There is a large body of research on corporate ownership and control of traditional media, such as print, television, and radio. Comparatively, research about corporate control of what we see online is underdeveloped, yet search engines are often the first place students uncritically look for research as opposed to the library website, catalogs, and discovery services. Dr. Safiya Noble shows that Google image searches for black women often perpetuate and reinforce dominant narratives involving racism and misogyny. As Google is often seen as neutral, such search results are presented as “natural,” the way things are, when in fact they are the products of capitalism, hegemonic patriarchy, and white supremacy. Interrogating results such as these is one goal of this lesson plan, along with getting students to think critically about, to problematize, the everyday tools used in the research process and to explore links between capitalism and racism, misogyny, and homophobia.

A two-credit online graduate information literacy course.

This assignment was created for an introductory nutrition course for health related science majors and nonmajors to meet the Information Literacy Flag criteria for the core standards at Loyola Marymount University. The assignment focuses on the evaluation of a primary and secondary source on a specific topic to assess the similarities and differences between the sources of information. The primary goal of the assignment is for a pair of students to select a current popular press article that references a recent scientific journal article. The students then procure a copy of the scientific journal article. Using a formatted questionnaire, the students evaluate characteristics and information from the popular press article and then characteristics and information from the journal article, then compare and contrast the two information sources.

Using ProQuest SIRS Issues Researcher or similar database, groups of students work together to find and read four informative magazine articles representing a variety of opinions on a topic. For each magazine article they write an MLA citation. In an oral presentation of less than three minutes per group, they summarize the controversy without giving their own opinions and explain why they chose the four articles. Students are told to be prepared to answer questions about their topic and why they selected each of the four articles. Students are given basic instruction on writing an MLA citation and using a database.

Students will learn to identify where they might find school and community data; practice accessing this data; and create a school community data profile. Students will also be introduced to some of the problems of bias when looking at school and community data. For part one, student will find data for the high school they attended and the community they grew up in. In part two, students will collect the same data for a school in the community they will be working in over the course of the quarter.

Students write to communicate and their writing, when citing sources, must communicate what they understand of others’ writings. By asking students to write with the purpose of summarizing, paraphrasing, and quoting a selected article to their classmate, they will experience what you experience when you read their writing. They will understand the purpose and mechanics of using sources in their writing. Activity is highly adaptable and suitable for independent readers high school and above. Activity can be modified for lower level learners. Additionally, .doc and .pdf versions of worksheets are attached so instructors can feel free to alter. Activity steps: * Distribute Source Notes worksheet to students. * Give students 10 min to re-read their source and to complete one summarize/ paraphrase/ quote exercise. * Students will exchange Source Notes with partner (Student B). * Without consulting Student A, Student B will tell the class what they understand about Student A’s topic. * Student A will self-assess, answering what they could have done better to communicate in writing. (Example sources are provided as PDF if students' actual sources are unavailable. Instructors are free to use their own example sources - those provided are included for inspiration or adoption.)

This activity asks students to work in groups to evaluate Internet sources to meet a research need. Students will use their available wireless devices, smartphones, tablets, computers, or laptops to retrieve the URLs provided to them. Working together, students will ask evaluation questions, guided by a CRAAP handout (attached) or instructor. Then, groups will share their findings with the class. o Students are grouped (3-4 students per group, number of groups in total is irrelevant what it important is the size of the group remains very small). o Each group is handed a scenario card – a 3x5 index card with a URL, beneath the URL is a topic/ question for research. Each student should also receive an Internet evaluation handout with the CRAAP criteria for evaluation on it. (These cards will be created by the instructor. They are recommended to be realistic, likely research questions/ topics for their course and the URLs should be likely search results. Results should vary between acceptable, recommended sources and not recommended sources.) o Students should be given a short time to review - 3-5 mins. Instructor should stress how quickly students can move through a website to capture information such as publication dates and check source links. o At the end of the review period, each group will have a spokesperson make their case to which the class can engage with questions as to the criteria. This activity can be repeated multiple times. It is highly adaptable and reusable.

This is a short, engaging activity suitable for learners of all levels. In it, students evaluate web sources that are provided by an instructor using the acronym CRAAP (currency, relevance, accuracy, authority, and purpose). Students work together in groups and explore evaluation processes aloud, with guidance from the CRAAP cards and the instructor. This is an adaptation of various evaluating sources activities available in LIS literature and professional resources. This activity is ideally implemented as a kind of collaborative game moderated by the instructor. It is highly adaptable. o Students are grouped into 5 groups - one for each criterion of CRAAP. Each group will receive a CRAAP card or 3x5 index card with evaluation questions pertaining to Currency, Relevance, Accuracy, Authority, and Purpose – different for each table. o A source will be shared with the class on the projector. These sources will include scholarly articles, websites (blogs and orgs), and reference entries. It is essential that the instructor select sources that are relevant to their students (either by course, subject, or level) and that would be likely results on a student Internet search for a research topic/ question. o Each group will evaluate the source aloud on the single criterion they’ve been assigned. If it “passes,” then the source gets asked the next question. If it “fails,” the source is dismissed. o This activity can be repeated with various websites or web sources.

Students create an entry in the Fremont Wiki - http://localwiki.net/fremont. Students incorporate information literacy concepts, have hands-on experience conducting research, and create actual content on the Internet [while also learning how easy it is for anyone to change that content]. It could also be a great chance to get students into local museums and archives.

Syllabus and five assignments within a two-credit live course at undergraduate level. See "Relevant Links" section for access to all assignments. Assignments include a rubric.