Looking For 75 Words Or More To Respond To This Discussion Post There Are Many D

Looking for 75 words or more to respond to this discussion post.  There are many differences between Popular sources and Scholarly sources.     Five differences of popular sources is that these are from magazines and newspaper articles, because these are usually someone’s opinions or trying to impress a boss.  The do not have an abstract to them, nor do they have references or a bibliography.  These kinds of sources are written by just anyone most of the time.     Scholarly articles are written by an expert in that field.  They have an abstract, an introduction, methods and materials like graphs and tables.  These also give the results of the findings that were tested or in question.  The peer also discusses the findings and what was do to get the results.  Then at the end there is a reference list and a Bibliography of an explanation and discussion of the different scholarly sources that were used.     A scholarly source that I am using is one of the articles that I will be using in my final paper.  It is a journal article by Chris Pawson, entitled “A comparative analysis of students satisfaction with teaching on STEM vs non-STEM programmes” (Pawson, 2012).  In this article, at the beginning there is an abstract tell the reader about the studies that were done getting the opinions of the students that was comparing the STEM programme, and the non-STEM programme.  This article was done by Pawson who was writing the article for the Psychology Teaching Review, which was peer-reviewed.  There was an introduction explaining what was to be reported on the advantages or disadvantage to the STEM programme, which included graphs and tables of how many students approved and how many did not.  Pawson reported on the findings and discussed everything that was done in achieving the results.  There also was a reference page and a Bibliography at the end of the article.     The popular source article was “Why American’s obsession with STEM education is dangerous” by Fareed Zakaria.  This article was found in The Washington Post.  This article was written by using the opinions of others about the program.  There was no abstract, no introduction, no references, no methods or materials were used, no one studied it, so there were no results or findings, just opinions, and no bibliography was attached with it.     To me, all of this were the visual cues as well as the proof of them being scholarly or popular articles.  To me the popular article lacked the proof that the results were not legitimate, and that anyone could have written it.  The writer of the article was a columnist for the newspaper, and because it was just opinions of others, there is no proof of what he had written.                                                                                                                       ReferencesPawson, C. (2012). A Comparative Analysis of students’ satisfaction with teaching on STEM vs. Non-STEM Programmes. Psychology Teaching Review, 18(2), 16-21.        Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.govZakaria, F. (2015). Why American’s obsession with STEM education is dangerous. The Washington Post. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com