Submit research notes

H1: Choose one route and check the requirements

The teacher selects the route. With an actual ER question, kept sources and assigned criteria, assemble your genuine packet. Do not also complete the simulated S1 packet.

Without those inputs, complete the original practice below. All S1 records are fictional classroom documents, not published research or evidence from an actual ER.

For the opening, a list names separate findings. A synthesis connects findings from multiple sources. An evidence gap names a question those sources cannot answer.

Answer both opening questions: how does synthesis differ from a list? Why should a summary name an unanswered question? Use this paragraph; later cards can wait.

The original completeness check requires the question, three source entries with annotations and citations, a supported synthesis, and one gap. It is not your teacher’s grade rubric.

R1: Keep the previous source-entry method

For each practice source, write two annotation sentences. First summarize its actual content; then explain its relevance to the question. Do not invent what the author observed.

Add a citation using author, date, title and publisher. Use one consistent format. For these simulated records, include the S identifier and the label fictional classroom record.

Check the source’s scope and possible bias. A title alone supplies no finding. An author label or official-looking layout does not prove credibility.

For real work, use the original sources and actual citation details. Retain the February 10 method: summary, relevance, consistent citation and supported bias checks. Do not reuse its vaccine example as ER evidence.

S1: Complete original practice source set

Original route only. Research question: Which entrance-direction information gaps occur across these three supplied draft ER visitor documents? The complete simulated excerpts and metadata follow.

All three records have fictional author Practice Design Team, fictional publisher Classroom Draft Collection, and simulated record date February 1, 2027. These labels belong only to the exercise.

S1-A title: Draft arrival card. Complete excerpt: “Go to reception.” Scope: this card’s wording only.

S1-B title: Draft appointment directions. Complete excerpt: “When you arrive, ask at reception.” Scope: this directions excerpt only; no real appointment exists.

S1-C title: Draft visitor map note. Complete excerpt: “Visitor entrance: east door. Reception: desk A.” Scope: this map note only.

No floor plan, actual building, visitors, waiting times or outcomes are supplied. East door and desk A are fictional labels. They are not directions for any real site.

The collection covers drafts selected by one fictional design team. That shared selection is a possible source-selection bias; these are not independent research studies. Do not call any author dishonest.

Use all three records for practice. Their text supports checking whether an entrance is named. It cannot establish which door is appropriate, what visitors do or whether a design works.

Actual route: use the teacher-approved source set and required source count instead. Do not add these three fictional source entries.

N1: Connect findings without inventing effects

Original route: compare the three excerpts. Combine at least two source findings and account for any record that differs. Cite the identifiers beside each supported finding.

Write two or three synthesis sentences. State the pattern, connect it to a bounded documentation need, and keep the conclusion about these drafts. Do not prescribe clinical routing.

State a supported need about the draft set’s entrance wording, not about visitors. A named entrance in one draft does not prove that another draft caused delay or harm.

Name one unanswered question and the information needed to address it. A next information need is a proposal, not evidence already collected. No new test or visitor contact is required.

Actual route: synthesize your actual findings with citations and limits instead. Use genuine evidence, including disagreement; source agreement alone does not prove a claim.

Q1: Check the same packet on your own

Original route: check each record’s complete excerpt for a named entrance, then compare all three. Your summary must account for every record’s wording.

Each entry needs two annotation sentences and a citation. Check each citation against M1’s pattern: author, date, title, collection, record identifier and the fictional classroom record label.

Name the possible shared-selection bias supplied in S1. It limits generalization beyond this selected draft set. No measured effect or actual research credibility is established.

If stuck, compare two records first: check whether each names an entrance. Then bring the third back and complete the full three-record packet.

Check every synthesis clause against a cited excerpt. Revise one unsupported clause, or explain why a checked clause is supported. Keep the correction in the same packet.

Actual route: check your genuine source entries and synthesis against the real originals and teacher criteria. Skip the fictional answers and restart; do not create a second packet.

P1: Hold real requirements separately

Use one brief note with evidence of what you actually did or a next action you need. Start it during work; update only changed items at closing.

Keep eight checks separate: actual ER question, genuine source set, rubric/format, notebook readiness, enrolled instructions, official completion, assignment access, and whether Schoology shows Submitted.

Do not copy private records, names, account information or clinical observations into this preparation. Keep genuine work in the teacher-approved route.

Open the linked February 16 BI assignment and follow its posted instructions and deadline. If access fails, save locally and ask the teacher for help.

A saved file is not a received submission. Uploading the practice packet does not complete official Research and Documentation work. Do not invent a grade or completion check.

Both routes finish with the same-packet reflection: name the most important supported finding and one limit. No separate exit submission or partner response is required.

Both routes: list, synthesis and gap

Answer H1’s two opening questions in brief phrases.

H1 supplies both distinctions. No prior source reading is required.

Original route only: question and source links

Record the S1 question and identify how A, B and C each help answer it.

Actual route: use your actual question and sources instead; skip these fictional links.

Original route only: three complete source entries

For A, B and C, write two annotation sentences and a consistent citation. State their scope and supplied selection-bias limit.

Use R1 and S1. Actual route: assemble genuine entries using real metadata and teacher requirements instead; no duplicate simulated entries.

Original route only: supported synthesis

Write two or three sentences connecting the findings, accounting for any record that differs, and naming a bounded documentation need. Cite source identifiers.

Use N1. Actual route: synthesize genuine findings and their limits instead; skip the fictional summary.

Original route only: one evidence gap

Name one question the excerpts cannot answer and the information needed to address it.

Do not collect new data. Actual route: name the gap in your genuine evidence instead.

Both routes: check and revise the same packet

Use Q1’s check for your selected route. Correct an unsupported clause or justify one accurate clause.

Original route uses Q1’s checks; actual route uses its real sources and teacher criteria. No second packet.

Both routes: requirements and Schoology submission check

For each of P1's eight checks, give brief evidence of what you did or a next action you need.

Use the same packet or existing work-check record. No private information or claimed action without evidence.

Both routes: final finding and limit

Point to the most important supported finding in your packet and explain one limit.

A short note or spoken self-check on the same product is enough; no separate exit submission.