{"id":151,"date":"2017-05-25T04:31:58","date_gmt":"2017-05-25T04:31:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.scu.edu\/lschreder\/?p=151"},"modified":"2017-05-25T04:31:58","modified_gmt":"2017-05-25T04:31:58","slug":"back-to-my-annotated-bibliography","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.scu.edu\/lschreder\/2017\/05\/25\/back-to-my-annotated-bibliography\/","title":{"rendered":"Back to my Annotated Bibliography"},"content":{"rendered":"

In my last post, I described the steps that I needed to make to try to connect the streps of authors who wrote scholarly articles.<\/strong> I planned to do the same process to connect the trends of all nine authors, but my plans had to change once I realized that doing to the process wouldn’t work well with having so many authors that have so many lines! I discovered that the chart would turn into a confusing mess– only after I made it though.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

But in the process of creating my chart, I found a way to make the connections betweens the author and trends more clear.<\/strong> I decided to write down the authors and go through the bibliographies that I had written. The quality of my bibliographies became essential as I wrote down brief main points to make connections. The part of my bibliographies in which I drew connections were I guess reminders of the main points but were not particularly necessary to accomplish what I needed to do– which was write a brief source paper.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

After I reviewed the bibliographies and wrote down the main notes of each author, I began to highlight the trends I observed.<\/p>\n

These trends included\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n