Critical annotated bibliography- No Child Left Behind

I need some help with my critical annotated bibliography. It is already done but my professor sent back fro revision. Below are his comments.

This draft of the bibliography mainly consists of summaries of the articles and government reposts. The material is useful for necessary public display since it offers overviews, even if somewhat general. The government repot is more than a decade old; it would require acknowledgement were it to be used and some other, more contemporary source might have to confirm the data and the findings. It can be used with is caveat. Issue of credibility of your review is important.

As a bibliography, the individual items are selected adequately but too general to be useful. You may actually have to go back to the original articles when you are putting together your large research project for this course—the review of literature. As I have suggested in the assignment help notes, the bibliographic items should be detailed summary and critical analysis should be sufficiently substantive and detailed so that you could draft the initial draft of the review of literature from it. It could also be useful in some future research project.

Writing concerns you should keep in mind have much to do with consistency, which can reinforce or undermine your point—for example:… “(NCLB) covers varied federal teaching programs, the Act’s provisions for testing, answerableness, and college improvement receive the foremost attention.” Answerableness is really over the top. Honestly in research, with terminology and reported speech already complicating matters I would keep it simple and without affectations.

I would suggest is that you might find some original quotes to include as you are reading these articles—brief, striking and unique ones only! You might also consider contrasting the article/items so which might help in future categorizing and priorities.

Note that the second entry also strikes me as old for this type of a project given the existing debate about how to improve schools. The sentences in the entry are essentially list-like. So this is not a summary by an enumeration of points—a blow by blow list. In writing, the rule for revising lists is: either make them obvious and self –evident to the reader or begin with a central point to revamp what is essentially a description.

Some of the entries do have critical observations but they are general and not very practical for the next assignment. One possibility in revision you might consider [it is not required but may yield practical results] is to restrict your biblio to research/consequences of the act published in the last five yeas, and perhaps audience [?] early and middle childhood education {define this narrowly].