critical information literacy

Submitted by Jacob Berg on November 4th, 2016
Short Description: 

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.

Attachments: 
AttachmentSize
vol2_chapter 11.pdfdisplayed 2250 times295.04 KB
Learning Outcomes: 

Articulate clearly how algorithms such as PageRank influence information-seeking behavior and search results. Explain Google’s data security and privacy issues. Create searches that show critical thinking and awareness of how Google works.

Individual or Group:

Suggested Citation: 
Berg, Jacob. "Googling Google: Search Engines as Market Actors ." CORA (Community of Online Research Assignments), 2016. https://projectcora.org/assignment/googling-google-search-engines-market-actors.
Submitted by Cristy Moran on March 3rd, 2016
Short Description: 

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.

Attachments: 
AttachmentSize
CRAAP Evaluation of Web Sources Infographic Handoutdisplayed 2384 times668.5 KB
Example for Scenario Cards - Search on Juvenile Justice Topicsdisplayed 2390 times251.42 KB
Learning Outcomes: 

o Students will analyze sources for currency, relevance, accuracy, authority, and purpose. o Students will determine whether a source meets their information need.

Individual or Group:

Course Context (e.g. how it was implemented or integrated): 

This activity is a 5-10 minute activity delivered after a tour of library resources, when students are taught about evaluating Internet sources and given tips on how to effectively manage Internet research. This activity has also been implemented with professional faculty acting as students when modeled for faculty professional development workshops.

Additional Instructor Resources (e.g. in-class activities, worksheets, scaffolding applications, supplemental modules, further readings, etc.): 

The attached handout is an infographic for the CRAAP evaluation strategies and can be printed out and used in tandem with Internet evaluation skills instruction or provided to students to guide them through this activity.

Suggested Citation: 
Moran, Cristy. "Evaluating the Interwebz with Think/ Square/ Share." CORA (Community of Online Research Assignments), 2016. https://projectcora.org/assignment/evaluating-interwebz-think-square-share.
Submitted by Cristy Moran on March 3rd, 2016
Short Description: 

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.

AttachmentSize
CRAAP Cards 2 sideddisplayed 1298 times3.97 MB
Learning Outcomes: 

o Students will examine sources for currency, relevance, accuracy, authority, and purpose. o Students will explain how different elements of a source (author, date, scope, slant, reading level, etc.) effect how the source meets or doesn’t meet their information gathering needs.

Individual or Group:

Course Context (e.g. how it was implemented or integrated): 

This is implemented in one-shot library instruction sessions at a state college. It has also been implemented as a way to model the activity in professional faculty workshops.

Additional Instructor Resources (e.g. in-class activities, worksheets, scaffolding applications, supplemental modules, further readings, etc.): 

CRAAP Cards print 2 sided for criterion (ex: Currency) on one side and questions (ex: What date...?) on back.

Potential Pitfalls and Teaching Tips: 

This activity is engaging, student-centered, and metacognitive. It is recommended that instructors curate a list of acceptable or recommended Internet resources for their various subject areas and use those among not recommended web sources for this exercise.

Suggested Citation: 
Moran, Cristy. "Evaluating the Interwebz with Designated Skeptics." CORA (Community of Online Research Assignments), 2016. https://projectcora.org/assignment/evaluating-interwebz-designated-skeptics.

Pages