Research+Paper+6

=**Rhetorically reading, tracking, and evaluating resources**=

=**Rhetorical reading**=

You've been reading for a long time. And not only have you been reading, but you've been reading to learn and to gather information. You may have also been doing what we call **focused reading**. Simply defined, **focused reading** is reading with a specific goal in mind. It is paying attention when you read. For example, before voting in an election, you might closely read the candidates' statements to decide if your ideas and goals align with theirs. You read their statements with the focused goal of deciding which candidate will receive your vote, and as you read you are choosing which statements most closely align with your values and beliefs.

To get the best results from resources you consult for any research question, it is wise to go one step further and **read rhetorically**. To read a resource **rhetorically**, you not only read for a purpose but also pay attention to the context of the document you are reading, closely analyzing it **rhetorical situation**. Let's say you are watching a movie. If you just watch the movie and zone out, you will probably laugh when everyone else at the theater is laughing and not remember much of it the next morning. In this case, you are just passively "reading" the movie. If you go to the movie to be entertained, you will be engaging in **focused reading** of the film as you watch it. The next morning you would be able to explain to someone whether you liked the move, whether you found it entertaining, and why. However, if you were to read the movie **rhetorically**, you would be paying attention to how certain people are depicted (e.g. women and characters of color), considering the historical context in which it was made, or comparing it to other films by the same director, screenwriter, or editor.

Let's consider an example from a different research situation. Imagine you're conducting research on gun control laws and you come across a Web site titles, simply, "Gun Control." The Web site begins with a quote from Thomas Jefferson and includes sections on "The Second Amendment" and "Gun Control: a Statistical PErspective." The Web site asks and responds to many of the questions you have been considering in revising your research question:


 * How often are guns used in self-defense?


 * Does gun ownership deter burglars?


 * What does the Second Amendment mean and how should it be interpreted?

On the surface, this Web site might seem like a perfect match for your research. If you were doing a focused reading of the site, looking for information on your research topic, the site provides a wealth of responses to relevant questions. A careful //rhetorical reading// of the Web site, however, reveals that the site has a clear **bias** toward and interpretation of the Second Amendment that protects gun owners and limits gun control. The Web site give very limited attention to other perspectives on the issue. Additionally, you would have difficulty establishing the credibility of the source because the authors are not clearly identified. The site refers to "GunCite" as the sponsoring organization but offers no specific information about that organization or the authors of the site. Reading your resources **rhetorically** will help you to evaluate them for usefulness in your research project.


 * Is your reading focused and rhetorical? **

To help distinguish between a // focused // and a // rhetorical // reading, list the various texts that you have read during the past couple of days. Then label each reading experiences as either focused or rhetorical. Ask yourself the following questions to help you categorize your reading experiences.


 * What was the goal in reading the material?


 * Did I consciously have this goal in mind before reading the material?


 * Did I pay attention to the rhetorical elements of the material (the text's author, purpose, audience, and topic?)


 * Did understaning the rhetorical elements of the material affect my goal for reading the material?

In your list, circle the reading experience that you are most confident was focused, circle another experience that you are most confident was rhetorical, and circle a third that you had the most difficult time labeling as either focused or rhetorical. Discuss these three experiences with a friend or classmate. Does your friend or classmate agree with your labeling? Why or why not?

Like all the activities related to writing talked about so far, reading **rhetorically** requires paying attention to the **rhetorical situation**. To be successful in reading something rhetorically you must first be aware of your purpose for reading the material. You will use your purpose as the criterion for deciding what material is important and worth remembering and what material is worth only skimming. In many cases when you read rhetorically you end up reading a document more than once. Suppose you buy a new car. You might not read the owner's manual at all when you first get the car (you already know how to drive, right?). However, once you've decided you are tired of the stereo's clock flickering the wrong time at you, you would read the manual to find out how to change the time on the clock. Your reading would be focused. If you had lost the manual, you might go online to find the instruction for setting the time or search YouTube for a video that shows how to change the time. You would read rhetorically, considering who was writing and publishing the Internet resource before following the instructions. You wouldn't want to damage the clock in your new car! In this case, you would read rhetorically to determine which source is credible, and then a focused reading would be necessary to find the information that you need to follow instructions.

When you rhetorically read documents in an academic setting, you generally have to read them more than once to obtain all the information you need. While reading resources for a research project, you probably want to read through them at least three times:

1. Read (or perhaps even skim) for the main point or claim of the resource so that you can decide whether it is worth your time and energy to read the material closely.

2. Read to identify the **rhetorical situation** of the resource so that you can understand the context as well as figure out how it will fit into your research project's specific **rhetorical situation**.

3. Read closely for details. In this reading you will probably annotate the resource and take notes paraphrasing the claim, reason, and evidence presented in the resource.

Sometimes you will want to rhetorically read materials from another person's perspective. To argue a particular claim effectively and to influence people who believe differently from you, you must demonstrate that you understand their point of view. To help understand those who might think or feel differently about your topic, and to make better connections wi that same group later, it is important that you rhetorically read materials from their perspective. This means (1) seeking a variety of materials and perspectives while doing research on your topic, especially **secondary research**, and (2) taking care to read rhetorically and take notes on those resources. Much of what follows is devoted to helping you develop these reading strategies for your own research.


 * Choose resources to read **

As you conduct your secondary research, you will find a large number of possible resources. Knowing that you can't possibly read them all, you need to quickly assess whether a resources wi worth your time to read more closely. Practice choosing relevant resources to read by using an Internet search engine to do a search with one of the key terms of your research question. After reading only the introduction, conclusion, and subject headings, answer the following questions about the first four hits.


 * Are you able to quickly identify who wrote the resource, on what subject the resource is focused, when it was published, where it was published, and what the purpose of the resource is?


 * How does the material in the resource directly respond to your specific research question, not just your research topic?

If the resource is organized enough to answer the first question and is specifically addressing your research question, it is probably worth your time to read it more closely. Reading rhetorically is the first step in choosing and evaluating resources, but to determine whether you'll use a resource in your project requires even more intense reading and evaluation.

=**Considering Context**=

As a piece of communication in its own right, every resource you read has its own **rhetorical situation**, or context. Just like everything that you write, each resource you read has a purpose, an audience, a topic, and an author that help to define the context in which it was produced and distributed. Rhetorically reading a resource means carefully understanding not only what it says but also its purpose in saying so. You need to know the **rhetorical situation** of a piece of writing in order to truly understand what it says.


 * Situate a resource rhetorically **

Select one of the resources you have found that could help you answer your initial research question. Respond to the following questions about that resource.


 * Who is the author of the resource, and what are his/her/their credentials?


 * With whom is the author affiliated (employer, organization, or other group?)


 * For what purpose(s) did the author write the resource? In other words, is the author trying to provide information? persuade readers? entertain? What clues help you identify the piece's purpose?


 * Who is the audience? How do you know? How might the audience have affected the way that the resource was written?

Once you have responded to all of these questions, consider the resource as a whole. How might the answers to these questions have influenced the writing of this resource?

=**Annotating Resources**=

Simply put, annotating is writing on or about something you read. You can annotate a resource in a variety of ways. Usually, the method in which you annotate your resource is based on your purpose for reading the resource. For example, if you are enrolled in a literature class that is currently discussing tone and rhythm and you are reading the //Odyssey//, you will probably mark section and take notes about language choice. However, if you were reading the same work in an ancient world history class, you might mark section and take notes about passages that refer to specific historical events. In both cases you are reading the same text; however, the method in which you annotate is based on the information you need from that text.

The annotation method you use is directed not only by your reading purpose but also by the materiality of the text itself. The least complicated way to annotate resources is to physically write on them. However, if you borrowed the books from someone or from a library, it is better to use sticky notes or notebook paper for annotations instead of writing on the pages. If you are reading a Web site, you might use software, such as //Diigo//, that allows you to take notes onscreen, but many people take notes from the Internet on paper.


 * Claim**

While reading resources for larger, more complex research projects, spend some time identifying and annotating the resource's claim, reasons, and evidence. The **Claim** is the overall point that the resource is making, or its thesis. Whereas identifying the **claim** in a scholarly, academic resource is fairly easy (it is usually located somewhere with the first few paragraphs), identifying the **claim** of a more informal resource - a blog, a newspaper editorial, a song, a movie - may be more difficult. For example, all commercials claim that some specific product is good and, furthermore, that you should spend money purchasing it. A primary **claim** might be explicit, but it is often implicit, and you might need to read the resource multiple times to identify a **claim**.


 * Reasons**

After identifying the claim that the resource is making, you will want to identify the **reasons** that the author is using to support his or her **claim**. The overall **claim** of car commercials is that a specific car is better than all others and that you want or need that car. However, different commercials provide different reasons for claiming that a car is good. Engine size and speed are often the primary reasons given in commercials for sports cars, but secondary reasons might include that the car would make you more popular, attractive, or envied by your neighbors. On the other hand, fuel efficiency and safety are often the primary reasons in commercials for more family-oriented vehicles. These reasons support the argument, or **claim**, in an advertisement that a specific car is good enough to spend thousands of dollars on it.


 * Evidence**

Finally, resources need to provide **evidence** to support their **reasons** and **claims**. **Evidence** is material provided about the object being discusses as support for the **reasons** and **claims**. Car companies might cite how quickly a car can go from zero to sixty miles per hour as **evidence** of a specific sports car's speed. They might also cite how many cylinders the engine has, or how much horsepower it puts out, as **evidence** of its engine size. Commercials for family cars might cite the number of air bags in the vehicle as **evidence** of the car's safety, or they might cite independent researchers who agree that the car gets more than forty miles to the gallon as **evidence** of fuel efficiency.

As you annotate a resource, make notes about how you think it might help you to answer your research question. When you read rhetorically, consider not only the **rhetorical** context of the resource but also your research context. How might this resource fit into your research plan? Does it provide a perspective that is lacking in the resources you have found so far?


 * Annotate a resource **

Once you have chosen at least one resource to help you answer your research question, use the following strategies to practice annotating it.


 * Print source: Write on the pages directly if you printed it yourself or "mark" it with sticky notes if it's a borrowed book.


 * Electronic source: Take notes on screen or paper, or print sections so that you can mark them and keep track of your thoughts.

Annotate your source by responding to the following questions.

1. Who is the author of the text and what are his/her/their credentials?

2. What is the purpose of the text and who is its intended audience?

3. What is the major claim made in the resource?

4. What are the reasons given for supporting that claim?

5. What evidence is provided to support those reasons?

6. How useful will this resource be in your own research? How does it fit with the other resources that you have found?

=**Summarizing**=

A **summary** gives the main points of a resource, but is briefer than the original. After you read one of your resources, you should be able to summarize it briefly. It is important to summarize the resource for two reasons. First, you need to be sure that you understand the main point of the resource. What is it trying to say? What does the author want the reader to do or think after reading the resource? Although you will want to read it again more closely to accumulate details about the information and arguments presented in the resource, it is important that you initially understand what the resource is doing. At minimum, **summarizing** the resource will help you understand whether it applies to your specific research project.


 * Summarizing** a resource also helps you keep your research organized. A short **summary** of the resource will be a reminder of what is in the document when you star organizing, and reorganizing, your resources. With **summaries** of various documents, you will be able to quickly assess whether you have enough information in one area of you project and if you need more in another.

The easiest way to **Summarize** a document is to briefly answer the standard journalists' questions. In other words, you will want to know the //who, what, when, where, why//, and //how// of the resource. A helpful guideline is to remember that your **summary** should be no more than ten percent as long as the original resource. In many cases, you can **summarize** a source in one or two sentences. Your **summary** will also probably reflect what you found most interesting in the resource and hint at your purpose for using the resource.


 * Summarize one of your resources **

Now, choose one of your own resources that you plan to use in your research project. Do a first reading of the resource (which you may have already done when you chose the resource in the first place) and summarize the main point of the resource. Keep the journalist's questions in mind as you summarize, and also try to maintain a balance between keeping your summary concise and making sure its is thorough enough to be helpful as you work on your research later.

Swap your summary with someone in your class, or a friend or family member. Ask him or her to read the summary. Did you provide enough information? If you have time, ask the person to skim the resource and recheck your summary. What information might he or she include in the summary? What information should be cut out? Why?

=**Paraphrasing**=

Another way to take notes on your resources is to **paraphrase** them. When you **paraphrase** a resource, or a part of a resource, you put the author's argument or ideas //into your own words//. Such a strategy might be helpful if you don't want to quote the resource or idea in it entirety but you also don't want to condense the ideas that were interesting and useful to you. For example, if you found a long passage in a print resources that had some great information in it but the resource was written for a very scientific audience (and your research is not), you might **paraphrase** the ideas to use them in your writing later. In this case, you don't want to condense, and possibly lose, some of the ideas in the resource, but you'll need to use different language when you share the information with your audience. Of course, when you **paraphrase**, you need to provide a citation to tell where the ideas came from.

One other guideline to keep in mind when **paraphrasing** is that you need to put the ideas in //your own words// - not just change a word or two here and there. If you find yourself keeping the same basic sentence structure as the resource but changing just a few words, it might be best to just quote the resource.


 * Paraphrase one of your resources **

Now, choose one of the resources that you plan to use in your research project. Skim through the resource to find a passage that is particularly interesting or that you think you might use in your research project. Try paraphrasing the passage, putting it into your own words. Once you have paraphrased the passage, reread the original passage and decide whether it would be better to use your paraphrase (with reference to the source) or to quote the resource.

=**Selecting Potential Quotations**=

Sometimes you might decide that it is best to quote directly from a resource. You might choose to quote, instead of **summarizing** or **paraphrasing** for several reasons:


 * You are doing direct analysis of a written text and need to provide the specific examples you are analyzing.


 * The section of text that you would like to use is short and could easily be incorporated into your larger text.


 * The author(s) of the resource used language that you believe to be particularly powerful and/or persuasive for your intended audience, and you would lose meaning or emphasis if you paraphrased it.


 * The text is well know and your audience might be familiar with the quotation you have chosen.


 * You know you will want to comment directly on the author's ideas and/or language.

As you are reading your resources, take not of quotations that you think might be particularly powerful to use in your research project. As your research project develops, you might find that some of those quotations are more useful than others.


 * Take detailed notes on a resource **

As you choose resources for your research, you might subconsciously be thinking that some of the resources are particularly useful. Often in the first stages of a research project we mentally categorize the resources we are finding into // resources I'll definitely use // and // resources I might use //. If you did this as you were doing your preliminary research, pick one of the resources that you think you would // definitely use // for this activity.

Now try using several of the strategies discussed in class to rhetorically read your resource.

As you read your resource, take the following steps.


 * Physically annotate your resource. Use a method that you are comfortable with - write on the document itself (if it is yours, you have printed it, or it is a copy), use sticky notes to keep track of ideas as you read, or keep notes on a separate piece of paper or on your computer as you read.


 * Summarize the claim or main point of the resource.


 * Paraphrase the reasons given in the resource for its claim or main point.


 * Make note of the evidence used to support the claim and reasons for the claim in the resource.


 * Contextualize the resource by noting its purpose, intended audience, author, and topic.


 * Project how and why this resource might help you answer your research question.


 * Finally, note sections that include evidence or reasons that you would want to quote directly. Carefully note specific phrases and sentences you might want to quote.

=**Tracking and Evaluating Data**=

The rhetorical reading strategies described will help you read through, understand, take notes on, and comprehend the resources yo have chosen during your preliminary research. By completing these tasks, you are beginning to evaluate the usefulness of the resources you have collected. But you also need to keep track of the information that you collect during your research process. It is much more efficient, and will better prepare you for the final presentation of your research, if you systematically track the data you collect.

Keeping track of a few resources is not a difficult task; however, chances are that a lack of resources will not be your problem. Instead, with the proliferation of information on the Internet, you are more likely to have too much information. Imagine a student who has chosen to research water conservation efforts and legislation in her city. She might collect general information about water conservation, documentation about water conservation in her community, minutes from city council meetings, interviews with city council members, and perhaps observations or interviews with people in her community. To keep her resources organized in a meaningful way, she will probably want to track her data in four ways:


 * **Verify**. She should verify that she has collected everything that she needs.


 * **Copy**. She should keep copies of the actual data collected.


 * **Respond**. She should reflect on and respond to her data, considering how the data answer her research question, compare to other resources, and might affect her intended audience.


 * **Fill gaps**. She should use the results from her consistent verifying and responding to identify gaps in her research that she still needs to fill.

Each of these methods includes an evaluation phase that would help her to determine whether she has collected useful, credible, and valid data. These strategies will help you to tack and organize your resources as well.


 * Verify -- and Evaluate Usefulness**

The downfall of many novice researchers is that they get stuck in the "data collection" mode. By not developing a well-though-out research plan, they just continue to collect data because they do not know when they have enough. To help keep you organized and consistently moving forward in your research project, you need to compare what you have found with what you actually need according to your research plan. In other words, use your research plan as an initial data-tracking checklist.

As you start collecting resources, both **primary** and **secondary**, be sure to quickly check them against your research plan. A quick evaluation of resources at this stage will help you determine if they actually focus on your research question. Another important criterion to keep in mind as you verify the importance of resources is their potential usefulness to your project.


 * How well will each resource help you respond to your research question?


 * What does each resource bring to your research project?

As you find and verify the importance of your resources, you may have to make changes to your original plan based on what you have found. If you do have to make changes (and who doesn't?), be sure to take notes of them. Instead of writing the changes in a separate document, handwrite them or type them as bold or italic notes in your original research plan.


 * Copy -- and Evaluate Credibility**

Once you've verified that a resource is worth keeping, it is critical that you copy if carefully or take detailed notes from it. If you are doing **secondary research**, obtain a complete copy of the secondary text. At some point, you might need to refer to the larger context of the piece, and documenting your resources will also be much easier if you have complete copies of them. Therefore, if you find a journal article in the library or in the library database, photocopy or print it. If you find a blog posting on the Internet, print or bookmark it.

If you are conducting **primary research**, you will want to carefully store your original texts (questionnaire results, interview tapes or files, highlighted literary work, etc.) You may even want to make copies of your primary data to work with and put your originals someplace safe. Whether your primary data are in hard copy or electronic format, it is always advisable to make a backup copy.

If for some reason you cannot obtain a complete copy of your secondary, or even primary, resource, be sure to take careful, thorough, well-organized notes that focus on the content of the text (exactly what is in it), not your reaction to it.


 * Track bibliographic information **

The easiest way to take note of the various types of bibliographic information you will need for a resource is to use the journalist's questions. Select one resource that you know you will use in your research project and answer all of the following questions.


 * Who is the author? editor? publisher? owner/webmaster?


 * What is the name of the article? journal (page number, volume number?) web page? web site? chapter? book? blog entry? blog title?


 * When was it published? posted to the Web? When did you find it? (Be as detailed as possible - day/month/year).


 * Where did you find it? What is the name of the library? name of database? name of search engine? URL/web address? (If a book, what city was it published in?)

Another part of the copying step in your tracking process is to write a brief summary for every secondary source you collect. These summaries will help you to keep your secondary sources organized as the pile of resources grows. The summaries will also allow you to group like sources together as you start working with your data.

As part of your note-taking during the copying phase, remember you should also carefully note the purpose and audience of the resource. To help prepare for you analysis of the resource, you need to know ho produced it as well as their purpose in producing it. For example, if you were doing research on breast cancer, you might find legitimate information from accounts of survivors as well as articles reporting the research of doctors working with patients. However, to adequately assess how and why you might use each resource in the answer to your research question, you need to understand the credibility and authority of it author.


 * Respond -- and Evaluate Validity**

A common mistake many students make is simply to combine several quotations and summaries from different resources and call it a paper. They miss the opportunity to make the project their own. While conducting research, you need to make research your own by making personal connections to your resources. In other words, you need to spend time with your data - to know the information that you have collected - and respond to it.

Responding to your data goes beyond just "taking notes" on it. Notes are reminders of the original information documented - the //who, what, when, where, why//, and //how// of the original resource. Responding the your data goes beyond reminding yourself of the content of the resource; it includes analyzing the resource in relation to your research question. When responding to your resources, consider the following questions.


 * How does the resource answer your research question?

-> Does it provide an answer? What evidence does it provide for support?

-> Does it introduce more questions? If so, what questions? How do these new questions affect your understanding of your original research question?


 * How does the resource compare with other resources?

-> Does it say the same thing as some of your other resources? If so, which ones? How are they related?

-> Does it say something different from some of your resources? If so, which ones?

-> Does it use similar language and ideas?

-> Does it refer to similar people, places, and other resources?

When discussing primary experimental research, "validity" means something very specific. It refers to the logical appropriateness of the methods for a specific study. Evaluating the validity of a resource in your own research is somewhat similar; you are assessing the content of the resource itself. This step differs from evaluating credibility, when you are looking at who conducted the research and wrote or sponsored the document you might use as a resource. When evaluating validity, you will need to look at two areas:


 * **Internal structure**. Look at whether the argument or presentation of information follows coherent lines of reasoning with easily identified claims and reasons and logically connected evidence.


 * **External comparison**. Look at how the types of information or conclusions being presented compare with other resources that present or use similar types of information and draw similar conclusions.

Therefore, when you are evaluating the **validity** or your **primary** research, pay close attention to your methods for inspecting and collecting data fro your primary resources. If you are interviewing people, you should document how you chose your interviewees, what questions you asked and why, and the rate of reply. You can then compare your methods and your results to similar studies that you found in your **secondary** research.

When evaluating the validity of **secondary** resources, you are critically assessing the information in the text. You might assess how current the information is that is cited in the source (if currency is important to your topic), how authoritative the sources are that your resource relies upon, and how ell developed the **claims, reasons**, and **evidence** presented in the source are. Although we are suggesting that you compare your resources as a test for validity, do not automatically throw out a resource that radically stands out from the rest. Sometimes when new ideas emerge, they are shockingly different from everything that has come before them. Some of the most groundbreaking work throughout history was questioned in terms of its validity in the beginning - for example, consider the work of Galileo and Albert Einstein. If you have a resource that fits into the "radically different" category, then it will be of the utmost importance to evaluate its validity by critically examining its internal structure to make sure that it contains a logical and well-supported argument. Also, be aware that if you are using such work as support for your argument, your audience (depending on who they are and what they value) might question such a resource, so you might need to defend its **validity** in order to use it effectively as a reference.


 * Evaluate validity **

Select one of the scholarly secondary resources that you will be using in your research project. Ask yourself the following questions about the resource.


 * Can you easily identify the claim, reasons, and evidence provided in the resource?


 * Do the evidence and reasons logically support the claim? Why or why not?


 * Do you have a similar resource that either argues the same perspective or conducts a similar study?


 * If so, did the two resources use similar methods for gathering and presenting data for their argument? How are they similar and different?


 * Fill the Gaps -- and Evaluate the Balance of Your Resources**

Do not wait until you've collected all of your data to start **verifying, copying** and **responding** to it. First, you'll want to carefully copy everything as soon as possible so you do not lose information. Second, you will need to know what you've collected so that you do not waste time collecting too much of the same information. Third, trends and themes you begin to identify as you respond to and reflect upon the resources and data might identify gaps in your original research plan. You may find that you need to collect other types of resources and data to answer your research question effectively.

Imagine Rajiv, who works for a transglobal company. He has been asked to research collaborative writing/document-sharing software that allows people from around the world to work synchronously. Once he started researching different technologies, he noticed that the various software applications had sections in their advertising that discussed security measures. He quickly realized he had overlooked an important area in his research and his bosses would be very concerned about security. Security was a "gap" in his research he needed to fill.

One way to fill some gaps in your research is to trace the resources referred to in one of your most useful, credible, and valid resources. Sometimes while you are conducting **secondary research**, you will find a "gold mine" that covers everything that you think is important. Both proficient and efficient researchers take advantage of the work others have already done. When a researcher finds that type of resource, he or she carefully checks the resource's reference lists or works cited page to search for more "veins of gold."

Although tracing research and information this way will not always lead to other important resources that you should read for yourself, it might lead you to one or two cornerstone pieces on the topic. You may also find an author's name repeated throughout numerous reference lists - that is a sign that you should probably look into that author's work yourself. And if you see a particular resource referred to across different reference lists, you should definitely search it out. Sometimes you'll see the names of one or two popular periodicals in the field. If you get those names, you may want to find the older issues to see if the periodical has other articles that might work for your topic.


 * WRITE: Trace a line of research**

Once you've started collecting a pile of resources, pick out two of three that you think are your strongest. Carefully read through and compare the reference lists to look for common sources, authors, and periodical titles. If you do not find any overlap, consider looking at the reference lists of other resources. Finding overlapping references can point to a specific conversation in the filed that might be of interest, and you'll want to be sure to follow those threads. Write down one or two points of overlap that you should follow up on, and then do a search using those terms (or names). What did you find?

Another way to fill some gaps is to evaluate the types of resources and data you have already collected.


 * Do you have both **primary** and **secondary** resources?


 * Do you have **static, syndicated**, and **dynamic** resources?


 * Do you have **edited, peer-reviewed* and **personally published** resources?


 * Do you have the following types of data: statistical evidence, experimental results, expert opinions, personal experience and/or testimony, and observations?

Not every project should have every type of resources of form of data, nor should every project have equal numbers of resources and data. Just pay attention to these categories and decide whether or not your project requires that type of resource of data. For example, Rajiv would not be doing his research project justice by just collecting primary research from his friend and colleagues and reading self-published articles on the Web about the different document-sharing applications he is considering. He would want to be sure to include articles that are edited and might include experimental results about the security and usability of the different applications.