| Course | NR 393 Nursing History |
|---|---|
| Week | 4 |
| Paper type | Annotated bibliography |
| Length | About 1,090 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Chamberlain University |
| Program | RN-to-BSN |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for NR 393 Week 4
Black Nurses and Professional Exclusion, 1908 to 1951: An Annotated Bibliography
Student Name
College of Nursing, Chamberlain University
NR 393: Nursing History
Instructor Name
Month Day, Year
Black Nurses and Professional Exclusion, 1908 to 1951: An Annotated Bibliography
Purpose and Scope
The paper this bibliography supports will examine how Black nurses in the United States responded to exclusion from professional nursing organizations, hospitals and military nursing between the founding of the National Association of Colored Graduate Nurses in 1908 and its dissolution in 1951, when its members were integrated into the American Nurses Association. The paper's claim is that the association's strategy was deliberately aimed at its own dissolution: it built a separate organization in order to force integration of the main one. The four sources below include two accounts written by participants, which are evidence from the period or close to it, and two histories written later by scholars, which are interpretations. The distinction matters because the participants' accounts are indispensable and also partisan.
How the Sources Were Found and Judged
The search began with the university library's catalog and the nursing history collections of two academic libraries, using the terms National Association of Colored Graduate Nurses, Black nurses, African American nurses, integration and nursing history, and then followed the reference lists of the sources found. Journal articles on individual leaders were read but not included here, because the paper needs sources that cover the organization's whole arc rather than one person. Popular websites that summarize the same history were excluded because they rely on the books below without adding evidence.
Each source was judged on three questions borrowed from historical method. When was it produced relative to the events it describes? Who produced it, and what did that person or organization want readers to believe? And what kind of sentence in the paper can it support: a fact such as a date or a name, a description of how participants understood events, or an interpretation of why events happened as they did? A participant's memoir can support the second kind of sentence well and the first kind with caution, while a scholar's monograph is the better support for the third. Stating those answers for each entry keeps the paper from using a source for a claim it cannot carry.
Thoms (1929)
Thoms, A. B. (1929). Pathfinders: A history of the progress of colored graduate nurses. Kay Printing House.
Kind of source: A history written by a participant. Adah Thoms was a founder and early president of the National Association of Colored Graduate Nurses, and she wrote this account while the struggle it describes was still under way.
Who made it and why: Thoms wrote partly to document achievements that the mainstream nursing press ignored and partly to build the association's standing. That purpose makes the book a record of how leaders wanted their work understood, and it tends to emphasize progress over conflict.
Use in the paper: Evidence of the association's early goals and self-image, and a source for names, dates and early activities. It will not be used as a neutral account of relations with white nursing organizations, since its author was one party to them.
Staupers (1961)
Staupers, M. K. (1961). No time for prejudice: A story of the integration of Negroes in nursing in the United States. Macmillan.
Kind of source: A memoir and history by the association's executive secretary during the campaign to integrate the Army and Navy Nurse Corps during World War II and the American Nurses Association after it. It is evidence of her strategy and reasoning, written a decade after the events.
Who made it and why: Mabel Keaton Staupers led the campaign and wrote with the purpose of recording how integration was achieved. She had an interest in presenting the dissolution of the association as a victory rather than a loss, which is itself part of the argument the paper will examine.
Use in the paper: The central source for the claim that dissolution was the goal. Staupers' account of lobbying military and professional leaders will be cross-checked against the later scholarly histories, since memoirs compress and reorder events.
Hine (1989)
Hine, D. C. (1989). Black women in white: Racial conflict and cooperation in the nursing profession, 1890-1950. Indiana University Press.
Kind of source: A scholarly monograph by a historian, based on archival research in organizational records, hospital records and correspondence. It is interpretation, carefully grounded in evidence.
Who made it and why: Hine wrote as an academic historian of Black women in America. Her interest was analytical rather than organizational, which makes her account the most useful check on the participants' versions.
Use in the paper: The main interpretive framework. Hine's account of racial conflict and cooperation will supply the context of hospital training schools, state licensure and professional organizations within which the association operated, and her reading of the integration campaign will be set beside Staupers' own.
Carnegie (1995)
Carnegie, M. E. (1995). The path we tread: Blacks in nursing worldwide, 1854-1994 (3rd ed.). National League for Nursing Press.
Kind of source: A survey history by a nurse leader and scholar who was herself active in the later part of the period. It is a secondary account with a participant's perspective on the postwar years.
Who made it and why: Elizabeth Carnegie wrote to record the contributions of Black nurses across a long span and many countries, and the book was published by a national nursing organization. Its breadth means that specific episodes are treated briefly.
Use in the paper: A reference for dates, names and sequences of events, and for the period after 1951, which the paper will touch on briefly to ask what integration did and did not change. It will not be relied on for detailed interpretation of the integration campaign.
What the Set Supports and What It Lacks
Together, the four sources support a paper that can present the association's strategy in its leaders' own words and test those words against a scholar's archival account. The set lacks two things the full paper would benefit from: records from the American Nurses Association side of the integration negotiations, which would show how the dominant organization understood the change, and the voices of rank-and-file Black nurses who were not leaders, whose views on dissolution may have differed. Searching the association's records, held in archives of Black history, and nursing journals of the period for letters from members would address both gaps. Both searches are planned for the next two weeks.
References
Carnegie, M. E. (1995). The path we tread: Blacks in nursing worldwide, 1854-1994 (3rd ed.). National League for Nursing Press.
Hine, D. C. (1989). Black women in white: Racial conflict and cooperation in the nursing profession, 1890-1950. Indiana University Press.
Staupers, M. K. (1961). No time for prejudice: A story of the integration of Negroes in nursing in the United States. Macmillan.
Thoms, A. B. (1929). Pathfinders: A history of the progress of colored graduate nurses. Kay Printing House.
NR 393 Week 4 instructions, in plain terms
The Week 4 assignment asks you to compile an annotated bibliography for your historical paper. The assignment sheet tends to list a stated topic and purpose, a mix of primary and secondary sources, correct APA references and annotations that describe, evaluate and explain how each source will be used. State what the future paper will argue and how the sources divide between evidence and interpretation. Describe how you searched. For each entry, say what kind of source it is, who produced it, when and why, and how that affects its reliability. State the specific use in your paper. End by saying what the set supports and what you still need.
How the NR 393 Week 4 example is put together
The purpose section states that the paper will examine how Black nurses responded to exclusion from organizations, hospitals and military nursing and argues that dissolving the association was its goal. The method section names the library catalog, two nursing history collections and three historical questions: when the source was produced, by whom and for what purpose. Thoms is described as a founder's history, useful for early goals but not as a neutral account. Staupers is the campaign leader's memoir and the central source for the claim, to be cross-checked. Hine supplies the scholarly framework from archival records. Carnegie serves as a reference for names, dates and the period after 1951. The final section names two gaps.
Where the points sit in the NR 393 Week 4 rubric
Annotated bibliography rubrics in NR 393 generally score source selection, the balance of primary and secondary sources, APA accuracy, annotation quality including evaluation of the source's perspective, the stated use of each source and organization. Annotation quality decides the most, and this bibliography earns it by naming each author's interest, such as Thoms writing to build the association's standing. Source balance is credited through two participant accounts and two scholarly histories. APA points come from complete book references with editions. The use row scores because every entry says what it will and will not support. The method section and the closing account of gaps show the historian's judgment graders reward.
NR 393 Week 4 help from the desk
Summary is the most common loss here: an entry that recounts the contents and stops. Next is a list that does not separate primary from secondary sources, so the reader cannot tell evidence from interpretation. Students also call every source excellent instead of naming the author's interest, include websites without authors or rely entirely on recent summaries. An entry with no stated purpose in the paper leaves the grader guessing. A source is primary when it was produced at the time by a participant, whatever its age. Some websites from archives are acceptable. If your topic is different, send it and an NR 393 annotated bibliography can be set up with entries that judge each source.
Get a NR 393 Week 4 example written to your instructions
Send the Week 4 assignment page and its reference requirements, with your leader or era if one is chosen already, and a custom example bibliography is written to those requirements and returned inside 24 to 48 hours. Nothing is charged for the first. Use it as a model or not at all.
More NR 393 papers and RN-to-BSN samples
- NR 393 Week 1: History of a Nursing Practice Post
- NR 393 Week 2: Notes on Nursing Source Analysis
- NR 393 Week 3: Lillian Wald Biographical Analysis
- NR 393 Week 5: Comparative Analysis
- NR 393 Week 6: Historical Analysis
- NR 393 Week 7: Nurse Leader Profile
- NR 393 Week 8: Reflection
- NR 394 Week 4: Transcultural Case Analysis
- NR 361 Week 4: Tele-ICU Literature Review Matrix
- NR 395 Week 4: Position Paper
- NR 360 Week 4: Wrong-Patient Medication Case Analysis
NR 393 Week 4 questions, answered
How old does a source have to be to count as primary?
Age is not the test. A primary source was produced by someone inside the situation, so a nursing journal article of the day, a hospital annual report or a nurse's own account all qualify, while a careful modern history of that same period does not. Sections often set a minimum number of each type, and that instruction governs the list.
Is a website ever acceptable?
Often, depending on what sits behind it. A professional association's archive, a library's digitized collection or a government record hosted online carries the authority of the body that made it. An anonymous summary page carries none, whatever its domain. Cite the underlying document and the collection it came from rather than the site reproducing it.
Should the annotation say the source is good?
Say what it is good for. Evaluation in the abstract turns into praise, and praise is unusable. The productive version names the source's angle, then the specific paragraph of the paper it will serve. An entry calling a source thorough and reliable tells an instructor nothing about whether it has been read closely.
Where can I find a free NR 393 Week 4 sample paper?
The full Week 4 bibliography on Black nurses and professional exclusion from 1908 to 1951, with the purpose, the search method, four evaluated entries, the closing account of gaps and the reference list, is on this page.
How does the NR 393 Week 4 bibliography judge each source?
With three questions from historical method: when the source was produced relative to the events, who produced it and what that person or organization wanted, and how that shapes its reliability.