Essay Journal Homework

Abstract of COLL 148 Week 1 Journal Guiding Statement

One of the most important steps in evaluating differing full-text journal resources for purchase is choosing the proper comparison service. Before selecting a service, one must first understand the variety of potential sources of online full-text journals to ensure that the selected comparison service is properly suited to the task. Such sources include for- fee e-journal subscriptions, open access journals, archive services, and full-text databases. The significant shortcomings of most commercially-available and freely-available comparison services must be made transparent in order for the user to have a proper understanding of what the services are able to actually provide in the way of content comparisons. In order to provide librarians with the proper data from which an educated collection development decision can be made, the chosen comparison service must take into account a number of important factors including (but not limited to): the variety of ways in which database providers reflect full-text content information (title name, ISSN, etc.) in their published title lists, loaded vs. licensed (i.e., “coming soon”), the importance of “active” vs. “halted” coverage, and the availability of unique content in each resource under consideration, rather than just overlap.

Keywords

journals, e-journals, Journal Where to Educate, active, halted, library, collection development, academic, research, ECE 430 Week 3 JOURNAL – Play time for children – Play time for children, databases, Individual Assignment Communications Journal Entry 3, ProQuest, Gale, reflective journal, archives, content, Journal Guiding Statement, publishers, subscriptions, Serials Solutions, Team Assignment Journal Article Review 1 Autism

Introduction

Comparing online full-text journal access in the effort to make an informed purchasing decision is often a daunting task. Adding to the difficulty of this undertaking is a lack of available guidance on how to properly make such comparisons. This problem is highlighted by Brier and Lebbin when they state that “library literature abounds with articles about full-text databases; however, the evaluation of title coverage has received little attention.”1

In order to help simplify this process, librarians and other information specialists faced with this challenge often turn to one of a growing number of available comparison services. The theory behind such services is that they will help to shed light on the common vs. unique content of the compared databases, so that the purchaser will better understand the differing values/benefits of each database. However, if they take the time to evaluate the comparison services themselves, they will quickly find that not all comparison services are created equal. This then begs the question that if the different services each produce different results (given the same full-text resources to compare), then how is a librarian to know which service will ultimately provide them with the most accurate comparative content information to make the right purchasing decision for their library? Only by first evaluating the comparison services themselves and gaining a solid understanding of their advantages and disadvantages can librarians know where to turn for an accurate and reliable comparison that will assist them in obtaining the greatest value from their resulting full-text database subscriptions, Journal Guiding Statement.

Online Journals Guiding Statement — Varieties of Access

Before making an in-depth inquiry into the nature of the comparison services themselves, it is first necessary to understand the various models and means by which online access to full-text journals (and other content sources) can be obtained. A solid understanding of the nature of the various full-text content resources themselves provides a fundamental knowledge as to what criteria a comparison service must take into account. By ensuring that journal comparisons take the appropriate criteria into consideration, a librarian can then be certain that the results of the comparison will allow them to make an accurate evaluation of the content under consideration.

Libraries receive online access to journals through many different models. To be clear, e- journals are not the same as journals available via full-text databases. E-journals are the extension of the print journal, available directly through the publisher (or through a subscription agent) at a price somewhat similar to the print. Most e-journals are purchased (rather than leased), so the library actually owns the backfiles (just like the print). Full-text databases are a commonly used method of supplementing e-journal collections. In fact, “much of the value that full text databases bring to a library lies heavily in not only the searching capabilities and deep back files of these collections, but also, importantly, in the many new, high-quality journals that these databases bring into a

library that were never before available in that library.”2  In contrast to e-journal

subscriptions, libraries are only leasing access to the content in most full-text databases. However, the lack of permanent ownership for these databases is a limitation that actually helps to maximize the cost-effectiveness of such resources.

For-Fee E-Journal Cultural Awareness Subscriptions

The most current and most stable form of access to online journals is via for-fee e-journal subscriptions. However, this model does have limitations:

1.        It is often the most expensive model and price increases of some journals are outpacing increases in library budgets.

2.        Many journals do not have an institution e-journal, but are available to institutions via another model such as cover-to-cover full-text databases. For example,

3.        Some publishers have an institutional e-journal, but only with incomplete/revolving archival coverage. However, these same journals are often available via cover-to-cover full-text databases with cumulative coverage. For example, Academy of Management, one of the world’s leading business journal publishers, has a revolving coverage institutional e-journal Cultural Awareness

4.        While some publishers are offering extensive backfiles with their e-journals, most are not. Yet, many journals only allow online access to their backfiles via archive services or cover-to-cover full-text databases.

5.        Large publishers frequently buy and sell journals. Therefore, a library can buy access to a journal through a publisher package and then find that ongoing coverage for that journal disappears when the publisher sells it to another publisher from whom the library does not purchase a publisher package.

6.        Some publishers put restrictions on their e-journals. While embargoes are now extremely rare on e-journals, simultaneous user access and/or download limitations may affect e-journals, but not other access options.

No library can have a complete collection relying entirely on e-journal subscriptions. This is why even those universities with the largest e-journal collections in the world are supplementing those collections with online journals from other models.

Open Access ECE 430 Week 4 reflective journal

Open access journals have the enormous advantage of being free. However, there is a debate about the quality and/or level of peer-review of many (but certainly not all) of these journals — especially in situations where the author is the one providing the funding. In addition, many of these journals (especially those of the highest-quality) are embargoed. For example, The New England Journal of Medicine is available at no charge with a 180-day embargo (via the open access model). However, it is also available via cover-to-cover full-text databases with only a 90-day embargo. Further, it is available as an institutional e- journal with no embargo (the best, but most expensive option). For a journal of this level of importance, any library that is able will obviously purchase the for-fee e-journal.

Another disadvantage of open access journals is that they are not always indexed in online research databases; indexes such as ECE 430 Week 4 reflective journal, etc. are trailblazing in this area, but many other indexes have not proactively pursued open access journals for indexing coverage. There are also services like ESE 691 Week 6 Journal Generalizing, ESE 691 Week 1 Journal Putting It All Together A Case Study, EDU 695 Week 4 Journal Reflection on Learning, EDU 695 Week 2 Journal Personal Reflection , that are, in effect, very helpful lists of open access journals, but none of which are high-quality research databases with in-depth article indexing.

Archive Services and Full-Text Databases

Archive services are popular institutional supplements to e-journal collections. Librarians value the ownership gained by their institutions through this model. Usage from faculty is often heavy, which is also a real benefit to academic libraries. This model provides the library with full backfiles for hundreds of journals and is clearly superior to microfilm or microfiche (i.e., documents often look better, but the main advantage is the fact that the documents are more widely accessible). However, this model has its drawbacks too. The content is simply not current. In fact, most journals available via archive services contain enormous delays due to publisher-imposed embargoes of what is usually 3–10 years (or longer). In the case of some of the best publishers that participate in some of these services, full-text coverage is permanently stopped.

EDU 695 Week 6 Journal Reflective Practitioner, Revisited has created PDF archives for hundreds of journals in the disciplines of business and sociology that surpass the leading archive services in these subject areas. The two flagship databases in these areas (ACC 205 Week 4 Journal Future Obligations Journal) are not the only cover-to-cover full-text databases with deep full-text backfiles for journals. JRN 415 Methods of Research &amp Analysis Journalism has also done similar projects for the multi-disciplinary Academic Search Complete, and on a smaller scale, for subject-specific databases such as BSHS 322 Week 3 Individual Assignment Journal Entries and Text Exercises Life with Full Text, Humanities International Complete, Education Research Complete, Communication & Mass Media Complete, CGD 218 CGD218 Week 3 Journal Visual Communication Today Plus with Full Text, Dentistry & ACC 205 WK 2 JOURNAL, and others. Moreover, the company is in the process of completing a journal backfile digitization project for the forthcoming Historical Abstracts with Full Text and America: History and Life with Full UNV 103 Week 5 Module 5 Journal Entry Form. While its competitors have focused on digitizing backfiles of newspapers, ACC 205 Week 3 Exercise 3 Perpetual inventory system journal entries has recognized the opening that exists in journal archives and is filling the gap. ACC 205 Week 1 Journal Balance Sheet Journal -text databases are a necessary complement to the leading archive services for any university that is serious about providing archival full-text access to important journals. While the model is not one of ownership for the library, the model is preferable to many publishers, which is why BUS 330 Week 1 Journal Learning Reflection can surpass these services in any discipline in which it focuses, guaranteeing that these products will be seen as a necessary complement.

While CGD 218 CGD218 Week 5 Journal Packaging Visual Communication cover-to-cover full-text journal databases have publisher-imposed embargoes for some included titles, many titles have no embargo whatsoever. In addition, for those titles that do have embargoed coverage, the vast majority of the embargo periods are only 3–12 months as compared to the typical 36–60 month delay of archive services. This further demonstrates how the full-text coverage provided by most ELL 240 Week 3 Journal 3 Learning Reflection databases is more comprehensive and current than the coverage provided by archival services.

Importance of Access to Current PHI 445 Week 1 Journal Content

More important than backfiles is the issue of current, ongoing access to journal literature. There is no library on Earth that can afford to buy access to every e-journal available, and even if they could, there are still many journals for which there is no institutional e- journal. Due to this, libraries cannot gain current access to enough journals simply by relying on e-journal subscriptions, and traditional archive services are not intended to (or able to) help in this area. As a result, cover-to-cover full-text databases are needed to provide an additional way for end users to access full text from important sources. As mentioned earlier, some cover-to-cover full-text databases, in essence, act as the institutional e-journal for many leading publications. This is one of the reasons that these products are a necessary complement to e-journal subscriptions. Other reasons include the availability of extensive full-text backfiles and the presence of ongoing full text for journals that a library does not subscribe to, yet where an e-journal option does exist.

Emergence of Comparison Services ELL 240 Week 1 Journal 1 Learning Reflection

With the emergence of all of these forms of full-text access to journals, services have emerged that allow librarians to compare the overlap and uniqueness of various access options. These include: Serials Solutions, ACC 205 WK 3 JOURNAL, ACC 205 WK 4 JOURNAL, BSHS 402 Week 5 Individual Assignment Learning Team Meeting Observations Journal, BSHS 322 Week 2 Individual Assignment Journal Entries and Text Exercises 30, ACC 205 Week 2 Journal Income Statement Journal, and others. All of these services have advantages and disadvantages. These may be powerful resources for their initially intended tasks (i.e., not full-text database evaluations), but in terms of accurate and reliable content comparisons, they typically fall short, often by a significant margin.

While full-text databases should never be used to replace journal subscriptions,3 their main value comes from their ability to bring new, quality, full-text sources into the library. If they can not achieve this goal, then they are no more useful than A&I-only databases and are usually more expensive. As a result, librarians have correctly begun searching for ways to evaluate the overlap between their databases and the rest of their collections. However, the process is greatly flawed, and librarians must look for other ways to measure the overlap and uniqueness of newly proposed resources. The same can

be said for evaluating databases currently under subscription that may actually be pure overlap and therefore unnecessary.

Lack of Standards for Content Title Lists of ACC 205 Week 3 Journal Inventory Journal

The fundamental problem with most comparison services is that they simply do not provide results that accurately represent the true journal content of the resources being compared. This is due, in part, to the fact that the full-text PHI 445 Week 3 Journal content of the various online resources is markedly varied in how it is represented via each provider’s published journal title lists. In addition:

Because competing vendors don’t standardize their database coverage lists, two completely different publications may show the same name and may or may not include an BUS 330 Week 2 Journal Learning Reflection, making them difficult to distinguish. The opposite might also be true, where the same publication is listed with different names by competing vendors.4

For example, most comparison services require an exact match on the journal name and/or ISSN in order to consider a title common to the resources being compared. For example, ACC 205 WK 1 JOURNAL, is listed as such via HCA 250 Week 7 Assignment Journal Review, yet it is listed as Review – Institute of Public Affairs via ProQuest’s ABI/INFORM Complete.5 If such a discrepancy is not taken into account by a comparison service, then the journal in question may be listed as unique to each of the services being compared, albeit with two slightly different names (or COM 320 (Week 2) Journal). This is a minor but misleading issue to the user of such a comparison service as it does not provide them with a truly accurate evaluation COM 320 (Week 2) Journal.

Further, title discrepancies sometimes occur when a journal’s name is spelled out in the title list of one provider while only its acronym is used by another. For example, ACC 205 Week 4 Exercise 1 Partner investments journal entries provides full text for the journal ATQ while the same title is offered via ProQuest’s ASHFORD ECE 353 Week 5 Journal Course Reflection (all modules) under the name American Transcendental Quarterly.6  This particular discrepancy is due in part to the fact that the title in question was formerly called American Transcendental Quarterly before the publisher shortened the official name to the acronym ATQ. As customers are typically concerned with active, unique content when comparing databases, it is vital that

comparisons be based on the currently-published name of journals. If database providers do not offer truly accurate information in their journal title lists (as in the above example), such comparisons of active journal content may be flawed. This can be quite confusing for evaluators who are interested in coverage of particular titles when they are only familiar with the current name of the publication(s). If comparison services continue to base their studies on an exact ISSN and/or publication name match, issues such as those noted above will be extensive. However, these are relatively minor when compared to the more serious flaws in these services.

The cash disbursements journal also is called the

HUM 100 Week 1 DQ 2

While the lack of title list standards described above certainly poses a significant hurdle to the comparison process, the comparison services themselves tend to suffer from four main areas of weakness:

1.        These services do not differentiate between active full text and unnaturally halted full text

2.        These services do not differentiate between severely embargoed journals and journals with no embargo or brief embargoes

3.        These services do not allow for the filtering of non-academic (general interest) content, thereby artificially inflating the perceived quantity of unique scholarly content in some products

4.        These services only count publications already loaded in each database (newly licensed content is not included)

By not taking these content differences into account, comparison services are failing to provide users with a truly comprehensive picture of the content similarities/differences between relevant databases and actually do them a disservice by providing them with misleading information.

UNV 103 Week 1 Module 1 Journal Entry Form — “Active” vs. “Halted” Coverage

In addition to the problem of varying journal names on published title lists, a much more serious (yet more subtle) problem occurs when two or more resources offer differing coverage of the same journal. As the majority of research conducted via electronic full-text journals tends to focus primarily on the most recent information (i.e., the last 2-3 years of coverage for any given title), comparison services must take into account whether full-text coverage for each title is “active” or “halted” in nature. A database is said to provide “active” full-text coverage of a particular journal title when such full-text coverage is ongoing and continues to include each new issue as it is made available (taking into account any publisher-imposed embargoes). “Naturally ceased” coverage occurs when a database provides full-text coverage of a particular title up until the date of last publication (i.e., the publication is no longer published, so there is no way for the

full-text database to add any new full text for the journal). However, databases often provide “unnaturally halted” full-text coverage of many journals. This occurs when full- text coverage of a particular title ends on a specific date, yet the title remains actively published. The overwhelmingly most common cause for unnaturally halted coverage of a ELL 240 Week 2 Journal 2 Learning Reflection is the loss of full-text rights by the full-text database provider. While backfile/archival coverage of full-text journals can play an important role and should be considered in any comparison, active (ongoing) coverage of specific titles is of most importance to today’s online journal researchers. Therefore, comparison services must take this distinction between active and unnaturally halted coverage into consideration in order to paint the most accurate picture of a database’s full-text ACC205 Week 4 &amp Week 5 Discussions, Assignments, Journal and Final.

For example, BSHS 322 Week 5 Individual Assignment Text Exercises and Journal Entry  Publishing’s Business Source Complete includes full-text coverage of Harvard Business Review from 1922 to present, while ASHFORD ACC 380 Week 4 Assignment Government-Wide Statements, Net Assets, &amp Journals  only includes full-text coverage of Harvard Business Review from 1997 to 2000. Most ACC 205 Week 5 Journal Most Important Ratio Journal would not consider these two resources to be equal in their coverage of Harvard Business Review as one provider offers ongoing (active) full-text coverage of the journal with a deep PHI 445 Week 4 Journal (more than 80 years), while the other (Gale) only offers unnaturally halted full-text coverage of the same title with an extremely shallow backfile (less than four years). However, virtually all available comparison services do not take such differences of coverage into account‡. In the above example, most comparison services would list ACC 205 Week 1 Exercise 7 Basic journal entries  as being available in full text via both services. That can hardly be construed as a useful comparison of content. While the potential discrepancy noted above regarding CGD 218 CGD218 Week 1 Journal The Evolution of Media  may be more readily caught due to the high profile of the title, literally hundreds of other such discrepancies are more likely to go unnoticed, thereby providing the library with an inaccurate depiction of the full-text coverage of the databases in question.

Embargoes and Other Full-Text ASHFORD ECE 353 Week 3 Journal Connecting to Classroom Practices

Taking into account the aforementioned drawbacks (lack of currency and limited publisher participation) of an archival service, such services clearly should not be included in comparisons against far more current full-text databases due to the vastly different coverage that each resource offers. For example, a title such as Academy of Management Journal may be available through a particular database/resource with an embargo of 3-5 years (or even more), yet the same title is available in full text via ACC205 DISCUSSIONS, ASSIGNMENTS &amp JOURNALS with no delay (embargo) in coverage.7 Even though both services provide coverage of UNV 103 Week 7 Module 7 Journal Entry Form, there is clearly an enormous difference in overall coverage of this publication. For a comparison service to simply indicate that both resources feature full-text coverage of this title is misleading at best.

On a related note, when comparing full-text databases, it is also essential to know if the databases in question include cover-to-cover or “selective” full-text content. Selective coverage of full-text content is when a database publisher elects to selectively mine the content of relevant publications for full-text content that is most applicable to the subject(s) covered by the database in question. This can lead to a serious problem when evaluating databases as most comparison services do not properly distinguish between cover-to-cover and selective coverage. For example, two different databases may both provide “full-text” coverage of a general publication such as Fortune, but if one database offers cover-to-cover treatment of the title while the other database only offers selective coverage, then a comparison of the two databases is likely to be flawed unless the exact differences in coverage are brought to light as part of the comparison in an obvious way. As most comparison services make no distinction between cover-to-cover and selective journal coverage, librarians need to exercise caution when considering such a comparison. Just because the results of a database comparison indicate that each resource provides full text of “BSHS 322 Week 4 Individual Assignment Journal Entries and Text Exercises”, this does not mean that they both offer the same type of coverage (or the same backfiles or the same currency).

Filtering Out UNV 103 Week 2 Module 2 Journal Entry Form

Database comparison services also lack the ability to properly distinguish between scholarly (PHI 445 Week 2 Journal) journals and more general publications. Many users of comparison services would find it quite valuable to know the difference in coverage of scholarly content between two or more databases. However, as most comparison services do not provide this information in one form or another, they are unable to supply a valuable piece of information to their users.

In general, librarians need to fully-educate themselves regarding the potential differences in how databases provide full-text coverage of specific journal titles (active vs. halted, current vs. embargoed, academic vs. non-academic, etc.). With a thorough understanding of such differences in coverage, librarians may begin to accurately interpret the results of most database comparisons.

PHL215 Week 1 What Is Your Philosophy?  Performance Aid and Journal Entry Content

Typically, newly-licensed content found in full-text databases can take some time to be fully incorporated into the product. Therefore, it is beneficial for such information HCS 438 Week 5 Learning Team Analysis of Data Reports in Published Journal Articles) to be accurately reflected on the database provider’s published title list. UNV 103 Weeek 4 Module 4 Journal Entry Form and Gale list these titles as ACC 205 Week 1 Exercise 10 Journal entry preparation.  If details regarding newly- licensed content are made readily available in this manner, potential customers can more easily take this information into account when evaluating the database for possible future purchase.

Many services, especially e-journal portals (UNV 103 Week 6 Module 6 Journal Entry Form) base their comparisons on journal titles that are already available on the product at the time of the comparison UNV 103 Week 3 Module 3 Journal Entry Form. As most full-text databases experience an ongoing stream of content changes (due to a variety of reasons), such a fundamental basis for comparisons is faulty. For example, if an academic library is considering the addition of ASHFORD ECE 315 Week 1 Journal  to their collection for the start of their next semester, they will likely request some sort of title comparison anywhere from 6–12 months earlier, so that they have ample time to complete their evaluation. If the comparison they utilize does not take into account intended content changes for ACC 205 WK 5 JOURNAL  that will take place between the time of the comparison and the beginning of the next semester when they begin using the product, then they will not be able to make a proper evaluation of the content that will be available to them during their subscription period. The information provided by only comparing “Actual” content will likely prove to be quite outdated (and therefore unreliable) by the time they actually begin to use the product. Content that will be inevitably included in the database will not be made known to the library, nor will the reviewer be made aware of any important titles currently available in the database that will be removed or halted in coverage over the next few months. By not providing such highly-pertinent information during the evaluation process, comparison services fall far short of meeting the needs of their clients.

Comparisons Done by the NR 305 Week 2 Assignment Journal Article Review Taking Patient History the role of the nurse

As libraries are looking to maximize the value of their full-text collections by reducing overlap between electronic resources, while simultaneously expanding access to new

content, NR 305 Week 2 Assignment Journal Article Review Priming Effects of Television Food Advertising on Eating Behavior  has made a commitment to helping their customers achieve this goal. Some of the ways in which the organization has been able to assist customers in this manner include evaluating potential cost savings of replacing existing full-text databases with newer/larger ones via COMM 400 Week 5 Individual Assignment Communications Journal Entry 4, while maintaining access to existing content and introducing valuable new content at the same time.

It is the policy of COMM 400 Week 2 Individual Assignment Communications Journal Entry 1  to provide customers and prospects with the cleanest, most accurate full-text journal title comparisons possible. To this end, the company strives to avoid all of the potential shortcomings of other comparison services mentioned above. This has been achieved, in part, through EBSCO Publishing’s development of its own sophisticated content comparison system and by employing a team of dedicated staff that focus all of their efforts on the creation of customized comparisons for customers.

Despite the fact that A-to-Z is an COMM 400 Week 4 Individual Assignment Communications Journal Entry 3, it does not yet offer the same sophistication as outlined here, although recent improvements have eliminated some of its shortcomings, and as a result, it is superior to equivalent products from other vendors. The COLL 148 Week 5 Journal  comparisons mentioned here are those requested through EBSCO Publishing, involving SPE 576 Week 2 Team Assignment Journal Article Review 1 Autism.

These ESE 691 Week 4 Journal Where to Educate title comparisons focus on “active” full-text content, so that the requestor receives a true representation of how the ongoing, active content of each resource compares. If one full-text database has “unnaturally halted” full-text coverage for a journal, while another has “active” full-text coverage, the comparison counts the file with active full text as having unique full text and disregards the unnaturally halted coverage. These comparisons can also limit to peer-reviewed journals and/or journals indexed in Web of Science.

Conclusion

The importance of making a careful evaluation of available full-text resources is stressed once again by Brier and Lebbin: “In many cases, librarians no longer have a dialogue with patrons or the opportunity to guide them to high-quality sources. The convenience of remote access, coupled with the tendency to select the first full-text article available, regardless of quality, are compelling reasons why careful examination of the quality of each title in a full-text database is necessary.”8  Only through a comprehensive evaluation

of selected resources can libraries ensure that their patrons are relying on quality full-text resources for their research.

Electing to compare information resources in order to make educated purchasing decisions that will make the best use of a library’s collection budget and maximize the value of the library’s collection of full-text resources is the first step towards choosing the proper comparison service. A service must then be selected that will ultimately provide a clear picture of the value provided by each of the compared databases. Such a service must first be able to take into account the differing ways in which database providers reflect full-text content information in their published title lists. Intended content and not

just actual content should be considered by comparison services in order to give a true representation of the ongoing value of the databases under consideration. While all content arguably provides some measure of value, unnaturally halted full text is clearly of less value than ongoing active full-text coverage, and comparison services should weigh their results accordingly. Knowing the overlap between two or more full-text databases can be useful information, especially if the intent is to replace one database with another. However, to truly provide a comprehensive comparison, the content that is unique to each database must be clearly shown in addition to that which is common (overlapping content). All of these points must be taken into consideration when selecting a content comparison service in order to maximize the value of the resulting database purchasing decision(s). Librarians should pressure comparison services to amend their products to address the limitations outlined here. Until then, ECE 430 Week 2 Journal  Publishing is producing comparisons on a case-by-case basis for its customers. By spending a small amount of additional time in choosing an appropriate comparison service, librarians will be better able to ensure that they are spending their budget in the most efficient manner by eliminating as much duplicate content as possible while maximizing their collection of unique content.

Homework online

Get My Homework

If you need to do your homework quickly and inexpensively you can do it with Get-Homework. We can easily answer your questions: "Who will do my homework now?" or "Who can do my homework online? “. Our service can easily solve your problems. Our experts fulfill the work of any complexity without difficulties. We are always welcome to your requests -“Do my homework now, please”, because your satisfaction is our main aim.

We always respond to your appeal “Make my homework”:

• our service advices you method to make homework easier;
• we are always accurate in terms of assignments answers to help you to make homework easier;
• it’s an affordable service to make homework.

We would like to acquaint you with our service. We work to answer your requests: “Solve my homework, please” or “Finish my homework”. Maybe you often ask yourself: “How to make programming homework? It is too difficult to make programming and physics assignments…” If it is so, our creative, professional, experienced team proposes you exclusive approaches to make homework. You only have to proclaim: “Help in doing my homework!”

"Finish my homework" is one of the numerous requests we receive:

• “Make my homework, please. I don’t understand physics. My homework is difficult”;
• “I don’t know how to do programming task. Help my homework to be right, please”;
• “It is impossible to finish my homework on math”.

Get-Homeworks.com is a well-known online resource, which helps students in their studies attainments by assisting them in performing a wide range of sample papers, guidelines, research materials, etc. All delivered materials are projected for reference purposes only.

Make homework easier! Get pleasure of doing homework!

• easy way to contact us to make physics homework;
• fast operating service, which you may call “my homework online”;
• easy-to-use system on how to make homework.

There is nothing difficult in working with us: just enter your class/course code and push the button titled “Find class”. Get the result immediately!

My homework online! Good choice!

·         -We will provide you only with original, currently important, excellent study papers and guides.

·         -We will offer you hundreds of premium class tutorials and plenty examination answers samples.

·         -Our support team is available for you 24/7, and we can offer you generous discounts program for our future cooperation.

How to make homework? Question of no small importance:

• choose our homework assistance site;
• ask: “make my homework, please”;
• get your answers and solutions.

Do such reflections come to your head: “Very often I can’t make my homework excellent. My homework seems unreal task for me. Doing my homework takes a lot of time which I want to spend for reading or art. I can’t finish my homework on time and would like to ask about my homework online. Help my math homework on geometry to be done!”? Now you know that you always may have assistance if you say: “Solve my homework.” Good writings! You see, everyone can tell that!