User:Sanchezpl/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1
Content: Tone and Balance: Sources and References: Organization and writing quality: Images and Media: Talk page discussion: Overall impressions:
 * Educational inequality in the United States
 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead Section:
 * The lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly and concisely describes the article's topic.
 * The lead includes a a brief description of most of the article's major sections.
 * The lead includes a topic that is not present in the article. It mentions "resources available for the student and their school." However, there's no section discussing this area in detain in the actual article.
 * The lead is pretty concise.
 * The articles content is relevant to the topic.
 * The content is up to date. Last edit was made on March 29th, 2021.
 * There is some content that is missing: further information on "resources available for the student and their school."
 * This article deals with educational equity gaps and addresses topics related to historically underrepresented populations.
 * The article is from a neutral point of view.
 * There are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position.
 * Viewpoints are pretty proportionally represented.
 * Minority and fringe points are accurately described. Statements are based upon independent reliable sources.
 * The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.
 * Facts in the article are backed up by reliable secondary sources of information. Not all are hyperlinked but they can be found if searched through Google or another search engine.
 * Sources are thorough and reflect the available literature on the topic.
 * Sources are current.
 * Sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors and include historically marginalized marginalized individuals.
 * The sources provided in the article are of high quality but more can we found elsewhere.
 * Very few of the links no longer work.
 * The article is well-written: it is clear, organized and concise.
 * The article has a few grammatical errors.
 * The article is well-organized. Sections are broken down neatly.
 * The article does not include high quality images that enhance the understanding of the topic.
 * images are well captioned.
 * Images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * Images are laid out in a semi-visually appealing way.
 * The article is within the scope of the WikiProject United States.
 * The article has been rated as Star-Class on the project's quality scale.
 * The article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 * Wikipedia discusses the article very similar to the way discussed in class. There's a main area of interest and within that areas, there are subtopics that help better understand the different factors surrounding that discourse. Ideas are also neatly organized and broken down.
 * The article's overall status is positive. It's strengths include cohesiveness and a clear breakdown of the main topic. However, it can further improve with the addition of more scholarly articles and more research in areas such as "resources available for the student and their school."
 * The article is quite well-developed. However, some of the statements and facts need more research back-up.
 * Sources
 * Long, Cindy. “The Every Student Succeeds Act: Four Years Later, How Much Progress?.” The National Education Association. December 2019. https://www.nea.org/advocating-for-change/new-from-nea/every-student-succeeds-act-four-years-later-how-much-progress
 * Noltemeyer, Amity L., Mujic, Julie & McLoughlin, Caven S. The History of Inequality in Education. Sacred Heart University. History Faculty Publication. 2012. https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1103&context=his_fac
 * Noltemeyer, Amity L., Mujic, Julie & McLoughlin, Caven S. The History of Inequality in Education. Sacred Heart University. History Faculty Publication. 2012. https://digitalcommons.sacredheart.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1103&context=his_fac

Option 2
 Content:   Tone and Balance:   Sources and References:   Organization and writing quality:   Images and Media:   Talk page discussion:   Overall impressions:  Sources
 * Tutoring
 * Article Evaluation
 *  Lead Section: 
 * The lead includes an introductory sentence that clearly and concisely describes the article's topic.
 * The lead doesn't includes a a brief description of most of the article's major sections.
 * The lead doesn't includes a topic that is not present in the article.
 * The lead is pretty concise.
 * The lead is pretty concise.
 * The articles content is relevant to the topic. However, it can be better organized.
 * The content is up to date. Last edit was made on April 14th, 2021.
 * There is some content that is missing: further information/background/research on "History," "Effectiveness," "Issues," and "Controversies"
 * This article provides a concise definition of what tutoring is, as well as a brief historical background and other relevant subtopics, such as tutoring in other parts of the world and some issues surrounding this practice. Additionally, the article addresses topics related to historically underrepresented populations.
 * The article is from a neutral point of view.
 * There are no claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position.
 * Viewpoints are pretty proportionally represented.
 * Minority and fringe points are accurately described. Statements are based upon independent reliable sources.
 * The article does not attempt to persuade the reader in favor of one position or away from another.
 * Facts in the article are backed up by reliable secondary sources of information. Not all are hyperlinked but they can be found if searched through Google or another search engine.
 * Sources can be more thorough to reflect the available literature on the topic.
 * The majority of sources are current. However, some are no longer accessible or current.
 * Sources are written by a diverse spectrum of authors and include historically marginalized individuals. The sources provided in the article are of high quality but more can we found elsewhere.
 * Very few of the links no longer work.
 * The article is semi well-written: it is clear, but can be better organized.
 * The article has a few grammatical errors.
 * The article not well-organized. Sections are broken down unevenly.
 * The article includes high quality images that enhance the understanding of the topic.
 * Images are well captioned.
 * Images adhere to Wikipedia's copyright regulations.
 * Images are laid out in a semi-visually appealing way.
 * The article is within the scope of the WikiProject United States.
 * The article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 * The article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 * Wikipedia discusses the article very similar to the way discussed in class. There's a main area of interest and within that areas, there are subtopics that help better understand the different factors surrounding that discourse. Ideas, however, can be better organized and broken down.
 * The article's overall status is positive. Its strengths include the neutral tone and unbiased information. However, it can further improve with the addition of more scholarly articles and more research in certain subtopics.
 * The article is quite well-developed. However, some of the statements and facts need more research back-up.
 * Kudinov, Dmytro V., et al. “Educational Process in Ancient Rome Schools.” European Journal of Contemporary Education, vol. 8, June 2019, pp. 425–436. EBSCOhost, doi:10.13187/ejced.2019.2.425.
 * Liu, Ruo-Lan, and Yu-Chi Li. “Action Research to Enrich Learning in E-Tutoring for Remote Schools.” Systemic Practice & Action Research, vol. 33, no. 1, Feb. 2020, pp. 95–110. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s11213-019-09517-5.
 * Mänty, Kristiina, et al. “Socio-Emotional Interaction in Collaborative Learning: Combining Individual Emotional Experiences and Group-Level Emotion Regulation.” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 102, Jan. 2020. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101589.
 * Vick, Nicholas, et al. “The Effectiveness of Tutoring on Developmental English Grades.” Community College Enterprise, vol. 21, no. 1, Spring 2015, pp. 11–26. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=108397540&site=eds-live.
 * Warkentien, Siri & Grady, Sarah. “Students’ Use of tutoring Services, by Adequate Yearly Progress Status of School.” National Center for Education Statistics. November 2009. https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010023.pdf