
Most bibliographic information is included and in correct format. 4-3 |
Bibliographic information is not included or is in incorrect format. 2-0 |
|
Central Theme 5 pts. |
Theme is appropriate and is stated coherently in the writer's own words or with citation information. 5 |
Theme is stated, but is either partly misunderstood or incomplete. Writer's words may be incomplete or not cited incorrectly. 4-3 |
Theme is not stated or is inappropriate for the article. The writer may have plagiarized.
2-0 |
|
Main Idea 5 pts. |
Main ideas are accurate and explained in the writer's own words. 5 |
Main ideas are accurate, but are not coherent and may be incomplete. Writer's words may be incomplete or not cited incorrectly 4-3 |
Main ideas are not stated or are inaccurate. The writer may have plagiarized. 2-0 |
|
Author’s Conclusion 5 pts. |
Author’s conclusion is appropriate for the article and is stated in words original to the writer of the summary. 5 |
Author’s conclusion is somewhat appropriate for the article, although the major conclusion has been missed. It is stated in words original to the writer of the summary. 4-3 |
Author’s conclusion is not included or is inappropriate for the article. Words used are mostly copied from the article. 2-0 |
|
Evaluative Comments 5 pts. |
Evaluative comments include specific reasons why the article is / is not useful. It also clearly and thoroughly states how the article relates to the class.
5 |
Evaluative comments are vague and not as specific as they need to be. The writer does not give sufficient reasons why the article is useful, or how it relates to the topic. 4-3 |
Evaluative comments are not included or are so vague they don't make sense. 2-0 |
|
Editing 5 pts. |
The paper is well edited and there are less than five errors. 5 |
Some editing is apparent. No more than ten errors are noted. 4-3 |
More than ten errors in editing are noted. 2-0 |
|
Total Points: 30 |
|
|
|